Manosphere Amud - The Balloon Loon, Loveshy Extraordinaire

  • 🐕 I am attempting to get the site runnning as fast as possible. If you are experiencing slow page load times, please report it.
And can you pinpoint the demarcation in the fossil record where the right side magically turned into the left side after Africans came into Europe?
This is something that is still being investigated. The thing with science is that it isn't static. Within the past 2 weeks a new fossil was found that pushes the origins of the Homo genus back by another 500,000 years than previously thought. I hate to break it to you, but your skull theory is neither revolutionary or unique, and is consistently debunked. Nor does it allow for things like this: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/...-evolution-fossil-jaw-ethiopia-olduvai-gorge/
 
And can you pinpoint the demarcation in the fossil record where the right side magically turned into the left side after Africans came into Europe?
I cannot, because it didn't. As has been repeatedly stated, homo sapiens did not descend from neanderthals. We coexisted. We interbred. Also? If you are so convinced that neanderthals were superior and modern humans are a "degradation", the same site that gave me that image also proves that idea wrong. "A Neanderthal’s skull (right) was larger than a human’s (left) and had a similar inner volume for mental capacity, but new research indicates less of it was devoted to higher-order thinking." "...a greater percentage of the Neanderthal brain seems to have been devoted to vision and control of their larger bodies, leaving less mental real estate for higher thinking and social interactions."

Hey, maybe you are a neanderthal after all, since higher thinking is such a difficulty for you.
 
Why would that make any difference?

Because you're claiming that "modern humans" came into Europe from Africa about 30,000 years ago and replaced the Neanderthals, with only 1-4% interbreeding. So, when we look at the fossil record, we should see Neanderthals up until 30,000 years ago, then starting at 30,000 years ago, the fossils should look the same as modern Europeans.

As the pictures I posted clearly demonstrate, that is not what we see in any way, shape, or form. Can you pinpoint, on my skull chart, where "Neanderthal" ends and "human" begins? There should be a clear demarcation.
 
3. Yeah, because I didn't pay hundreds of thousands of dollars for a piece of scienmagistical paper, I must be incapable of examining pieces of bone with my eyes and making note of what they look like.

@Amud the reason we pay money for 'scienmagistical' is because it has a much higher chance of being empirical and factual. We get a range of professionals trained in their fields to analyse data and check conclusions. That's how science works.

I must be incapable of examining pieces of bone with my eyes and making note of what they look like.

Exactly. Your eyes may deceive you.

Btw are you a global warming denier? I'm Just curious.
 
If we assume that Neanderthals and "humans" are different SPECIES, then we would expect their skulls to look different at a glance. We shouldn't need fancy computer data to determine who belongs to what species. There should be a clearly observable, visual demarcation between the Neanderthal skulls and the "human" skulls. As I have demonstrated, there is no such thing.
Additionally, as I've mentioned before it is flawed for you to look at structures such as the skull for "likeness" when we have DNA to compare, which is much more accurate way to determine evolutionary relationships.

If humans were descended from Neanderthals, you would expect that their DNA would not differ by much more than the standard differences between humans. This is not the case. Please read this article. http://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence...nd-neanderthals/neanderthal-mitochondrial-dna
 
1. I got them off Google images. I will name them.

*La Ferrassie 1
*Saint Cesaire 1
*Predmosti 2
*Solutre 1
*Borreby
*Corded Ware skull
*Modern European skull

You can look up the dates if you are so inclined.

2. If we assume that Neanderthals and "humans" are different SPECIES, then we would expect their skulls to look different at a glance. We shouldn't need fancy computer data to determine who belongs to what species. There should be a clearly observable, visual demarcation between the Neanderthal skulls and the "human" skulls. As I have demonstrated, there is no such thing.

3. Yeah, because I didn't pay hundreds of thousands of dollars for a piece of scienmagistical paper, I must be incapable of examining pieces of bone with my eyes and making note of what they look like.

1. Thats incredibly helpful thanks. It's good to know you have all the data to hand before you make a claim (!)

2. No. Firstly there is something called a cryptic species, which is a species that cannot be easily distinguished from a relative by eye. More generally a species is defined by whether it can breed with potential conspecific individuals, than by what it looks like. What exactly a species is gets very complicated, but your defintion is vague enough to be unworkable.

3. You can make an observation with your eyes, but that doesn't mean it's going to be right. The scientific method helps us determine the correct conclusion. As I said the evolution of bone shapes over time is incredibly complex and difficult to model.
 
And can you pinpoint the demarcation in the fossil record where the right side magically turned into the left side after Africans came into Europe?

Speciation has never, ever been observed in action, so no, there wouldn't be a pinpoint. We co-existed and Homo sapiens outcompeted Neanderthals.

Also what genetic benefits do you have? You've been asked this three times by me and another user. I'm curious as to why you think women should choose you over other men.
 
And if we're not descended from Neanderthals, then how does Pete Postlethwaite exist?
He doesn't. (:_(
Because you're claiming that "modern humans" came into Europe from Africa about 30,000 years ago and replaced the Neanderthals, with only 1-4% interbreeding. So, when we look at the fossil record, we should see Neanderthals up until 30,000 years ago, then starting at 30,000 years ago, the fossils should look the same as modern Europeans.

As the pictures I posted clearly demonstrate, that is not what we see in any way, shape, or form. Can you pinpoint, on my skull chart, where "Neanderthal" ends and "human" begins? There should be a clear demarcation.
Again, what difference does that make? Why is this important/significant to you?
 
Speciation has never, ever been observed in action, so no, there wouldn't be a pinpoint. We co-existed and Homo sapiens outcompeted Neanderthals.

Also what genetic benefits do you have? You've been asked this three times by me and another user. I'm curious as to why you think women should choose you over other men.

If speciation has never been observed, then how can you say that humans replaced Neanderthals? That would be a transition between two species in Europe, right?

How can I explain what my genetic benefits are? It should be obvious at this point.
 
So, when we look at the fossil record, we should see Neanderthals up until 30,000 years ago, then starting at 30,000 years ago, the fossils should look the same as modern Europeans.

That would only be the case if there was a mass genocide of homo neanderthalis that coincided with the homo sapiens migration.

How can I explain what my genetic benefits are? It should be obvious at this point.

They're not. We only know you lack intelligent and critical thinking skills, and last time I checked I don't think anyone would call that a "genetic benefit."
 
Also -
skulls2.jpg


This dude's skull barely even superficially resembles a neanderthal skull. His cranium is smaller and more rounded. His jaws are dramatically smaller. He hasn't got the pronounced bony eye ridge. And this is only comparing shape, completely ignoring actual scale difference. Or - you know - DNA.
 
How can I explain what my genetic benefits are? It should be obvious at this point.
Smooth, can I get your Tinder? I've always dreamed of reproducing with a man who puts foreign bodies into his nose and argues on forums about outdated pseudoscience.

If speciation has never been observed, then how can you say that humans replaced Neanderthals
Speciation has never been observed. That is a fact. What we do have is the fossil record, which show us that we share a common ancestor with neanderthalis but we are not directly decended from them.
 
I think you 'forgot' my post again:

Thank you for answering.

Others have covered the issues with your answer to no.4 so i won't.

Instead id like to query your answer to 5.

If women have a choice in who they marry then surely the burden is on you toconvince them you are a good choice?

People in reality are not all that shallow, if you genuinely were better than mr thundercock you would get more positive female attention. I'm afraid the only person that can be blamed for your failure in love is yourself. I realise this will not be a pleasant thought but if you think it through the logic is sound. Provided you believe women are as intelligent as men.

Would be interested in hearing your thoughts?
 
Back