Why didn't the pre-Columbian Americans evolve?

[Seymour Flops]

The people of America before European exploration were descendants of a large group of people who were isolated for ten to twenty thousand years. Those descendants spread over a large land mass, and founded civilizations including cities with up to five million in habitants. All without trade or any form of communication with people outside of the Americas. There were a wide variety of climate conditions over the large area and across the thousands of years. A perfect opportunity for Darwinian evolution to take place.

Yet, when Europeans landed in the Americas, they immediately began to copulate with natives and they produced large numbers of healthy and fertile offspring. In other words, in all those thousands of years, no human evolution had taken place. The Americans had their own languages, cultures, and superficial appearances, but their they were.

Still human. "After their kind," indeed.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

The people of America before European exploration were descendants of a large group of people who were isolated for ten to twenty thousand years. Those descendants spread over a large land mass, and founded civilizations including cities with up to five million in habitants. All without trade or any form of communication with people outside of the Americas. There were a wide variety of climate conditions over the large area and across the thousands of years. A perfect opportunity for Darwinian evolution to take place.

Yet, when Europeans landed in the Americas, they immediately began to copulate with natives and they produced large numbers of healthy and fertile offspring. In other words, in all those thousands of years, no human evolution had taken place. The Americans had their own languages, cultures, and superficial appearances, but their they were.

Still human. "After their kind," indeed.

A perfect opportunity for Darwinian evolution to take place.

Why do you feel it didn't take place?

Yet, when Europeans landed in the Americas, they immediately began to copulate with natives and they produced large numbers of healthy and fertile offspring.

Yup.

In other words, in all those thousands of years, no human evolution had taken place.

What's "human evolution"? Post the definition.

 

[Gabe Lackmann]

Racism.

Or I.Q....probably I.Q.

 

[fncceo]

The people of America before European exploration were descendants of a large group of people who were isolated for ten to twenty thousand years.

The evolution of early hominids to humans took place over millions of years.

The development of early hominids from a common mammalian ancestor a hundred million years or more.

 

[Seymour Flops]

A perfect opportunity for Darwinian evolution to take place.

Why do you feel it didn't take place?

Yet, when Europeans landed in the Americas, they immediately began to copulate with natives and they produced large numbers of healthy and fertile offspring.

Yup.

In other words, in all those thousands of years, no human evolution had taken place.

What's "human evolution"? Post the definition.

Darwinian evolution is about new species evolving via natural selection.

His book is about natural selection and the title is "On the Origin Species." It amazes me that people still think that evolution has nothing to do with new species.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Darwinian evolution is about new species evolving via natural selection.

Right.

So why do you feel none happened?

 

[Seymour Flops]

Right.

So why do you feel none happened?

Re-read the OP.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Re-read the OP.

I read it.

I'm waiting for your proof.

 

[abu afak]

The people of America before European exploration were descendants of a large group of people who were isolated for ten to twenty thousand years. Those descendants spread over a large land mass, and founded civilizations including cities with up to five million in habitants. All without trade or any form of communication with people outside of the Americas. There were a wide variety of climate conditions over the large area and across the thousands of years. A perfect opportunity for Darwinian evolution to take place.

Yet, when Europeans landed in the Americas, they immediately began to copulate with natives and they produced large numbers of healthy and fertile offspring. In other words, in all those thousands of years, no human evolution had taken place. The Americans had their own languages, cultures, and superficial appearances, but their they were.

Still human. "After their kind," indeed.

No Evolution?
You Constantly are showing your SPECTACULR STUPIDITY.
Humans have races, aka subspecies.
If allowed to stay apart long enough they would become sperate species, and indeed given another 5K or 10K years we would have them. If not already.

Note the mere Semantic Wisecracks/nitpicking, NEVER KNOWLEDGE, you get from Toddster as opposed to my meaty info posts.

As soon as a population separates they start moving apart genetically and morphologically.
We were close.

Chimps have TWO species each with two subspecies/Races
Gorillas have TWO Species with 7 or 8 subspecies among them.
Tho creationists would call them the same 'Kind.'

Only the last 100+ years have let us reintegrate off the inevitable path.
We were very close to having separate species

Who is closer to being separate species morphologically, Us or Chimps, Gorillas, etc
You call this No evolution?

`

 

[Seymour Flops]

I read it.

I'm waiting for your proof.

My proof that pre-Columbian humans in America did not evolve into a new species?

No Evolution?
You Constantly are showing your SPECTACULR STUPIDITY.
Humans have races, aka subspecies.
If allowed to stay apart long enough they would become sperate species, and indeed given another 5K or 10K years we would have them. If not already.

You must not have read my OP. They had ten to twenty years to "stay apart," and they did not become a separate species, as Darwinist predict would happen.

Note the mere Semantic Wisecracks/nitpicking, NEVER KNOWLEDGE, you get from Toddster as opposed to my meaty info posts.

As soon as a population separates they start moving apart genetically and morphologically.
We were close.

Chimps have TWO species each with two subspecies/Races
Gorillas have TWO Species with 7 or 8 subspecies among them.
Tho creationists would call them the same 'Kind.'

Only the last 100+ years have let us reintegrate off the inevitable path.
We were very close to having separate species

Who is closer to being separate species morphologically, Us or Chimps, Gorillas, etc
You call this No evolution?

Are you saying that you are a better poster than Toddster? I would disagree. Toddster is trying to make an argument, even if his technique of playing dumb is pretty lame. At least Toddster is only playing dumb.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

My proof that pre-Columbian humans in America did not evolve into a new species?

Your proof that there was no evolution taking place.
It's obvious that there wasn't a new species.

They had ten to twenty years to "stay apart," and they did not become a separate species, as Darwinist predict would happen.

Which Darwinist predicted ten to twenty thousand years would create a separate species?

 

[abu afak]

Are you saying that you are a better poster than Toddster? I would disagree. Toddster is trying to make an argument, even if his technique of playing dumb is pretty lame. At least Toddster is only playing dumb.

He only wrote a total of 15 words in his first response (while I was composing mine/my first) after breaking your OP into three quips!!!!
WTF?
That was better?

Toddster's #6 and #8 had only 8 words each!
WTF!
He's a Clown/wisecrack artist.

Compared to my post about species, subspecies, and how they exist/Evolve, and using our closest Primate relatives in doing so.
Something you and he didn't and wouldn't ever know.

Plus I made a MONKEY out of Your 'no evolution' with my Photo.. which is indeed worth 1000 words.. esp in busting your bad pre-columbian choice.

You lying and stupid little ****.

Plus I wrote a G-D book debunking Your 'Quote-Mining Blunder: (You are sooo stupid)

The Pretense Called Evolution

Are you saying the scientists are engaged in a conspiracy? How many findings are enough? So there are no wall paintings or hearths found in caves? So ALL stone tools are found with metal tools? And the mechanism was supernatural. That is not science. Untrue. Uniformitarianism has...

www.usmessageboard.com

Tooddster EVER come close to that level of elaboration?
Not within 1/10th.

`

`

 

[Hollie]

The people of America before European exploration were descendants of a large group of people who were isolated for ten to twenty thousand years. Those descendants spread over a large land mass, and founded civilizations including cities with up to five million in habitants. All without trade or any form of communication with people outside of the Americas. There were a wide variety of climate conditions over the large area and across the thousands of years. A perfect opportunity for Darwinian evolution to take place.

Yet, when Europeans landed in the Americas, they immediately began to copulate with natives and they produced large numbers of healthy and fertile offspring. In other words, in all those thousands of years, no human evolution had taken place. The Americans had their own languages, cultures, and superficial appearances, but their they were.

Still human. "After their kind," indeed.

"Yet, when Europeans landed in the Americas, they immediately began to copulate with natives.."

You have these, you know, really dirty, primitive psycho-sexual fantasies, right?

 

[Seymour Flops]

Your proof that there was no evolution taking place.
It's obvious that there wasn't a new species.

New species originating is what Darwinian evolution is about.

They had ten to twenty years to "stay apart," and they did not become a separate species, as Darwinist predict would happen.

Which Darwinist predicted ten to twenty thousand years would create a separate species?

Abu.

Look at his post above with the racist picture. He says 5K to 10K.

 

[Seymour Flops]

He only wrote a total of 15 words in his first response (while I was composing mine/my first) after breaking your OP into three quips!!!!
WTF?
That was better?

Toddster's #6 and #8 had only 8 words each!
WTF!
He's a Clown/wisecrack artist.

Compared to my post about species, subspecies, and how they exist/Evolve, and using our closest Primate relatives in doing so.
Something you and he didn't and wouldn't ever know.

Plus I made a MONKEY out of Your 'no evolution' with my Photo.. which is indeed worth 1000 words.. esp in busting your bad pre-columbian choice.

You lying and stupid little ****.

Plus I wrote a G-D book debunking Your 'Quote-Mining Blunder: (You are sooo stupid)

The Pretense Called Evolution

Are you saying the scientists are engaged in a conspiracy? How many findings are enough? So there are no wall paintings or hearths found in caves? So ALL stone tools are found with metal tools? And the mechanism was supernatural. That is not science. Untrue. Uniformitarianism has...

www.usmessageboard.com

Tooddster EVER come close to that level of elaboration?
Not within 1/10th.

`

`

You type a lot without saying much. Toddster is concise.

Look, Abu, Taddster disagrees with me and is snarky about it. I have no motive to defend him. But I have to be honest and recognize that you suck as a poster compared to him.

 

[abu afak]

You type a lot without saying much. Toddster is concise.

Look, Abu, Taddster disagrees with me and is snarky about it. I have no motive to defend him. But I have to be honest and recognize that you suck as a poster compared to him.

He's not "Concise".
You can't make a (3 response) in 15 words... and then Two -eight word posts on Evolution!!
LOFL
You Idiot.

You're just sore because I kick the shlt out of your idiocy like I had hours before on 'quote mining'
(not to mention Months of GUTTING your voodoo ass on You BS "apparent design")

Again our exchange on your Blinding Stupid miscue on 'Quote Mining' in which you thought I said the victims of it were 'lying.'
YOU IDIOT!
But I explained elaborately and with Links why you were wrong.
and you SHUT THE F*** UP.
Something Toadstool is incapable of
Here ya go you Stupid MFer!

Seymour Flops said:
I haven't been responding to you, abu afak, but I could not resist this time. I don't know what you were trying to say there, but you just did say that quote mining is lying by people who Believe in Evolution. I don't know why you capitalized believe and evolution, but that may have prevented you from checking your grammar.[/B]

If you haven't been responding it's because you can't
Let's be clear.
As it turns out, you can't now either.
Quote Mining is NOT lying by the people being quoted. (you ******* IDIOT!)
Quote mining them is quoting them OUT OF CONTEXT or partially/misleadingly.
I Explained in detail in my OP etc in my thread on the topic... just down a few threads.
YOU IDIOT!

The Dishonest Creationist Tactic of 'Quote Mining'​

Used hourly here mainly by Political Sheik. Indeed it is her Main and Bogus line of attack. Quote mining - RationalWiki Quote mining (also contextomy) is the Fallacious tactic of taking quotes out of context in order to make them seemingly agree with the quote miner's viewpoint...
www.usmessageboard.com
You're so G-D lazy or stupid
Read it or look it up yourself. You dope.

A very short example could be "Although I do Not agree, some people say that god is behind it all".....
and then only 'quoting' "God is behind it all."

You'll note my Signature of many years by the famous Stephen J Gould specifically Dealing with this practice.
A staunch Evolution/Darwin supporter who himself is often quote-mined/abused!!!

"Yet amidst all this turmoil No biologist has been lead to doubt the Fact that evolution occurred; we are debating How it happened...​

Creationists Pervert and caricature this debate by conveniently neglecting the Common Conviction that underlies it, and by Falsely suggesting that evolutionists now doubt the very phenomenon we are struggling to understand...​

The entire Creationist program includes little more than a rhetorical attempt to Falsify Evolution by presenting Supposed Contradictions among its Supporters.​

Hark! Inspired by the former practice OF (PoliticalCheat and ChemEngineer) who I chased OFF this board until some idiot bumped up her old thread.

There are PAGES of them, many if not most of them, debunked below:
PoliticalCheat put up app 50, and said she had app another 30.
Well guess what?
86 are debunked here after the Intro page
Perhaps the SAME old list they've been using for years.

Quote Mine Project: Examining 'Evolution Quotes' of Creationists
The Quote Mine Project

Or, Lies, Damned Lies and Quote Mines​

Introduction​

and the specific quote debunking (86) starting here: pg 1 of 4.
Quote Mine Project: "Lack of Identifiable Phylogeny"

Would you EVER do so much research (actually a little googling) to find Anything out?
NO.
That's why you hold the views you do.
- - -- - - - - -
- - - - - - - --
- - - - - -- - -
That's like 40 Toddster posts
NO one knows this topic like I do and no one explains it better and with sources.

I've just DESTROYED YOUR @SS so many times it's Sore.
Outed your Voodoo BS.
Toadstool is a one phrase Joke/quipster who never posts any meat.

`

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

New species originating is what Darwinian evolution is about.

You realize that organisms can evolve without creating a new species, right?
That doesn't disprove evolution, right?
Abu is a whiney twat, but his picture in post #9 was an excellent example.

 

[Seymour Flops]

He's not "Concise".
You can't make a (3 response) in 15 words... and then Two -eight word posts on Evolution!!
LOFL
You Idiot.

You're just sore because I kick the shlt out of your idiocy like I had hours before on 'quote mining'
(not to mention Months of GUTTING your voodoo ass on You BS "apparent design")

Again our exchange on your Blinding Stupid miscue on 'Quote Mining' in which you thought I said the victims of it were 'lying.'
YOU IDIOT!
But I explained elaborately and with Links why you were wrong.
and you SHUT THE F*** UP.
Something Toadstool is incapable of
Here ya go you Stupid MFer!



If you haven't been responding it's because you can't
Let's be clear.
As it turns out, you can't now either.
Quote Mining is NOT lying by the people being quoted. (you ******* IDIOT!)
Quote mining them is quoting them OUT OF CONTEXT or partially/misleadingly.
I Explained in detail in my OP etc in my thread on the topic... just down a few threads.
YOU IDIOT!

The Dishonest Creationist Tactic of 'Quote Mining'​

Used hourly here mainly by Political Sheik. Indeed it is her Main and Bogus line of attack. Quote mining - RationalWiki Quote mining (also contextomy) is the Fallacious tactic of taking quotes out of context in order to make them seemingly agree with the quote miner's viewpoint...
www.usmessageboard.com
You're so G-D lazy or stupid
Read it or look it up yourself. You dope.

A very short example could be "Although I do Not agree, some people say that god is behind it all".....
and then only 'quoting' "God is behind it all."

You'll note my Signature of many years by the famous Stephen J Gould specifically Dealing with this practice.
A staunch Evolution/Darwin supporter who himself is often quote-mined/abused!!!

"Yet amidst all this turmoil No biologist has been lead to doubt the Fact that evolution occurred; we are debating How it happened...​

Creationists Pervert and caricature this debate by conveniently neglecting the Common Conviction that underlies it, and by Falsely suggesting that evolutionists now doubt the very phenomenon we are struggling to understand...​

The entire Creationist program includes little more than a rhetorical attempt to Falsify Evolution by presenting Supposed Contradictions among its Supporters.​

Hark! Inspired by the former practice OF (PoliticalCheat and ChemEngineer) who I chased OFF this board until some idiot bumped up her old thread.

There are PAGES of them, many if not most of them, debunked below:
PoliticalCheat put up app 50, and said she had app another 30.
Well guess what?
86 are debunked here after the Intro page
Perhaps the SAME old list they've been using for years.

Quote Mine Project: Examining 'Evolution Quotes' of Creationists
The Quote Mine Project

Or, Lies, Damned Lies and Quote Mines​

Introduction​

and the specific quote debunking (86) starting here: pg 1 of 4.
Quote Mine Project: "Lack of Identifiable Phylogeny"

Would you EVER do so much research (actually a little googling) to find Anything out?
NO.
That's why you hold the views you do.
- - -- - - - - -
- - - - - - - --
- - - - - -- - -
That's like 40 Toddster posts
NO one knows this topic like I do and no one explains it better and with sources.

I've just DESTROYED YOUR @SS so many times it's Sore.
Outed your Voodoo BS.
Toadstool is a one phrase Joke/quipster who never posts any meat.

`

I guess they're right. You do have a mental illness.

 

[Seymour Flops]

You realize that organisms can evolve without creating a new species, right?
That doesn't disprove evolution, right?
Abu is a whiney twat, but his picture in post #9 was an excellent example.

I guess now we are debating the meaning of "evolve," and "evolution?"

For future reference, whenever I use those terms, I'm referring to origin of species by natural selection, or the preservation of "favoured species" in the struggle for life, as Darwin wrote about.

That offspring of species who reproduce sexually are not genetic copies of the parents is well known and not in dispute. It's what Creationists call "mico-evolution" or "change within kinds."

I call it "kids aren't twins of their parents" and wonder why people trying to prove Darwin right keep bringing it up.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

I guess now we are debating the meaning of "evolve," and "evolution?"

For future reference, whenever I use those terms, I'm referring to origin of species by natural selection, or the preservation of "favoured species" in the struggle for life, as Darwin wrote about.

That offspring of species who reproduce sexually are not genetic copies of the parents is well known and not in dispute. It's what Creationists call "mico-evolution" or "change within kinds."

I call it "kids aren't twins of their parents" and wonder why people trying to prove Darwin right keep bringing it up.

I guess now we are debating the meaning of "evolve," and "evolution?"

Only because you appear to be confused.

I'm referring to origin of species by natural selection

Did you think natural selection occurred in isolated groups in the Americas?