Entmoot
 


Go Back   Entmoot > Other Topics > General Messages
FAQ Members List Calendar

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Old 11-09-2002, 04:07 PM   #11
BeardofPants
the Shrike
 
BeardofPants's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: San Francisco, CA <3
Posts: 10,647
Quote:
Originally posted by Lief Erikson
I know that there are some, like the Neanderthals. But when such discoveries do come, up, they are generally major discoveries. We have the evidence of many Neanderthals having existed at one time now, but we don't have a constant, slightly evolving chain of species. This is easily explained by a faster evolution, for by that theory a species would hop from one stage of development to another within a rather small space of time, and doesn't even need hundreds of in between species.
First of all, Neandertals are NOT the precursor to Sapiens. They were a side branch that developed in Europe when Sapiens were still in the African/Middle East region. The precursor to Neanders is most likely Homo sapiens heidelbergensis, and possibly antecessor in Spain. Erectus is our direct precendent.

And that is why you are wrong about there being no slightly evolving chain. There are many slight differrences between heidelbergensis and the neandertal. So much so, that it is now generally a given that they were two separate species, as opposed to what they previously thought - that heidelbergensis was Neander.

I'm not even gonna get into the timeframe here, but needless to say, a long period of time stretched between Heidelbergensis and Neander (who were developing before sapiens expanded out) and the expansion of Sapiens. On top of all this, there is a convergence between Erectus, Sapiens, and Heidelbergensis, of several thousands of years. Your faster evolution theory is simply not possible.

Quote:
Originally posted by Lief Erikson
I'm personally a little surprised that you consider our current dating methods to be just as accurate as the fact that the world is round, but it's your choice how strong you think these methods are.
I didn't even mention dating methods there. (See my post below regarding precision vs accuracy) Here, I was talking about the fossil record, and stratigraphic layers. Just by using geomagnetic reversals tells us that the earth is very very old.
__________________
"Binary solo! 0000001! 00000011! 0000001! 00000011!" ~ The Humans are Dead, Flight of the Conchords

Last edited by BeardofPants : 11-09-2002 at 04:09 PM.
BeardofPants is offline   Reply With Quote
 



Posting Rules
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may post attachments
You may edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Evidence for Evolution jerseydevil General Messages 599 05-18-2008 02:43 PM
Catholic Schools Ban Charity Last Child of Ungoliant General Messages 29 03-15-2005 04:58 PM
Evidence for Creationism and Against Evolution Rían General Messages 1149 08-16-2004 06:07 PM
A discussion about Evolution and other scientific theories Elvellon General Messages 1 04-11-2002 01:23 PM
Evolution IronParrot Entertainment Forum 1 06-19-2001 03:22 AM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:19 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
(c) 1997-2019, The Tolkien Trail