Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 109 (8738 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 04-26-2017 7:46 AM
392 online now:
14174dm, Chiroptera, NoNukes, Percy (Admin), Pressie (5 members, 387 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Jayhawker Soule
Post Volume:
Total: 805,318 Year: 9,924/21,208 Month: 3,011/2,674 Week: 435/961 Day: 51/114 Hour: 2/10

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev1
...
56
7
891011Next
Author Topic:   New Species of Homo Discovered: Homo naledi
Faith
Member
Posts: 24414
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.0


Message 91 of 163 (768616)
09-12-2015 12:57 PM
Reply to: Message 84 by RAZD
09-12-2015 7:03 AM


Re: Time
Sorry, I don't accept your dating methods. Lot of "adjusting" goes on to make things fit the theory.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 84 by RAZD, posted 09-12-2015 7:03 AM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 93 by Dr Adequate, posted 09-12-2015 1:19 PM Faith has not yet responded
 Message 94 by RAZD, posted 09-12-2015 1:21 PM Faith has not yet responded

    
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 15766
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 3.1


(2)
Message 92 of 163 (768624)
09-12-2015 1:19 PM
Reply to: Message 90 by Faith
09-12-2015 12:47 PM


I was OBVIOUSLY talking about the hands with the skeleton Mr. Obfuscator. They do not have short thumbs.

And nor do modern humans, as you can see from the x-ray.

Let's look at some more bones.

On the left, a chimp, in the middle, a human, on the right, an australopithecine for good measure. Which one has the short thumb?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 90 by Faith, posted 09-12-2015 12:47 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 96 by Faith, posted 09-12-2015 1:23 PM Dr Adequate has responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 15766
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 3.1


Message 93 of 163 (768625)
09-12-2015 1:19 PM
Reply to: Message 91 by Faith
09-12-2015 12:57 PM


Re: Time
Sorry, I don't accept your dating methods. Lot of "adjusting" goes on to make things fit the theory.

[citation needed]


This message is a reply to:
 Message 91 by Faith, posted 09-12-2015 12:57 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 18257
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.2


(3)
Message 94 of 163 (768626)
09-12-2015 1:21 PM
Reply to: Message 91 by Faith
09-12-2015 12:57 PM


Re: Time
Sorry, I don't accept your dating methods. Lot of "adjusting" goes on to make things fit the theory.

And curiously, as I said in Message 84: " ... any denial of the ages shown is empty until you have explained the evidence in Age Correlations and An Old Earth, Version 2 No 1 for an old earth and the methods of dating artifacts."

So until you actually show that the dating methods are actually erroneous, prone to error, or manipulated by some vast conspiracy, your comment is taken as plain denial of actual evidence to the contrary.

Enjoy


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 91 by Faith, posted 09-12-2015 12:57 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 15766
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 3.1


Message 95 of 163 (768627)
09-12-2015 1:21 PM
Reply to: Message 89 by Faith
09-12-2015 12:45 PM


Obviously I'm talking about those that ARE human.

So when you say they're human, you're only talking about the ones that are human. Good, good, glad we sorted that out.

Now, would you please answer the frickin' question and tell us which one are in fact human. Thanks.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 89 by Faith, posted 09-12-2015 12:45 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 24414
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.0


Message 96 of 163 (768628)
09-12-2015 1:23 PM
Reply to: Message 92 by Dr Adequate
09-12-2015 1:19 PM


THE SKELETON DOES NOT HAVE A SHORT THUMB. PERIOD.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 92 by Dr Adequate, posted 09-12-2015 1:19 PM Dr Adequate has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 97 by Dr Adequate, posted 09-12-2015 1:51 PM Faith has not yet responded
 Message 98 by Admin, posted 09-12-2015 2:14 PM Faith has responded

    
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 15766
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 3.1


Message 97 of 163 (768629)
09-12-2015 1:51 PM
Reply to: Message 96 by Faith
09-12-2015 1:23 PM


THE SKELETON DOES NOT HAVE A SHORT THUMB. PERIOD.

No, it doesn't. It has a long thumb. Like a modern human.

H. naledi:

H. sapiens:

See?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 96 by Faith, posted 09-12-2015 1:23 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
Admin
Director
Posts: 12428
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 2.3


(1)
Message 98 of 163 (768631)
09-12-2015 2:14 PM
Reply to: Message 96 by Faith
09-12-2015 1:23 PM


Moderator Attempt at Clarification
Hi Faith,

Just to clarify further, Dr Adequate's top image in Message 97 shows a reconstruction of the bones of a H. naledi hand into the way they actually fit together in life. They are the bones from a single individual that were discovered in articulation. The image is of a single hand, front and rear.

The image of all the bones on the table is just to show all the bones recovered from the cave. The bones of the skeleton in the center are not from a single individual, and they're only in the approximately correct position and are not an attempt at a reconstruction.

See the original paper for the details I just related and more: Homo naledi, a new species of the genus Homo from the Dinaledi Chamber, South Africa


--Percy
EvC Forum Director

This message is a reply to:
 Message 96 by Faith, posted 09-12-2015 1:23 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 99 by RAZD, posted 09-12-2015 3:28 PM Admin has acknowledged this reply
 Message 100 by Faith, posted 09-12-2015 6:36 PM Admin has responded

    
RAZD
Member
Posts: 18257
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 99 of 163 (768634)
09-12-2015 3:28 PM
Reply to: Message 98 by Admin
09-12-2015 2:14 PM


Moving on -- brain size and brain development
See the original paper for the details I just related and more: Homo naledi, a new species of the genus Homo from the Dinaledi Chamber, South Africa

That paper lists a number of traits that are primitive (ie more ape-like, and similar to australopiths) and traits that are derived -- modified from earlier species.

This involves iirc, curved finger bones, shape inside skull, hips and feet.

One of the things I find interesting is the size of the brain, and the comments regarding the conception of burial or care of the dead. There are no other animal bones in the cave (except one owl) so the best explanation is that they were deposited there by the naledi.

And one of the reasons I find this interesting is (a) the reasoning ability of chimps, and (b) Homo floriensis had similar smallish brains

quote:
Homo floresiensis: ... Examination of the remains shows members of the species stood just 1 metre tall and had a brain no bigger than a grapefruit.

Doing a "google scholar" on Homo floresiensis brain size I get:

quote:
The Brain of LB1, Homo floresiensis

Abstract
The brain of Homo floresiensis was assessed by comparing a virtual endocast from the type specimen (LB1) with endocasts from great apes, Homo erectus, Homo sapiens, a human pygmy, a human microcephalic, specimen number Sts 5 (Australopithecus africanus), and specimen number WT 17000 (Paranthropus aethiopicus). Morphometric, allometric, and shape data indicate that LB1 is not a microcephalic or pygmy. LB1's brain/body size ratio scales like that of an australopithecine, but its endocast shape resembles that of Homo erectus. LB1 has derived frontal and temporal lobes and a lunate sulcus in a derived position, which are consistent with capabilities for higher cognitive processing.


So we are talking the same approximate size, and what may matter more than size is whether we will see derived frontal and temporal lobes "... consistent with capabilities for higher cognitive processing."

So we will need more analysis or more fossils.

abe

From the technical paper it appears that cranial volume in nalide is larger than floresiensis:

This makes more information on the frontal and temporal lobe development to ascertain cognitive ability of even greater interest.

/abe

Enjoy

Edited by RAZD, : abe section


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 98 by Admin, posted 09-12-2015 2:14 PM Admin has acknowledged this reply

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 24414
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.0


Message 100 of 163 (768652)
09-12-2015 6:36 PM
Reply to: Message 98 by Admin
09-12-2015 2:14 PM


Re: Moderator Attempt at Clarification
I understand all that. The hand does not have a short thumb, as clearly shown in the pictures by Dr. A despite his ridiculous attempt to pretend otherwise..

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 98 by Admin, posted 09-12-2015 2:14 PM Admin has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 101 by RAZD, posted 09-12-2015 7:22 PM Faith has not yet responded
 Message 102 by Dr Adequate, posted 09-12-2015 7:25 PM Faith has not yet responded
 Message 103 by Admin, posted 09-12-2015 8:08 PM Faith has responded

    
RAZD
Member
Posts: 18257
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 101 of 163 (768655)
09-12-2015 7:22 PM
Reply to: Message 100 by Faith
09-12-2015 6:36 PM


not to thumb my nose at this issue, but ...
I understand all that. The hand does not have a short thumb, as clearly shown in the pictures by Dr. A despite his ridiculous attempt to pretend otherwise..

I'm confused by this whole spat: it seems to me that both of you are saying that the thumb of naledi is not short, as it is for chimps (by comparison, though it may be more a matter of finger metacarpal lengths than thumb bones) ...

Can you cite the post where he says the thumb is short?


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆Zen☯Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 100 by Faith, posted 09-12-2015 6:36 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 15766
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 3.1


Message 102 of 163 (768657)
09-12-2015 7:25 PM
Reply to: Message 100 by Faith
09-12-2015 6:36 PM


Re: Moderator Attempt at Clarification
I understand all that. The hand does not have a short thumb, as clearly shown in the pictures by Dr. A despite his ridiculous attempt to pretend otherwise..

Have you gone completely insane? I say it has a long thumb. I have said so clearly and distinctly. I have said so in so many words. In post #97 for example, I say: "It has a long thumb." I have also produced pictures. What the fuck is the matter with you?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 100 by Faith, posted 09-12-2015 6:36 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
Admin
Director
Posts: 12428
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 103 of 163 (768661)
09-12-2015 8:08 PM
Reply to: Message 100 by Faith
09-12-2015 6:36 PM


Re: Moderator Attempt at Clarification
Faith writes:

I understand all that. The hand does not have a short thumb, as clearly shown in the pictures by Dr. A despite his ridiculous attempt to pretend otherwise..

You've forgotten your own words. In Message 83 you said:

Faith in Message 83 writes:

As for the hands, human hands have short thumbs and those don't.

While Dr Adequate was trying to present images showing you they both have long thumbs, you seem to have forgotten your erroneous assertion that humans have short thumbs that Dr Adequate was trying to correct.

Time to move on.


--Percy
EvC Forum Director

This message is a reply to:
 Message 100 by Faith, posted 09-12-2015 6:36 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 104 by Faith, posted 09-12-2015 8:43 PM Admin has responded

    
Faith
Member
Posts: 24414
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.0


Message 104 of 163 (768662)
09-12-2015 8:43 PM
Reply to: Message 103 by Admin
09-12-2015 8:08 PM


Re: Moderator Attempt at Clarification
Some kind of semantic nonsense is going on here. The skeleton shows no difference in the length of the thumb from the fingers. My own hand shows a large difference. I have a much shorter thumb relative to my fingers than the one belonging to the skeleton has. The pictures of hands Dr. A and others have been posting show various versions of thumbs that are shorter than the fingers. The skeleton does not have a thumb that is shorter than the fingers. I don't know what everybody's problem is but the skeleton does not show a human type hand because the thumb is as long as the fingers. It doesn't show any kind of hand, not ape either. But certainly not a human hand.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 103 by Admin, posted 09-12-2015 8:08 PM Admin has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 105 by Admin, posted 09-12-2015 9:08 PM Faith has not yet responded
 Message 106 by Dr Adequate, posted 09-12-2015 9:15 PM Faith has responded

    
Admin
Director
Posts: 12428
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 105 of 163 (768664)
09-12-2015 9:08 PM
Reply to: Message 104 by Faith
09-12-2015 8:43 PM


Re: Moderator Attempt at Clarification
Hi Faith,

You have to understand how the paleontologists conducted the dig and the subsequent research. First they collected all the bones from the cave that they could during the dig portion. They placed all the bones they'd found on a table, arranging some into their approximate correct position to form a skeleton, and took a picture, this one:

You cannot imply anything about thumb length from the above image.

They then spent months assembling the bones into 15 skeletons, including this articulated hand:

This is the image that shows the true length of the thumb.

Faith, if it takes this many posts to convince you of simple obvious facts (and who knows, maybe you're still not convinced), this discussion hasn't a chance. It's fine to question everything, but make sure your own position is solid first. Links have been provided to articles and to the original paper. Read them. Understand them.


--Percy
EvC Forum Director

This message is a reply to:
 Message 104 by Faith, posted 09-12-2015 8:43 PM Faith has not yet responded

    
Prev1
...
56
7
891011Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017