[Happy Rain]

According to Darwin,the first human was a mutated species born from a less than human species. But the big brain is the key human characteristic—for homo erectus to give rise to humans,it should have had a much larger brain allowing it's human progeny to enjoy not only the larger cranium but the other human conditions,improved manual dexterity,better upright posture and more efficient running feet that HAD to develop BECAUSE of the large brain in the first place.
Otherwise its like a bird having wings because it flies--it is NOT natural selection.
Darwinism is the backbone of socialism and social engineering and they the backbone of academia and Leftist “scientific” activism. The big brain in the more evolved primate lines should be first but so far it ain't and that not only threatens Darwinism but socialist dogma itself. The spontaneous appearance of the large hominid brain AFTER the traits dependent on it appear is,quite frankly,a terrifying prospect to the Left that may invite perhaps metaphysical considerations. Homo erectus,though not our ancestor according to the “scientific method” MUST be our ancestor so that man can be kept on the proggresive lathe.

[bert]

Drivel

[alstewartfan]

Nothing about macro-evolution makes sense, except in a specious way. E.G., if you can find specimen which can show a lineage among big apes on all fours to humans, humans must have “evolved” from these other creatures. Right? WRONG!
Common sense tells us that the early birds would have encountered insurmountable problems before it developed wings, or the ability to build nests. And spiders would have had to coax their prey like a Democrat to get it close enough for blood sucking, if it couldn’t yet spin a web. Yeah, it’s silly. Bob