I dont wanna live on this planet anymore.

If Adam and Eve only had 2 kids, both boys, and one killed the other, where did all the humans come from?

Answer me that, Jesus freaks!

That's some great 4th grade thinking right there.

except we started standing upright before the savannah came about.

Reading fail.

"The tide goes in, the tide goes out: you can't explain that!"

-- Some stupid old guy who has his own TV show

To her surprise, they (grasslands) seem to have been there even 12m years ago
Dr Feakins has shown that early humanity's east African homeland was never heavily forested

Subby can't read.

Anyway, I remember reading something about walking upright being an adaption to free up the use of hands/arms for carrying food and children.

FTFA: "Plants in rainforests tend to discriminate against ¹³C. Those in modern African grasslands are less selective and ¹³C is thus more abundant in their molecules."

Um...

Jake Havechek: If Adam and Eve only had 2 kids, both boys, and one killed the other, where did all the humans come from?

Answer me that, Jesus freaks!

Mommie and sons were sexing each other up when daddy wasn't looking?

Jake Havechek: If Adam and Eve only had 2 kids, both boys, and one killed the other, where did all the humans come from?

Answer me that, Jesus freaks!

Not a Jesus freak, but I think that the story goes that Adam and Eve had many, many children who all married each other.  I've also heard contradictory stories saying that there was a land of God's failed creations where Adam's first wife went off to live and that that's where the outside blood came from in the kid's marriages.  Obviously, no self-respecting Jewish mother would let her kids marry from God's rubbish bin, but there you go.

First I'll join the line of people telling <b>subby</b> they are an idiot

Second, one form of the "grasslands impacted our evolution towards bipedalism" was that they coincided with one another. As referenced at the very end of the article, there was nothing in the most general formulation of the hypothesis that precludes human ancestors moving in to the grassland as a new niche and adapting to it. We see that sort of thing happening all of the time.

gadian: Jake Havechek: If Adam and Eve only had 2 kids, both boys, and one killed the other, where did all the humans come from?

Answer me that, Jesus freaks!

Not a Jesus freak, but I think that the story goes that Adam and Eve had many, many children who all married each other.  I've also heard contradictory stories saying that there was a land of God's failed creations where Adam's first wife went off to live and that that's where the outside blood came from in the kid's marriages.  Obviously, no self-respecting Jewish mother would let her kids marry from God's rubbish bin, but there you go.

Yeah, I know about that, that info was in gospels that were not put into the Bible.

Much like the Crucifixion.  There is not a detailed account about that, but Christians in 14th century Europe ginned up the tale in order to blame the Jews for the Black Plague.

Baryogenesis: To her surprise, they (grasslands) seem to have been there even 12m years ago
Dr Feakins has shown that early humanity's east African homeland was never heavily forested

Subby can't read.

Anyway, I remember reading something about walking upright being an adaption to free up the use of hands/arms for carrying food and children.

Plus I read an interesting hypothesis about how early hominids could have escaped lions by standing up in waterholes.  Those who couldn't stand were eaten.

How did symbiosis/symbiants evolve? Answer that, Darwinians!

gadian: Jake Havechek: If Adam and Eve only had 2 kids, both boys, and one killed the other, where did all the humans come from?

Answer me that, Jesus freaks!

Not a Jesus freak, but I think that the story goes that Adam and Eve had many, many children who all married each other.  I've also heard contradictory stories saying that there was a land of God's failed creations where Adam's first wife went off to live and that that's where the outside blood came from in the kid's marriages.  Obviously, no self-respecting Jewish mother would let her kids marry from God's rubbish bin, but there you go.

How could God possibly have 'failed' creations?

If science is right and religion is wrong, why does science keep having to changing its story while religion has been stalwart in its model of the world for the last 6000 years? Hm? HMMMMMM? Explain THAT scienticians!

God Is My Co-Pirate: Of course, if that's not trolling, I weep for the future.

I have to imagine it is. The Economist generally uses too many big words and facts to keep the interest of the sorts of idiots who would normally post that sort of thing. They prefer to wait until these stories have trickled down to their local news rag and lost all context and substance.

A PHD in geology and a BA in Geography.
It's not like she has a time machine and photographic proof.
It's more like speculation on her part.
Wild, wild speculation.
Alas, it is backed up with more research and proofs than any biblical story of cockamamie proportions.

Jake Havechek: If Adam and Eve only had 2 kids, both boys, and one killed the other, where did all the humans come from?

Answer me that, Jesus freaks!

I'm no bible "scholar" but some of the thumpers I know say that there were another group of people to which I say to them Jesus Christ.  They look down upon me which is hard because I walk upright and not slouched with my head crammed in a book of stories.

Uh, subby? The article states that the idea that the reduction of forests into savannahs leading to walking upright is likely incorrect, not because we walked upright first, but because the savannah basically existed in some form long before we walked upright. You kinda got it backwards.

FTA: "Close examination of the cores shows that the nature of the grass changed over the millennia, as species that were adapted to dry conditions took over from those that prefer wetter weather, but savannah of some form there always was.

The climatic change she observed was already known about. It was the reason people suspected forests had given way to savannah. But, contrary to that suspicion, Dr Feakins has shown that early humanity's east African homeland was never heavily forested, so the idea that people were constrained to walk upright by the disappearance of the forests is wrong."

gadian: Not a Jesus freak, but I think that the story goes that Adam and Eve had many, many children who all married each other. I've also heard contradictory stories saying that there was a land of God's failed creations where Adam's first wife went off to live and that that's where the outside blood came from in the kid's marriages. Obviously, no self-respecting Jewish mother would let her kids marry from God's rubbish bin, but there you go.

Adam and Eve were not Jewish... Abraham was the first Jew.

I did not know about this grassland theory. I always assumed that early hominids were scared into walking upright by a time-traveling Charlton Heston.

Jake Havechek: If Adam and Eve only had 2 kids, both boys, and one killed the other, where did all the humans come from?

Answer me that, Jesus freaks!

God.

QED.

God Is My Co-Pirate: Yet Darwin has no transitional evidence or solid foundation what so ever.

I hate that argument.  Every time a transitional form is discovered some window-licker comes along and asks, "well, what about the 2 new holes in the fossil record?"

Jake Havechek: If Adam and Eve only had 2 kids, both boys, and one killed the other, where did all the humans come from?

Answer me that, Jesus freaks!

Cain and Abel where not the only chilrens of Adam and Eve. Cain had a wife whom the bible did not name. Adam and Eve also had another son Seth after Cain slew Abel who also had a wife the bible did not name.

I_C_Weener: Son of Thunder: You got it backwards, subbo. TFA is saying that the grasslands were there first.

The point still stands. The appendix is where we put this nonsense to rest!



\still looking for the Table of Contents

Slackfumasta: How could God possibly have 'failed' creations?

I didn't tell the story, I don't know.  His angels apparently sucked too, given the rebellion and all.  Maybe the guy isn't handy with the tools.

proteus_b: Adam and Eve were not Jewish... Abraham was the first Jew.

It was either a Jewish mom joke or a joke about the ex wife sexing up the kids.

Jake Havechek: If Adam and Eve only had 2 kids, both boys, and one killed the other, where did all the humans come from?
Answer me that, Jesus freaks!
Some explain that even if they were doing what would be considered incest to populate the world, it wouldn't be considered incest back then, as they were "pure" by God's standards, so it doesn't count.  Read the story of Lot and his two daughters.  There's supposed to be an important lesson to be learned from that, and the only thing I get is "If you're going to have sex with your father, the oldest daughter gets first dibs."

Slackfumasta: gadian: Jake Havechek: If Adam and Eve only had 2 kids, both boys, and one killed the other, where did all the humans come from?
Answer me that, Jesus freaks!
Not a Jesus freak, but I think that the story goes that Adam and Eve had many, many children who all married each other.  I've also heard contradictory stories saying that there was a land of God's failed creations where Adam's first wife went off to live and that that's where the outside blood came from in the kid's marriages.  Obviously, no self-respecting Jewish mother would let her kids marry from God's rubbish bin, but there you go.
How could God possibly have 'failed' creations?
There were multiple, contradictory versions of the Bible.  Heck, the first chapter of Genesis and the second chapter of Genesis contradict each other on how humans were created.  So it's possible there's a  version of the Bible that talks of this stuff.

Baryogenesis: To her surprise, they (grasslands) seem to have been there even 12m years ago
Dr Feakins has shown that early humanity's east African homeland was never heavily forested

Subby can't read.

Anyway, I remember reading something about walking upright being an adaption to free up the use of hands/arms for carrying food and children.

Not exactly. The adaptation wasn't intended to do anything before it happened. Natural selection just favoured those that had it, in that particular climate and time, and it became the norm after those without the adaptation died out as they couldn't effectively compete. Or, alternatively, they branched off into a different species after migrating to another area.
I know it seems like a small nitpick, but I think it's fairly important.

/No matter what Star Trek might have said, evolution isn't on a pre-determined path with certain milestones along the way.
//Also, disclaimer, I'm not a scientician. I just play one on the internet

Human beings are so egocentric.  Hell, we even believed that the sun revolved around us.  And even at this point, many people still can't believe that there's intelligent life out there.  We're the most important, smartest, most adaptive, awesome creatures the universe has ever seen.

Want to hear the tiniest little laugh ever?  Tell a horseshoe crab how awesome you are.  It's been around for 445 million years.  Doesn't make the 200,000 years that homo sapiens have walked the earth seem that impressive does it?  And if you want to go back to earlier forms of humanoid, go ahead.  It still doesn't amount to much.

And so, with our tremendous knowledge and experience, we assume that walking on two legs is the evolutionary forward pass.  Wrong!  Doesn't it strike you as a little odd that the majority of mammals move about on four legs?  And the fossil records taken from mud imprints indicate that around 2.3 million years ago the homo habilis (one of the earliest human forms) actually hoped around on one leg.  These early creatures could be knocked over by a strong breeze.  They couldn't outrun anything.  As a species, they were doomed to failure.

Then came the homo erectus, the first two legged human-like mammal.  Two legs proved superior to one, but they were still no match for their four legged predators.  The four legged animals were more stable, stronger, faster, and smarter.  Why smarter?  They had more complete diets because they were apex predators.  Humans were mostly living off scraps and unprocessed grains at that point - not exactly brain boosters.

Then came the asteroid impact that triggered the massive volcanic eruptions.  The two legged creatures that were able to climb trees were able to escape the lava.  The four legged creatures were not.  That simple good-luck twist of fate moved human beings up the evolutionary ladder, but we're still on a path to evolve into four legged creatures.

Think about how much more you sit than your grandparents did.  Sitting is not a far cry from crawling.  In a few dozen generations, we'll laugh at pictures of people like Oscar Pistorius, with their fools goal of two functional legs.

Bottom line, don't assume that you are on the upswing of your species evolutionary path.  You're probably going extinct anyway.

God Is My Co-Pirate: Oooh and the comments are off to a roaring start:


For Example,,We have a dozen theory's about aliens manipulating primates DNA for a labor force
advancing humanity beyond Darwin's wildest Dreams,,,Yet despite the Mountain of evidence mainstream refuses to look at it seriously..as though it is impossible so why bother looking.
The same thing happens every time New concepts are introduced..Yet Darwin has no transitional evidence or solid foundation what so ever..Same with Creationism..My better judgment says the jury is still out on this "origin of Man" issue.

Someone here needs to fess up. Of course, if that's not trolling, I weep for the future.

I blame the "History" channel.

Actually, tall and skinny radiates heat more effectively in warmer climates.

The scientific method demands that cause and effect is observable and repeatable.
Sorry evolutionists, but faith is what binds believers and non believers together. We just have faith in opposing theory's.

gadian:
Not a Jesus freak, but I think that the story goes that Adam and Eve had many, many children who all married each other.  I've also heard contradictory stories saying that there was a land of God's failed creations where Adam's first wife went off to live and that that's where the outside blood came from in the kid's marriages.  Obviously, no self-respecting Jewish mother would let her kids marry from God's rubbish bin, but there you go.

Which sects of Christianity actually still have the bit about Lilith in their holy book? I know it's not in most protestant texts. Do Catholics have it?

nmemkha: Jake Havechek: If Adam and Eve only had 2 kids, both boys, and one killed the other, where did all the humans come from?

Answer me that, Jesus freaks!

Its an allegory genius. Dumb Christians of the Sky Wizarding World are smart enough to figure that out, so what does that say about you?

I get a kick out of those people that say yes this particular story is an allegory but Jesus soooooo definitely walked on water for realz!!!!eleventy

jaggspb: nmemkha: Jake Havechek: If Adam and Eve only had 2 kids, both boys, and one killed the other, where did all the humans come from?

Answer me that, Jesus freaks!

Its an allegory genius. Dumb Christians of the Sky Wizarding World are smart enough to figure that out, so what does that say about you?

I get a kick out of those people that say yes this particular story is an allegory but Jesus soooooo definitely walked on water for realz!!!!eleventy

Jesus walked on water.  He forgot to tell everyone there were rocks underneath.

Graffito: God Is My Co-Pirate: Yet Darwin has no transitional evidence or solid foundation what so ever.

I hate that argument.  Every time a transitional form is discovered some window-licker comes along and asks, "well, what about the 2 new holes in the fossil record?"


Flying Spaghetti Monster: Hey, Professor, I'm a Flying Spaghetti Monster. You seriously believe I've descended from some kind of flightless manicotti?
Farnsworth: Yes!
Banjo: Oh, please. A far more logical explanation is the undisprovable science of Creatureism. All life was created in its present form seven thousand years ago, by a fantastical creature from outer space!
Farnsworth: Bunk!
Banjo: Oh! If you elitist, East Coast evolution is real, why has no one found the missing link between modern humans and ancient apes?
Farnsworth: We did find it! It's called Homo erectus!
Banjo: Then you have proven my case, sir, for no one has found a link between apes and this Homo erectus.
Farnsworth: Yes, they have! It's called Homo habilis!
Banjo: Ah-ha! But no one has found the missing link between ape and this so called Homo habilis.
Farnsworth: Yes, they have! It's called Australopithecus africanus!
Banjo: Oh-ho! I've got you now!
[time passes]
Banjo: Fair enough, but where, then, is the missing link between apes and this Darwinius masillae? Answer me that, Professor!
Farnsworth: Okay, granted, that one missing link is still missing, but just because we haven't found it doesn't mean it doesn't exist!
Banjo: Things don't exist simply because you believe in them. Thus sayeth the Almighty Creature in the Sky!

Oldiron_79: Jake Havechek: If Adam and Eve only had 2 kids, both boys, and one killed the other, where did all the humans come from?

Answer me that, Jesus freaks!

. Cain had a wife whom the bible did not name. Adam and Eve also had another son Seth after Cain slew Abel who also had a wife the bible did not name.

Two unnamed wives, eh?

Deus ex machina?

Or otherwise known as pretty shiatty storytelling?

kitsuneymg: Which sects of Christianity actually still have the bit about Lilith in their holy book? I know it's not in most protestant texts. Do Catholics have it?

I actually heard all this from a Rabbi and I still don't know if he was just yanking my chain with most of what he was saying.  He was just summarizing some different interpretations of the origins of humanity.  I don't know anything about the Christian take on any of it or if any of it was ever an "official" part of any religion.  He did also say that no one ever seriously suggested Christ was immaculately conceived until many centuries after his death.

entropic_existence: Second, one form of the "grasslands impacted our evolution towards bipedalism" was that they coincided with one another. As referenced at the very end of the article, there was nothing in the most general formulation of the hypothesis that precludes human ancestors moving in to the grassland as a new niche and adapting to it. We see that sort of thing happening all of the time.

I think the point is that they were already so well spread out that they were in the grasslands anyway. Sometimes evolution takes a while, and I think the article was right in supposing that perhaps early humans just failed to take advantage of the evolutionary niche for a while. After a few million years, the right kind of adaptation started to take shape. Mutation is, after all, random.

At some point, walking upright became a more efficient trait, and humans who could walk upright were more successful, had more children, and became the dominant type of human.

That's logic.  That's evolution right there, sports fans.