Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Wrong - that isn't evolution, it's just the case of accumulated knowledge. You'll find the people 10,000 years ago would be just as smart as you an I, if they were raised the same way as us. Every one of us goes to school for over 15-20 years, remember.Asimov said:What about in terms of brain power, I'm sure progressing from domesticating horses to the Industrial Revolution to splitting an atom have something to do with our brains evolving. If I'm wrong, then tell me what would be a factor in that?
Not to mention the fact that it was bipedal, and there is evidence it may have had rudimentary speech.Split Rock said:If 1470 [Homo habilis fossil ER 1470] was an ape, it would be a truly extraordinary one. The brain is far larger than that of any ape, with the possible exception of extremely large male gorillas. The braincase is far more rounded and gracile than that of any ape, and the brain has a human rather than an apelike pattern.- Tobias P.V. (1987): The brain of Homo habilis: a new level of organization in cerebral evolution. Journal of Human Evolution, 16:741-61.
I would think that the size of humans would continually get smaller since there are fixed resources and large population growth. smaller people need less food to survive etc.
They do? You have never seen my wife eat then, she eats more than I do, but then she works harder than I do. When I was doing construction work, I would burn up to 3500 calories a day. People trying to survive in the artic can burn up to 4500 calories a day. So, it has a lot more to do with how active you are.ServantofTheOne said:smaller people need less food to survive etc.
I seem to recall a PhD who, judging by his name, was an expert in dinosaurs and evolution saying that we should expect to see about 1100 species of bats come from even a single pair in only six thousand years. He seemed quite critical of evoultion, so I'd trust him to give estimates that are very conservative.Vance said:Has anyone mentioned that 6,000 years is simply too short of a time period to see any noticable change even if evolution was in full swing?
Another example is the ability of adults to digest the lactic acid in milk. This is a recent adaptation to the domestication of cows.Mad Arab said:Contrary to popular opinion, evolution has not stopped with humans. When you only consider natural selection, there are several gene frequency shifts that you can talk about to distinguish between modern urban humans and earlier human populations. For example, the genes that control insulin production (and give people who are no longer hunter gatherers diabetes) are greatly reduced in the modern populations (though with modern medicine that is less of an issue). The same is true for the genes that give resistances to many diseases (like plague). I am not sure how to factor other evolutionary processes than natural selection like "mate selection" into this, but I would think it too has and will always have a significant impact on our evolutionary heritage.
Well, you have to be skeptical of assertions *about* evolution from someone who is avowedly an opponent of it. I would be interested to hear his background.michabo said:I seem to recall a PhD who, judging by his name, was an expert in dinosaurs and evolution saying that we should expect to see about 1100 species of bats come from even a single pair in only six thousand years. He seemed quite critical of evoultion, so I'd trust him to give estimates that are very conservative.
I must be feeling oblique today.Vance said:Well, you have to be skeptical of assertions *about* evolution from someone who is avowedly an opponent of it. I would be interested to hear his background.
Yes. And 6,000 years is far from five millionbrightlights said:yeah seriously avimov, evolution in education and theories that progress over time is far from ape to man.
They don't.ego licet visum said:Immunities also. I can understand how if only someone who has been exposed to a disease becomes resistant to it. But what about their children? Why is it that the children of people that have developed certain resistances retain these same resistances?
European children didn't "pick up" the immunities from being exposed to the diseases from birth. They inherited stronger resistance to the diseases.ego licet visum said:If European children could pick the immunities up from simply being exposed to the disease from birth, why couldn't the native Americans?
anythingFreodin said:I have to wonder: what kind of changes do you expect? Six fingers? Wings? A second pair of arms?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?