Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 63 (9161 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,581 Year: 2,838/9,624 Month: 683/1,588 Week: 89/229 Day: 61/28 Hour: 3/4


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   "If I descended from an ape, how come apes are still here?"
Big_Al35
Member (Idle past 790 days)
Posts: 389
Joined: 06-02-2010


Message 208 of 286 (656997)
03-24-2012 1:18 PM
Reply to: Message 207 by frako
03-24-2012 11:43 AM


Re: Getting Back On Topic
Look at the erectus skull provided by RAZD and yours frako they are completely different. One of you must be wrong.
Edited by Big_Al35, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 207 by frako, posted 03-24-2012 11:43 AM frako has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 209 by frako, posted 03-24-2012 1:38 PM Big_Al35 has replied

  
Big_Al35
Member (Idle past 790 days)
Posts: 389
Joined: 06-02-2010


Message 210 of 286 (656999)
03-24-2012 2:01 PM
Reply to: Message 209 by frako
03-24-2012 1:38 PM


Re: Getting Back On Topic
frako writes:
U sure? What post?
Here is one for you. As you can see homo erectus looks nothing like your image.
Edited by Big_Al35, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 209 by frako, posted 03-24-2012 1:38 PM frako has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 211 by frako, posted 03-24-2012 2:25 PM Big_Al35 has not replied
 Message 212 by Wounded King, posted 03-24-2012 2:47 PM Big_Al35 has replied
 Message 213 by Percy, posted 03-24-2012 2:52 PM Big_Al35 has not replied
 Message 219 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-24-2012 3:36 PM Big_Al35 has not replied
 Message 221 by Tangle, posted 03-24-2012 3:52 PM Big_Al35 has replied

  
Big_Al35
Member (Idle past 790 days)
Posts: 389
Joined: 06-02-2010


Message 214 of 286 (657006)
03-24-2012 2:54 PM
Reply to: Message 212 by Wounded King
03-24-2012 2:47 PM


Re: Getting Back On Topic
WK writes:
Apart from some differences with the teeth I don't see the distinction you wish to draw either
Ahhh...so you do see some differences then. It appears anyone can just dig up any old set of bones and within limits claim that it is homo erectus. Not very scientific!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 212 by Wounded King, posted 03-24-2012 2:47 PM Wounded King has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 215 by frako, posted 03-24-2012 3:13 PM Big_Al35 has not replied
 Message 216 by jar, posted 03-24-2012 3:24 PM Big_Al35 has not replied
 Message 217 by Percy, posted 03-24-2012 3:34 PM Big_Al35 has not replied
 Message 218 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-24-2012 3:34 PM Big_Al35 has not replied
 Message 220 by frako, posted 03-24-2012 3:36 PM Big_Al35 has not replied
 Message 232 by RAZD, posted 03-25-2012 9:01 AM Big_Al35 has not replied

  
Big_Al35
Member (Idle past 790 days)
Posts: 389
Joined: 06-02-2010


Message 222 of 286 (657022)
03-24-2012 5:02 PM
Reply to: Message 221 by Tangle
03-24-2012 3:52 PM


Re: Getting Back On Topic
Tangle writes:
you think that you can google a single image and form a reasoned opinion that they're all wrong?
It wasn't me who googled the first image, it was RAZD. If you can't see the differences between the two images (frako and RAZD) then I can't really help you. You need an optician!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 221 by Tangle, posted 03-24-2012 3:52 PM Tangle has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 223 by Percy, posted 03-24-2012 5:23 PM Big_Al35 has not replied
 Message 224 by Panda, posted 03-24-2012 8:26 PM Big_Al35 has not replied

  
Big_Al35
Member (Idle past 790 days)
Posts: 389
Joined: 06-02-2010


Message 229 of 286 (657037)
03-25-2012 7:55 AM
Reply to: Message 227 by Dr Adequate
03-25-2012 12:55 AM


Re: Getting Back On Topic
Dr A writes:
Whereas your point now would appear to be that there's so much variation in H. erectus alone that the specimens even within that necessarily narrower range shouldn't be classified together:
Well the images are now available for all to see. Individuals can make up their own judgements about the differences and merits of classification. I won't explain what I can see as I presume you have eyes.
Edited by Big_Al35, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 227 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-25-2012 12:55 AM Dr Adequate has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 230 by Percy, posted 03-25-2012 8:03 AM Big_Al35 has replied
 Message 231 by RAZD, posted 03-25-2012 8:14 AM Big_Al35 has not replied

  
Big_Al35
Member (Idle past 790 days)
Posts: 389
Joined: 06-02-2010


Message 233 of 286 (657050)
03-25-2012 11:19 AM
Reply to: Message 230 by Percy
03-25-2012 8:03 AM


Re: Getting Back On Topic
Percy writes:
The question on everyone's mind is whether you can see the differences between the Homo erectus skulls and the human skull.
WK has already identified the teeth difference between pics 1 and 3, furthermore he claims that pic 3 has the lowest cranial capacity. This is WK's comments not mine. After having done my own research I am dubious about the latter comment.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 230 by Percy, posted 03-25-2012 8:03 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 234 by Tangle, posted 03-25-2012 11:51 AM Big_Al35 has not replied
 Message 235 by RAZD, posted 03-25-2012 1:39 PM Big_Al35 has not replied
 Message 236 by Percy, posted 03-25-2012 2:13 PM Big_Al35 has replied

  
Big_Al35
Member (Idle past 790 days)
Posts: 389
Joined: 06-02-2010


Message 237 of 286 (657080)
03-25-2012 3:44 PM
Reply to: Message 236 by Percy
03-25-2012 2:13 PM


Re: Getting Back On Topic
Percy writes:
Well, whatever it is you're seeing
It's not me, it's your colleagues doing most of the seeing. You have already showed me two pictures of homo erectus which you now admit are different. You also now admit that one of the erectus images might be better classified as habilis. You claim to see no differences and yet you admit these differences. You now claim that shop replicas are virtually fraudulent copies. You claim that the lower jaw is a key difference when assessing fossils against modern man but show me a bunch of images where the lower jaw is missing. I think you should think carefully about making judgements about these fossils and before submitting your next post. Good luck.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 236 by Percy, posted 03-25-2012 2:13 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 238 by Coyote, posted 03-25-2012 4:58 PM Big_Al35 has replied
 Message 239 by Percy, posted 03-25-2012 5:23 PM Big_Al35 has not replied
 Message 240 by RAZD, posted 03-25-2012 8:51 PM Big_Al35 has not replied
 Message 249 by Nuggin, posted 03-27-2012 2:31 AM Big_Al35 has replied

  
Big_Al35
Member (Idle past 790 days)
Posts: 389
Joined: 06-02-2010


Message 242 of 286 (657200)
03-26-2012 4:37 PM
Reply to: Message 238 by Coyote
03-25-2012 4:58 PM


Re: Ducking?
Coyote writes:
Are you ignoring me deliberately?
Yes, I am ignoring you deliberately.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 238 by Coyote, posted 03-25-2012 4:58 PM Coyote has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 243 by Tangle, posted 03-26-2012 4:58 PM Big_Al35 has seen this message but not replied
 Message 244 by RAZD, posted 03-26-2012 5:03 PM Big_Al35 has not replied
 Message 247 by Coyote, posted 03-26-2012 8:47 PM Big_Al35 has replied

  
Big_Al35
Member (Idle past 790 days)
Posts: 389
Joined: 06-02-2010


Message 250 of 286 (657342)
03-27-2012 4:13 PM
Reply to: Message 249 by Nuggin
03-27-2012 2:31 AM


Re: Let's talk about Al
Nuggin writes:
I'll simply ask you two questions:
#1) What do you feel is the best explanation for the fossils that exist?
#2) What would you expect/need to see to be convinced that fossils represent changes over time from one set of features to a different set of features?
My concern is that you appear to have only one explanation for how these fossils might have come about. Issues such as the effects of weathering, diet change, environmental factors, and medicine seem to be completely ignored. I am not even convinced by your dating arguments. And yes I am being honest!
Edited by Big_Al35, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 249 by Nuggin, posted 03-27-2012 2:31 AM Nuggin has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 251 by subbie, posted 03-27-2012 4:32 PM Big_Al35 has not replied
 Message 252 by New Cat's Eye, posted 03-27-2012 4:38 PM Big_Al35 has not replied
 Message 253 by Theodoric, posted 03-27-2012 6:28 PM Big_Al35 has not replied
 Message 254 by RAZD, posted 03-27-2012 9:13 PM Big_Al35 has not replied
 Message 255 by Nuggin, posted 03-27-2012 9:26 PM Big_Al35 has not replied
 Message 258 by Taq, posted 04-02-2012 3:02 PM Big_Al35 has not replied

  
Big_Al35
Member (Idle past 790 days)
Posts: 389
Joined: 06-02-2010


Message 256 of 286 (657985)
04-01-2012 3:18 PM
Reply to: Message 247 by Coyote
03-26-2012 8:47 PM


Re: Ducking?
Coyote writes:
I would be interested in your reasons for ignoring my posts.
I think I've snubbed you before. Don't be so surprised.😜

This message is a reply to:
 Message 247 by Coyote, posted 03-26-2012 8:47 PM Coyote has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 257 by Coyote, posted 04-02-2012 1:03 AM Big_Al35 has replied
 Message 259 by subbie, posted 04-02-2012 3:57 PM Big_Al35 has not replied

  
Big_Al35
Member (Idle past 790 days)
Posts: 389
Joined: 06-02-2010


(1)
Message 260 of 286 (658153)
04-02-2012 4:26 PM
Reply to: Message 257 by Coyote
04-02-2012 1:03 AM


Re: Ducking?
Coyote writes:
You should be banned for that--that's trolling behavior.
Percy, is this your call? Should I be banned or not? Actually being banned would be a welcome relief. I might do something meaningful with my life.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 257 by Coyote, posted 04-02-2012 1:03 AM Coyote has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 261 by subbie, posted 04-02-2012 6:38 PM Big_Al35 has replied
 Message 262 by Percy, posted 04-02-2012 6:58 PM Big_Al35 has not replied

  
Big_Al35
Member (Idle past 790 days)
Posts: 389
Joined: 06-02-2010


Message 263 of 286 (658875)
04-10-2012 3:01 PM
Reply to: Message 261 by subbie
04-02-2012 6:38 PM


Re: Ducking?
subbie writes:
Doubtful. You're doing anything meaningful here. Not even anything original.
I must have missed your ground breaking posts then! 😜

This message is a reply to:
 Message 261 by subbie, posted 04-02-2012 6:38 PM subbie has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 264 by Taq, posted 04-10-2012 3:16 PM Big_Al35 has not replied
 Message 265 by subbie, posted 04-10-2012 3:29 PM Big_Al35 has replied

  
Big_Al35
Member (Idle past 790 days)
Posts: 389
Joined: 06-02-2010


Message 266 of 286 (659012)
04-11-2012 5:51 PM
Reply to: Message 265 by subbie
04-10-2012 3:29 PM


Re: Ducking?
subbie writes:
That you missed anything is hardly news or noteworthy.
Percy have a private word with subbie will you. He's not adding to the debate here!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 265 by subbie, posted 04-10-2012 3:29 PM subbie has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 267 by Percy, posted 04-11-2012 6:57 PM Big_Al35 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