01 Aug 07
Originally posted by EsotericRecc'd.
Being a hysterical, incessant ignoramus who posts mounds of easily discredited and non-scientific "papers" on a scientific subject does not win a argument. You have lost and you will continue to lose the argument and no amount of overexcited posting on this forum will change that fact.
01 Aug 07
Originally posted by SpastiGovThe consensus was NEVER for a coming ice age.
lmao! Gee what a clever come back! I've realised you guys descend into emotive diatribe when you can't handle the heat (excuse the pun).
Give it up guys. You've lost the fight and missed the boat. You look like fools for jumping on the AGW bandwagon! But I realise you only did so because it was the latest fashion and you're simply not clever enough or b ...[text shortened]... just like it did in the seventies when the "consensus" was of a coming ice age.
Losers.
That is a bold faced lie.
01 Aug 07
Originally posted by AThousandYoungMan is apparently more likely to have been a coastal ape, and moved inland after the savannah developed.
I suspect global warming led to human speciation due to changing the jungle to savanna in East Africa. Either global warming or heavy use of fire by humans.
01 Aug 07
1 edit
Originally posted by agrysonWhere did you hear that? I hope you're not relying on The Naked Ape by Desmond Morris. Interesting book but ultimately scientific consensus is that his conclusions were mostly wrong.
Man is apparently more likely to have been a coastal ape, and moved inland after the savannah developed.
EDIT - I looked around a bit and it looks like there's quite a bit of evidence for this idea. It does explain why humans settled pretty much along the coast first, even island hopping before going inland from what I understand. Morris' book does note how our back hair is aligned with the motion of water over a swimming person, and this website has other interesting info:
http://www.riverapes.com/
01 Aug 07
Originally posted by wittywonkaWell, that's succint and to the point...
You have no legitimate facts, studies, models, statistics, or anything even resembling cold, hard evidence. You simply have opinionated rants. So you have resorted to name-calling and finger-pointing. Nice job with the debating there, Spastic.
Recc'ed
01 Aug 07
Originally posted by AThousandYoungOh, I really have to admit that it's only what I had heard, I saw a documentary on it. If you've any links on the geographical aspects of human evolution, please post them, or to keep it out of the threads way send me a pm. I'd be interested in reading more on that.
Where did you hear that? I hope you're not relying on The Naked Ape by Desmond Morris. Interesting book but ultimately scientific consensus is that his conclusions were mostly wrong.
01 Aug 07
Originally posted by agrysonSee my edit.
Oh, I really have to admit that it's only what I had heard, I saw a documentary on it. If you've any links on the geographical aspects of human evolution, please post them, or to keep it out of the threads way send me a pm. I'd be interested in reading more on that.
02 Aug 07
1 edit
Originally posted by AThousandYoungCool, thanks, I'll have a look.
See my edit.
Incidentally, getting back to the thread...
Notice on the last page, how spastigov keeps claiming the debate is over, the debate is won, etc. despite the fact that not even he/she can pretend that such is the case. Just a theory, but do you think that it's a "back out without getting egg on my face" clause?
i.e. "If I claim the debate is over and won, and stop posting I can fool myself into thinking it's true and keep my pride"?
Just a thought...
02 Aug 07
1 edit
Originally posted by agrysonI'm guessing it's the "Drown Their Logic in My Screams and Shut the Door Before I Look Even More Like a Fool" Syndrome.
Just a theory, but do you think that it's a "back out without getting egg on my face" clause?
i.e. "If I claim the debate is over and won, and stop posting I can fool myself into thinking it's true and keep my pride"?
Just a thought...
02 Aug 07
Originally posted by scottishinnzWell then it depends on your loose definition of "consensus". Put it this way, the belief that an ice age was iminent was popular and widely held within the scientific community. So what does that make it?
The consensus was NEVER for a coming ice age.
That is a bold faced lie.
Look it up.
02 Aug 07
Originally posted by SpastiGovIt was mentioned in the popular press quite a bit, but I think only 1 scientific paper was ever published which suggested it to be a possibility. The authors of that paper later re-evaluated their position, and abandoned the idea, if my memory serves correctly.
Well then it depends on your loose definition of "consensus". Put it this way, the belief that an ice age was iminent was popular and widely held within the scientific community. So what does that make it?
Look it up.
One paper hardly represents "consensus".