13 replies to this topic

[speedz99]

I mean...I like my girls hairy, but this is a little too much. Oh yeah, and the researchers at Harvard and MIT are probably not just making crap up to further the theory of evolution. Enjoy.http://www.cnn.com/2...t.ap/index.html

[FOOSE1]

speedz99, on Wednesday, May 17th, 2006, 10:13 AM, said:

I mean...I like my girls hairy, but this is a little too much. Oh yeah, and the researchers at Harvard and MIT are probably not just making crap up to further the theory of evolution. Enjoy.http://www.cnn.com/2...t.ap/index.html

This will be another Creation vs. Evolution argument thread. I'll just say up front I'm not going to argue in this one. However, this one line says it all to me . . .The researchers hypothesize . . .

[timwakefield]

FOOSE1, on Wednesday, May 17th, 2006, 11:25 AM, said:

The researchers hypothesize . . .

Whereas the creationists base their beliefs on concrete scientific fact.Oh wait, they don't.

[mtdesmoines]

quote -- Daniel Lieberman, a professor of biological anthropology at Harvard, said, "My problem is imagining what it would be like to have a bipedal hominid and a chimpanzee viewing each other as appropriate mates, not to put it too crudely." -- unquoteThere's another egghead whose research would have benefitted from being in the parking lot of Sully's Tap three minutes after close.

[Swift_Psycho]

Ugh, I think the title summed it up nicely.

[SilentSnow]

well if it makes you feel any better, the "humans" from 9 to 5 million years ago are indistinguishable from a chimpanzee to the average person.see Ardipithecus ramidus. even lucy came a couple million years later.maybe the ardi did know the difference between species back then, but to a human observer i think we would hardly have been able to tell.

[Canada]

Well it would explain a lot about Matt ... and Michael Jackson

[DonkSlayer]

Yeah "human" might be a pretty crude term to use for these things.Makes sense though I guess.

[screech]

Hahah. The title is misleading.Human's weren't humans then. It's like saying polar bears and crocidiles used to **** because at some point approximately 3 billion years ago, they're dna went down seperate paths. Well maybe not quite, since we share extremely similar dna with chimps, but you get the idear.

[copernicus]

screech, on Thursday, May 18th, 2006, 4:39 PM, said:

Hahah. The title is misleading.Human's weren't humans then. It's like saying polar bears and crocidiles used to **** because at some point approximately 3 billion years ago, they're dna went down seperate paths. Well maybe not quite, since we share extremely similar dna with chimps, but you get the idear.

You need to reread the article, the title isnt at all misleading.

[DonkSlayer]

Ooooook, MODERN humans are different than the likes of these chimp-lovers.

[MisterB]

disgusting

[loogie]

Used to?

[HangukMiguk]

loogie, on Thursday, May 25th, 2006, 6:36 PM, said:

Used to?

after it caused this creation, they stopped:also, do realize the sheer coincidence you created on the front page by posting in this thread?