New scientist Gregg Braden

[robocop (actually)]

Gregg Braden's book was published in Oct. 2017. The Morocco Jebel Irhoud was discovered in June 2017. So I'm going to guess Gregg Braden discounted him.

Correction: I think Gregg Braden didn't get the information in time.

 

[robocop (actually)]

Alright! Here's what's up. The Jebel Irhoud is an anatomically modern human or h. sapien. h. sapien == AMH.

They have:

"A brain 50 percent larger than that of our nearest primate relative, the chimpanzee.
Upright posture and advanced manual dexterity.
The capacity for advanced language.
An extended neural network that allows for extraordinary capabilities, such as deep intuition and access to heart-based wisdom on demand."

Just replace the number 200,000 years ago with 300,000 years ago and continue the argument. Gregg Braden probably did not get the info from Morocco in time when he published.

 

[robocop (actually)]

I'm confused. Homo heidelbergensis appears to have the same brain volume we have. And if they meant the monkeys why did they say 200,000 ya?

 

[robocop (actually)]

Fact 1. Our origin—Modern humans appeared suddenly on earth approximately 200,000 years ago, with the advanced brain, nervous system, and capabilities that set them apart from all other known forms of life already developed, rather than having developed slowly and gradually over a long periods of time.

He must mean that the homo sapien had the advanced brain, nervous system and capabilities that set them apart from all other known forms of life already developed.

That means they were set apart from monkeys and the human predecessors were not developed into us.

That makes sense.

 

[robocop (actually)]

Those skulls are all different, and if you say there is a tree from them it could just mean that an intelligent designing agent made the skulls so they could be classified. We don't even have a second way to check with the skulls.

Is this true?

 

[Audie]

The Jebel Irhoud had a different skull according to the article. Correction: The Jebel Irhoud seems to have been an anatomically modern human.

But if I'm wrong, this was discovered in 2017 and perhaps the author didn't know about it when he wrote the book.

Then, perhaps they appeared suddenly 300,000 years ago?

There was no sudden appesrance.


Why dont you see if you can struggle thru
lomg division before you engage people
who've done calculus? Some of here actually
have some background in this, and it is
painful to watch such blundering.

You are making it worse by reading
something something written at
"Enquirer" level, for the purpose of
misleading the unsophisticated.

But I expect that is what you want, why else
zero in on woo woo from a con man.

In this case, to help you mislead yourself,
it seems. In the event-

You are determined to go down your
creationist path, so, go ahead. You
brush aside every observation that
you is eatin' garbage.

It is a waste of time to try to help you
actually learn anything. I wont make
that mistake again.

 

[robocop (actually)]

There was no sudden appesrance.

Damn me! You're right.

But damnit if it isn't a good goal to get people to behave better.

 

[Audie]

Damn me! You're right.

But damnit if it isn't a good goal to get people to behave better.

How about setting for yourself a behavioural goal:

No more posting ignorant drivel.

 

[robocop (actually)]

Hard for me to tell what's what!

Also hard for me to tell what I should be encouraging.

One thing that always bites me in the butt:

It seems like the human race is in great danger,

and I don't know if simple honesty is the best way to get through it together.

 

[robocop (actually)]

How about setting for yourself a behavioural goal:

No more posting ignorant drivel.

​

Alright, go easy on me. I was in a movement that published that article on the original post. I was heavily motivated by other factors to believe it. I am not a member of that movement anyway but now I do not believe it. Thank you for your help.

My IQ is 134. I'm sure with added balance from standing on my own two feet I will post better thoughts in the future. I wish I could share my books I've written with everyone but don't want to rip off my customers.

I still don't understand why the voices in my head get so many things right!? I also can't understand why my books are so related to Epicurus when I found out about him only after publishing them.

 

[robocop (actually)]

How about setting for yourself a behavioural goal:

No more posting ignorant drivel.

I may sound ignorant but I still don't understand a gematria study in the Torah, word-print analysis in the Book of Mormon, or why my voices are right all the time (or why my books follow Epicurus so much).

I guess I don't have to believe the article though; the voices are the Holy Ghost.

 

[Audie]

I may sound ignorant but I still don't understand a gematria study in the Torah, word-print analysis in the Book of Mormon, or why my voices are right all the time (or why my books follow Epicurus so much).

I guess I don't have to believe the article though; the voices are the Holy Ghost.

Let us leave it at that

 

[sayak83]

Some of the following is what the author says and some is what I think.

None of these animals were shaped like anatomically modern humans.

They are shaped more and more like anatomically modern humans until the difference becomes too small, at which time they are classified within our species.

Those skulls are all different, and if you say there is a tree from them it could just mean that an intelligent designing agent made the skulls so they could be classified. We don't even have a second way to check with the skulls.

What do you want to check. When I say species A evolved from species B, obviously species A is going to be different from species B in several characteristics, which, over time, would begin to look more and more like that of species A, until one can say that it has become species A.

These AMHs had the following new conditions that haven't changed since and never appeared before:
"A brain 50 percent larger than that of our nearest primate relative, the chimpanzee.

False. Brain size variation is a continuous trend. Not sudden. See below.

As you can, there is an upward evolutionary curve in brain capacity from 2 million years. Not sudden.

Upright posture and advanced manual dexterity.

Both present since Homo erectus, 2 million years ago. Below the skull all these species have more or less modern human anatomy. Its the brain size that's increasing over the last 2 million years.

The capacity for advanced language.

There is no way to tell if any human or their ancestors could speak like us till writing was invented about 6000 years ago.

An extended neural network that allows for extraordinary capabilities, such as deep intuition and access to heart-based wisdom on demand."

Nobody can tell a anything like that existed before writing was invented. But human ancestors were making tools from 3 million years ago, using fire from 1.5 million years ago, burying their dead from 900,000 years ago, painting their body from 300,000 years ago, making jewellery from 150,000 years ago, painting caves since 50,000 years ago and making musical instruments from 30,000 years ago. This does not look like sudden to me.

My question, sayak, was this: Were there a lot of each of these species you showed the skulls of and no in-betweens or were there just a few of each so that we just guess this is all we know about the progression?

More than a 1000 fossil specimens have been uncovered over this 2 million period with all of them in betweens.

 

[robocop (actually)]

Alright thanks sayak83; I've abandoned this.

 

[Thermos aquaticus]

I'm just saying in general the way that mutations can occur do not seem enough to transfigure cells into greater cells.

What science are you basing this on?

Well, the author is saying there are specific species of human/ape/whatever that do not have go-betweens. If I said that myself I didn't mean to because I haven't checked out how many go-betweens there should be before I say how many there aren't.

How did the author determine that there were no "go-betweens"? That claim is definitely going to require some evidence.

 

[Thermos aquaticus]

Fact 1. Our origin—Modern humans appeared suddenly on earth approximately 200,000 years ago,

False.

Fact 2. Missing physical evidence—The relationships shown on the conventional tree of human evolution are speculative connections only. While they are believed to exist, a 150-year search has failed to produce the physical evidence that confirms the relationships shown on the evolutionary family tree.

Common ancestry between humans and other apes is not speculative. We have the evidence, and mountains of it.

ERVs: Evidence for the Origin of Humans

 

[Thermos aquaticus]

Fact 3. New DNA evidence—The comparison of DNA between ancient Neanderthals, previously thought to be our ancestors, and early humans tells us that we did not descend from the Neanderthals.

Neanderthals were our cousins with whom we share a common ancestor. How is that a problem? It still doesn't make all of the evidence for common ancestry between humans and other apes go away.

 

[Thermos aquaticus]

Fact 4. A rare DNA fusion—Advanced genome analysis reveals that the DNA that sets us apart from other primates, including in our advanced brain and nervous system, is the result of an ancient and precise fusion of genes occurring in a way that suggests something beyond evolution made our humanness possible.

Every primate species has DNA that sets it apart from other primate species. That's why they are separate species.

This appears to have happened after we already split from other primates (going from 48 chromosomes to 46. The problem is that the two old chromosomes just went into obscurity.

Two chromosomes fused into a single chromosome. They didn't disappear.

Fact 5. Our extraordinary abilities—We are born with the capacity to self-heal, to self-regulate longevity, to activate an enhanced immune response, and to experience deep intuition, sympathy, empathy, and, ultimately, compassion—and to do each of these on demand.

Every species has extraordinary abilities. The cheetah can run faster than any other land mammal. The guinea pig can drink 30 times more alcohol by weight than a human. Cetaceans can hold their breath under water for much longer than humans can. Every species has their unique features that make them extraordinary. Ours just happens to be our ability to use our brains.

 

[robocop (actually)]

What science are you basing this on?

Thermos aquaticus, I have already conceded the issue. Thank you.

Sincerely,

robocop

 

[gnostic]

They have:

"A brain 50 percent larger than that of our nearest primate relative, the chimpanzee.
Upright posture and advanced manual dexterity.
The capacity for advanced language.
An extended neural network that allows for extraordinary capabilities, such as deep intuition and access to heart-based wisdom on demand."

Just replace the number 200,000 years ago with 300,000 years ago and continue the argument. Gregg Braden probably did not get the info from Morocco in time when he published.

I'm confused. Homo heidelbergensis appears to have the same brain volume we have. And if they meant the monkeys why did they say 200,000 ya?

Chimpanzees are apes, not monkeys.

All Homo, including Homo sapiens humans, belonged to the “great apes”, Hominidae, in which the extant species gorillas, chimpanzees also belonged to. (The “lesser apes” are gibbons.)

The split between monkeys (or more precisely Old World monkeys) and apes (which would include the great apes, hence humans too) occurred 25 million years ago, not 300,000 years ago.

Second, the Homo heidelbergensis didn’t split from the other great apes.

Homo heidelbergensiswere themselves directly descendants of the older Homo ergaster species.

The descendants of Homo heidelbergensis include the Homo neanderthalensis and Homo sapiens.

There are some problems with the classification of Homo ergaster, as to whether it is distinct to the Homo erectus, or they are the same species. But that’s really above my head, so until the palaeontologists can agree and settle with the ergaster and erectus issues, I cannot know if one is true or the other.

But older than both erectus and ergaster, is the Homo habilis, perhaps the oldest of the genus Homo.

If I remember correctly the split between Pan and Homo occurred 6 or 7 million years ago.