|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 10/20/2011 : 10:15:35 [Permalink]
|
Cune:
You seem to be confusing "human-like" with "human" in these videos. They're not the same thing-- certainly not in this context. Moreover, the quote "apes in many ways evolved from humans" isn't Dr Lovejoy, it's the narrator of the piece-- a journalist obviously phrasing things in a provocative way (and one that some with a more creationist bent immediately salivate over). |
Bingo!
It has been argued that scientists who talk to the media really do need to learn how to be better communicators of science. Some scientists have balked at that notion. "We are scientists, not media consultants." But right here we see the problem. If more scientists were better communicators, this problem wouldn't exists as much as it does. But what a pain in the ass for scientists. Still, I'm on the side that says they should give more thought to the words that they choose. Sagan was a master. Neil deGrasse Tyson is a master. Donald Johansson was a good communicator, as was Stephan J. Gould. There just aren't enough of those guys. |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
 |
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
 Posted - 10/20/2011 : 10:25:29 [Permalink]
|
justintime:
The last sentence even emphatically stated human bipediality could not have been modeled around locomotive anomalies of chimpanzees and apes for the evolution of human bipdeality. |
True. And you are still getting it wrong. What he's saying is that we can't look at MODERN apes because what they evolved came AFTER the split of our last common ancestor. There were no nuckle walkers before the split as was once assumed. It's a recent development among apes. Bipedalism is older. But not the bipedalism that you think of. There was no "human" bipedalism before the split. How many times must this be said? Ardi couldn't walk for very far. We didn't come from nuckle walkers is the point. We came from creatures that shared more traits with us than was once assumed. That didn't make them human. They were apes. It just means that modern apes evolved more physiological changes than we once assumed since the split, in terms of locomotion and a few other things. So we can't look to them as some sort of ape blueprint of the creature we both came from.
|
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
 Posted - 10/20/2011 : 10:28:59 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by justintime
I don't know what you are reading here Kil. Everything in the article supports my position which is actually Dr. Lovejoys position. Humans could not have evolved from a ape like ancestor. |
Humans are "ape like."
What Lovejoy is saying is that the last common ancestor of humans and chimps didn't look like a modern-day chimp. It didn't look like a modern-day human, either.
But it was still an ape.| The last sentence even emphatically stated human bipediality could not have been modeled around locomotive anomalies of chimpanzees and apes for the evolution of human bipdeality. |
That doesn't mean that apes evolved from humans.| So our closest ancestor was not very ape like. |
Yes, it wasn't like any modern ape, including humans. But it was still an ape.| You did not view Dr. Lovejoys video. He has made the claim apes in many ways evolved from humans. |
"In many ways." This is just another case of you taking someone else's nuanced and particular conclusion and then inappropriately generalizing it to everything. Like when you claimed that orangutans are genetically closer to humans than are chimps, even though the articles you cited specifically said that that applies to only some genes, and not the whole genome.| I should not have added monkeys to the list because Dr. Lovejoy mentions chimpanzees and apes. You can fault me for that. |
I have been, for quite some time now. Glad you finally wised up.| I was just trying to be inclusive. |
And that's the problem that also makes you think that modern apes evolved from humans. Inclusivity isn't particularly scientific. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist
USA
4955 Posts |
Posted - 10/20/2011 : 10:34:22 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by justintime
I don't know what you are reading here Kil. Everything in the article supports my position which is actually Dr. Lovejoys position. Humans could not have evolved from a ape like ancestor. |
How carefully did you read it?!? Read this:
"The picture emerging from Ar. ramidus is that this last common ancestor had limb proportions more like those of monkeys than apes. Its feet functioned only partly like those of apes and much more like those of living monkeys and early apes such as Proconsul (which lived more than 15 million years ago)"
Holy heck!! This doesn't sound very much like what you're saying at all!!
You're right that this find is challenging some conventional notions of primate evolution, but it certainly isn't saying that apes and chimps descended from humans. |
|
|
|
justintime
BANNED
382 Posts |
Posted - 10/20/2011 : 10:40:17 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Cuneiformist
Originally posted by justintime
I don't know what you are reading here Kil. Everything in the article supports my position which is actually Dr. Lovejoys position. Humans could not have evolved from a ape like ancestor. |
How carefully did you read it?!? Read this:
"The picture emerging from Ar. ramidus is that this last common ancestor had limb proportions more like those of monkeys than apes. Its feet functioned only partly like those of apes and much more like those of living monkeys and early apes such as Proconsul (which lived more than 15 million years ago)"
Holy heck!! This doesn't sound very much like what you're saying at all!!
You're right that this find is challenging some conventional notions of primate evolution, but it certainly isn't saying that apes and chimps descended from humans.
|
That is why I included the video of Dr Lovejoy where he clearly makes the claim apes in many ways evolved from humans. New evidence as Dr. Lovejoy said requires us to see evolution quite differently.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Su71DLLKuQ4 |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 10/20/2011 : 10:45:34 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by justintime
...apes in many ways evolved from humans... |
Your theory #3 would have us believe that apes evolved from humans in all ways.
Make up your mind. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 10/20/2011 : 10:47:31 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by justintime
...Dr Lovejoy... |
Of course, it's important to remember that in videos and on the Discovery Channel, Lovejoy is offering sound bites for a popular audience. He's not offering a technical overview for scientists.
Even then, it's quite possible that both you and Lovejoy are wrong. Only a lunatic would treat a scientist as a priest or a god. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 10/20/2011 : 10:50:00 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
Originally posted by justintime
...apes in many ways evolved from humans... |
Your theory #3 would have us believe that apes evolved from humans in all ways.
Make up your mind.
|
Where have we seen justintime do this before? Oh Yeah! That whole orangutan thing!
|
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist
USA
4955 Posts |
Posted - 10/20/2011 : 10:51:01 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by justintime
That is why I included the video of Dr Lovejoy where he clearly makes the claim apes in many ways evolved from humans. New evidence as Dr. Lovejoy said requires us to see evolution quite differently.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Su71DLLKuQ4
|
Actually, I addressed this about 30 minutes ago. Lovejoy says no such thing. That's the science reporter for the Wall Street Journal saying it.
In the article that LOVEJOY ACTUALLY WROTE, it's clear that he doesn't think that. |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 10/20/2011 : 10:57:37 [Permalink]
|
justintime:
That is why I included the video of Dr Lovejoy where he clearly makes the claim apes in many ways evolved from humans. New evidence as Dr. Lovejoy said requires us to see evolution quite differently.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Su71DLLKuQ4 |
Again. This is a really stupid creationist video. And again, Lovejoy is being (purposely) miss-understood. And again, since this is the third time you have posted it, I now have to ask, are you a creationist?
|
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist
USA
4955 Posts |
Posted - 10/20/2011 : 11:36:00 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Kil
Again. This is a really stupid creationist video. And again, Lovejoy is being (purposely) miss-understood. And again, since this is the third time you have posted it, I now have to ask, are you a creationist? |
To be fair, it's not a "Creationist" video per se-- though clearly uneducated creationists latch onto it. It's something produced by a mainstream media outlet (the Wall Street Journal) and just presenting some new finds-- of course, in true journalistic fashion, doing so in a somewhat sensationalist way.
The real question is if he understands the difference between what Lovejoy says and what the journalist says. |
|
|
|
justintime
BANNED
382 Posts |
Posted - 10/20/2011 : 11:41:29 [Permalink]
|
No, I am not a creationist Kil. I am not even a Christian. Nor am I homophobic and even less a racist. I am not a conspiracy theorist either but would like to be viewed as a skeptic. But no one here has ranked me or suggested my positions are too innately sobering to qualify as a skeptic. So I declared myself a Renaissance man.
There is just too much hate going on here. We already have 60% of Americans who do not believe in Evolution. The same 60% doubt if Obama their President evolved in America and point to his origins in Africa.
Many Americans have no problems calling their previous President a moron (George W Bush) but somehow find their current President an elitist because he is smarter.
Ranking 25th in the world in science and 20th in math. Is it even relevant to discuss new evolutionary evidence in such a volatile, backward environment?
Americans do not want to be linked with monkeys or apes even though every bit of American history points to primate venturism. American Capitalism.....
And yet being declared monkeys or apes actually vindicates them from the higher aspirations declared in their constitution. There are just old chips of the block....They are fucking monkeys mate.
You tell me what science teaches Americans ........considering most of the modern evolution theories are stemming from American Universities and American research scientist. Dr Lovejoy is one example.
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 10/20/2011 : 12:08:37 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by justintime
Many Americans have no problems calling their previous President a moron (George W Bush) but somehow find their current President an elitist because he is smarter. |
Actually, that's two totally different groups of people doing those things. The people who think Bush is smart are the ones who think Obama is an elitist engaging in class warfare by trying to give them a break. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 10/20/2011 : 12:36:15 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Cuneiformist
Originally posted by Kil
Again. This is a really stupid creationist video. And again, Lovejoy is being (purposely) miss-understood. And again, since this is the third time you have posted it, I now have to ask, are you a creationist? |
To be fair, it's not a "Creationist" video per se-- though clearly uneducated creationists latch onto it. It's something produced by a mainstream media outlet (the Wall Street Journal) and just presenting some new finds-- of course, in true journalistic fashion, doing so in a somewhat sensationalist way.
The real question is if he understands the difference between what Lovejoy says and what the journalist says.
|
Oh yeah. Huh... I was looking at the name of the video and I thought the narrator was rather amateurish. |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
justintime
BANNED
382 Posts |
|
 |
|
Evolution Questions
