Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 78 (8960 total)
86 online now:
DrJones*, PaulK (2 members, 84 visitors)
Newest Member: Mikee
Upcoming Birthdays: AlexCaledin
Post Volume: Total: 869,794 Year: 1,542/23,288 Month: 1,542/1,851 Week: 182/484 Day: 0/105 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   When Earth’s population was 10,000 persons
frako
Member
Posts: 2853
From: slovenija
Joined: 09-04-2010
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 61 of 194 (603109)
02-02-2011 6:55 PM
Reply to: Message 60 by Coragyps
02-02-2011 5:32 PM


Re: What differentiates human prototypes from alleged ancestry
Really? And you know this for *most* cultures of 20,000 years ago how, exactly? Is that why the Parsis of India let vultures eat their dead? Individually?

Or why an African tribe gives the body of a dead person to the lions.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 60 by Coragyps, posted 02-02-2011 5:32 PM Coragyps has not yet responded

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 6969
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 62 of 194 (603116)
02-02-2011 7:57 PM
Reply to: Message 56 by celestialGyoud
02-02-2011 3:51 PM


Re: What differentiates human prototypes from alleged ancestry
because humans tend to gather the dead bodies of their parents or children not too far from one another.

The search engine does often bring up cemeteries dated at about 4,000 or 5,000, but not at 30 or 40,000

-

You actually might want to try some basic research before you spout nonsense

quote:
Burial customs varied widely from tribe to tribe. Indians disposed of their dead in a variety of ways. Arctic tribes, for example, simply left their dead on the frozen ground for wild animals to devour....Southeastern tribes practiced secondary bone burial. They dug up their corpses, cleansed the bones, and then reburied them. ..Northwest coastal tribes put their dead in mortuary cabins or canoes fastened to poles. Further south, California tribes practiced cremation. In western mountain areas tribes often deposited their dead in caves or fissures in the rocks. Nomadic tribes in the Great Plains region either buried their dead, if the ground was soft, or left them on tree platforms or on scaffolds. .. But during outbreaks of smallpox or other diseases leading to the sudden deaths of many tribe members, survivors hurriedly cast the corpses into a mass grave or threw them into a river.

Source

This is just native americans. This took me less than 1 minute to find. I am sure if I spent 10 mins I could find dozens of other death rituals that do not meet you claim.


Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by celestialGyoud, posted 02-02-2011 3:51 PM celestialGyoud has not yet responded

  
celestialGyoud
Member (Idle past 53 days)
Posts: 564
From: Roraima Peak
Joined: 02-11-2004


Message 63 of 194 (603207)
02-03-2011 11:22 AM
Reply to: Message 59 by Taq
02-02-2011 5:10 PM


Re: What differentiates human prototypes from alleged ancestry
Taq writes:

all we have ..unevidenced assertion that 30,000 year old humans are not our ancestors.

-

Proof of ancestry grounded in reality was not presented, for example, 2 skeletons; father and son or mother and her child.

-

And this is what differentiates the proof that you do not have from a Real proof: A Real proof will be the same as the above found twice.

-

Contrary to expectations, history has demonstrated that there's no reason why it would have been impossible for Humans to have reached a population of 1 million persons in less than 20 thousand years, when the population was 10,000

that is, there's no reason except the reputation of many Universities and the financial comfort of many jobs, sponsorships and books containing what is believed by many men in regards to the origin of the Human body.

-


This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by Taq, posted 02-02-2011 5:10 PM Taq has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 64 by Taq, posted 02-03-2011 11:39 AM celestialGyoud has responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 8213
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.3


Message 64 of 194 (603210)
02-03-2011 11:39 AM
Reply to: Message 63 by celestialGyoud
02-03-2011 11:22 AM


Re: What differentiates human prototypes from alleged ancestry
Proof of ancestry grounded in reality was not presented, for example, 2 skeletons; father and son or mother and her child.

I guess you missed one of my prior posts. Here it is again:

quote:
PLoS One. 2008 Jul 16;3(7):e2700.

A 28,000 years old Cro-Magnon mtDNA sequence differs from all potentially contaminating modern sequences.

Caramelli D, Milani L, Vai S, Modi A, Pecchioli E, Girardi M, Pilli E, Lari M, Lippi B, Ronchitelli A, Mallegni F, Casoli A, Bertorelle G, Barbujani G.

Dipartimento di Biologia Evoluzionistica, Università di Firenze, Firenze, Italy.

Abstract
BACKGROUND: DNA sequences from ancient specimens may in fact result from undetected contamination of the ancient specimens by modern DNA, and the problem is particularly challenging in studies of human fossils. Doubts on the authenticity of the available sequences have so far hampered genetic comparisons between anatomically archaic (Neandertal) and early modern (Cro-Magnoid) Europeans.

METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: We typed the mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) hypervariable region I in a 28,000 years old Cro-Magnoid individual from the Paglicci cave, in Italy (Paglicci 23) and in all the people who had contact with the sample since its discovery in 2003. The Paglicci 23 sequence, determined through the analysis of 152 clones, is the Cambridge reference sequence, and cannot possibly reflect contamination because it differs from all potentially contaminating modern sequences.

CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: The Paglicci 23 individual carried a mtDNA sequence that is still common in Europe, and which radically differs from those of the almost contemporary Neandertals, demonstrating a genealogical continuity across 28,000 years, from Cro-Magnoid to modern Europeans. Because all potential sources of modern DNA contamination are known, the Paglicci 23 sample will offer a unique opportunity to get insight for the first time into the nuclear genes of early modern Europeans.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18628960


30,000 year old modern human skeletons found in Europe are the ancestors of modern Europeans as the DNA evidence demonstrates.

Contrary to expectations, history has demonstrated that there's no reason why it would have been impossible for Humans to have reached a population of 1 million persons in less than 20 thousand years, when the population was 10,000

But you are saying that this boom HAD TO HAPPEN 30,000 years ago, and since it didn't those human-like skeletons had to be from something other than modern humans.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by celestialGyoud, posted 02-03-2011 11:22 AM celestialGyoud has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 65 by celestialGyoud, posted 02-03-2011 12:48 PM Taq has responded

  
celestialGyoud
Member (Idle past 53 days)
Posts: 564
From: Roraima Peak
Joined: 02-11-2004


Message 65 of 194 (603222)
02-03-2011 12:48 PM
Reply to: Message 64 by Taq
02-03-2011 11:39 AM


Re: What differentiates human prototypes from alleged ancestry
Taq writes:

Proof of ancestry grounded in reality was not presented, for example, 2 skeletons; father and son or mother and her child.

CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: .... a genealogical continuity ....

-

Anyone's genetic combination might be a genealogical continuity of whoever it will be; and that is very different from a paternity test.

A simple paternity test is all that the natural selection theory (for the origin of the Human body) needs to prove that it's correct. Other than that, it will be just another brick in the wall of believed things that becomes an obstacle for many 'many men' not see the open road

-

-

Edited by CrazyDiamond7, : update


This message is a reply to:
 Message 64 by Taq, posted 02-03-2011 11:39 AM Taq has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 66 by Taq, posted 02-03-2011 1:06 PM celestialGyoud has responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 8213
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.3


Message 66 of 194 (603227)
02-03-2011 1:06 PM
Reply to: Message 65 by celestialGyoud
02-03-2011 12:48 PM


Re: What differentiates human prototypes from alleged ancestry
Anyone's genetic combination might be a genealogical continuity of whoever it will be; and that is very different from a paternity test.

False. Mitochondrial DNA extracted from Neanderthals from the same region and the same time period demonstrated that their mitochondrial lineages do not have a living representative in Europe. DNA sequencing is a paternity test, and it demonstrates that the population of modern humans 30,000 years ago are the ancestors of modern Europeans.

ABE: Mitochondrial DNA actually serves more as a maternity test, but that is beside the point.

Edited by Taq, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 65 by celestialGyoud, posted 02-03-2011 12:48 PM celestialGyoud has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 67 by celestialGyoud, posted 02-03-2011 2:47 PM Taq has responded

  
celestialGyoud
Member (Idle past 53 days)
Posts: 564
From: Roraima Peak
Joined: 02-11-2004


Message 67 of 194 (603267)
02-03-2011 2:47 PM
Reply to: Message 66 by Taq
02-03-2011 1:06 PM


Re: What differentiates human prototypes from alleged ancestry
Taq writes:

Anyone's genetic combination might be a genealogical continuity of whoever it will be; and that is very different from a paternity test.

.. DNA sequencing is a paternity test, and it demonstrates that the population of modern humans 30,000 years ago are the ancestors of modern Europeans

-

Let's not turn it into a Mexican drama nor search for a horn on a horse's head

quote:

Proof of ancestry grounded in reality was not presented, for example, 2 skeletons; father and son or mother and her child.

And this is what differentiates the proof that you do not have from a Real proof: A Real proof will be the same as the above found twice.


-

Edited by CrazyDiamond7, : update

Edited by CrazyDiamond7, : update


This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by Taq, posted 02-03-2011 1:06 PM Taq has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 68 by Taq, posted 02-03-2011 4:20 PM celestialGyoud has responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 8213
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.3


Message 68 of 194 (603293)
02-03-2011 4:20 PM
Reply to: Message 67 by celestialGyoud
02-03-2011 2:47 PM


Re: What differentiates human prototypes from alleged ancestry
Either the popular meaning of the term 'paternity test' was distorted by the above reply

You are aware that they use DNA for paternity tests, aren't you?

The DNA from anatomically modern humans (Cro-Magnon) 30,000 years ago demonstrates that they are the ancestors of modern Europeans in the same way that a DNA paternity test indicates paternity. What more do you want?

or it's actually saying 'Anyone of us might be a son or daughter of those Neanderthals' which is absurd.

If you had paid attention you would have understood that the same tests showed that no living modern human carries neanderthal mitochondria. This shows a DISCONTINUITY between neanderthals and modern humans.

Edited by Taq, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 67 by celestialGyoud, posted 02-03-2011 2:47 PM celestialGyoud has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 69 by celestialGyoud, posted 02-04-2011 1:06 PM Taq has responded

  
celestialGyoud
Member (Idle past 53 days)
Posts: 564
From: Roraima Peak
Joined: 02-11-2004


Message 69 of 194 (603439)
02-04-2011 1:06 PM
Reply to: Message 68 by Taq
02-03-2011 4:20 PM


Re: What differentiates human prototypes from alleged ancestry
Taq writes:

This shows a DISCONTINUITY between neanderthals and modern humans.

-

Indeed, Cro-Magnon is not a descendent of Neandertal. After seeing a discontinuity of the dna sequence then the title given by science, 'Neandertal our ancestor' has been gradually changed to 'Neandertal our closest extinct relatives',

because of the belief that a different genealogical continuity would still be evidence of evolution
regardless of the fact that no evidence was found that a skeleton of human prototype dated at 30,000 would have had a son or daughter;

If the human body was not made by intelligent designer then there is no justice other than that of the world,

However, inside a Court house, even justice of this world does not apply belief to the most current and trivial things;

Instead, the justice only says that a person had descendants when evidence is found that there was a son or a daughter.

Let's get rid of the BELIEVING!

-

Edited by CrazyDiamond7, : update


This message is a reply to:
 Message 68 by Taq, posted 02-03-2011 4:20 PM Taq has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 70 by Otto Tellick, posted 02-06-2011 2:07 AM celestialGyoud has not yet responded
 Message 71 by bluescat48, posted 02-06-2011 11:58 AM celestialGyoud has responded
 Message 73 by Taq, posted 02-07-2011 12:31 PM celestialGyoud has not yet responded

  
Otto Tellick
Member (Idle past 719 days)
Posts: 288
From: PA, USA
Joined: 02-17-2008


Message 70 of 194 (603619)
02-06-2011 2:07 AM
Reply to: Message 69 by celestialGyoud
02-04-2011 1:06 PM


Re: What differentiates human prototypes from alleged ancestry
CrazyDiamond7 writes:

If the human body was not made by intelligent designer then there is no justice other than that of the world,

I don't see the relevance of "justice" to this topic, but it's your topic, and you brought it up... Well, I think I would agree with you here: "there is no justice other than that of the world." Do you have a problem with that? (I guess that would have to be another topic.)

However, inside a Court house, even justice of this world does not apply belief to the most current and trivial things;

Instead, the justice only says that a person had descendants when evidence is found that there was a son or a daughter.

"I am not a lawyer," and I'm not a biologist either, but it seems entirely sensible to expect that DNA testing would work to establish whether or not two individuals were related as grandfather and grandson, or even great-grandfather and great-grandson, without having access to DNA samples from the intermediate generation(s). It's in the nature of the evidence that these relationships can be established with the same certainty as the father-son case.

I haven't tried to spend the few minutes of web research that would be needed to check into that question -- perhaps one of the others here knows the answer already from personal experience with the research involved. (Presumably there are differing constraints on tracking paternal versus maternal descendant relations, but at the level of population studies, these things do not impede the clarity of the evidence.)

Let's get rid of the BELIEVING!

That would be an admirable goal indeed. In order to achieve it, you also have to get rid of the dogmatic denial of evidence, and abandon the silly notion that some "revelatory" text written thousands of years ago is "inerrant".


autotelic adj. (of an entity or event) having within itself the purpose of its existence or happening.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by celestialGyoud, posted 02-04-2011 1:06 PM celestialGyoud has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 72 by Coragyps, posted 02-06-2011 12:33 PM Otto Tellick has not yet responded

  
bluescat48
Member (Idle past 2578 days)
Posts: 2347
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2007


Message 71 of 194 (603635)
02-06-2011 11:58 AM
Reply to: Message 69 by celestialGyoud
02-04-2011 1:06 PM


Re: What differentiates human prototypes from alleged ancestry
Let's get rid of the BELIEVING!

That is what I do.I separate everything into 3 categories. Acceptance, Rejection or skepticism.

Acceptance = strong evidence
Rejection = lack of evidence
Skepticism = weak evidence


There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002

Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969

Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008


This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by celestialGyoud, posted 02-04-2011 1:06 PM celestialGyoud has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 74 by celestialGyoud, posted 02-07-2011 3:17 PM bluescat48 has responded

  
Coragyps
Member
Posts: 5428
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 72 of 194 (603637)
02-06-2011 12:33 PM
Reply to: Message 70 by Otto Tellick
02-06-2011 2:07 AM


Re: What differentiates human prototypes from alleged ancestry
It's in the nature of the evidence that these relationships can be established with the same certainty as the father-son case.

As in the observation that a huge number - 8% of the male population of Asia - of folks that share y-chromosome markers apparently inherited from Genghis Khan. Not as much a matter of believing, CD7, as a matter of going where the evidence takes you. You don't get a shared string of unusual DNA from nowhere.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by Otto Tellick, posted 02-06-2011 2:07 AM Otto Tellick has not yet responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 8213
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.3


Message 73 of 194 (603734)
02-07-2011 12:31 PM
Reply to: Message 69 by celestialGyoud
02-04-2011 1:06 PM


Re: What differentiates human prototypes from alleged ancestry
regardless of the fact that no evidence was found that a skeleton of human prototype dated at 30,000 would have had a son or daughter

But it is very strong evidence of a genetic continuity between the Cro-Magnon population and the modern population.

What evidence do you have that there is no genetic continuity?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by celestialGyoud, posted 02-04-2011 1:06 PM celestialGyoud has not yet responded

  
celestialGyoud
Member (Idle past 53 days)
Posts: 564
From: Roraima Peak
Joined: 02-11-2004


Message 74 of 194 (603773)
02-07-2011 3:17 PM
Reply to: Message 71 by bluescat48
02-06-2011 11:58 AM


Re: What differentiates human prototypes from alleged ancestry
bluescat48 writes:

Let's get rid of the BELIEVING!

That is what I do.I separate everything into 3 categories. Acceptance, Rejection or skepticism.

Acceptance = strong evidence
Rejection = lack of evidence
Skepticism = weak evidence

-

It takes more than a possibility left to actually verify what really took place 30,000 years ago,

Acceptance – strong evidence - when you have the proof that 30,000 years ago there was Human life IN REPRODUCTION naturally and spontaneously [for example, the skeletons of two real relatives; father and son or a mother and her child] then that is the evidence of evolution.

-

Rejection – lack of evidence - when the above proof is not found then the alleged 'genealogical continuity', in regards to a skeleton dated at 30,000, is still a presumed POSSIBILITY of descendents or ancestry.

-

Weak evidence – therefore the so called evidence is weak in regards to proof of descendants and only proves that there was human prototype(s); an older version of a perfect human product on the Earth.

-

Conclusion: The above proof is necessary so that the possibility can be called total SURENESS.

If one states that a possibility is assurance then he's believing;
That is the clear purpose of every camouflage - to make believe
Without believing or making believe there's no possibility at all of a robber [or one that deceives] to do his job;
his carrier would be in permanent vacation.

-

Edited by CrazyDiamond7, : update

Edited by CrazyDiamond7, : updated

Edited by CrazyDiamond7, : update


This message is a reply to:
 Message 71 by bluescat48, posted 02-06-2011 11:58 AM bluescat48 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 75 by Taq, posted 02-07-2011 3:48 PM celestialGyoud has not yet responded
 Message 76 by bluescat48, posted 02-07-2011 5:36 PM celestialGyoud has responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 8213
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.3


Message 75 of 194 (603783)
02-07-2011 3:48 PM
Reply to: Message 74 by celestialGyoud
02-07-2011 3:17 PM


Re: What differentiates human prototypes from alleged ancestry
Acceptance – strong evidence - when you have the proof that 30,000 years ago there was Human life IN REPRODUCTION naturally and spontaneously [for example, the skeletons of two real relatives; father and son or a mother and her child] then that is the evidence of evolution.

So you are assuming that Cro-Magnon populations were infertile until shown otherwise?

Are you nuts?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 74 by celestialGyoud, posted 02-07-2011 3:17 PM celestialGyoud has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2020