The Non-Evolution of Modern Man

@Thomas,

The only thing which has evaporated here is evolutionites' grasp of logic.

For us to be descended from ANY hominid, you'd need some new kind of hominid, closer to us in both time and morphology than any now known. The works and remains of such a creature, had he ever existed, would be all over the map and very easy to find.

2 Replies

@gungasnake,

Someone never learned convergent and divergent evolution, or the concept of environmental niches Rolling Eyes

You're probably going to start saying things like, "if man is descended from apes, then why do we still have apes?"

Preach on, small minded one.

0 Replies

@gungasnake,

gungasnake wrote:

For us to be descended from ANY hominid, you'd need some new kind of hominid, closer to us in both time and morphology than any now known.

Why?

1) Why couldn't the common ancestor of Homo Sapiens and Homo Neanderthalensis have been a non-hominid? Why couldn't both branches, after their separation, have independently acquired their hominid characteristics independently?

2) Even if our common ancestor was a hominid, why is it logically necessary for it to be closer to us in both time and morphology?

2 Replies

@Thomas,

Thomas wrote:

Why?

1) Why couldn't the common ancestor of Homo Sapiens and Homo Neanderthalensis have been a non-hominid? Why couldn't both branches, after their separation, have independently acquired their hominid characteristics independently?

2) Even if our common ancestor was a hominid, why is it logically necessary for it to be closer to us in both time and morphology?

Yeh, I was wondering the same thing.

I never understood Gunga's whole argument with the neanderthals. Not that I expect there to be any rationality to his argument anyway, but usually I at least "get" what he's talking about even if it sounds crazy.

0 Replies

@Thomas,

Quote:

1) Why couldn't the common ancestor of Homo Sapiens and Homo Neanderthalensis have been a non-hominid?

You mean like a fish or a dog perhaps??

Once again, the neanderthal has been ruled out as a plausible ancestor for modern man since he was too far genetically removed (DNA about halfway between ours and that of a chimpanzee) and there is NOTHING else on the planet as close or closer to us genetically AS the neanderthal.

This one simply is not complicated.

1 Reply

@gungasnake,

gungasnake wrote:

You mean like a fish or a dog perhaps??

Although there are certainly fish among the common ancestors of Homo Sapiens and Homo Neandertalensis, the ancestors I had in mind were actually other primates.

gungasnake wrote:

there is NOTHING else on the planet as close or closer to us genetically AS the neanderthal.

Not today. Because the common ancestors of Neanderthals and modern humans, who would have been genetically closer to us than Neanderthals were, is now extinct.

1 Reply

@Thomas,

The neanderthal has been officially ruled out as a plausible human ancestor since the genetic gap is deemed too wide; the gap between us and non-hominid primates is much wider.

Picture it like this...

Remember what Florence Joyner (Flojo) looked like when she was about 25 years old?

Suppose at that age, she had walked up to one of the NFL teams, towards the end of the season, and said something like:

Quote:

Okay, I'm gonna give alla you old losers a chance: two foot head start at a hundred meters, and if one of you old losers can catchme, he can HAVE me...

And suppose they let the fastest guy on the team, probably one of the defensive backs, have the first shot at it... they lined up two feet part (Flojo two steps ahead), somebody fired a starting pistol, and the best the guy could do was finish the hundred meters about eleven or twelve steps behind Flojo.

Are you going to sit there and say something like

Quote:

Hey, no problem, we need to let the fifth or sixth fastest guy on the team try it!!

??

1 Reply

@gungasnake,

How we got from actual science and evolution, to using FloJo and the football team to "clarify" the discussion simply staggers the mind. One can only gasp at the insanity being poured forth here.

1 Reply

@rosborne979,

Quote:

How we got from actual science and evolution, to using FloJo and the football team to "clarify" the discussion simply staggers the mind.

It only staggers INFERIOR minds. Normal people can see it.

1 Reply

@gungasnake,

gungasnake wrote:

It only staggers INFERIOR minds. Normal people can see it.

... says the lone voice with no valid evidence to back up his claims.

0 Replies

This discussion is mental!

GUNGA - I don't want to be rude, and I believe we are all entitled to believe. But I suggest you look at the whole evolution thing again, at all the evidence, at all the problems with it and the hypotheses that seek to fill the gaps but this time look at it all through fresh eyes.

Go in with the premise that there is no God. The idea that there might be a God is unprovable and thus has no place in logical reasoning when trying to solve a scientific conundrum like gaps in our knowledge of human evolution. Look at the whole lot again without the back-up answer - "Eureka!! It must have been God!"

Gaps in our knowledge of human evolution are much more likely to be caused by missing examples in the fossil record than creationism. Be fair. Zany ideas like cro-magnon ate all his ancestors, even their bones, are more plausible than "God made us". Not that I would ever dream of buying it, but those crackpots who say we came to be on this earth because aliens brought us here are more likely to be right than those who say God made us out of mud.

Go in with a clean slate, a mind that's unclouded by 2000 years of gibberish.

2 Replies

@iamsam82,

Quote:

Not that I would ever dream of buying it, but those crackpots who say we came to be on this earth because aliens brought us here are more likely to be right than those who say God made us out of mud.

The idea of modern man being put on this planet by aliens of whatever stripe merely kicks the can down the road a tiny bit as far as evoloserism, which is still impossible. You'd need quadrillions of years even if it was possible and there is no way to believe that anything within reachable distance from us is that old.

1 Reply

@gungasnake,

I don't really need to counter that as I already say in the piece you quoted from my first post that I didn't personally believe that.

I merely wanted to show that even a ridiculous notion based on alien intervention is still, logically, much sounder than any notion based on God. Observe:

"How did we get from Neanderthal to modern man? I am modern man. I live on a planet. There are other planets. Other planets may have things living on them. Other things could have brought man to earth."

There's a chain of reason there, albeit preposterous. In

"How did we get from Neanderthal to modern man? A god made us out of clay."

there is not.

Just as I said in my original post, however, my take on it is:

"How did we get from Neanderthal to modern man? There is a gap in the fossil record which is temporarily meaning we cannot see direct human evolution. I can, however, see it in all other fossils of all other species, even in those of earlier hominids. Ergo, it must be the same with the more recent ones."

No doubt we will one day find the fossil. A long while before we prove there's a God.

1 Reply

@iamsam82,

iamsam82 wrote:

This discussion is mental!

That's because it's a Gunga thread. We've learned to expect nothing less from him. Smile

Welcome to A2K. Have fun.

0 Replies

@gungasnake,

We now know that modern humans aren't the descendants of neandertal man. Most modern anthropologists propose that neandertal man and modern humans both have the same anscestor, Homo Erectus. As this species migrated into Europe there was a genetic split, one split developing into cro-magnon man, and one developing into neandertal man. Both species were considerably more intelligent than Homo Erectus. "In other words, if the neanderthal is too far removed from us for us to be descended from him and all other hominids are FURTHER removed, then logically we could not be descended from ANY of them.", you stated. Who said anything about us being descendant of neandertal?
That would be like saying "Since the Indian Cobra and Egyptian Cobra are too far genetically seperated for the Egyptian cobra to be the former's anscestor, it is only logical that any other previously existing serpent couldn't have possibly been the former's anscestor." You my friend are using logic as a fortress to protect your precious beliefs. Logic doesn't have to make sense, it just has to be logical.

0 Replies

@gungasnake,

Listen, fucktard. You don't have to have taken a logic course to use logic. In fact, your logic isn't sound and doesn't leave room for other possibilities.

2 Replies

@estonianwoodsman,

Gunga does have at least one redeeming characteristic; he doesn't curse at people and call them names.

0 Replies

@estonianwoodsman,

Quote:

Listen, fucktard. ...

Welcome to my ignore list...

0 Replies

@parados,

There is more to that statement than they are putting forward.

0 Replies

I have nothing much to add. Other then the fact that I have no knowledge of this fact.

And at first reading guns post I can see how someone who doesn't know much in the field (not saying that anyone who has commented on this thread does or doesn't know anything of the matter) can see the argument and see how it would make sense.

But on the same hand, after reading the replies which refute the original post I can see how they make sense and push the original post as false.

And to close my statement. Great read! Enjoyed it! Really, I did

0 Replies

The Non-Evolution of Modern Man

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know