Study: Primates may have come along earlier than thought

The Gainesville Sun ^ | 16 Jan 2007 | JACK STRIPLING

[ASA Vet]

Primates that eventually gave rise to human beings came on the scene shortly after the extinction of dinosaurs, a full 10 million years earlier than the fossil record has ever conclusively illustrated, according to a new paper co-authored by a University of Florida faculty member.

[stm]

And some of them have regressed....all you have to do is look at the left side of the isle

[Young Werther]

GEICO commercial????

[Squawk 8888]

Making the popcorn...

[SlowBoat407]

First one to hurl an insult or quote unsubstantiated material (from either side) loses.

[BenLurkin]

Turned into lawyers they did --

[Red Badger]

IBHTP!.......

[Theo]

Further evidence that evolutionists, after so many years, still have it wrong.

[org.whodat]

quote unsubstantiated material

Might that be just regular old common Bull Sh--?

[Blue State Insurgent]

They were off by 10 million years. You are still off by a few billion years.

[SengirV]

There very little of what I'd call evidence in that article.

[Nathan Zachary]

The fossil record has never shown primates were evolutionists aunts and uncles. The articles starts out with an unproven statement and states it as fact. The "fossil record" also shows that the lake sturgeon hasn't 'evolved' in the least for 10,000 million years, doesn't this prove evolution doesn't happen? I just love the tangled web evolution theory has woven. every new discovery contradicts another.

[stockpirate]

lawyers haven't even started to evolve/

[Sols]

Just because some species have existed relatively unchanged for a few tens of millions of years doesn't mean evolution doesn't happen. There is nothing about genetic drift or natural selection that would force ALL species to evolve.

Also, your 10,000 million year unchanged sturgeon "factoid" is only off by about 9,900 million years.

[gedeon3]

And from what kind of monkey did you evolve?

[sionnsar]

[Alter Kaker]

The "fossil record" also shows that the lake sturgeon hasn't 'evolved' in the least for 10,000 million years,

Given that 10,000 million years is about twice as old as the solar system, I'm a bit incredulous. But you raise an important question -- why do some organisms appear to change very little over long periods of time whereas other organisms change dramatically. The answer is the idea of a niche -- if an organism is well adapted to its particlar environment, no force will push it to change. In fact, evolutionary forces will work against it changing significantly. This is all the more true when you're talking about large populations.

[Prodigal Son]

Further evidence that evolutionists, after so many years, still have it wrong.

How so? Just curious.

[Sols]

Do you know what the difference between an ape and a monkey is? It is not merely a pedantic question. You will be most excited to learn that my mother was a great ape and I am, in fact, a great ape.

The answer to your question is, to the best of my knoweledge, homo antecessor. There might be another hominin in there before sapiens, I do not know.

[Alter Kaker]

And from what kind of monkey did you evolve?

Hominoids (a superfamily that includes modern apes and humans) split off from old world monkeys about 20 million years ago. The most likely common ancestor is Proconsul.