Skip to comments.Fossil skull fuels debate over human origin
Posted on 03/21/2002 7:04:27 AM PST by RoughDobermannEdited on 04/29/2004 2:00:17 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
click here to read article
I'd wondered what happened to her. Guess the Vegas gig didn't pan out.
This seems more reasonable...
Only the insane and the ignorant are ever certain of anything.
It is tedious to keep reading quotes from these "scientists" without a life who claim "proof" of the unproveable every few months.
First of all the basic question can never and will never be proven.
Events of 1 or 2 million years ago simply have not left enough evidence evenly distributed across the world and accessible uniformly. That's just the nature of the problem.
The pathological "P.C." obsession with "proving" Africa is the origin of everything (a setup for "reparations"? LOL) is getting very tired. That horse is mush already...
If we originated from a single source or several, or from Antarctica or Cucamonga... is irrelevant.
Let's just continue to gather knowledge for academics' sake and get rid of the "proves" obsession.
This "proves" nothing. It is an interesting brick in the wall of knowledge; nothing more and nothing less.
How do you know that a dozen different species will not evolve. Who knows what will happen over the next five million years?
A new study shows that schools and many education programs are failing to provide students with a basic understanding of evolution. It is famously difficult to explain evolutionary principles without resorting to anthropomorphic or figurative language: Evolution "selects" the fittest individuals; species "adapt" to change. Both of these phrases are commonplace when explaining the very complex processes involved in evolution. However, this use of language implies that there is an agency or cognition involved in evolution. This misunderstanding is being picked up on by students in the classroom and could form part of a wider desire to fit evolutionary theory into broad social narratives. Rob Moore and colleagues (University of Cape Town, South Africa), writing in the Spring issue of the Journal of Biological Education, call for more care in the use of language in science education. "Given the centrality of evolutionary theory to a clear foundation in biology, the widely documented difficulty that many students have in coming to terms with these concepts is of enduring concern. ... Establishing a clear conceptual grasp of evolutionary theory will need to include an enhanced sensitivity to language usage."
No wonder--one kid killed his mother and said he wasn't responsible to anybody for anything--only his parents and he belonged back in free society.
Looks like trial-error...mutation---survival of the fittest!
Our technologic--cultural base is moral--physical laws(science) that don't change...
evolution-"change" at its premise is worthless--perverted--detrimental--fatal!
Too much miscegenation goin' on all that time kept the races "impure". This prevented them from drifting away into true species.
What is evolution, --to evolve? The word means a "turning out". That is, it is a display of characteristics that were there all along but not displayed.
It has little to do with the genetic code, and this is the source of the peoblem with understanding what is going on. If we say that the genetic code has all the characterists contained in it, then what are we to do with the observation that each individual person has a different genetic code? Even if the offspring has a section of genetic code that seems new, that neither of the parents, --or parent in the case of asexual reporduction or cloning,-- had, what does that mean in terms of evolution? A mutation? What is that -- a mutation?
Imagine that the new characteristic was there all along --not in the genetic code because the genetic code is only part of the mechanism of expression-- in the nature of the organism but not expressed. Then we can get away from this mechanical explanation and perhaps get closer to the true underlying force of expression of characteristics.
What are "fossil skull fuels" doing debating over human origins? And who's moderating?
Yeah; layovers were a bummer 2 million years ago.
in Social Darwinism
that evil people
will use to justify something that is
evil, because they are scientifically ignorant morons as well as heartless
pathetic excuses for human beings.
You pose the same
and once answered
¤you ignore the answers.
Wanna know why? Because whiners and scientifically inept idiots come in to the school board complaining about all the perceived evils of darwinism and evolution in general because in their ignorant bliss they believe that evolution disproves something that one cannot prove (God) and try to legislate their religion and attempt to infiltrate our school with idiotic and watered down science curricula and/or scare Biology teachers into keeping silent on the subject of evolution.
sorta of a carreer--occupation for freaks too!
We all saw the magician "too" perfectly landing knives close to a woman on a revolving target---how?
Well it is timed perfect---the guy with a mallet hits the knives from the backside while the audience does not see the magician throwing his knife to the side in a big pillow. The sound you hear is from the clown in the back knocking out the knives from the back! All of the skill is the coordination they need to synchronize their throwing--hitting and to build the suspense--entertainment.
We aren't allowed to have restraint of speech--trade--elections but education is being rigged by circus performers like clinton-reno and they know it unconsciously only to keep up their self respect and public dignity.
Now-a-days you don't need the clown---everything goes off electronically---via computers and the media...pop corn--soda--beer!
Image: Courtesy of Nature
Scholars of human evolution have long debated just how many branches and twigs make up the human family tree. Some place the known human fossils into numerous genera and species, creating a bushy tree. Others tend to see more similarities between fossils and opt for trees with fewer offshoots. Now newly described fossils from Ethiopia indicate that for at least one part of the human pedigree, less is more.
Announcing their findings today in the journal Nature, a team of researchers led by Ethiopian paleoanthropologist Berhane Asfaw reports that the million-year-old fossils, which belong to Homo erectus, lay to rest the idea that that species should be split in two. Some experts have argued that earlier African representatives of the group, which dates back as far as 1.7 million years ago, look so different from later examples from Asia that they warrant their own species, H. ergaster. In this scenario, Asian Homo erectus went extinct and H. ergaster spawned modern humans. But the newly recovered remains--including a complete skull cap (see image)--exhibit an intermediate anatomy that, according to Asfaw's group, bridges the gap between the two proposed species.
"Before this time, we really haven't had a good comparison between African and Asian forms from the same time window," says team member W. Henry Gilbert, a graduate student at the University of California, Berkeley. "We've had early African forms and late Asian forms, and people have used the differences between them to generalize about all African and Asian specimens. Now that we have a later African form for comparison, we are finding that they are very similar in a lot of the features that people were formerly using to separate early African from late Asian ones."
"The anthropological splitting common today is giving the wrong impression about the biology of these early human ancestors," asserts Berkeley paleoanthropologist Tim White, another study co-author. "The different names indicate an apparent diversity that is not real." Homo erectus, he says, was a biologically successful organism, "not a whole series of different human ancestors, all but one of which went extinct." --Kate Wong
FOAMA-LOAMA-SAUDE. abcdefghijklmnop!!! qrstuv!!! where's the rest of the abc's?
45+% are creationists(unamused-frustrated) only...
45+% are creationists/evolution...mutants/grips---
less than 10% are evolutionists/atheism only...sorta the clowns-freaks-performers!
I got a cutting torch--TRUTH--escaped the cave--show!
Don't worry about jedigirl---she has her training strings on---big net--lotta applause!
Ah, sorry. I missed this sentence, such as it is. So, you escaped the cave show by knowing the TRUTH? What truth is that exactly?
I guess "Fossil fuels" do contribute to global warming, with all the additional hot air the numb skulls will banter around.
An honors class elective. No credit hours.