The So-called "Tree of Life" has been debunked

[Ambrose_Bierce]

 

LOL I dont see any agenda here... I just see jokers and more jokers that think they are right

[Immortal4life]

 

Darwinian evolution very conveniently removed the idea of a higher power. 'Oh, it can all be explained by random, it's just bunch of things knockin' together, there's nothing divine in the universe at all, you're just gonna die and that's it, you don't exist anymore.' Well, I don't believe that." - David Wilcock (

)

 

I agree with that quote

[Ambrose_Bierce]

I agree with that quote

 

Some people believe since God is everything, God blew up.

 

[Immortal4life]

Sweet, that's actually kind of a cool idea

[Marblehead]

Sweet, that's actually kind of a cool idea

 

Well, let's face it. If one considers Singularity equal to God then yes, God blew up. BANG!

[zerostao]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/technology/science/new-fossil-may-be-missing-link-in-human-family-tree/article2158182/print/

[Marblehead]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/technology/science/new-fossil-may-be-missing-link-in-human-family-tree/article2158182/print/

 

There were comments to that in a documentary I saw recently but so far I have seen no in-depth documentary on this find. I'm sure I will catch it when one becomes available.

[Immortal4life]

Headlines claiming "A Missing Link May Have been found!" are extremely common.

 

What always happens, is after the headlines die down, they make a small comment in the back of the paper weeks later, "Oops, no it's not a missing link afterall".

Edited September 20, 2011 by Immortal4life

[Marblehead]

Headlines claiming "A Missing Link May Have been found!" are extremely common.

 

What always happens, is after the headlines die down, they make a small comment in the back of the paper weeks later, "Oops, no it's not a missing link afterall".

 

Yeah. I don't pay any attention to the "Missing Link" hype.

 

I personally think that the 1.9 million years can go back even further than that but I have no data to back up my thinking on this.

 

Similar to the migration to the Americas. I think that there were two major migrations during two different ice ages. Again though, I have no data to back this up. Just thoughts and opinions.

[Immortal4life]

Similar to the migration to the Americas. I think that there were two major migrations during two different ice ages. Again though, I have no data to back this up. Just thoughts and opinions.

 

I think there definitely had to be at least 2.

 

Heh, I might be able to help you out with that at some point.

[Marblehead]

Heh, I might be able to help you out with that at some point.

 

That would be great. But don't give me any of that quacky stuff, Okay? Hehehe.

 

The main thing I am interested in is the differences between the peoples of Central and South America and the peoples of North America. These peoples evolved so very differently.

[Immortal4life]

Have you looked into....

 

Evidence contradicting the Clovis first theory?

http://www.learnersportal.com/CanadaFP/Origins/theory.html

 

Monte Verde?

http://www.epinions.com/content_3269959812

 

Chachapoyas?

http://www.meta-religion.com/Archaeology/Southamerica/mummies_amazon.htm

 

Kenewick Man?

 

Hopewell Mound Builders?

 

40,000 year old footprints in Mexico?

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn7627-footprints-rewrite-history-of-first-americans.html

Edited September 20, 2011 by Immortal4life

[Marblehead]

I hadn't heard anything about the footprints in Mexico but I have of all the rest.

 

I accept the thought that the Clovis people were a mixture of Asian and European peoples who came to North America during the last ice age.

 

I can accept the possibility that Polynesians did make it to Chile.

 

If the footprints in Mexico can be better established as true then that would be consistent with my understanding that there was an Asian migration during an earlier ice age.

 

Thanks for the links.

[zerostao]

"Headlines claiming "A Missing Link May Have been found!" are extremely common."

so we are to ignore the skeletal remains found that go with this headline?

[Marblehead]

"Headlines claiming "A Missing Link May Have been found!" are extremely common."

so we are to ignore the skeletal remains found that go with this headline?

 

Absolutely not. All evidence must be tested and, if sound, considered in the collection of data.

 

I, personally, think that there is presently enough sound data to state, as a matter of fact, how humans evolved and that would include that all great apes evolved from a common ancestor. And that humans evolved out of that group of great apes just as the other great apes became individual species.

 

And no, we are not of the monkey lineage. That's a different group.

 

But everything evoled from something else. Even the gators, etc, who have been around for over 150 million years virtually unchanged.

[fiveelementtao]

In all honesty this is very interesting info. And I find it very intriguing, but it doesn't disprove evolution in the slightest.

 

I truly do not understand what your agenda is. Nothing you have shown conclusively proves or disproves anything. In fact, it only reinforces my belief that there was an even longer period of transformation that some people call "evolution."

 

Seriously, what is your agenda with this?

 

Have you looked into....

 

Evidence contradicting the Clovis first theory?

http://www.learnersportal.com/CanadaFP/Origins/theory.html

Yes and??.. So, the previously held Clovis first theory might have some holes in it... How does this refute evolution?

Monte Verde?

http://www.epinions.com/content_3269959812

Since when does an unnamed contributor on epinions.com represent any kind of real science? even so, just because people may or may not have populated the americas according to the latest theory that has ZERO impact on evolution...

Chachapoyas?

http://www.meta-religion.com/Archaeology/Southamerica/mummies_amazon.htm

Again... There is no scientific corroboration. You and I can take any photo we want and write an article without any scientific corroboration or scrutiny and say whatever we want. Do yu believe everything you read if it fits your agenda?

"The Chachapoyas were a tall, fairhaired, light-skinned race that some researchers believe may have come from Europe." There is no statement of any genetic tests to determine this. So, how the hell do I know they were descended from Europeans? And even if that is true... As interesting as that is that doesn't prove or disprove anything except that maybe Europeans were traveling by boat ( or for that matter walking across asia) alot earlier than earlier thought.. But it does not prove or disprove evolution in the slightest...

 

40,000 year old footprints in Mexico?

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn7627-footprints-rewrite-history-of-first-americans.html

Again very interesting if true... But doesn't disprove evolution....Just means that Humans got to the americas alot sooner than we thought... So what?

 

Again it would be nice if all this stuff were in ONE thread....