# The Family of man just got Bigger



## dorsetknob (Apr 11, 2019)

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-47873072

excerpt
*New human species found in Philippines*
There's a new addition to the family tree: an extinct species of human that's been found in the Philippines.
It's known as _Homo luzonensis_, after the site of its discovery on the country's largest island Luzon.
Its physical features are a mixture of those found in very ancient human ancestors and in more recent people.
That could mean primitive human relatives left Africa and made it all the way to South-East Asia, something not previously thought possible.
The find shows that human evolution in the region may have been a highly complicated affair, with three or more human species in the region at around the time our ancestors arrive
The new specimens from Callao Cave, in the north of Luzon, are described in the journal Nature. They have been dated to between 67,000 years and 50,000 years ago.
They consist of thirteen remains - teeth, hand and foot bones, as well as part of a femur - that belong to at least three adult and juvenile individuals. They have been recovered in excavations at the cave since 2007.
_Homo luzonensis_ has some physical similarities to recent humans, but in other features hark back to the australopithecines, upright-walking ape-like creatures that lived in Africa between two and four million years ago, as well as very early members of the genus _Homo_.
The finger and toe bones are curved, suggesting climbing was still an important activity for this species. This also seems to have been the case for some australopithecines


----------



## Caring1 (Apr 12, 2019)

dorsetknob said:


> *New human species found in Philippines*
> That could mean primitive human relatives left Africa and made it all the way to South-East Asia, something not previously thought possible.


Or it could mean aliens dropped them off, or that they originated in Asia and didn't migrate.


----------



## R-T-B (Apr 12, 2019)

Caring1 said:


> Or it could mean aliens dropped them off, or that they originated in Asia and didn't migrate.



If you reject mainstream science and our pretty well studied lineage sure, I guess...


----------



## Caring1 (Apr 12, 2019)

Lol, mainstream science is like a flock of sheep, all following each other, don't dissent or they'll call you a heretic or witch.


----------



## R-T-B (Apr 12, 2019)

Caring1 said:


> Lol, mainstream science is like a flock of sheep, all following each other, don't dissent or they'll call you a heretic or witch.



Not really (as science is one of the few fields not only providing documentation on how but why it is good to think for yourself) but I can tell you've already made up your mind, good luck with that.


----------



## Caring1 (Apr 13, 2019)

R-T-B said:


> but I can tell you've already made up your mind, good luck with that.


If anything, I am very open minded and not convinced mankind originated solely in Africa, if it was possible there, why not elsewhere.
Until irrefutable proof is presented showing lineage and migration, I am open to mankind developing across the globe in differing birthplaces.


----------



## R-T-B (Apr 13, 2019)

Caring1 said:


> If anything, I am very open minded and not convinced mankind originated solely in Africa, if it was possible there, why not elsewhere.



Because geographic isolation is what creates unique species.  Human fossil records point our isolation event from whatever common anscestor to Africa.  There is simply no way it could have happened elsewhere short of alien DNA engineering / drop offs because the anscestors would not be around to create us in their isolated region.

What you are theorizing is not impossible.  However it is improbable on the same level as bigfoot, nessie, etc.

In short,



Caring1 said:


> I am open to mankind developing across the globe in differing birthplaces.



Unless you don't believe in the very fundementals of evolution, or believe in aliens, this simply cannot be.


----------



## Caring1 (Apr 13, 2019)

R-T-B said:


> Because geographic isolation is what creates unique species.
> Unless you don't believe in the very fundementals of evolution, or believe in aliens, this simply cannot be.


As you already said, "geographic isolation is what creates unique species", this is evolution.
Species that have a common ancestor and have migrated, and adapted to their environment.
It doesn't explain new species that have no commonality to other known species and originate where they are found.


----------



## R-T-B (Apr 13, 2019)

Caring1 said:


> It doesn't explain new species that have no commonality to other known species and originate where they are found.



No it doesn't.  On the other hand, we haven't dug up even 1% of the fossil record and it's astounding what we have already sorted out.


----------



## John Naylor (Apr 13, 2019)

How do we know they all dead ... build a wall !


----------



## storm-chaser (Apr 14, 2019)

Evolution is a falsehood. Modern man only dates back about 4000 years to the very start of civilization 

Every single "Lucy" has been debunked. Evolution was created in part by the forces of darkness and has hoodwinked many an intelligent man.


----------



## SoNic67 (Apr 14, 2019)

The thing is that all those "ancestors" are looking a lot like each other, but a LOT different than humans. There is still missing that magical missing link.
Personally, I am agnostic, but also a critical thinker. I can't accept science at face value, not more that I can't accept religion at face value. There are "believers" in both camps.
I need to be convinced, and evolution has big holes in it.

Some of those holes were explained by Lyod Pye, just IMO, he really exaggerated justifying solely it by alien intervention, but the questions are very valid. There is no single human bone in the pre-historic fossil history. We need like a dozen "missing links" in between to work per evolutionary time scale... So actually, we couldn't evolve from pre-humans.
Towards the end you get his 48 versus 46 chromosomes take.

Watch the whole 2 hour video below before you argue anymore for evolution of humans:


----------



## er557 (Apr 14, 2019)

there has been a known foreign species for a long time, it is called "the AMD fanboy"


----------



## R-T-B (Apr 15, 2019)

storm-chaser said:


> Every single "Lucy" has been debunked.



Do tell.  Preferable provide non-youtube links.


----------



## dirtyferret (Apr 15, 2019)

Caring1 said:


> Until irrefutable proof is presented showing lineage and migration,


besides the proof of DNA science, archeology, history...buy hey you are entitled to your opinion just not your own facts


----------



## storm-chaser (Apr 15, 2019)

R-T-B said:


> Do tell.  Preferable provide non-youtube links.


By no means are these links complete, but they should at least get you started in the right direction...

http://www.cs.unc.edu/~plaisted/ce/lucy.html

http://bnugent.org/famous-fossil-ape-named-lucy-debunked-by-science/


----------



## lexluthermiester (Apr 15, 2019)

Caring1 said:


> Lol, mainstream science is like a flock of sheep, all following each other, don't dissent or they'll call you a heretic or witch.


As a scientist who currently bucks the trend of the mainstream, I take exception to that statement...


----------



## Ferrum Master (Apr 15, 2019)

LoL it turned into a creationism clash


----------



## lexluthermiester (Apr 15, 2019)

Ferrum Master said:


> LoL it turned into a creationism clash


Thing is, a basic unsolvable problem exists. And it exists in two parts;
1. Religion can not prove God exists.
2. Science can not prove God doesn't exist.

This kind of debate will continue endlessly.


----------



## R-T-B (Apr 15, 2019)

lexluthermiester said:


> Thing is, a basic unsolvable problem exists. And it exists in two parts;
> 1. Religion can not prove God exists.
> 2. Science can not prove God doesn't exist.
> 
> This kind of debate will continue endlessly.



Thank you Mr Nutshell.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Apr 15, 2019)

R-T-B said:


> Thank you Mr Nutshell.


You're welcome, always willing to help!  



storm-chaser said:


> http://bnugent.org/famous-fossil-ape-named-lucy-debunked-by-science/


That article has no citations. Additionally, I've done some research on "Lucy" and the skull in question was proportionally large enough for a modern human brain. However, I will agree that while "Lucy" gave a great deal of insight as to the development of humanity, "she" is not the missing link she is suggested to be.


----------



## Deleted member 67555 (Apr 15, 2019)

"Beliefs" and science do not mix.
If you do not understand that go back and learn some more.

This stuff is a theory, and as such all
 evidence points to something and that something has been put to the test and as of yet cannot be disproven.

Religion is a belief that can easily be put down by science.
Religion is a "claim".
You cannot simply make a claim without evidence and then say it to be true just because it cannot be proven false.


----------



## dorsetknob (Apr 15, 2019)

storm-chaser said:


> We date time by one man. His name is Jesus.


"Sorry your wrong there"
Different Societys worldwide have Different Calenders /dating Schemes'


----------



## sneekypeet (Apr 15, 2019)

Not sure how we went to proving God's existance here, but it has very little to do with the topic.


----------



## juiseman (Apr 15, 2019)

Disappointed....Thought they found a new type of human alive.....

Sounds like pure speculation.
Pretty much like everything else that someone "discovers"


----------



## infrared (Apr 15, 2019)

dorsetknob said:


> I have no intreast  in debating  god or any other Deity creation myth and have requested thread be clensed/closed
> Thank you for sharing your myths ect.
> 
> Science is what this sub forum is for   take the myths ect to the lounge area.


Thread cleansed 

Everyone:
As per OP's wishes please stay on topic, this thread is not for religious discussion. Thank you.


----------



## xkm1948 (Apr 17, 2019)

Typed up over 20k words to try to explain evolution from the perspective of stochastic genome modeling. In the end realized it is not worth it.

Ahhh f$$k i want my 2hrs back....


----------



## Caring1 (Apr 21, 2019)

lexluthermiester said:


> As a scientist who currently bucks the trend of the mainstream, I take exception to that statement...


Then my statement was not aimed at you 
Every new discovery is like a small piece of a jigsaw puzzle, but i'm convinced there is more than one puzzle laid out that it can fit, but most people only see the one in front of them.


----------



## SoNic67 (Apr 21, 2019)

xkm1948 said:


> Typed up over 20k words to try to explain evolution from the perspective of stochastic genome modeling.


Obviously, this is not the place.
Today in both "camps" 99% of the people are just believers. Even the self-declared "evolutionists" are believers because they believe in something that their intellect cannot understand. They barely finish HS, never had a probability math class at college level... so on and so forth.

To me, as agnostic, nobody could explain the apparition of humans genetically in a convincing way. How one pair of chromosomes got fused in one individual and got transmitted by natural sexual reproduction in the rest of population that had normal, not-fused chromosomes. How come mitochondrial evidence points to a very short "evolution" of humans on timescale, more like an "explosion".

I have read some papers that claim to explain that, but I didn't get convinced. 20-30 years since I have started questioning myself this... then one day I randomly saw the videos of late Llyod Pye linked above. He was the only one that really tried to address the same questions. Coincidence that we tough the same? Not to me.

Until scientists are genuinely try to solve this great mystery, without using dogma and stigma, they are no better than the rest of religious believers.


----------



## Zareek (Apr 21, 2019)

I can't even comment on some of the garbage I've read in this forum because it so insane I will end up in a rant. Just one question, if you don't believe in evolution why would come to a thread that is so obviously about evolution?


----------



## SoNic67 (Apr 21, 2019)

Why not? The purpose of a forum is to have discussions, not to be a "safe space" echo chamber. Per your logic, if you don't believe in creation, why do you comment about creation?

Is it though about "evolution"? Who says that those fossils are from what we evolved from? Actually, even per evolution dogma, most of the humanoid fossils are not in our evolution path.


----------



## the54thvoid (Apr 21, 2019)

As an archaeology student, I can tell you there is no missing link. That term is used by idiots and the astoundingly ignorant.

The tree of life concept is enough of an illustration to guide. Branches of evolution flourish, then fail. Few make it through.

The great thing about a true science is that we don't know the truth until it's infallible. Mainstream science guides us through logical thought but it is ALWAYS open to critique and change. Unlike other ideological dead ends.


----------



## SoNic67 (Apr 21, 2019)

Circa 150-200kya the humans appeared suddenly in Africa and then slowly moved out, in phases (60-80 kya).
Before that we have ape-like hominids. There is nothing "in between".

We are not descendants of the Neanderthal or Homo Erectus. We might inbreed with them (2-3%) later, before we drove them off...
Archeology got more interesting today: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archaeogenetics


----------



## dorsetknob (Apr 21, 2019)

The little old lady that lives near you and the old man oppose your mum are actively practicing Evolution
in their case its called Gardening where they breed crops/plants  for colour /size of fruit
95% of what modern people eat is directly resulted from evolution


----------



## R-T-B (Apr 21, 2019)

SoNic67 said:


> more like an "explosion".



Yes, and that had happened before, historically, in the fossil record.  It's not unheard of.  The Cambrian Explosion is the best known example.  I would reccomend reading this: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambrian_explosion#Possible_Causes

It's an excellent (but incomplete) list of possible ways an organisms development may be supercharged.

As for chromosomes fusing, and all that, it's sort of weird to think about, but interspecies breeding is showing increasing evidence as having both happened and had an impact on a lot of the evolutionary tree (yes, even late humans).  The weirdness you get from that in even humanity's brief experiments with interbreeding animals may explain all sorts of abnormalities.  It certainly does weird things to the chromosomes when you get viable offspring.

Relevant article:

https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2006/05/did-ancestral-humans-chimps-interbreed/

And yes, I am fully aware the monkeysex angle makes this even less appetizing to religious types.  That shouldn't matter to science if the theory holds any credibilility.


----------



## SoNic67 (Apr 21, 2019)

dorsetknob said:


> The little old lady that lives near you and the old man oppose your mum are actively practicing Evolution
> in their case its called Gardening where they breed crops/plants for colour /size of fruit


That's Selection, not evolution. If you have a genome fund, and you selectively eliminate some of the genes from it, you are not evolving that population into a different species. A tomato didn't evolve from a cactus.
Only recently we found out how to genetically engineer them. And that makes my point of *creative* evolution versus random one.

Like I said before, people don't know what they don't know. But they always BELIEVE strongly in what they don't understand.


----------



## MrGenius (Apr 21, 2019)

Being human sucks ass. That's all I know. Not a single good thing about it, other than the fact that it eventually ends.


----------



## SoNic67 (Apr 21, 2019)

R-T-B said:


> The Cambrian Explosion is the best known example.


And that doesn't raise questions? How those "empty" ecological niches got filled so sudden by random mutations that usually take millions of years to develop?

Random mutations need much, much longer times. Here certainly looks like *creative* engineered processes. God, Aliens... any civilization that could do that, at that point in time, are certainly indistinguishable from God to us.


----------



## dorsetknob (Apr 21, 2019)

SoNic67 said:


> That's Selection, not evolution.


Evolution is the process of successful selection


----------



## R-T-B (Apr 21, 2019)

SoNic67 said:


> And that doesn't raise questions?



It does.  But rather than throw everything out because one piece doesn't fit, Occam's Razor would have us ask "What Changed?" rather than throwing out what seems a perfectly good theory.

Only if none of the explanations make sense can the theory truly be discarded.  That is not the case.  If you really think those explanations are impossible, please do detail what you see wrong with them beyond "lol too fast therefore aliens."


----------



## MrGenius (Apr 21, 2019)

The question is...why are stupid people allowed to live and/or procreate? When will we evolve to that level? Ever?

Hint: Then "when" and "ever" are semi-rhetorical. The time will come. I'm just pissed off it's not sooner than later. Anywho...enjoy your stay while it lasts idiots!


----------



## R-T-B (Apr 21, 2019)

dorsetknob said:


> Evolution is the process of successful selection



Very much so.



MrGenius said:


> The question is...why are stupid people allowed to live and/or procreate?



Because they've convinced the majority to let them.

Seperate discussion Mr. Wonderful.


----------



## storm-chaser (Apr 21, 2019)

dorsetknob said:


> Evolution is the process of successful selection


Evolution is the process of successful mutation. Which is impossible and paradoxical when you consider the odds. Fill the entire state of texas with quarters, a total of 10 feet high and pick the golden quarter not just once, but over and over again for every single animal. 99% of mutations are bad.


----------



## dorsetknob (Apr 21, 2019)

SoNic67 said:


> And that doesn't raise questions? How those "empty" ecological niches got filled so sudden by random mutations that usually take millions of years to develop?
> 
> Random mutations need much, much longer times


No it does not 
evolution has been Scientificly Documented with Various Species within the lifetime  ( and to be more precise Acedemic lifetime ) of Scientist and reserchers


----------



## SoNic67 (Apr 21, 2019)

dorsetknob said:


> evolution has been Scientificly Documented with Various Species within the lifetime ( and to be more precise Acedemic lifetime ) of Scientist and reserchers


Like said... if you *believe* that, then more power to you. But you are not different than any other believer. BTW the others have "documented" their beliefs too. Dogma is something that you are not allowed to question.


----------



## R-T-B (Apr 21, 2019)

storm-chaser said:


> Evolution is the process of successful mutation.



Mutation just brings new genes in.  Selection decides which ones win out.




storm-chaser said:


> Which is impossible and paradoxical when you consider the odds.



No, not really.  Not even close to really.  A lot of selection has gone on over the last millions of years alone.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Apr 21, 2019)

dorsetknob said:


> Evolution is the process of successful selection


This..


storm-chaser said:


> Evolution is the process of successful mutation.


And this. Both are correct. Both have been proven to happen.


----------



## R-T-B (Apr 21, 2019)

SoNic67 said:


> Like said... if you *believe* that, then more power to you.



I do believe in the ability of people who've spent a lifetime on this to know more than me, yes.

I also do my own research to fact check and understand the theories, as I understand (from history ironically) recorded "fact" can be very very wrong (Columbus, anyone?)

You claim to do the same but I have honestly yet to see it.  You see the difference?  You have choosen the path you liked.  I chose the path that has the most things add up.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Apr 21, 2019)

SoNic67 said:


> Dogma is something that you are not allowed to question.


Rubbish.


----------



## Vayra86 (Apr 21, 2019)

MrGenius said:


> The question is...why are stupid people allowed to live and/or procreate? When will we evolve to that level? Ever?
> 
> Hint: Then "when" and "ever" are semi-rhetorical. The time will come. I'm just pissed off it's not sooner than later. Anywho...enjoy your stay while it lasts idiots!



Our current society and systems are actually very good at exponentially increasing the % of idiots and failing at natural selection ie. evolution, under the guise of humane and equal policies.. And ironically, even a great war is not a very good tool for natural selection, yet its the only way to radically reduce that number at some point in the future. And it gets worse, we're now even thinking of sending our best and brightest off-planet, to a Mars colony or something likewise.

Painful, I say.


----------



## storm-chaser (Apr 21, 2019)

If selection has actually occurred why don't we see evidence of it in the natural world? or in the fossil record for that matter ? I.E Half evolved creatures - we've been keeping tabs on a whole spectrum of animal species for at least the past 300 + years you'd think something would change or at least be able to recover transitional forms.

If I truly believed in evolution I would also wonder why humans are the dominate species on earth. If all life started of a primordial stew, why is it that humans are the only ones capable of building skyscrapers?


----------



## 64K (Apr 21, 2019)

MrGenius said:


> The question is...why are stupid people allowed to live and/or procreate? When will we evolve to that level? Ever?
> 
> Hint: Then "when" and "ever" are semi-rhetorical. The time will come. I'm just pissed off it's not sooner than later. Anywho...enjoy your stay while it lasts idiots!



That's a good question. Why are defective people cared for by other people and allowed to drain resources from other more capable humans? Why do humans have a conscience to begin with? Wouldn't that be a hindrance  to Evolution? Intelligence is obviously an advantage in Evolution but why self-awareness? Why do humans care about anything other than survival and procreation?


----------



## Vayra86 (Apr 21, 2019)

storm-chaser said:


> If selection has actually occurred why don't we see evidence of it in the natural world? or in the fossil record for that matter ? I.E Half evolved creatures - we've been keeping tabs on a whole spectrum of animal species for at least the past 300 + years you'd think something would change or at least be able to recover transitional forms.
> 
> If I truly believed in evolution I would also wonder why humans are the dominate species on earth. If all life started of a primordial stew, why is it that humans are the only ones capable of building skyscrapers?



Evolution is exactly the answer to that question. All those creatures that are now extinct are the product of natural selection, they are all failures in a certain sense. Each and every piece of our wildlife/ecosystem has a very specific function, sometimes even just as part of the food chain. Everything that still lives on this planet has a purpose, however big or small that may be. That is the living proof of evolution.



64K said:


> That's a good question. Why are defective people cared for by other people and allowed to drain resources from others? Why do humans have a conscience to begin with? Wouldn't that be a hindrance  to Evolution? Intelligence is obviously an advantage in Evolution but why self-awareness? Why do humans care about anything other than survival and procreation?



Our own survival also hinges on the idea that we care for each other in a basic sense. If nobody cared about you, why would you do something for others? Our consciousness imposes that on us, and that is why we are dominant. Other animals do this too, caring for each other stands at the very centre of our lives, from birth to death. The more we care for each other, the more we can free up time to 'evolve' free of our daily challenges. Most animals have very little free time because they spend all day on basic necessities.


----------



## 64K (Apr 21, 2019)

Vayra86 said:


> Evolution is exactly the answer to that question. All those creatures that are now extinct are the product of natural selection, they are all failures in a certain sense. Each and every piece of our wildlife/ecosystem has a very specific function, sometimes even just as part of the food chain. Everything that still lives on this planet has a purpose, however big or small that may be. That is the living proof of evolution.
> 
> 
> 
> Our own survival also hinges on the idea that we care for each other in a basic sense. If nobody cared about you, why would you do something for others? Our consciousness imposes that on us, and that is why we are dominant. Other animals do this too, caring for each other stands at the very centre of our lives, from birth to death. The more we care for each other, the more we can free up time to 'evolve' free of our daily challenges. Most animals have very little free time because they spend all day on basic necessities.



Then why do we go to war over ideologies and kill millions of other humans? That's not Evolution. No other species does that.


----------



## Vayra86 (Apr 21, 2019)

64K said:


> Then why do we go to war over ideologies and kill millions of other humans? That's not Evolution. No species does that.



I agree it doesn't look good. But that does not disprove evolution, it may even be a product of it, but that can only be said in hindsight. We can't predict the future. Perhaps history books in 1000 years will say we needed war to find a way forward - even if that meant the ultimate answer was total pacification and perfect unity and harmony. The idea of having to tear things down before you can build something new. All the radical changes in our society (and therefore also part of our evolution) have been preceded by war/revolution/conflict.

Its our way of enforcing change, and in that sense very much a sign of evolution. Keep in mind this is a process that spans many generations, not just our tiny frame of reference.

Another thing to consider is that many people went to war in history because they were protecting home and hearth - the very essence of caring for one another. It all depends what side you're on.

Nuclear deterrence I think is a great example of evolution in our species. We created a hammer so fearsome, nobody would dare use it. We escalated 'war' to the pinnacle of what it can be to make sure we don't wage it that way. It was used once on a population hub to end one of our greatest wars and serve as a lasting example.


----------



## vega22 (Apr 21, 2019)

Vayra86 said:


> Nuclear deterrence I think is a great example of evolution in our species. We created a hammer so fearsome, nobody would dare use it. We escalated 'war' to the pinnacle of what it can be to make sure we don't wage it that way. It was used once on a population hub to end one of our greatest wars and serve as a lasting example.



Slight contradiction there dude. 

We did use it, not that nobody would dare.

But that is a slight derail of the topic.

If we use mainstream historical/archeological evidence as the truth we are only ever going to see a narrow view of what happened.

History is wrote by the victors, as such is inherently biased and archeological only takes into account a narrow view of evidence based of the "findings" of people who used candles at night.

That's before we talk about how most of the land that was used by our ancient ancestors is at the bottom of the seas now.

But for anybody who is entrenched in the mainstream agenda, that claims the pryamids are only 6000 years old. What about göbekli tepe? How does that fit into the big picture?

Imo we have forgotten more than we know.


----------



## dorsetknob (Apr 21, 2019)

64K said:


> Then why do we go to war over ideologies and kill millions of other humans? That's not Evolution. No other species does that.



APART FROM
just chuck in those Documented Chimpanzee that are documented waging war on their neighbours
and the known filmed accounts of porpouse's attacking other species of cetations
Warfare is not just restricted to hominids


----------



## 64K (Apr 21, 2019)

dorsetknob said:


> APART FROM
> just chuck in those Documented Chimpanzee that are documented waging war on their neighbours
> and the known filmed accounts of porpouse's attacking other species of cetations
> Warfare is not just restricted to hominids



I'm not talking about territorial disputes with species against species dorsetknob. I was referring to, as an example, Americans going to war with Koreans and later with Vietnamese over ideologies (political in those cases). There have been numerous other wars over religious ideologies in European history that had nothing to do with Evolution or procreation or Economics and Economics is the usual cause of war.

The bottom line is that humans are not in the same chain of events that Evolution can explain. There's something very different about us that Scientific Dogma and Religious Dogma can't explain.


----------



## Athlonite (Apr 21, 2019)

BLAH BLAH BLAH who the fuck cares where and when we came from I sure as hell don't it doesn't effect my daily life of moving forward if all we do is look backwards we'll never get to where we're going 

As to why do we care for the stupid or defected well ask those stupid human rights BS believers that basically stopped hospitals from leaving defect babies in a cold room to die or these moronic save the kids from starving groups who just help perpetuate the problem


----------



## SoNic67 (Apr 21, 2019)

64K said:


> Americans going to war with Koreans and later with Vietnamese over ideologies


Not with all of them. Koreans and Vietnamese governments asked for help in front of much stronger enemies.
Those were proxy wars, blame goes to China and Russia that were the expansionists powers challenging the status quo.


----------



## R-T-B (Apr 22, 2019)

storm-chaser said:


> we've been keeping tabs on a whole spectrum of animal species for at least the past 300 + years you'd think something would change or at least be able to recover transitional forms.



There are documented new species happening quite frequently, if thats what you mean...  Some of them are most likely the product of fresh evolution.

And 300 years is nothing in a evilutionary timescale.  It's less than the blink of an eye



64K said:


> I'm not talking about territorial disputes with species against species dorsetknob. I was referring to, as an example, Americans going to war with Koreans and later with Vietnamese over ideologies (political in those cases).



Politics exist in chimp tribes too.  How else do you get an otherwise unassociasted Chimp to fight for you?

We do it bigger but ultimately, we do it for very similar motivations and reasons.  Territory.  Power.  Control.

Dominant species is possibly a good argument for some outside force having interferred with the natural evolutionary process, elevating one above it's peers.  But there is no hard evidence to support that.  It's a weak theory as such at best, and better, simpler explanations tend to exist.

That does not mean it is wrong.  But to follow it blindly is foolish.



Athlonite said:


> As to why do we care for the stupid or defected well ask those stupid human rights BS believers that basically stopped hospitals from leaving defect babies in a cold room to die or these moronic save the kids from starving groups who just help perpetuate the problem



You are talking to a "defect baby" right now.  (Wolf Parkinsons white survivor, a very severe case) Might want to rethink your views a bit, lest you be burned by them.



vega22 said:


> Imo we have forgotten more than we know.



I agree with that.  My inner historian cannot deny it.


----------



## sepheronx (Apr 22, 2019)

MrGenius said:


> Being human sucks ass. That's all I know. Not a single good thing about it, other than the fact that it eventually ends.



dunno about you but I prefer not to be a Gazelle.  Unless one in a zoo that isn't going to be used as food for the Lions.


----------



## SoNic67 (Apr 22, 2019)

R-T-B said:


> There are documented new species happening quite frequently, if thats what you mean... Some of them are most likely the product of fresh evolution.


All those are because we didn't know about them, and just found them, not because they "evolved" now. Next time maybe you research and give links to those assertions.
Don't confuse the selection inside an existing genome with evolution into a new species.


----------



## juiseman (Apr 22, 2019)

juiseman said:


> Disappointed....Thought they found a new type of human alive.....
> 
> Sounds like pure speculation.
> Pretty much like everything else that someone "discovers"



Guess the only way to prove it would be to find some of these "in-between" creatures alive.

too bad that's not happening anytime soon....lol...

And yea; I did just quote myself also...

on a different topic; I'm freaking hungry!!! cant wait for lunch time...


----------



## R-T-B (Apr 22, 2019)

SoNic67 said:


> All those are because we didn't know about them, and just found them, not because they "evolved" now. Next time maybe you research and give links to those assertions.
> Don't confuse the selection inside an existing genome with evolution into a new species.




Yeah, no.  Have a link sure.  Could've used google too, btw.

https://www.wired.com/2009/11/speciation-in-action/

That was in 2009.  I know there have been other examples over the years but this is both the earliest and the best (The Galapagos are small and watched closely)


----------



## SoNic67 (Apr 22, 2019)

Those are Darvin's Finches, are not new at all, it was the base of his theory.
And some say it's an example of inbreeding selection, not evolution.



Vya Domus said:


> Well, there is no convincing way to explain anything as such. It took around 3 billion years to get from single cell organisms to multi cell and no one can explain why it took so much time and how that happened and you expect an explanation for something that's far more complicated. Not likely to get one anytime soon, no one has even figured out the basics.
> Meh, fairy tales.


In physics we have a rule of increasing entropy. In this Universe, any random action is never going to the direction of a more organized system. All the genetic mutations today are leading to defects in the living systems.
And I am supposed to believe that random mutations in the chemical soup actually went against the law of physics and created more organized systems. Life.


----------



## R-T-B (Apr 22, 2019)

SoNic67 said:


> Those are Darvin's Finches, are not new at all, it was the base of his theory.



Why does that matter given it's still the best example?

A more recent example I can think of involves polar bears and grizzlies breeding to form a new species (another way evolution can and has happened historically).  Let's see what google turns up:

https://polarbearsinternational.org...imate-change-will-this-help-save-polar-bears/

It's less ideal than the speciation example, but that takes a long time usually.


----------



## dorsetknob (Apr 22, 2019)

Ethics be dammed '  A Moral .dilemma 
https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg19926701-000-blasts-from-the-past-the-soviet-ape-man-scandal/
Not Natural Evolution But its Possible now with genetic engineering.


----------



## vega22 (Apr 22, 2019)

juiseman said:


> Now, that's one thing I can't get into...
> I'm a theory nut; but that is where I draw the line...
> 
> We didn't go to the moon-9/11 inside job-fake hoax mass shootings-ect...ect.....all of that has a motive...
> ...




Distraction tactics. Pull people away from things like vault 7, climate change and political corruption/new world order type stuffs.

Imo anyway.


----------



## juiseman (Apr 22, 2019)

Yea, good point Vega...


----------



## John Naylor (Apr 22, 2019)

Looking at the standard creationist myth versus the FSM, I find the FSM argument equally compelling from a factual standpoint.  But as a sidenote, as to which would i want to be true .... who wouldn't rather have a heaven with Beer Volcano and Stripper Factory ?

https://www.venganza.org/about/open-letter/


----------



## lexluthermiester (Apr 22, 2019)

Athlonite said:


> BLAH BLAH BLAH who the fuck cares where and when we came from I sure as hell don't it doesn't effect my daily life of moving forward if all we do is look backwards we'll never get to where we're going


Wow, just wow. Wait for it...


Athlonite said:


> As to why do we care for the stupid or defected well ask those stupid human rights BS believers that basically stopped hospitals from leaving defect babies in a cold room to die or these moronic save the kids from starving groups who just help perpetuate the problem


By your logic, hospitals should be allowed to effectively kill off babies with down-syndrom and other such dysfunctions? Irony much? IF those hospitals you speak of were still allowed to do such a cold and callus things, YOU wouldn't be around to make such morally lacking and mentally bereft statements. The fact that these things are not done/allowed is what seperates us from the animals. Kindness and compassion, while not exclusively human traits, do go hand in hand with the logic and reason that are.


R-T-B said:


> There are documented new species happening quite frequently, if thats what you mean... Some of them are most likely the product of fresh evolution.
> And 300 years is nothing in a evolutionary timescale. It's less than the blink of an eye


This. One of the things to remember also is that Earth is currently in one of the largest extinction events of the last 22million years. While new species are popping up, we are loosing far more on average.


SoNic67 said:


> All those are because we didn't know about them, and just found them, not because they "evolved" now.


No, R-T-B is correct. Science has documented actual and real evolution in real time.


SoNic67 said:


> In physics we have a rule of increasing entropy.


Which is incorrect.


SoNic67 said:


> In this Universe, any random action is never going to the direction of a more organized system.


That's not true at all. Evidence? Galaxy's and Galaxy clusters. Those are examples of definitive proof that matter and energy can gravitate(pun intended) to a more organized state.


SoNic67 said:


> All the genetic mutations today are leading to defects in the living systems.


"Genetic mutations" is a fancy way of saying "chemical changes". And that's all they are, minor changes to the chemical structure of DNA which bare out an effect. Sometimes that effect is beneficial, sometimes it is not and sometimes it has no tangible effect at all.


SoNic67 said:


> And I am supposed to believe that random mutations in the chemical soup actually went against the law of physics and created more organized systems. Life.


You want evidence? Go outside and look at all of the forms of life that surround us. Now go investigate the geological record of life that has existed in the past. Every one of them, including the one you see when you look in the mirror(an object that exists because the life form that invented it become more complex and organized over time), are more complex and organized forms of life than have existed in the past.


----------



## R-T-B (Apr 22, 2019)

dorsetknob said:


> Ethics be dammed '  A Moral .dilemma
> https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg19926701-000-blasts-from-the-past-the-soviet-ape-man-scandal/
> Not Natural Evolution But its Possible now with genetic engineering.



Although animal hybrids interest me, for...  reasons (god I couldn't haven't worded that weirder, nevermind.  Let's just say I like biology) those soviet experiments are an abomination.  That and what your reading is what they allowed to leak out publically.  Pretty damn well can bet worse happened back in Russia.

At any rate I'm out for now.  Not enough learning and too much "stick in the mud" in here.


----------



## Athlonite (Apr 22, 2019)

lexluthermiester said:


> By your logic, hospitals should be allowed to effectively kill off babies with down-syndrome and other such dysfunctions? Irony much? IF those hospitals you speak of were still allowed to do such a cold and callus things, YOU wouldn't be around to make such morally lacking and mentally bereft statements. The fact that these things are not done/allowed is what separates us from the animals. Kindness and compassion, while not exclusively human traits, do go hand in hand with the logic and reason that are.



meanwhile all those goody good feelings are overburdening our planet with a population it can barely sustain which will only become worse with the passage of time leading to massive wars for resources china for instance is already buying up large tracts of land for growth of food or for mining of coal and other ores it requires because it can't support it's own population the U.S. and it's "war on terror" where they offer aid for cheap oil from Iraq certainly makes you stop and wonder was it really about terror or was it really about the oil.  
Who's next Russia well they've already started to expand again wont be long before all those who used to be behind the iron curtain will once again be back there,  and India their population rivals that of China who are they going to take over ?


----------



## lexluthermiester (Apr 22, 2019)

Athlonite said:


> meanwhile all those goody good feelings are overburdening our planet with a population it can barely sustain which will only become worse with the passage of time leading to massive wars for resources china for instance is already buying up large tracts of land for growth of food or for mining of coal and other ores it requires because it can't support it's own population the U.S. and it's "war on terror" where they offer aid for cheap oil from Iraq certainly makes you stop and wonder was it really about terror or was it really about the oil.


----------



## Vayra86 (Apr 22, 2019)

Athlonite said:


> meanwhile all those goody good feelings are overburdening our planet with a population it can barely sustain which will only become worse with the passage of time leading to massive wars for resources china for instance is already buying up large tracts of land for growth of food or for mining of coal and other ores it requires because it can't support it's own population the U.S. and it's "war on terror" where they offer aid for cheap oil from Iraq certainly makes you stop and wonder was it really about terror or was it really about the oil.
> Who's next Russia well they've already started to expand again wont be long before all those who used to be behind the iron curtain will once again be back there,  and India their population rivals that of China who are they going to take over ?



Totally offtopic, if the subject is too big for you, don't partake. You will derail this thread and it will go nowhere. Read, maybe you will learn a thing or two. Most of the insights being shared here are much bigger than our current day politics.

Make your story bigger and suddenly it can have its place in our evolutionary process. Let's try that?

So, yes, our resources will be exhausted at some point - this pushes us to find new ways to survive and thrive, and there is a whole galaxy out there. It may sound sci-fi, but its either that or we turn things around radically on our own planet - now, given your own sense of realism about the current state of affairs, what is more likely? If we are successful at evolving further, we will probably have to adapt to new hardships for example those in zero G. We already have astronauts trying hard at that. Perhaps they represent the next step in our development/evolution of traits and strengths.


----------



## R-T-B (Apr 22, 2019)

> meanwhile all those goody good feelings are overburdening our planet with a population it can barely sustain which will only become worse with the passage of time leading to massive wars for resources china for instance is already buying up large tracts of land for growth of food or for mining of coal and other ores it requires because it can't support it's own population the U.S. and it's "war on terror" where they offer aid for cheap oil from Iraq certainly makes you stop and wonder was it really about terror or was it really about the oil.



And if one of the goody good feelings came up with Fusion energy largely solving our problems, would your brain go inside out?

People like you would ensure Stephen Hawking would've been a goner the moment he was diagnosed...  I have no words, honestly.  Please, elsewhere with this irrelevant and utterly strange off-the-wall viewpoint.


----------



## Caring1 (Apr 23, 2019)

John Naylor said:


> Looking at the standard creationist myth versus the FSM, I find the FSM argument equally compelling from a factual standpoint.  But as a sidenote, as to which would i want to be true .... who wouldn't rather have a heaven with Beer Volcano and Stripper Factory ?


Your wife!


----------



## SoNic67 (Apr 23, 2019)

R-T-B said:


> Why does that matter given it's still the best example?
> 
> A more recent example I can think of involves polar bears and grizzlies breeding to form a new species (another way evolution can and has happened historically).  Let's see what google turns up:
> 
> It's less ideal than the speciation example, but that takes a long time usually.



That's like saying that a child of a Chinese human with an African human is a new species of human.
Same with those Finches - a mutant with bigger beak resulted from incest of one pair - sister and brother. Well, we have mutants being hemophiliacs in royal families, and other genetic variations (big noses on some people), we don't call those "a new species".

Whatever, you are true believers that random events can lead to more order. That a random chemical can create a more organized system, called life.
That humans really descend from the apes like Neanderthals _in a blink of the eye_ (historically) and _without intermediate forms_.

So I can't do much here on this thread, agree to disagree... thanks for watching.


----------



## Bones (Apr 23, 2019)

To a point it's like asking this series of questions.





No one really knows what but I'm with the above post, no way random, chaotic events created order because that just doesn't happen.
You simply don't get order from chaos, not the nature of it.

I also agree to disagree so...... Carry on guys and thanks.


----------



## infrared (Apr 23, 2019)

John Naylor said:


> But as a sidenote, as to which would i want to be true .... who wouldn't rather have a heaven with Beer Volcano and Stripper Factory ?





Caring1 said:


> Your wife!


How do you know John's partner wouldn't also enjoy a heaven with beer and strippers? lol
apologies for off-topic..


----------



## Vayra86 (Apr 23, 2019)

Bones said:


> To a point it's like asking this series of questions.
> View attachment 121525
> 
> No one really knows what but I'm with the above post, no way random, chaotic events created order because that just doesn't happen.
> ...



Yeah... all those questions are actually pretty easy to answer... I hate to come off arrogant but this is precisely the infinite stupidity of all these self proclaimed "critical thinkers". Blissful ignorance because they are not open to the answers that are right in front of them.

Just because you dont understand something doesnt mean its wrong nor does it mean there is space for an alternative 'fact'. Agree to disagree? No: get educated is what is appropriate here...

1. None of them, you arent an owner
2. Simple phonetics...
3. Well documented...
4. Spelling and grammar rules
5. Sundial


----------



## witkazy (Apr 23, 2019)

If anything proves evolution that would be strippers and booz.


----------



## Bones (Apr 23, 2019)

Vayra86 said:


> Yeah... all those questions are actually pretty easy to answer... I hate to come off arrogant but this is precisely the infinite stupidity of all these self proclaimed "critical thinkers". Blissful ignorance because they are not open to the answers that are right in front of them.
> 
> Just because you dont understand something doesnt mean its wrong nor does it mean there is space for an alternative 'fact'. Agree to disagree? No: get educated is what is appropriate here...
> 
> ...



I agree with most of the above but that wasn't really what I was getting at, I was using that as an example of how some questions are asked that really doesn't need to be or in the case of a couple in the attachment at least no need to worry about it because it just doesn't matter.

Some really do have obvious answers but not all - As to #3, sorry but I don't believe in evolution, plain and simple and no, it's still Darwin's theory not Darwin's fact.
All the rest do have obvious answers to them IF you think about it in the right way.

And yes, I can and do agree to disagree because that's up to me in my case as it is for you and anyone else as it should be.


----------



## Ahhzz (Apr 23, 2019)

SoNic67 said:


> That's like saying that a child of a Chinese human with an African human is a new species of human.
> Same with those Finches - a mutant with bigger beak resulted from incest of one pair - sister and brother. Well, we have mutants being hemophiliacs in royal families, and other genetic variations (big noses on some people), we don't call those "a new species".
> 
> Whatever, you are true believers that random events can lead to more order. That a random chemical can create a more organized system, called life.
> ...



Polar bears and Grizzly bears are different SPECIES. An Asian Human is the same SPECIES as an African Human. All Human Beings alive today are the same SPECIES, and two mating together do not create a new species.  The finches on the Galapagos Isle that arrived 4 decades ago, by mating with a different SPECIES of finch, have created a totally different SPECIES, in 2 generations. 

Your statements lack facts.


----------



## SoNic67 (Apr 23, 2019)

"Species" are historically classified to fit evolutionist reasons. If we apply the same logic (and it was applied at a time), humans would be split in different species too. But we invented the "race" for that. It's not politically correct to call mixed race people "hybrids".

Genetically if two specimens can have offspring, they are the same species. It's different races of bears if you want.
This kind of articles are just doing "damage control":
https://news.ucsc.edu/2013/03/polar-bear-genomics.html


----------



## R-T-B (Apr 23, 2019)

SoNic67 said:


> That's like saying that a child of a Chinese human with an African human is a new species of human.



Strictly speaking from an observable trait and geographic isolation perspective, it could almost qualify if we did not personally know our genomes to be so similar.  That, and social reasons, mainly (no one wants to be another species except of course, me).

The species line is somewhat arbitrary and more used to identify regular breeding groups than anything.  Interracial breeding isn't unusual anymore so the "one species" thing as it stands now is actually mostly correct.  

Still, the "species" ambiguity, that really is a valid point, but in no way disproves evolution or the numerous examples of it given.



SoNic67 said:


> "Species" are historically classified to fit evolutionist reasons.



Nope.  Taxonomy, at least in the sense of identifying animals, far predates Darwin and evolution.  There's no grand conspiracy there.


----------



## mouacyk (Apr 23, 2019)

For those who haven't given science a chance, do it now, before it's too late.  Materials science and nano-technology is coming and they will bring Mount Olympus down to ground level.  We all can always enjoy a good book and its stories when that happens.


----------



## R-T-B (Apr 23, 2019)

mouacyk said:


> For those who haven't given science a chance, do it now, before it's too late.  Materials science and nano-technology is coming and they will bring Mount Olympus down to ground level.  We all can always enjoy a good book and its stories when that happens.



It's ok, the Frog God forgives all whether they believe in him or not*

*After consumption


----------



## lexluthermiester (Apr 23, 2019)

What I find interesting is that topic like this invariably bring out the "Us Vs Them" God talk.

He's a thought. What if evolution is actually God's way of doing things? Religious texts clearly tell us that "His ways are not our ways", so what if all of the inconsistencies science and religion through at each other are actually perfectly consistant because we simply haven't connected the dots?


----------



## R-T-B (Apr 24, 2019)

lexluthermiester said:


> What I find interesting is that topic like this invariably bring out the "Us Vs Them" God talk.
> 
> He's a thought. What if evolution is actually God's way of doing things? Religious texts clearly tell us that "His ways are not our ways", so what if all of the inconsistencies science and religion through at each other are actually perfectly consistant because we simply haven't connected the dots?



I would suspect that to be the case were god real, frankly.


----------

