Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,905 Year: 4,162/9,624 Month: 1,033/974 Week: 360/286 Day: 3/13 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Ape skulls? Human? Hominid?
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 9004
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 5 of 29 (106593)
05-08-2004 12:04 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by Unseul
05-08-2004 11:48 AM


Skulls
This means intermediates as such could be hard to come by.
But we have a series of specimens that have increases in skull capacity over time already. Not nearly as many as we'd like of course and not yet enough to sort our line out of the tangle in the earlier times.
They are hard to come by, but they keep turning up.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by Unseul, posted 05-08-2004 11:48 AM Unseul has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by Unseul, posted 05-08-2004 8:46 PM NosyNed has not replied

  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 9004
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 11 of 29 (106866)
05-09-2004 8:11 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by Unseul
05-09-2004 7:29 PM


A bit backwards
The suggestion is to move the Chimps from genus Pan to genus Homo as they are close enough for that. They are not the same species so they would not be called sapiens. They would be Homo troglodytes instad of Pan troglodytes for example. (one of the 3 chimp species).

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by Unseul, posted 05-09-2004 7:29 PM Unseul has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by Asgara, posted 05-09-2004 8:12 PM NosyNed has replied

  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 9004
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 13 of 29 (106869)
05-09-2004 8:13 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by grass monkey
05-09-2004 7:36 PM


But what wouldn't you see?
If we were created all at once all done and final you would not expect to see a series of species that are more and more like us as we get closer in time. That is not explained by creation ideas.
It isn't just the differences in form but also the time relationship between them. This makes no sense from the creationist view.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by grass monkey, posted 05-09-2004 7:36 PM grass monkey has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by grass monkey, posted 05-09-2004 8:48 PM NosyNed has replied

  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 9004
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 16 of 29 (106923)
05-09-2004 10:13 PM
Reply to: Message 14 by grass monkey
05-09-2004 8:48 PM


Read a bit more carefully.
No, I am saying that that poster is saying apes and humans make evolution. That's all he said, apes and humans. So that's all I'm talking about - apes and humans. I didn't mean anything else.
What sidelined is saying (and I think I'm not putting words into his mouth, just restating what he has to say) is we only have the terms "apes" and "humans" and our language is stuck with those (in popular terms anyway).
However, what we find fossils of are things that are not clearly either. That is where rough terms like "ape-man" come from.
As I noted they aren't just showing aspects of both current apes and current humans but there is also a number of specimens that mark points in time that show more aspects of humans over time.
I noticed one poster today commented that these simply show adaptations to changing conditions. These conditions were supposed to have changed from the flood (about 4500 years ago?) to a point in time when records should show these (the romans were into africa before 2,000?). The idea that these forms are laid out in this order (ignoring the real ages) and changed in just this way in only 100 generations seems a bit absurd to me.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by grass monkey, posted 05-09-2004 8:48 PM grass monkey has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by DC85, posted 05-16-2004 2:23 AM NosyNed has replied

  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 9004
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 17 of 29 (106924)
05-09-2004 10:14 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by Asgara
05-09-2004 8:12 PM


H. troglodytes
Yes, IIRC, Linneaus did that at first.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by Asgara, posted 05-09-2004 8:12 PM Asgara has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by Lithodid-Man, posted 05-17-2004 9:12 PM NosyNed has not replied

  
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 9004
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 19 of 29 (108627)
05-16-2004 12:14 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by DC85
05-16-2004 2:23 AM


Flawed?
yes I agree our language and classification are very flawed.
I think flawed is a bit strong here. It is simply a reflection of the fact that we have a continuum and are trying to make it all tidy and boxed up. It is easier for us to handle things in neat little piles and if the edges get mixed together we don't like it. Tough! They are mixed.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by DC85, posted 05-16-2004 2:23 AM DC85 has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024