Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 59 (9164 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,919 Year: 4,176/9,624 Month: 1,047/974 Week: 6/368 Day: 6/11 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Cast your Vote Evolutionists
Apostle
Inactive Member


Message 1 of 43 (63411)
10-30-2003 12:42 AM


Please respond yes or no.
"NEANDERTHALS ARE JUST LIKE MODERN PEOPLE"
I would only like comments from evolutionists.
Feel free to add details justifying your position.
The Apostle

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by NosyNed, posted 10-30-2003 12:57 AM Apostle has not replied
 Message 3 by Asgara, posted 10-30-2003 1:05 AM Apostle has not replied
 Message 4 by Rei, posted 10-30-2003 1:24 AM Apostle has not replied
 Message 5 by NosyNed, posted 10-30-2003 1:31 AM Apostle has replied
 Message 6 by Minnemooseus, posted 10-30-2003 1:40 AM Apostle has not replied
 Message 7 by Sylas, posted 10-30-2003 3:10 AM Apostle has not replied
 Message 10 by Prozacman, posted 10-30-2003 11:22 AM Apostle has not replied

  
Apostle
Inactive Member


Message 19 of 43 (63554)
10-31-2003 12:08 AM
Reply to: Message 9 by Darwin's Terrier
10-30-2003 8:45 AM


DT
I realize you do not know me and so have no way to tell whether or not I am about to lie to you.
I will tell you that the following is completely truthful. The reason I started this poll, is because I wanted to have my statement confirmed. Now that it has not been, and if this trend continues, I will know that my statement needs to change.
It is becoming apparent that my thread needs some language changing so as to be more consistent.
However (with regards to the second possibility you mentioned), certainly you woundnt deny that the Neanderthal did show intelligence in his tools, culture and religion? You confused me a bit at the end there.
Apostle

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by Darwin's Terrier, posted 10-30-2003 8:45 AM Darwin's Terrier has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by NosyNed, posted 10-31-2003 1:23 AM Apostle has not replied
 Message 21 by Darwin's Terrier, posted 10-31-2003 3:46 AM Apostle has not replied
 Message 25 by Rei, posted 11-06-2003 11:19 AM Apostle has not replied

  
Apostle
Inactive Member


Message 22 of 43 (64664)
11-05-2003 11:51 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by NosyNed
10-30-2003 1:31 AM


NosyNed asks in Message 5;
"Apostle, why don't you look at the information available and tell us what you think?"
Truth is Ned, from the information that I have about the Neanderthal's I must conclude that, while not like modern humans in every way, they certainly are fully human.
"Primitive?" Nothing about them leads me to this conclusion either.
Apostle

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by NosyNed, posted 10-30-2003 1:31 AM NosyNed has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by NosyNed, posted 11-06-2003 1:12 AM Apostle has not replied
 Message 24 by Darwin's Terrier, posted 11-06-2003 10:46 AM Apostle has replied

  
Apostle
Inactive Member


Message 26 of 43 (65306)
11-09-2003 10:37 AM
Reply to: Message 24 by Darwin's Terrier
11-06-2003 10:46 AM


Re: Neanderthals not 'primitive'?
Perhaps sometimes there are misconceptions about the Neanderthal. This is often shown in artists portrayals of them. Here are a few to think about.
1. Early Humans were Hairy Creatures
The oldest fossils of humans are either bones or pieces of bones and this makes it absolutely impossible to determine what kind of skin or hair the early people had. Furthermore, some groups of people have more body hair than others but this has never been a reason to believe that early humans had a type of skin that was similar to a modern apes fur.
2. Early Humans had Long Arms
A ‘hairy’ man with long arms makes it quite easy to picture early man evolving from apes. However, just as there is no way to tell how hairy early man was, so too is there no evidence to suggest that they had arms longer than that of modern humans. Quite the contrary, all discernable human fossil arms that have been found are about the same size as that of modern arms.
3. Early Man was a Hunched Over Creature
The Neanderthal Man founded in 1856 did walk hunched over. Does this mean that all early men shuffled along hunched over like apes? Probably not. Also, after a thorough examination it was concluded that almost definitely the Neanderthal man did suffer from arthritis. His stooped over appearance would be normal for a man of his age with his particular bone disease. The other early fossil discoveries of early man have consistently shown a fully erect human. Despite this though, many still favor the more ape-like posture.
4. Early Man had a Small Skull
At one time scientists believed that a man’s brain size indicated how smart he was. Of coarse after gaining more knowledge in this field we know that this is simply not the case. At this time, scientists do not know the actual brain size of the early man yet artists have continued to draw a small head with a large jaw so as to make the early man appear more ape-like. What is interesting is that some of the Cro-Magnum men have larger heads that that of modern man.
5. Early Man was Unintelligent
On the faces of the majority of early man drawings, is a rather stupid expression. Usually the faces appear rather confused, the creature being unable to ponder even the most simple matter. One must keep in mind that these are only the opinion of the artists. Nobody can tell what the skin and muscles looked like from the remaining bones that have been discovered.
I will have more misconceptions (at least what I feel are)to come in the future.
Apostle

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by Darwin's Terrier, posted 11-06-2003 10:46 AM Darwin's Terrier has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by NosyNed, posted 11-09-2003 10:45 AM Apostle has replied
 Message 30 by Darwin's Terrier, posted 11-10-2003 4:19 AM Apostle has not replied
 Message 31 by Darwin's Terrier, posted 11-10-2003 4:34 AM Apostle has not replied
 Message 32 by Darwin's Terrier, posted 11-10-2003 6:38 AM Apostle has replied

  
Apostle
Inactive Member


Message 28 of 43 (65483)
11-09-2003 10:18 PM
Reply to: Message 27 by NosyNed
11-09-2003 10:45 AM


Re: Neanderthals not 'primitive'?
Artists portrayals of the early man are often of the Neanderthal. Hence the criticism of obvious misconceptions.
Apostle

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by NosyNed, posted 11-09-2003 10:45 AM NosyNed has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by NosyNed, posted 11-09-2003 10:26 PM Apostle has not replied

  
Apostle
Inactive Member


Message 35 of 43 (66586)
11-15-2003 12:28 AM
Reply to: Message 32 by Darwin's Terrier
11-10-2003 6:38 AM


Once again Julian, if you wish for me to respond you need to be more respectful. I try very hard to offer that same respect to all who disagree with me.
Please take issue with points I bring up. However a word spelled wrong is not evidence of a high level of ignorance. If you feel I am way off in my defensibility, please say so, but dont bother responding to my posts.
If, on the other hand, you feel that I am not as ignorant as you let on, please moderate your language and criticisms. Once that happens then I will do my best to respond to your points. (If I truly am that ignorant why bother having a discussion with me?)
Apostle

This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by Darwin's Terrier, posted 11-10-2003 6:38 AM Darwin's Terrier has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 36 by Apostle, posted 11-15-2003 12:31 AM Apostle has not replied
 Message 37 by Darwin's Terrier, posted 11-15-2003 4:24 AM Apostle has replied
 Message 39 by Darwin's Terrier, posted 11-15-2003 5:43 AM Apostle has not replied

  
Apostle
Inactive Member


Message 36 of 43 (66589)
11-15-2003 12:31 AM
Reply to: Message 35 by Apostle
11-15-2003 12:28 AM


Not Julian but T.H.
Oops, it is not Julian but rather T.H.
My apologies,
The Apostle

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by Apostle, posted 11-15-2003 12:28 AM Apostle has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by Darwin's Terrier, posted 11-15-2003 4:45 AM Apostle has not replied

  
Apostle
Inactive Member


Message 40 of 43 (66820)
11-16-2003 10:53 AM
Reply to: Message 37 by Darwin's Terrier
11-15-2003 4:24 AM


DT,
I hope you took the 'Julian. T.H.' shot as a light hearted joke. Indeed that was the intention.
First, there is a fundamental difference between 'Deuteronimus' and Deuteronomy while the difference between 'Cro-Magnum' and Cro-Magnon is less obvious or disturbing.
With regards to my initial attempt to not include Homo Habilis in my peice, that was simply because I do not accept their existence. I believe the majority of H.habilis specimens are either obvious australopithecines (note: this is probably spelt wrong too), or homo sapiens. However because this is not accepted by many it seems I better tell why.
Also I am not a scientific expert. My expertise comes through more obviously in theology. That said, I certainly can hold my own in this field also.
With regards to post 32, I agree: Many older fossils do show ape-like features. Perhaps where we disagree is when I say that these ape-like features belong to an ape.
Apostle

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by Darwin's Terrier, posted 11-15-2003 4:24 AM Darwin's Terrier has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 41 by NosyNed, posted 11-16-2003 1:25 PM Apostle has not replied
 Message 42 by Darwin's Terrier, posted 11-17-2003 7:23 AM Apostle 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