Oops, seems "Lucy" wasn't alone

[Two Thumbs]

Oh.. you mean she wasn't Eve?

No she wasn't.

Mitochondrial Eve is generally estimated to have lived around 200,000 years ago,[2] most likely in East Africa,[3] when Homo sapiens sapiens ("anatomically modern humans") were developing as a population distinct from other human sub-species.

source

Incidently, before we Christians take too much heart in the fact that we all share the same Great (to the nth degree) GrandMOTHER, know that the same genetic studies indicate that our protogenitor EYE never met our protogenitor ADAM

The most recent ancestor of all males living today was a man who lived in Africa around 59,000 years ago, according to an international team of researchers.

But the finding raises new questions, not least because our most recent paternal ancestor would have been about 84,000 years younger than our maternal one.

So all modern humans apparently DO share common a Grand (to the nth power)Mother AND GRAND FATHER, but apparently those two univsersally shared ancestors of ours were never formally introduced.

DNA is some fun stuff.

Funny how it gives creadance to the Adam and Eve myth.

 

[konradv]

Did you miss the word "probably"?

The "missing link" was and is a baseless theory. The further we go back the more and more and more evedence shows up that there is no relation.

People, like you I assume, have some nutty need for us to be linked to monkeys. As if standing up all of a sudden was an evolution.

sorry to tell you, but the PROOF is showing that we always stood up, there was always (since the dino's died) a human like critter that stood up naturally.

"Knowledge advances, too bad you don't!"

We don't know each other. But you've made it clear that we have not moved far from our animal ways with such piss poor mannerisms.

Where's the evidence that there always was a human-like creature that stood up? The dinos died out 65 millions years ago. Lucy is about 5 million years old. Where's the evidence from the intervening 60 million years?

You call me nutty, but then say I'm the one with piss-poor mannerisms?!?! I must be getting to you guys, because I'm constantly accused of being rude or dismissive and then get very rude and dismissive answers. I'm a counter-puncher. If I've been that way, it's only because someone else has gone there first. I'm only human. I'm not a saint, but don't try to blame the tenor of this discussion on me.

You are also a liar. I did not insult you, you started off insulting me.

rdean is an asshole of the first order, so being kind to him is not normal, nor does he expect it.

mia koopa on the missing years.

The missing link is a theory that becomes more and more a bad idea with each older bone we find.

that theory came from the 50's(?), based off what they thought they knew. But so many people confuse theory with fact. It's a theory, an educated guess. Nothing more.

Each older bone found actually proves that it's a good idea. The only thing that's changed is that the divergence from a common ancestor happened further in the past than previously thought. A theory is more than an educated guess. It's backed by years of accumulated data. The fact that the "missing link" hasn't been found yet, does not preclude its existence. As a matter of fact the further back we go the more likely rather than unlikely it becomes.

 

[Two Thumbs]

Where's the evidence that there always was a human-like creature that stood up? The dinos died out 65 millions years ago. Lucy is about 5 million years old. Where's the evidence from the intervening 60 million years?

You call me nutty, but then say I'm the one with piss-poor mannerisms?!?! I must be getting to you guys, because I'm constantly accused of being rude or dismissive and then get very rude and dismissive answers. I'm a counter-puncher. If I've been that way, it's only because someone else has gone there first. I'm only human. I'm not a saint, but don't try to blame the tenor of this discussion on me.

You are also a liar. I did not insult you, you started off insulting me.

rdean is an asshole of the first order, so being kind to him is not normal, nor does he expect it.

mia koopa on the missing years.

The missing link is a theory that becomes more and more a bad idea with each older bone we find.

that theory came from the 50's(?), based off what they thought they knew. But so many people confuse theory with fact. It's a theory, an educated guess. Nothing more.

Each older bone found actually proves that it's a good idea. The only thing that's changed is that the divergence from a common ancestor happened further in the past than previously thought. A theory is more than an educated guess. It's backed by years of accumulated data. The fact that the "missing link" hasn't been found yet, does not preclude its existence. As a matter of fact the further back we go the more likely rather than unlikely it becomes.

5 million years and the only thing we are getting is that we used to be the same size as todays chimps.

the·o·ry   /ˈθiəri, ˈθɪəri/ Show Spelled
[thee-uh-ree, theer-ee] Show IPA

–noun, plural -ries.
1. a coherent group of general propositions used as principles of explanation for a class of phenomena: Einstein's theory of relativity.
2. a proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural, in contrast to well-established propositions that are regarded as reporting matters of actual fact.
3. Mathematics . a body of principles, theorems, or the like, belonging to one subject: number theory.
4. the branch of a science or art that deals with its principles or methods, as distinguished from its practice: music theory.
5. a particular conception or view of something to be done or of the method of doing it; a system of rules or principles.
6. contemplation or speculation.
7. guess or conjecture.

we're both right.

 

[konradv]

You are also a liar. I did not insult you, you started off insulting me.

rdean is an asshole of the first order, so being kind to him is not normal, nor does he expect it.

mia koopa on the missing years.

The missing link is a theory that becomes more and more a bad idea with each older bone we find.

that theory came from the 50's(?), based off what they thought they knew. But so many people confuse theory with fact. It's a theory, an educated guess. Nothing more.

Each older bone found actually proves that it's a good idea. The only thing that's changed is that the divergence from a common ancestor happened further in the past than previously thought. A theory is more than an educated guess. It's backed by years of accumulated data. The fact that the "missing link" hasn't been found yet, does not preclude its existence. As a matter of fact the further back we go the more likely rather than unlikely it becomes.

5 million years and the only thing we are getting is that we used to be the same size as todays chimps.

the·o·ry   /ˈθiəri, ˈθɪəri/ Show Spelled
[thee-uh-ree, theer-ee] Show IPA

–noun, plural -ries.
1. a coherent group of general propositions used as principles of explanation for a class of phenomena: Einstein's theory of relativity.
2. a proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural, in contrast to well-established propositions that are regarded as reporting matters of actual fact.
3. Mathematics . a body of principles, theorems, or the like, belonging to one subject: number theory.
4. the branch of a science or art that deals with its principles or methods, as distinguished from its practice: music theory.
5. a particular conception or view of something to be done or of the method of doing it; a system of rules or principles.
6. contemplation or speculation.
7. guess or conjecture.

we're both right.

It's just that you're using it in the wrong context. The usual scientfic definition of 'theory' is #1. 6 & 7 are non-scientific defintions of the term. In a scientific context they don't apply.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Oh.. you mean she wasn't Eve?

No she wasn't.

Mitochondrial Eve is generally estimated to have lived around 200,000 years ago,[2] most likely in East Africa,[3] when Homo sapiens sapiens ("anatomically modern humans") were developing as a population distinct from other human sub-species.

source

Incidently, before we Christians take too much heart in the fact that we all share the same Great (to the nth degree) GrandMOTHER, know that the same genetic studies indicate that our protogenitor EYE never met our protogenitor ADAM

The most recent ancestor of all males living today was a man who lived in Africa around 59,000 years ago, according to an international team of researchers.

But the finding raises new questions, not least because our most recent paternal ancestor would have been about 84,000 years younger than our maternal one.

So all modern humans apparently DO share common a Grand (to the nth power)Mother AND GRAND FATHER, but apparently those two univsersally shared ancestors of ours were never formally introduced.

You really should try to keep up with current events.

In this week's issue of Nature, a Yale mathematician presents models showing that the most recent person who was a direct ancestor of all humans currently alive may have lived just a few thousand years ago.

'Most recent common ancestor' of all living humans surprisingly recent

It always amazes me that people who want to discredit my faith cannot even keep up with the basic science, and they always make fools of themselves in their attempt to make me look stupid.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Each older bone found actually proves that it's a good idea. The only thing that's changed is that the divergence from a common ancestor happened further in the past than previously thought. A theory is more than an educated guess. It's backed by years of accumulated data. The fact that the "missing link" hasn't been found yet, does not preclude its existence. As a matter of fact the further back we go the more likely rather than unlikely it becomes.

5 million years and the only thing we are getting is that we used to be the same size as todays chimps.

the·o·ry   /ˈθiəri, ˈθɪəri/ Show Spelled
[thee-uh-ree, theer-ee] Show IPA

–noun, plural -ries.
1. a coherent group of general propositions used as principles of explanation for a class of phenomena: Einstein's theory of relativity.
2. a proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural, in contrast to well-established propositions that are regarded as reporting matters of actual fact.
3. Mathematics . a body of principles, theorems, or the like, belonging to one subject: number theory.
4. the branch of a science or art that deals with its principles or methods, as distinguished from its practice: music theory.
5. a particular conception or view of something to be done or of the method of doing it; a system of rules or principles.
6. contemplation or speculation.
7. guess or conjecture.

we're both right.

It's just that you're using it in the wrong context. The usual scientfic definition of 'theory' is #1. 6 & 7 are non-scientific defintions of the term. In a scientific context they don't apply.

Sure they do, the difference is that the Theory of Evolution is considered differently than string theory. It is not science's fault that language is not up to using different words for the different concepts, but most scientists understand the difference between sound scientific theories like evolution and the speculation involved in string theory.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

One hopes that one day Rdean will evolve past his incorrect One Note Samba "94%" squawk.

 

[konradv]

Oh.. you mean she wasn't Eve?

No she wasn't.

source

Incidently, before we Christians take too much heart in the fact that we all share the same Great (to the nth degree) GrandMOTHER, know that the same genetic studies indicate that our protogenitor EYE never met our protogenitor ADAM

So all modern humans apparently DO share common a Grand (to the nth power)Mother AND GRAND FATHER, but apparently those two univsersally shared ancestors of ours were never formally introduced.

You really should try to keep up with current events.

In this week's issue of Nature, a Yale mathematician presents models showing that the most recent person who was a direct ancestor of all humans currently alive may have lived just a few thousand years ago.

'Most recent common ancestor' of all living humans surprisingly recent

It always amazes me that people who want to discredit my faith cannot even keep up with the basic science, and they always make fools of themselves in their attempt to make me look stupid.

What does this have to do with the amount of time since the divergence of the lines that led to humans and to chimpanzees? What you're talking about happened much later and doesn't have anything to do with the OP.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

No she wasn't.

source

Incidently, before we Christians take too much heart in the fact that we all share the same Great (to the nth degree) GrandMOTHER, know that the same genetic studies indicate that our protogenitor EYE never met our protogenitor ADAM

So all modern humans apparently DO share common a Grand (to the nth power)Mother AND GRAND FATHER, but apparently those two univsersally shared ancestors of ours were never formally introduced.

You really should try to keep up with current events.

In this week's issue of Nature, a Yale mathematician presents models showing that the most recent person who was a direct ancestor of all humans currently alive may have lived just a few thousand years ago.

'Most recent common ancestor' of all living humans surprisingly recent

It always amazes me that people who want to discredit my faith cannot even keep up with the basic science, and they always make fools of themselves in their attempt to make me look stupid.

What does this have to do with the amount of time since the divergence of the lines that led to humans and to chimpanzees? What you're talking about happened much later and doesn't have anything to do with the OP.

What did your post have to do with the OP, or reality?

 

[konradv]

You really should try to keep up with current events.

'Most recent common ancestor' of all living humans surprisingly recent

It always amazes me that people who want to discredit my faith cannot even keep up with the basic science, and they always make fools of themselves in their attempt to make me look stupid.

What does this have to do with the amount of time since the divergence of the lines that led to humans and to chimpanzees? What you're talking about happened much later and doesn't have anything to do with the OP.

What did your post have to do with the OP, or reality?

Trying to get you back on track after you hijacked the topic. The OP was about a hominid named Lucy, but you started talking about a more recent and totally irrelevant event. We were talking about when we diverged from the line that created the Great Apes, while you went off on a tangent about a much more recent bottle neck in human genetic history. THAT'S reality!

 

[Quantum Windbag]

What does this have to do with the amount of time since the divergence of the lines that led to humans and to chimpanzees? What you're talking about happened much later and doesn't have anything to do with the OP.

What did your post have to do with the OP, or reality?

Trying to get you back on track after you hijacked the topic. The OP was about a hominid named Lucy, but you started talking about a more recent and totally irrelevant event. We were talking about when we diverged from the line that created the Great Apes, while you went off on a tangent about a much more recent bottle neck in human genetic history. THAT'S reality!

Your post that Adam never met Eve was relevant to the topic how? I replied to that, so any hijacking must have been done by you.

 

[JoReba]

Famed Hominid Lucy no Longer Alone

"The KSD skeleton is long-sought fossil evidence," said Haile-Selassie. [KSD is shorthand for 'Korsi Dora,' the name of the locality where the skeleton was found.] "It complements the Laetoli footprints and incontrovertibly shows A. afarensis was an obligate bipedal since its first appearance in the fossil record."

Before now, anthropologists concluded evolutionary ancestors had shoulders more like those of chimpanzees. But "Kadanuumuu" surprised researchers by revealing a shoulder very different from chimpanzees, which are thought to be the closest living relatives of Homo sapiens.

"This tells us that chimpanzees have evolved a great deal since we shared a last common ancestor with them," said Haile-Selassie.

----------------------------------------------

Every year there are more discoveries. I like to point that out to right wingers. Seems that 94% of scientists are working after all.

Are you aware that your ancestors were slime, cockroaches, and monkeys? Lol.

My most ancient ancestor was God.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Famed Hominid Lucy no Longer Alone

"The KSD skeleton is long-sought fossil evidence," said Haile-Selassie. [KSD is shorthand for 'Korsi Dora,' the name of the locality where the skeleton was found.] "It complements the Laetoli footprints and incontrovertibly shows A. afarensis was an obligate bipedal since its first appearance in the fossil record."

Before now, anthropologists concluded evolutionary ancestors had shoulders more like those of chimpanzees. But "Kadanuumuu" surprised researchers by revealing a shoulder very different from chimpanzees, which are thought to be the closest living relatives of Homo sapiens.

"This tells us that chimpanzees have evolved a great deal since we shared a last common ancestor with them," said Haile-Selassie.

----------------------------------------------

Every year there are more discoveries. I like to point that out to right wingers. Seems that 94% of scientists are working after all.

Are you aware that your ancestors were slime, cockroaches, and monkeys? Lol.

My most ancient ancestor was God.

I have been wondering if I could find someone equally as stupid as rdean on the other side to poke whenever they started spouting nonsense. It now seems I owe rdean an apology, because you make him look intelligent. I thought that would be impossible.

 

[JBeukema]

There are those who deny science whenever they want to protect their failed ideas.

Who is denying science? both you and rdean seem to think this proves something, but other than the fact that science is wrong about the evolution of humans...

 

[rdean]

Famed Hominid Lucy no Longer Alone

"The KSD skeleton is long-sought fossil evidence," said Haile-Selassie. [KSD is shorthand for 'Korsi Dora,' the name of the locality where the skeleton was found.] "It complements the Laetoli footprints and incontrovertibly shows A. afarensis was an obligate bipedal since its first appearance in the fossil record."

Before now, anthropologists concluded evolutionary ancestors had shoulders more like those of chimpanzees. But "Kadanuumuu" surprised researchers by revealing a shoulder very different from chimpanzees, which are thought to be the closest living relatives of Homo sapiens.

"This tells us that chimpanzees have evolved a great deal since we shared a last common ancestor with them," said Haile-Selassie.

----------------------------------------------

Every year there are more discoveries. I like to point that out to right wingers. Seems that 94% of scientists are working after all.

Are you aware that your ancestors were slime, cockroaches, and monkeys? Lol.

My most ancient ancestor was God.

Wow, so that must make you a "Gawd".

 

[rdean]

There are those who deny science whenever they want to protect their failed ideas.

Who is denying science? both you and rdean seem to think this proves something, but other than the fact that science is wrong about the evolution of humans...

Yea, science is wrong. And you can prove that, "how"?

 

[JBeukema]

Oh.. you mean she wasn't Eve?

No she wasn't.

Mitochondrial Eve is generally estimated to have lived around 200,000 years ago,[2] most likely in East Africa,[3] when Homo sapiens sapiens ("anatomically modern humans") were developing as a population distinct from other human sub-species.

source

Incidently, before we Christians take too much heart in the fact that we all share the same Great (to the nth degree) GrandMOTHER, know that the same genetic studies indicate that our protogenitor EYE never met our protogenitor ADAM

The most recent ancestor of all males living today was a man who lived in Africa around 59,000 years ago, according to an international team of researchers.

But the finding raises new questions, not least because our most recent paternal ancestor would have been about 84,000 years younger than our maternal one.

So all modern humans apparently DO share common a Grand (to the nth power)Mother AND GRAND FATHER, but apparently those two univsersally shared ancestors of ours were never formally introduced.

Bullshit

Adam knew Eve

How do you explain that one?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Who is denying science? both you and rdean seem to think this proves something, but other than the fact that science is wrong about the evolution of humans...

Yea, science is wrong. And you can prove that, "how"?

You just did by pointing out that we are older than they thought.

 

[konradv]

What did your post have to do with the OP, or reality?

Trying to get you back on track after you hijacked the topic. The OP was about a hominid named Lucy, but you started talking about a more recent and totally irrelevant event. We were talking about when we diverged from the line that created the Great Apes, while you went off on a tangent about a much more recent bottle neck in human genetic history. THAT'S reality!

Your post that Adam never met Eve was relevant to the topic how? I replied to that, so any hijacking must have been done by you.

Never mentioned Adam and Eve in any of my posts. Try again!!!

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Trying to get you back on track after you hijacked the topic. The OP was about a hominid named Lucy, but you started talking about a more recent and totally irrelevant event. We were talking about when we diverged from the line that created the Great Apes, while you went off on a tangent about a much more recent bottle neck in human genetic history. THAT'S reality!

Your post that Adam never met Eve was relevant to the topic how? I replied to that, so any hijacking must have been done by you.

Never mentioned Adam and Eve in any of my posts. Try again!!!

You responded to a specific post. Live with the fact that I am not going back and double checking who said what when I am explaining my position to you. I was wrong about you being the one that said it, but that does not make you right for saying I derailed the thread.