A Question to the Intelligent People of ATS: How old are we?

Originally posted by PsyMike91
reply to post by coven83

 

The reason we stopped evolving....theres no reason to adapt anymore. We have everything we need in society. I could see us losing our pinky fingers though as the years go on...such a pointless appendage.

edit on 25-7-2012 by PsyMike91 because: typo

What is the point of pubic hair?

The picture is definitely a photoshop job.. And that is one seriously deformed human footprint at that lol..

Originally posted by unityemissions
reply to post by rhinoceros

 

Still, I don't think it's as reliable as the establishment likes to believe.

I could be wrong.

So what exactly are you basing your evaluation of radiometric dating on?

The reason we stopped evolving

Actually we haven't stopped evolving.. A simple search or recent changes in the human genome will tell you that. And evolution doesn't mean improving, it simply means "change", and adapting to a given environment. And it doesn't mean that will result in success either. Just ask the dodo bird.., wait, you can't..

Originally posted by TheJackelantern

The reason we stopped evolving

Actually we haven't stopped evolving.. A simple search or recent changes in the human genome will tell you that. And evolution doesn't mean improving, it simply means "change", and adapting to a given environment. And it doesn't mean that will result in success either. Just ask the dodo bird.., wait, you can't..

After our species has remained anatomically the same for 50 million years we can resume the question whether we're changing or not. Saying our change has stopped because our anatomy has remained more or less the same for a few hundred thousand years, is pretty stupid..

Originally posted by taccj9903

Originally posted by PsyMike91
reply to post by coven83

 

The reason we stopped evolving....theres no reason to adapt anymore. We have everything we need in society. I could see us losing our pinky fingers though as the years go on...such a pointless appendage.

edit on 25-7-2012 by PsyMike91 because: typo

What is the point of pubic hair?

The real question should be, what's the point of body hair? Don't forget humans aren't nearly as hairy as they and their ancestors once were. Since we used our intelligence to create clothing and shelter, our need for body hair was pretty much non existent and has been slowly vanishing as its no longer a necessary survival trait. Pubic hair along with other body hair was probably useful in protecting our skin from the sun as well as other factors that could do us harm.

Originally posted by Barcs
The real question should be, what's the point of body hair? Don't forget humans aren't nearly as hairy as they and their ancestors once were. Since we used our intelligence to create clothing and shelter, our need for body hair was pretty much non existent and has been slowly vanishing as its no longer a necessary survival trait. Pubic hair along with other body hair was probably useful in protecting our skin from the sun as well as other factors that could do us harm.

I believe the rationale for losing the body hair was the lifestyle of our ancestors in the savannah, heat exchange and all that.. Elephants, rhinos, hippos, and such, aren't that hairy either. Pubic hair might be a relic of for example sexual selection, or perhaps it provides a little extra safety for some critical parts and was selected for by nature..

Originally posted by john_bmth

Originally posted by unityemissions
reply to post by rhinoceros

 

Still, I don't think it's as reliable as the establishment likes to believe.

I could be wrong.

So what exactly are you basing your evaluation of radiometric dating on?

Intuition...the fact that theories and laws in science are often found to be false as the years roll on...or that everything is only known and experienced in relation to each other...

I simply find that we like to place exactness in science often times where it doesn't exist...just so our puny minds can fake some sort of control over our environment.

What I saw in the class was a lightning quick image of molecules being excited and "speeding up" as the temperature increased, and I somehow applied this notion to radioactive decay....meaning I found that it was variable depending on factors we may not be aware, or simply are no longer considering.

Yea, it's a stretch, but sometimes I simply trust my intuition regardless of if I can logically back it up or not.

I could be wrong.

To add a little more:

I think the dating works well in controlled environments, and in the short term, but the more time is allowed to pass, the more variance in environmental circumstances, the less stable the rate of decay, and the less reliable the data.

I'm not sure this can't fit in with the fact that it's used in many fields. Where it's applied in the short term to make calculations, it works pretty well. When it's applied to try and date super old objects, who would know the difference? I do think there is some confusion on a lot of things found in history, and perhaps this variance is all that's needed to account for it.

Originally posted by unityemissions

Originally posted by john_bmth

Originally posted by unityemissions
reply to post by rhinoceros

 

Still, I don't think it's as reliable as the establishment likes to believe.

I could be wrong.

So what exactly are you basing your evaluation of radiometric dating on?

Intuition...

Yup, I trust the scientific evidence accumulated over the decades by experts in their fields over someone's uninformed "intuition" any day of the week.

reply to post by john_bmth


Cool.

Good luck with that!

What I've noticed of those who need "empirical evidence" so badly, is they miss a ton of things because of it.



Enjoy the Box!

reply to post by unityemissions


Why are you using this technology to communicate with me? Wouldn't a cave me more apt? You could shun all of the benefits of science and use your "intuition" to heal yourself and provide you with a life of luxury.

By the way, you can't "think outside the box" if you lack the most basic understanding of what a box is.

reply to post by john_bmth


I'm sorry, but that post made absolutely no sense.



You seem to have a terribly confused understanding of my stance.

I see no reason to try and explain it to you.

Enjoy your day!

reply to post by unityemissions

Intuition...the fact that theories and laws in science are often found to be false as the years roll on...or that everything is only known and experienced in relation to each other...

Can you provide a list of scientific facts that have been proven false?

Science changes and updates as new information arises, but most of the time the change is in the minor details like date estimates. Show me a major fact or scientific theory that's been proven false and please don't say that we used to think the sun revolved around the earth. This was a religious view, not a scientific one.

reply to post by Barcs


I'll give you a few links that talk about it.

All the time I'm going to spend on it, sorry!

This was just an easy google search away with the search terms, "scientific facts that have been proven wrong"

1

2

3

reply to post by unityemissions


What happened to your intuition? Has it failed you already?

reply to post by unityemissions

This was just an easy google search away with the search terms, "scientific facts that have been proven wrong"

*Buckles seatbelt*

1

2

3

Do you not even bother to read your own links? The first and second linkl is about scientific theories and that second link contains outright false information. But even if it is taken at face value, you have still failed to grasp the difference between a scientific theory and a scientific fact and how these links demonstrate this quite clearly. Did your intuition not warn you of this intellectual blunder you made? The third link even contradicts your assertion on multiple levels:

Next, your phrase “proven wrong” creates a difficulty. As works in
progress, many scientific theories just keep getting revised. For
example, we base our current evolutionary theory of when humans
diverged from apes on the fossil record. But every time a new fossil
is found, the date gets pushed back.

And on that list there is not one scientific fact that was "disproved", that you cannot differentiate between a scientific fact, a scientific hypothesis and a scientific theory only serves to make you look more ignorant.

So, all in all, your embarrassingly bad attempt of a rebuttal by googling "science that was proved wrong" and then pasting the first few links has highlighted even further how little you actually know about the scientific fields you dismiss out of hand. I'm surprised your "intuition" did not prevent you from failing so hard at the task at hand.

It would appear that given your usage of the term, "intuition" is a synonym for wilful ignorance.

Originally posted by unityemissions
reply to post by Barcs

 

I'll give you a few links that talk about it.

All the time I'm going to spend on it, sorry!

This was just an easy google search away with the search terms, "scientific facts that have been proven wrong"

1

2

3

This is an intellectually bankrupt argument that literally self-admits it is.. Now that is pathetic.. And we are curious of what scientific work have you done, or can you site that magically proves empirically that all of science to which you can search have been "proven wrong".. All while you sit on a computer digitizing your ignorance on a forum to which was literally made through scientific academia. Ahh but of course anyone that rides on ignorance, preys on it, and survives by it is going to make the argument you just made. After all, ignorance is threatened by getting an actual education, and that is what people like yourself fear the most. So now that you have made yourself irrelevant, why are you here? To prove how irrelevant you are? Why isn't that precious! "/

After our species has remained anatomically the same for 50 million years we can resume the question whether we're changing or not. Saying our change has stopped because our anatomy has remained more or less the same for a few hundred thousand years, is pretty stupid..

I agree, Last time I checked, Asians don't look anatomically identical to Africans, and either don't Anatomically look identical to Caucasians ect. And anatomically is not the only form result of evolutionary processes. And to even say we were the same for the last 50 million years would be an utterly laughable joke. They must really think people are stupid, or they are really are this uneducated in this subject. :/

I also find it interesting that a poster links to a page that discusses science hypothesis's as proven wrong as an argument when science is the one that proved them wrong. It's like they didn't even stop and think before posting it, or bothered to read why and how they are proven wrong.. It's a total face palm in epic proportions.

EVOLUTION

1. Goosebumps :Humans get goose bumps when they are cold, frightened, angry, or in awe. Many other creatures get goose bumps for the same reason, for example this is why a cat or dog’s hair stands on end and the cause behind a porcupine’s quills raising. In cold situations, the rising hair traps air between the hairs and skin, creating insulation and warmth. In response to fear, goose bumps make an animal appear larger – hopefully scaring away the enemy. Humans no longer benefit from goose bumps and they are simply left over from our past when we were not clothed and needed to scare our own natural enemies. Natural selection removed the thick hair but left behind the mechanism for controlling it.

2.Jacobson’s Organ:Jacobson’s organ is a fascinating part of animal anatomy and it tells us a lot about our own sexual history. The organ is in the nose and it is a special “smell” organ which detects pheromones (the chemical that triggers sexual desire, alarm, or information about food trails). It is this organ that allows some animals to track others for sex and to know of potential dangers. Humans are born with the Jacobson’s organ, but in early development its abilities dwindle to a point that it is useless. Once upon a time, humans would have used this organ to locate mates when communication was not possible. Single’s evenings, chat rooms, and bars have now taken its place in the process of human mate-seeking.

3.Extra ear muscle : Also known as the extrinsic ear muscles, the auriculares muscles are used by animals to swivel and manipulate their ears (independently of their head) in order to focus their hearing on particular sounds. Humans still have the muscles that we would once have used for the very same reason – but our muscles are now so feeble that all they can do is give our ears a little wiggle. The use of these muscles in cats is very visible (as they can nearly turn their ears completely backwards) – particularly when they are stalking a bird and need to make the smallest movements possible so as to not frighten its future meal.

4.Plantaris Muscle :The plantaris muscle is used by animals in gripping and manipulating objects with their feet – something you see with apes who seem to be able to use their feet as well as their hands. Humans have this muscle as well, but it is now so underdeveloped that it is often taken out by doctors when they need tissue for reconstruction in other parts of the body. The muscle is so unimportant to the human body that 9% of humans are now born without it.

5. Wisdom Teeth : Early humans ate a lot of plants – and they needed to eat them quickly enough that they could eat a sufficient amount in one day to get all of the nutrients they needed. For this reason, we had an extra set of molars to make the larger mouth more productive. This was particularly essential as the body lacked the ability to sufficiently digest cellulose. As evolution made its selections, our diets changed, our jaws grew appropriately smaller, and our third molars became unnecessary. Some human populations have now all but completely stopped growing wisdom teeth, while others have almost 100% likelihood of developing them.

6.Third Eyelid: If you watch a cat blink, you will see a white membrane cross its eye – that is called its third eyelid. It is quite a rare thing in mammals, but common in birds, reptiles, and fish. Humans have a remnant (but non-working) third eyelid (you can see it in the picture above). It has become quite small in humans, but some populations have more visible portions than others. There is only one known species of primate that still has a functioning third eyelid, and that is the Calabar angwantibo (closely related to lorises) which lives in West Africa.

7. Coccyx (human Tail) The coccyx is the remnant of what was once a human tail. Over time we lost the need for a tail (as tree swinging was replaced by hanging out at the local water hole grunting neanderthal gossip), but we did not lose the need for the coccyx: it now functions as a support structure for various muscles and a support for a person when he sits down and leans back. The coccyx also supports the position of the anus.

8. Appendix: The appendix has no known use in modern humans and is often removed when it becomes infected. While its original use is still speculated on, most scientists agree with Darwin’s suggestion that it once helped to process the cellulose found in the leaf-rich diet that we once had. Over the course of evolution, as our diet has changed, the appendix became less useful. What is particularly interesting is that many evolutionary theorists believe that natural selection (while removing all of the abilities of the appendix) selects larger appendices because they are less likely to become inflamed and diseased. So unlike the little toe, which may eventually vanish and is equally useless, the appendix is likely to stay with us for a long time – just hanging around doing nothing.