Hairless Chimps

  • We are currently upgrading MFK. thanks! -neo
Cohazard said:
Just joining the discussion here.

Want to start by saying thank you for laying out your ideas clearly and in an organized respectful manner. Good thought went into that post.

Now, I disagree with you that applying the same principles of natural selection to humans requires faith.

We have uncovered many types of 'human' type remains, including Neanderthal, which support the application of natural selection to the development of Homo sapien.



Sent from my DROID BIONIC using MonsterAquariaNetwork App
Click to expand...

:thumbsup::thumbsup: Just want to clarify what I said:

"natural selection" is well proven scientific fact; and requires no "faith".

"evolution" as the idea that humans evolved from a primordial organism (or any other organism), is not a scientifically provable fact; and therefore requires "faith" ie the voluntary belief in something that cannot be proven through measurable, repeatable, scientific experiments.

To be clear; I'm not defending or representing myself on either "side" of the debate. Just pointing out the flaws in both arguments and why I believe people are "unsuccessfully" trying to make their own points, since they are using the same term (evolution) in very different ways.

Take Neanderthals for example. There is no experiment (that I am aware of) that can prove/disprove our relationship to them and their "place" in human history; because there is no way to run a scientific experiment (remember it must be measurable and repeatable) on the "past".

As for my opinions: do I think its likely that Neanderthals were an early branch of human development; which we subsequently "out competed"? Yes. But can I prove that with scientific method? No.
 
happy thoughts ...happy thoughts ,......never mind.......mods please note , I DIDN'T START OR ENGAGE IN ANYONE'S FIGHT......although I HAVE OPINIONS ON THIS MATTER:):)....
 
I belive one can consider the relationship between homo neanderthal and sapiens well enough through antropologocial and paleontological studies.

It is a fact thay lived together for millenia. It is a fact they interbred.

It is a fact that with competitive exclsuion and, possibly, worse adaptation to changes ( climate comes to mind ) they ended up disappearing.

Even so, i believe it is a fact ( must look for the paper ) that a relevant % of homo sapiens ( us ) has neanderthal dna.
 
Miguel said:
I belive one can consider the relationship between homo neanderthal and sapiens well enough through antropologocial and paleontological studies.

It is a fact thay lived together for millenia. It is a fact they interbred.

It is a fact that with competitive exclsuion and, possibly, worse adaptation to changes ( climate comes to mind ) they ended up disappearing.

Even so, i believe it is a fact ( must look for the paper ) that a relevant % of homo sapiens ( us ) has neanderthal dna.
Click to expand...
:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup: my only input:popcorn:
 
Miguel said:
I belive one can consider the relationship between homo neanderthal and sapiens well enough through antropologocial and paleontological studies.

It is a fact thay lived together for millenia. It is a fact they interbred.

It is a fact that with competitive exclsuion and, possibly, worse adaptation to changes ( climate comes to mind ) they ended up disappearing.

Even so, i believe it is a fact ( must look for the paper ) that a relevant % of homo sapiens ( us ) has neanderthal dna.
Click to expand...

Without playing Devil's Advocate too much: anthropology/paleontology are much more artistic than truly scientific. They make observations and theories based on what they dig up from no-longer-existing time-periods and apply their own opinions to it. Hardly meets the measurable and repeatable criteria for a scientific experiment/fact.

I'm not saying they don't provide value to our understanding of times gone by, or even that they are wildly inaccurate; but I do find the term "fact" to be used a little too loosely.

Per your earlier comments; we also share a lot of DNA with other animals and plants too... not very convincing proof of anything that we would share DNA with Neanderthals too... just saying.
 
ok here we go.. I GOTTA WADE IN.... ALL life is related in one way or another.. to think we were 'created ' .... well step OUTSIDE THAT statement and view it as ANOTHER CIVILAZATION.. studying man... pretty superstitious thinking ?OR "THE TRUTH"?
 
I think we have strayed far afield from the original topic of what causes hair loss in apes.
 
it's almost as if a jinx is following Sumo around the forum.
 
I believe the experts are believing that it is alopecia :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
MonsterFishKeepers.com
Top Bottom