Skip to comments.
Fossil find pushes human-ape split back millions of years
Breitbart ^
| 8/24/07
| Mikey_1962
Posted on 08/24/2007 12:01:34 PM PDT by Mikey_1962
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-28 last
To: Maelstorm
even the number of chromosomes are different
Humans have one less chromosome than apes. Why? We know the exact locus of the telomere to telomere fusion of ape-chromosomes 2A and 2B into human chromosome 2.
As you might expect, this is certainly not evidence against evolution.
To: UndauntedR
To: Coyoteman
Our ancestors taking to the sea seems to be a plausible explanation for the dearth of fossil remains dating between 11-7 million years ago.
To: mysterio
Well, a bad side of Science is the tendency to leap to conclusions. Darwin et al. leapt to conclusions that cannot now be supported, just like the rest of us do. The bad thing was that Darwinists shouted down all opposition as obscurantism, even variant theories of evolution. Religious zealots get bad press in scientific circles, but science has its zealots as well.
24
posted on
08/24/2007 2:40:53 PM PDT
by
RobbyS
( CHIRHO)
To: Blue State Insurgent
Our ancestors taking to the sea seems to be a plausible explanation for the dearth of fossil remains dating between 11-7 million years ago. When I studied evolution in grad school the standard explanation for the lack of late Miocene fossils was because so many of the apes were living in the forests. Forests are notoriously poor at preserving fossils.
Later, when groups left the forests for grasslands and lake shores, etc., the number of fossils increased.
The aquatic ape theory I think deals more with this latter time frame.
25
posted on
08/24/2007 2:48:16 PM PDT
by
Coyoteman
(Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.)
To: LiteKeeper
Amazing how these estimates keep getting pushed further and further back in time. Not really, it used to be 25 million. More evidence dropped it to 7 million, no revised to 10.
That's the thing about science. More evidence gives you more confindent in the refined estimate.
Religion> Well I think it might be 10,000 years not 6000. Why? I dunno..
26
posted on
08/24/2007 5:20:03 PM PDT
by
Oztrich Boy
(Don't vote, it only encourages them)
To: LiteKeeper
Maybe they were never joined...and this is further proof.
Amazing how these estimates keep getting pushed further and further back in time.
How far back in time is too far? 4000 BC?
27
posted on
08/24/2007 5:31:56 PM PDT
by
Dog Gone
To: mysterio
I think the other poster was stating that he doesn’t think the evidence points to that, and that this evidence could be used to bolster that argument.
28
posted on
08/24/2007 6:21:29 PM PDT
by
ECM
(Government is a make-work program for lawyers.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-28 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