Skip to comments.
Our ancient primate ancestors mostly had twins — humans don't, for a good evolutionary reason
Live Science ^
| 01/05/2025
| Tesla Monson, Jack McBride
Posted on 01/06/2025 11:28:11 AM PST by BenLurkin
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-30 next last
1
posted on
01/06/2025 11:28:11 AM PST
by
BenLurkin
To: BenLurkin
Moral of the story: Big animals have smaller litters?
2
posted on
01/06/2025 11:32:27 AM PST
by
JJBookman
(Democrats = Party of no kids )
To: BenLurkin
How nice.
But what about those of us who don’t have “ancient primate ancestors”?
3
posted on
01/06/2025 11:35:36 AM PST
by
Cletus.D.Yokel
(When I say "We" I speak of, -not for-, "We the People")
To: BenLurkin
What is the primate that is between the silhouettes of the bear and the shrew?
4
posted on
01/06/2025 11:36:40 AM PST
by
higgmeister
(In the Shadow of The Big Chicken! )
To: BenLurkin
Me: Well I'll be a monkey's uncle.
Darwinist: You've got that backwards.
Democrats: This is how we know eugenics is the way to go.
Me: If natural selection works, then why do you have to play God on who makes babies and who doesn't?
5
posted on
01/06/2025 11:38:07 AM PST
by
Tell It Right
(1 Thessalonians 5:21 -- Put everything to the test, hold fast to that which is true.)
To: BenLurkin
“ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny”?...................
6
posted on
01/06/2025 11:38:59 AM PST
by
Red Badger
(Homeless veterans camp in the streets while illegals are put up in 5 Star hotels....................)
To: Cletus.D.Yokel
Good news. Have all the twins you want!
7
posted on
01/06/2025 11:39:31 AM PST
by
BenLurkin
(The above is not a statement of fact. It is either opinion, or satire, or both.)
To: Red Badger
Enhances the transformamogration of exious fentalbenomes.
8
posted on
01/06/2025 11:40:44 AM PST
by
BenLurkin
(The above is not a statement of fact. It is either opinion, or satire, or both.)
To: higgmeister
What is the primate that is between the silhouettes of the bear and the shrew?
-
An ancient space alien. They died out long ago. The left us with mysterious megalithic stone structures that modern humans cannot build. Ancient Alien theorists say, “Yes”.
9
posted on
01/06/2025 11:41:04 AM PST
by
PIF
(They came for me and mine ... now its your turn)
To: BenLurkin
Making up explanatory stories after the fact is not science, it is "just so" storytelling without testability to confirm/debunk the (historical, not scientific) hypothesis. That said, there's no basis for even imagining that natural selection would allow for the existence of sexual reproduction in the first place. Quite apart from the impossibilities of an evolutionary process going from asexual to sexual reproduction, sexual reproduction eliminates half of all contributing parental genes by chance rather than a selection process. In other words natural selection is diluted by half by shifting to sexual reproduction. It is such a marvelous form of magic in the eyes of religious believers (for almost all world religions rely vitally on evolutionary beliefs - the only exception of note is monotheism) - natural selection is able to work constructive miracles here, there and everywhere, and then gets thrown out the window as an driving mechanism the next moment.
To: higgmeister
11
posted on
01/06/2025 11:41:46 AM PST
by
SauronOfMordor
(Either you will rule. Or you will be ruled. There is no other choice.)
To: Cletus.D.Yokel
‘ But what about those of us who don’t have “ancient primate ancestors”?’
You a lizard?
12
posted on
01/06/2025 11:42:14 AM PST
by
Fuzz
To: BenLurkin
I hate it when that happens.................
13
posted on
01/06/2025 11:43:30 AM PST
by
Red Badger
(Homeless veterans camp in the streets while illegals are put up in 5 Star hotels....................)
To: Fuzz
Nope.
Just someone who hasn’t rejected God for some fanciful human train of thought.
The science is in tension.
14
posted on
01/06/2025 11:48:08 AM PST
by
Cletus.D.Yokel
(When I say "We" I speak of, -not for-, "We the People")
To: BenLurkin
Very interesting.
Women who are in their 30s are more likely to have twins
Women who take fertility drugs are more likely to have twins
Twin rates are about 3%
Many twins are premature and have to spend time in neonatal care.
15
posted on
01/06/2025 11:50:02 AM PST
by
algore
To: higgmeister
16
posted on
01/06/2025 11:56:02 AM PST
by
ifinnegan
(Democrats kill babies and harvest their organs to sell)
To: BenLurkin
Enhances the transformamogration of exious fentalbenomes. If only I had a nickel for every time I have said this very thing to my husband...
To: BenLurkin
Bears have bumps in litter count after population declines from weather etc too
18
posted on
01/06/2025 12:51:49 PM PST
by
wardaddy
(Elon ….damn boy….. bly in jou baan verdomp)
To: BenLurkin
Yeah... Sure...
Also, the 2020 election was squeaky clean and honest...
To: algore
Elvis Presley had a twin brother who died shortly after birth.
I had a first cousin once removed who was a twin--her twin sister died at birth but she lived to 96. Their mother was 30 when they were born.
My grandmother and her brother were twins--their mother was 26 when they were born. I have a second cousin who had twins when she was 26. One of them is the father of twins who were born when their mother was 30. My other grandmother had younger sisters who were twins, born when their mother was 34.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-30 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson