Sign up with Googlehttp://www.nature.com/news/2011/012345/full/news.2011.350.html
Something for the evolutionists to ponder on.
Something for the evolutionists to ponder on.
-
Ask a question and get free supportUnlock new privileges and see hidden discussionsWin prizes and earn reputation
-
Question of the day ~ How often do you braai?
-
Afristay giveaway.Win a 2-night stay for two people at an establishment of your choice with R1,000 in spending money. Enter here.
Human ancestors in Eurasia earlier than thought
- Thread starter alpha777
- Start date
copacetic
King of the Hippies
- Joined
- Nov 22, 2009
- Messages
- 57,908
What are the ramifications for evolution, if this is true?
None, its just interesting.
copacetic
King of the Hippies
- Joined
- Nov 22, 2009
- Messages
- 57,908
I presumed when you said the evolutionists should ponder the article, that you felt it was suggestive of something to do with evolution, pardon me.
It doesn't really change things much... It's already known that there's differences between Eurpeans/Asians and Africans. However, even if Asians turned out to have built the pyramids, and that africans are inferior (I'm saying this as a hypothetical case), no one can say anything because it's not really politically correct, and will piss off a billion odd people.
w1z4rd
Karmic Sangoma
- Joined
- Jan 17, 2005
- Messages
- 49,747
:wtf:
porchrat
Honorary Master
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2008
- Messages
- 34,277
Took the emoticon right out of my mouth.
To be honest what Scotty said there is interesting, I had heard (by way of third party though) that a discussion with a very highly renowned scientest in some or other field of paleontology/archeology or some such and in questioning out of interest he mentioned that he could not fully disclose nor comment with what he knew because it would not be "politically correct" and would harm many people and his reputation as well.
So what I think Scotty means is that no matter what way history has been written, it doesn't matter anyway because there will always be those who try and distort it. I mean for instance take the cradle of humankind - is almost sacred in those believing that it is the true origin of us and almost in a way view it to be a superior notion of ownership of everything involving human development going forward.
Ridiculous to you and I as it hardly changes a thing but there are some strange people in this world who use these types of things in their agenda
Of course I can't really comment with surety though, just a perception which is probably wrong.
Last edited:
porchrat
Honorary Master
- Joined
- Sep 11, 2008
- Messages
- 34,277
Don't get me wrong the race groups are definitely different. We have different rates of developing cancer, medical problems that are far more common in one race group than another etc. I am also fully aware that there is some sort of political correctness atmosphere surrounding these sorts of studies in certain places but these studies do still occur. I myself wrote a mini-thesis dealing with only Zulu South Africans and their genetic predisposition towards a particular cancer. The research is definitely happening we maybe just don't hear about it as often in the press.To be honest what Scotty said there is interesting, I had heard (by way of third party though) that a discussion with a very highly renowned scientest in some or other field of paleontology/archeology or some such and in questioning out of interest he mentioned that he could not fully disclose nor comment with what he knew because it would not be "politically correct" and would harm many people and his reputation as well.
So what I think Scotty means is that no matter what way history has been written, it doesn't matter anyway because there will always be those who try and distort it. I mean for instance take the cradle of humankind - is almost sacred in those believing that it is the true origin of us and almost in a way view it to be a superior notion of ownership of everything involving human development going forward.
Ridiculous to you and I as it hardly changes a thing but there are some strange people in this world who use these types of things in their agenda
Of course I can't really comment with surety though, just a perception which is probably wrong.
We should be stepping up these sorts of studies and discarding the stigma surrounding them. Instead of sticking our heads in the sand and pretending we're all identical we should be celebrating our genetic diversity and fully understanding just how different we all are. It can only help us to better control our health in the long run.
Until you can produce archeological evidence of your mythical Garden of Eden, it'll remain just that. A myth.
Totally agree, the only people who would be offended by these studies would be the ones who have "race issues". For the rest of the progressed world this would be a step in the right direction.
ponder
Honorary Master
- Joined
- Jan 22, 2005
- Messages
- 92,823
Why? Because you believe that is where the garden of eden was even though there is no proof?
Ok, lets go with the bible route, lets go by your belief that the garden of eden is in that area? Now lets take this a step further and say this is where god created the first humans (adam & eve)? Sound good so far?
Now lets build a chronological timeline of the bible & it's events which most scholars (yes even biblical ones & you can find it on bible sites) puts the creation of the first humans (adam & eve) at about 6000 yrs ago. You liking this so far? (Btw this is based on the jewish bible which the christian old testament very closely follows).
Now if the above is true (with your belief & reasoning you would have to agree that it's true) it means every single scientist, carbon dating test, archaeological dig etc etc has been lying to us and the stuff they dug up were props made by sadistic varsity students. It's pretty obvious then that before god got on the scene there must have been another god that made all these things prior to 4000BC? Or maybe the logical conclusion any sane and reasonable person can come to is that religion is a load of lying BS and we are better off with proven science, carbon dating, skeletons we can actually touch, genetic code we can actually trace via markers etc etc etc.
I can however understand why the bible has this creation thing in mesopotania, that area is full of creation myths and is considered the cradle of civilisation. The bible is full of such myths taken from other myths, folklore etc that originated from way before the bibles timeline.
Last edited:
What is there to ponder about?
I bet you thought you "had" us
No the reason I posted the link is because i simply find it interesting that the idea that humans originated in Africa is flogged so much. This link might change that idea, but I doubt it.
Just a thought. Do you think people evolved into homo sapiens at similar times in different parts of the world? That would explain the marked differences between different races...if I believed in evolution of course.