[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

Search:


View post   

>> No.8995359 [View]
File: 1.95 MB, 2560x1440, Twoviews.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
8995359

>>8995350
>Luckily, molecular evidence tells us that all apes (including humans) share a common ancestor.
Yet other studies show completely different dates.

>You seem to have a little trouble distinguishing >one guy claimed from >multiple independent studies concluded
Actually, I think it was the latter for a time.

>you don't have to get salty just because you don't know anything about evolutionary timescales, and think that hominids speciate faster than trilobites. are you really that upset about me throwing out big numbers? Homo sapiens HAS been around for ~280 kyr; sorry if that's too big a number for your mind to comprehend
>implying those dates are reliable

>I did. You responded with an unrelated comment out of left field, as if I would fall for that ruse.
Your comment came off as, "I can make up anything ai want and you have to accept it, because Pee Aech Dee."

>yes, that's it! it's the thumbs! not the intelligence, language, or advanced culture!
Twisting my words yet again. I was merely pointing out one trait (dexterous hands) and showing how poorly our "relatives" fit that.

>there IS no issue. you're claiming that "humans made this hand-axe" is equivalent to "a supernatural being made everything". and you're whining when I point out how monumentally stupid this statement is.
>"if I act like it doesn't exist, I'll come pff as winning the argument"

>"common sense" also tells you that the Earth is flat, that water warms up when it's boiled, that rocks can't float in water, and that solid rocks certainly can't flow. There's nothing rational about it, and it is NOT a substitute for actual knowledge.
Observational science is more reliable than historical science.

>Homo habilis is a descendant of Australopithecus, but its features clearly support grouping it with Homo. Yes, paleoanthropologists have argued extensively about this.
And haven't they also argued over habilis' very validity as a species? If they can't be certain on a species, what about several?

>> No.8862443 [View]
File: 1.95 MB, 2560x1440, Twoviews.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
8862443

>>8862402
https://answersingenesis.org/human-evolution/ape-man/did-humans-really-evolve-from-apelike-creatures/

Navigation
View posts[+24][+48][+96]