Re: As long as Braun posts here, we're not going to see much sensible.

On Apr 19, 6:24 pm, Day Brown <daybr...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Apr 19, 6:27 pm, Lee Olsen <paleoc...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:> >That's not stupidity, just asinine.

And your adding to the flame war is not?

Thats a statement of fact Lee. It makes no judgement of the mental
capacity of the poster. I said that such a diagnosis was not tenable.
I frankly dont care what you think of Marc's posts, or what he thinks
of yours.

I have said several times we really dont have enuf reliable data to
warrent the passion in the remarks seen here. Hominids have lived in
both aquatic and savannah ecosystems for a long time, and I dont see
any way at this point to sort out which had more impact on evolution,
altho the exploitation of both makes clear economic sense. A smarter
hominid would figure that out.

I think Day is the only one that is making any sense in this
discussion. Once they had evolved the intelligence and consciousness
to be able to take advantage of less obvious opportunities in their
environment there is no reason why we would not expect them to begin
to venture from treed localities--their communal setting--into both
treeless savanna habitat and littoral (aquatic) haibitat.

Nitwit arguments always spring forth when the participants start with
nitwit assumptions. And nitwit assumptions spring forth from
fundamental misunderstandings of the nature of natural selection. One
of the sacred cows of conventional theory is that the environment
presented problems that could only be solved by rational tool usage.
This is an idiotic assumption. It has no basis in fact it only has
basis in unstated--and therefore untestable--beliefs.

The only process in nature that can possibly explain the selective
origins of hominid intelligence is group selection (communal
selection). The fact that so many people find groups selection
reprehensible is a political issue, not a scientific issue.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Question for DumbFuck Xtian Fundies About Earths Derivation
    ... I have no problem ignoring beliefs which are unsupported by evidence. ... no its just you really dont understand what the scientific method is ... Intelligent Design. ... artificial selection, the mechanism is exactly the same as natural ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Sweating and Brain Size
    ... effectively, and other hominid ... hominid populations (or species) would ... What's this got to do with selection for intelligence. ... So the reason the other species didn't evolve language is ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)
  • Re: Bipedalism in different substrates
    ... >> would the average hominid have to do this? ... >> decisions would have been an insignificant ... selective benefit of wading? ... > agency of selection - no more, ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)
  • Re: I dont see much hope for this team
    ... > - David Silva -heck, Guiza has as many assists as David Silva ... > (and also Xavi, might I add). ... > consistent enough and again I dont think his confidence ... > selection, ...
    (rec.sport.soccer)
  • Re: Ashes team:pre 2006/07 series pick
    ... Pietersen - marginal selection ahead of Hussey ... Harmison - a great bowler to have even if he fires once every 3 tests.Is Ponting not in form? ... I think we are talking of a form in test matches. ... I dont even think of replacing him, ...
    (rec.sport.cricket)
Quantcast