Racial Evolution 101

of course that you would be closer genetically to your brother or sister than you would be to your grandparents wouldn't have anything to do with the logic you use.Guess you didn't have any grandparents and were spontaneously generated.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

The logic is yours -- just applied close to home. enjoy it.The reason that Neanderthal DNA is close to ours is because we are closely related. The reason it is closer to ours than chimps or bonobos is because we are more closely related.Last I heard there were no DNA samples for any other prehistoric hominids, so your going on about the relationship being cut off is pure hokum.Enjoy.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

Notice the lack of canines in both skulls. Nice laugh on the Homo erectus, makes me think of some comedians on TV. I see no problem with this trend in the skulls, but point out that you also seem to be missing something in the scheme:http://www.mnh.si.edu/anthro/humanorigins/ha/a_tree.html or from a different site:
http://www.handprint.com/LS/ANC/evol.html The first column is Homo sap (descending from Homo heidelburg), the second is Homo heidelburg (descending from Homo ergaster), the third is Homo neander (also descending from Homo heidelburg, but earlier), and then on the right is Homo erectus (also descending from Homo ergaster, but earlier)So your tree is off the mark, erectus is more second cousin than ancestor.From your picture of Homo Erectus I think he would fit in without much notice in modern society when you consider the diversity of types from aboriginal to blacks to asian to caucasian: Nice family eh?I don't know what you mean by "Basically, the further back you go, the worse it gets" unless you are saying that the further you go back in time the less modern the specimens look (doh!) or that your biases and prejudices are showing.Enjoy.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

You are confusing opinion with evidence.I am not disputing that neanderthal was a different species, or that homo erectus or homo egaster were different species. You can see my response to redwolf on this issue at message #56in this topic (right after yours). Certainly the discovery of anatomically modern humans in Ethiopia that date to 160,000 years old show a long overlap in time when Homo sap and Homo neander lived.There are genetic differences between you, your sister or your mother or a person from Africa. The differences between you and the person in Africa are greater than the differences between you and your sister or your mother. There are also differences between you and your ancestors that increase as you go back in time. It does not take long for the differences in your ancestor DNA to be as great as the differences between you and the person in Africa. Go back far enough and you will find one (if not several) common ancestors between you and the person in Africa (I am related 4 different ways to a single person on the Mayflower). And Homo erectus who also lived at the same time for a while ... and maybe even some Homo ergaster cousins (see Dmanisi, hominids in europe found above a 1.85 million year old lava flow). Seems to me that is a question for you to answer rather than ask. Again, this is conflating opinion (incredulity?) with evidence. For me it is fairly obvious that they all come from the same source, as shown by the fossil evidence.There are many species in other families, why should we feel we need to be special? There are even some scientists that are now saying that chimpanzees and Bonobos should be in the Homo family instead of Pan. This may also mean pushing back the original debut of the Homo family to earlier than 2 million years ago.Enjoy.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

this post by redwolf (#60) is verbatim from
http://www.bearfabrique.org/evorants/neander_Matternes.htmleither redwolf is ted holden or he is plagarizing ted's 'work'or he just doesn't know to properly credit stuff to those who do it.AND neanders may have been around until 30,000 years agohttp://www.mnh.si.edu/anthro/humanorigins/ha/neand.htm How that all affects human evolution still escapes me, as this is consistent with the evolutionary hominid tree.It's like saying "WOW there were two people in the room, how did they get there?"enjoy.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

opinion, and that's all.The line between human and hominid and between hominid and ape is blurred by ages, no question. But I look at that picture of Homo erectus and see a human: And you still haven't answered about the family tree shown on two different sites above
(http://EvC Forum: Racial Evolution 101)

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

What they want is the website the information comes from? what did you use to find the information ...

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

Boys. Go sit in the corner until you can be nice!

Can you take this from post #66 to end and move it to a new thread?(This is the kind of thing I mean about side topics and the new process ...)Then perhaps we can get back to the topic on this thread?Thanks

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

once again. math is a model. it can be used to model several aspects of reality, but when there is a conflict between the model and the reality it is not reality that loses. real scientist look at the assumptions and simplifications that went into the calculations to see why they are wrong.the calculation of the age of the earth ("gets revised upwards from his 20 Million years to only about 200 Million years") is missing or over simplifies elements. this is just more misleading pseudo-information, not science. sorry ted.enjoy

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

you present a mathematical result out of some source with no reference to the math actually done and then claim that it trumps all the scientific evidence for the age of the earth.lets see which is likely to be wrong? bad math or reality?ps -- nice new avatar

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

Sorry. No math can trump evidence. I don't care who is doing the math, they can be missing factors. A true scientist that does such a calculation that does not jibe with the evidence looks for reasons for the discrepancy. A creatortionista says "look the earth is only 4000 (or 200 Million) years old" or something equally ludicrous. If the result is based on good science there will be others that corroborate it -- where are those?Why don't you dig up the math and start a new topic on it (per AdminNosey)?Then we can get back to human ancestors in the real world again. Have you corrected your information of Human family tree and Neander DNA yet?

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

This is off topic.The petroglyphs have already been discussed on another thread where Ted (aka redwolf) has failed to answer posts that refute his points on them. Posting them again is against guidelines as well as being intellectually dishonest.See discussion on Dinosaurs and the reduced felt effect of gravity:
http://EvC Forum: Dinosaurs and the reduced felt effect of gravity
http://EvC Forum: Dinosaurs and the reduced felt effect of gravity
http://EvC Forum: Dinosaurs and the reduced felt effect of gravityThe ica stones were also discussed on that thread, the paluxy footprints are a well known creatortionista hoax, and the thigh bone of a mastodon does not make evidence for a giant human.Enjoy.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

ROFLOL!What refutations?#40 - no answer
#59 - no answer
#29 - pathetic claim that the reason the pictures are totally wrong on the head and neck is from retouching every 30 to 50 years - refuted by me on post #35, to which there is --- no answer.If they are so lame, why don't you have any answer to them? Talk about LAME!Go to the links and follow them -- better yet look at the totally pathetically LAME answer to my post #64 which lists 6 posts on that topic as yet unanswered by you.That is LAME!Or go to unanswered post #101 for an updated list of unanswered posts. Unanswered because they refute your points and you have no more (even lame) answers.Don't talk to me about LAME. Or Dishonest.Enjoy.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

still no answer to the point made = no answer to the points made.bluff and bluster, you are still off topic on this thread.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}