Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(MSNBC)   Fossil discovery proves theory human ancestors were a bunch of dolts   (msnbc.com ) divider line
    More: Interesting  
•       •       •

5520 clicks; posted to Main » on 06 Jul 2002 at 7:06 AM (14 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



51 Comments     (+0 »)
 


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2002-07-06 07:06:53 AM  
.

Then nothing has changed.....

.
 
2002-07-06 07:07:56 AM  
Damn it. SpDrMN beat me to it.
 
2002-07-06 07:09:28 AM  
Scientific Proof:

fossilized algore bumber stickers
 
2002-07-06 07:10:24 AM  
This article is gonna be a winner...I hope so anyway
 
2002-07-06 07:12:18 AM  
The new skull also is thought to be early Homo erectus or ergaster, but its brain pan is about 25 percent smaller and appears to be more primitive

And this skull was found where? Georgia? Pff, puny american sub-species!
 
2002-07-06 07:15:49 AM  
Yay Republic Of Georgia!
 
2002-07-06 07:32:04 AM  
[image from comedy-zone.net too old to be available]

Of course they did.
 
2002-07-06 07:35:05 AM  
Most deceptive title evar!

Here's a possible reason:
[image from home.earthlink.net too old to be available]
Freakshow entertainment for the clan.
 
2002-07-06 07:43:26 AM  
Spamdog:

The REPUBLIC of GEORGIA, not the State of Georgia.
As in the former SOVIET UNION.
 
2002-07-06 07:44:23 AM  
Ahh, my bad.
 
2002-07-06 07:55:26 AM  
...but most people act like dolts today.
 
2002-07-06 08:55:44 AM  
Daniel Lieberman of Harvard University said if the discoveries by Ferring, Lordkipanidze and their co-authors are confirmed, it will "throw a monkey wrench into many people's ideas about early Homo migration out of Africa."

nuf said
 
2002-07-06 09:25:32 AM  
Heh, well DUH, didn't they ever read the Restaraunt at the End of the Universe? It's all right there, man..
 
2002-07-06 09:55:21 AM  
"This was completely unexpected because until now, prevailing scientific views placed habilis, ergaster and erectus into an evolutionary sequence," said Ferring.

Here's a thought: Perhaps evolutionary theory is dead wrong.

http://www.evolutiondeceit.com/chapter9.php
 
2002-07-06 09:56:53 AM  
This will be proven as a mistake just like all those other prehistoric ape-man type fossiles.
 
2002-07-06 10:11:48 AM  
Bevets: That's actually the strong point of evolutionary theory, the ability to change when new evidence is introduced. Religions, on the other hand, won't generally change to match the evidence for hundreds of years. But eventually, when the heathens who discovered these facts are all dead, religions will admit they might have been wrong about a few details hundreds of years ago.
 
2002-07-06 10:23:46 AM  
It is neat how they can find a jaw bone or skull, and they know everything about the animal from its intelligence to the way it walks.
 
2002-07-06 10:23:50 AM  
Well said Simon. At least with evolution there can be debate, but not so with the closed-minded magical-monkey-in-the-sky followers.
 
2002-07-06 10:43:17 AM  
OK ill bite.

All evolutionary theory, Bevets, or just human evolutionary theory?
 
2002-07-06 10:49:18 AM  
Apparently this was the vampire strain of humanity
[image from a799.ms.akamai.net too old to be available]
 
2002-07-06 11:10:00 AM  
Samster

It is neat how they can find a jaw bone or skull, and they know everything about the animal from its intelligence to the way it walks.

In the current issue of Discover there is article that explains how physicists do not understand why rocks skip accross the water the way they do or why sand piles the way it does. These are events that can be easily reproduced in the laboratory. Skip ahead to evolution (which can not be reproduced in a lab even though we are told it all happened by blind chance) and we are pretty confident we know how and when the universe formed and how and when life began and how and why there are so many different life forms.

God is Truth and therefore an essential part of any theory that would explain how and why. When people ignore God, they are forced to develop contrived fantasies about our origin.

1 Corinthians 1.19 For it is written: "I will destroy the wisdom of the wise; the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate." 20 Where is the wise man? Where is the scholar? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?
 
jre
2002-07-06 11:30:52 AM  
Bevets, I hate to inform you, but your religion is wrong.
 
2002-07-06 11:52:58 AM  
How did I know this was going to become a religious flame war?
*grabs popcorn*
 
2002-07-06 11:56:02 AM  
God is Truth

The existence of God cannot be experimentally backed up, and is therefore of no interest to science.

Science attempts to find logical reasons for observations. "Because God said so" does not fit this category. As strong as your belief in God, theres just as many people out there with just as strong a belief in something different. Someones gotta be wrong. You'll say its them, theyll say its you. Neither will be able to offer up proof.
 
2002-07-06 11:59:40 AM  
Bevets

What do you mean evolution can't be reproduced? Many situations in a lab have produced results. The basic building blocks (proteins, etc) for life exist in "primordial ooze" (aka the water in the ocean). You take some high energy source and apply it to the ooze and there you go, single celled entities. Of course I summed that up very briefly, but maybe you should watch Bill Nye or some other show.

And you think things in the Bible can be reproduced?!?! Lessee...can anyone build an ark big enough to hold 4 million species of insects alone?? Can anyone part a large body of water? Can you reproduce "creation?" I think not. The Bible simply has no credibility because almost nothing in it can be reproduced. Whereas in science, a whole fark load of stuff can be. So maybe you should present some proof other than the Bible, because let's face it....that's all evangelists have, the Bible.
 
2002-07-06 12:06:44 PM  
Current status of the vote:

How do you regard theories of hominid evolution?

* 23317 responses

I think there's sufficient evidence tracing the evolutionary family tree of primates and humans.
68%

I don't accept any evidence that humans arose through evolution.
21%

Neither of the above.
11%


p.s. I voted correctly.
 
2002-07-06 12:09:18 PM  
Bevets & God said:Where is the wise man? Where is the scholar? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?


nope.
 
2002-07-06 01:08:14 PM  
2 words : Piltdown man
 
2002-07-06 01:45:24 PM  
2 more words: blow me!
 
2002-07-06 01:46:07 PM  
Sorry, couldn't resist :)
 
2002-07-06 02:55:34 PM  
I voted correctly.

I voted "neither of the above" too. The primate family tree is still fairly rough, as is much of the evolutionary phylogeny in general. It's pretty good, though, considering we've only been working at constructing phylogenies for the past 150 years, and didn't really get into a good stride until a couple of decades ago.

Rob
 
2002-07-06 02:57:07 PM  
"The REPUBLIC of GEORGIA, not the State of Georgia."

Correct. Primitive humans still are living in the State of Georgia.
 
2002-07-06 03:41:56 PM  
Bevets,
read what i wrote again, sounds ridiculous doesnt it. that is why it is called sarcasm.
 
2002-07-06 03:47:06 PM  
Anyone knows that using a skull or jawbone to explain everything about a species is just impossible. Like in africa when they find a few bones, give it a personality and call it Lucy. Both creation and evolution require lots of faith to believe either one. Evolution just requires more faith and is harder to believe.
 
2002-07-06 04:00:20 PM  
Both creation and evolution require lots of faith to believe either one. Evolution just requires more faith and is harder to believe.

You misspelled "less" and "easier."

Rob
 
2002-07-06 05:59:22 PM  
Bevets: If you're getting your science from Discover magazine then no wonder you cling to your faith like a limpet clings to a rock face.
 
2002-07-06 06:25:26 PM  
Evolution has had support to it's claims in the past.

Bevets, I will be an honest convert if you could show one shred of proof that God has had any help in our development as a species. No, You cannot site the bible because the bible was written by man, and is thus fallible to all mans mistakes and lies.
 
2002-07-06 07:06:24 PM  
Religous people farked with my head. I was a victim and sought to be a victim no more. Science provided an alternative. I also found it more interesting, because more thought goes into it, and when wrong it is more willing to change.

I have been hooked on an evolution kick lately, having recently read Dawkins, "The selfish gene" which covers some modern thought on evolution such as new species are formed when a parasite uses its hosts reproductive system to reproduce thus sharing its hosts motives and fate. This is a very readable book for any interested.

Currently I am reading Darwins "Voyage of the Beagle". Like much of his writings it tends towards the tedious at times, but provides an interesting view of the natural world through the eyes of a master observer. More readable then some of his other writings.

One of the things that fascinates me about this whole debate is the fact that we have have evolved this tendency/need for the religous experience. There is a part of the brain responsible for feelings of awe in the supernatural. Sometimes people have epilepsy that affects this part of the brain. It used to be they were called mystics, but today they are given thorazine and are called the mentally ill homeless people.
 
2002-07-06 08:10:26 PM  
I hope that all searchers out there don't throw out christianity because you think that all the animals on the earth can't fit into the ark = Christianity is bogus, that is ridiculus. Christianity has never held to this strictly "literalist" view. St Augustine, one of the doctors of the Church, in the 4th century set the standard for the way the Church reads scripture and also in a somewhat prophetic way had this to say:

Usually, even a non-Christian knows something about the earth, the heavens, and the other elements of this world, about the motion and orbit of the stars and even their size and relative positions, about the predictable eclipses of the sun and moon, the cycles of the years and the seasons, about the kinds of animals, shrubs, stones, and so forth, and this knowledge he hold to as being certain from reason and experience. Now, it is a disgraceful and dangerous thing for an infidel to hear a Christian, presumably giving the meaning of Holy Scripture, talking nonsense on these topics; and we should take all means to prevent such an embarrassing situation, in which people show up vast ignorance in a Christian and laugh it to scorn. The shame is not so much that an ignorant individual is derided, but that people outside the household of faith think our sacred writers held such opinions, and, to the great loss of those for whose salvation we toil, the writers of our Scripture are criticized and rejected as unlearned men. If they find a Christian mistaken in a field which they themselves know well and hear him maintaining his foolish opinions about our books, how are they going to believe those books in matters concerning the resurrection of the dead, the hope of eternal life, and the kingdom of heaven, when they think their pages are full of falsehoods and on facts which they themselves have learnt from experience and the light of reason? Reckless and incompetent expounders of Holy Scripture bring untold trouble and sorrow on their wiser brethren when they are caught in one of their mischievous false opinions and are taken to task by those who are not bound by the authority of our sacred books. For then, to defend their utterly foolish and obviously untrue statements, they will try to call upon Holy Scripture for proof and even recite from memory many passages which they think support their position, "although they understand neither what they say nor the things about which they make assertion." [1 Timothy 1.7]

Please Check out this link too:

http://www.utas.edu.au/docs/focus/May97/augustine.html
 
Tor
2002-07-06 08:26:42 PM  
There WAS a flood, but it was not on the scale as the bible says, the reason that "every animal" could fit on the ark was becasue they threw all the species in their AREA in the ark, which would be some cattle and goats and shiat.
Also to those who scoff at biblical people liiving far far longer than we possibly could, the early hebrews used age as a measurment of wisdom. Thus, if I was 567 years old I would be wiser than a 298 year old.
 
2002-07-06 08:59:59 PM  
tor
if I was 567 years old I would be wiser than a 298 year old.

I dunno, I have met some pretty dumb oldfarks. If someone was really that old they would prolly have alzheimers pretty bad.

You know, I have nothing against someone trying to improve their life, and if they find it in a book then power to them. The trouble is that so many fundies have this power fetish and want to ram their beliefs where they are not welcome. You have the right to whatever stupid belief suits you, but just because you choose to be an ignorant fool doesn't mean I have any interest in your fantasy.
 
2002-07-06 09:52:36 PM  
OsamaBonJovi

Bevets: If you're getting your science from Discover magazine then no wonder you cling to your faith like a limpet clings to a rock face.

Discover is a science magazine written for the popular audience. Aside from your snobbish aspersions, do you have a substantive reply?

Thewheeze

Bevets, I will be an honest convert if you could show one shred of proof that God has had any help in our development as a species. No, You cannot site the bible because the bible was written by man, and is thus fallible to all mans mistakes and lies.

The error in your assumption is that the Bible did not come from God.

2 Timothy 3.16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness

2 Peter 1.20 Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet's own interpretation. 21 For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit.

Hermit

Religous people farked with my head. I was a victim and sought to be a victim no more. Science provided an alternative.

What has science proven (beyond any doubt) about who you are and the origin of the universe?
 
2002-07-06 10:05:28 PM  
Uglybumper

Christianity has never held to this strictly "literalist" view. Now, it is a disgraceful and dangerous thing for an infidel to hear a Christian, presumably giving the meaning of Holy Scripture, talking nonsense on these topics; and we should take all means to prevent such an embarrassing situation, in which people show up vast ignorance in a Christian and laugh it to scorn. Reckless and incompetent expounders of Holy Scripture bring untold trouble and sorrow on their wiser brethren when they are caught in one of their mischievous false opinions and are taken to task by those who are not bound by the authority of our sacred books. For then, to defend their utterly foolish and obviously untrue statements, they will try to call upon Holy Scripture for proof and even recite from memory many passages which they think support their position, "although they understand neither what they say nor the things about which they make assertion." [1 Timothy 1.7]

It is an honor to bask in your theogical superiority.

Matthew 23.35 And so upon you will come all the righteous blood that has been shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah son of Berekiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar.

http://christiananswers.net/q-aig/aig-c015.html
http://www.rae.org/dayfaq.html

http://www.icr.org/creationscientists.html
 
2002-07-06 10:29:01 PM  
The error in your assumption is that the Bible did not come from God.

Yes, the Bible itself says that it is the word of God, so it surely has to be true!!!1111!!1!

What has science proven (beyond any doubt) about who you are and the origin of the universe?

Nothing, beyond any doubt. But at least science has tried, and in many cases has come extremely close to removing all possible doubt, which is more than you can say for religion.

Rob
 
2002-07-06 10:30:20 PM  
bevets You used the bible to prove that the bible wasn't written/interpreted by man.

Yes -- science does not have all the answers. However, science does provide an alternative with possibilities. Fundamentalists and extremists are not open to the possibility that they are wrong, that what they believe is wrong. This is the inherit problem in religion.

By the by, science has proven we're made up of the same material as everything around us, be it the stars above or the dirt beneath our feet. We're made of atoms. That's what everything is made of.

What has the church or bible proven? Besides killing innocents and commiting crimes against humanity in the name of god, what has the church as a whole done to help and enrich the lives of people?
 
jre
2002-07-06 10:37:12 PM  
Bevets
The error in your assumption is that the Bible did not come from God.

2 Timothy 3.16 All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness


Bevets, the following line was divinely inspired by God.

You're an asshead.

End divine inspiration.

Now, prove it wasn't divinely inspired.
 
2002-07-07 08:02:39 AM  
"The error in your assumption is that the Bible did not come from God."

Sorry, but it's not reasonable to assume that God, an all perfect, all seeing and omniprescent being, wrote a text with so many contradictions and errors. Not to declare the entire bible is in error and contradictory but the assumption that perfection wrote an imperfect text contradicts itself. It would be foolish to declare the bible as completely useless to all but it would be equally foolish to think that it is completely correct and a work of perfection, as you declare without logical reason.
 
2002-07-07 11:58:42 AM  
Contradictions? The bible has none.
 
2002-07-07 01:34:45 PM  
Exodus 20:13 "Thou shalt not kill."
Leviticus 24:17 "And he that killeth any man shall surely be put to death."
No contradiction there.
Thou shalt not kill! Well, you can killeth under certain circumstances.
And there's the contradiction of the God of Love who has no qualms of casting his finest creation into the bowels of Hell for all eternity. Sort of reminds me of the angry father who beats his children, and then shouts, "Look what you made me do!"
I can understand why Christians have trouble with science, especially evolution. Evolution is an insult, it's an embarrasment (who wants a monkey in their family tree? Who wants to believe they are less than perfect?). But I can't for the life of me understand why scientists even bother debating with Christian nuts. Evolutionary theory offers facts, followed by conjecture. The history of the world is a beautiful, fascinating puzzle, which will never be solved (to study evolution is to admit that there are unanswerable questions). All Christians can offer is the bible, and a poorly thought out creation science. Let the Christians have negative gut reactions to evolutionary theory, but if you really want to know how we came to be today, you must look at the past.
 
2002-07-07 02:34:24 PM  
Spinner:
And there's the contradiction of the God of Love who has no qualms of casting his finest creation into the bowels of Hell for all eternity. Sort of reminds me of the angry father who beats his children, and then shouts, "Look what you made me do!"

You know, I had that thought too...religion seems to be based on abuse, or at least some S&M here...told to pray to the guy in the sky, and if we're 'lucky,' and we live a life of purity, pain, self-flagellation, punishment inflicted for so-called sins, melancholia, self-denial, etc...maybe the big G will open those gates. Otherwise, if we indulge in things (some naughty, some harmless), and, on occasion, dance, we're to be damned eternally, in pools of fire, hatred, pain, and dolphins .
Unless we send money to some guy on TV.
(Oh, wait. That's something else.)

Hm.

Not that morals are all bad, but I'm really not sure this system of indoctrination and, in some places, outright brainwashing, are the right way to teach them.
 
Displayed 50 of 51 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter








In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report