Ed

Since there is evidence that homo erectus lived as recently as 12,000 years ago some of that cave art could very well be theirs. And for Neanderthal artwork go to the American Museum of Natural History in NY and you will see some of theirs.


[b] No, what you are doing is similar to counting the tree rings on two trees to look for drought periods in the past and not realizing they come from two totally different ecosystems. You are just assuming that they come from the same ecosystem because their appearance is similar but you have no empirical evidence that they are from the same ecosystem. And if you go back far enough in the rings you will find a drought period that appears to match and so you say Aha! This proves the drought occured at such and such a time!

Duvenoy

"No, what you are doing is similar to counting the tree rings on two trees to look for drought periods in the past and not realizing they come from two totally different ecosystems. You are just assuming that they come from the same ecosystem because their appearance is similar but you have no empirical evidence that they are from the same ecosystem. And if you go back far enough in the rings you will find a drought period that appears to match and so you say Aha! This proves the drought occured at such and such a time!"
-------------------------

Now wait a minute. This is a little out of my field of endevor, but aren't all of the trees that bore samples are taken from carefully documented; dates and location and so forth? Also, ice core samples are located by the Global Satilite(sp?) Whatsis. So, I say, "Aha! Looks good!"

doov

lpetrich

However, cave painting starts happening only when Homo sapiens (sapiens) shows up -- I don't know of any evidence of older cave painting. If Homo erectus could paint caves, then why didn't any of them ever paint caves over most of the million-plus years of their existence?

Except that tree-ring researchers are careful to keep track of where their trees had come from. At least if they are competent ones. If they are not careful about doing so, the journal referees will likely compose some nasty rejection letters. It's strange that some supposedly great wildlife biologist would be unaware of what's supposed to go into a professional publication.

As to whether the human and chimp versions of some protein or RNA strand have the same function, that can be tested.

I haven't read any tree-ring-analysis papers any time recently, but papers on other subjects that I've read are consistent with such care.

Global Positioning Satellites. (GPS)

Oolon Colluphid

Oh really? How come then, when asked how post-flood creatures got from Ararat to their present locations (and only there), eg koalas to Australia, you said (9 April, page 10 of this thread):

and when I pointed out that Gondwanaland’s split didn’t explain Laurasian biogeography; maybe you meant Pangaea? you said:

Please therefore:

1. provide evidence that Pangaea, which is generally considered to have broken up around 180mya, only actually split up 2mya. Why do geologists consistently find a figure ninety times as long?

2. alternatively, explain present biogeography.

3. explain how a 2mya flood ties in with the bible. Luke 3:23-36 is pretty specific on how many generations there were between Noah and Jesus: he lists 66 generations between them. Well, we know from the bible that those folks lived longer than us, anything up to 900. But that’s a bit young: simple maths shows they apparently averaged 30,000 years old when each generation reproduced.

Or are there some generations missing from Luke’s list? (Why?) Okay, if each generation reproduced at, say, age 500, then there should be 4,000 generations from Noah to Jesus. Not 66. How accurate is a genealogy that misses at least 3,900 -- or over 98% -- of the members? How come you trust the bible’s accuracy in Gen 1&2?

(Of course, if geologists have it right with their 180my date, then there’s either at least 360,000 generations (reproducing at age 500, remember) missing from Luke, or those 66 generations lived at least 2.73 million years each.)

Failure to resolve these conundrums will, I think, conclusively show that your hypothesis is manure.

TTFN, Oolon

Duvenoy

Global Positioning Satellites. (GPS)


I knew that! It was late and I was too lazy to look up the spelling. Thanks, ip for doing it for me.

doov

Ed

No, gorillas, chimps, and orangs are members of the family Pongidae. Humans are Hominidae.

lpetrich

I wonder what Ed thinks of <a href="http://animaldiversity.ummz.umich.edu/chordata/mammalia/primates/hominidae.html" target="_blank">this page</a>, which lists gorillas, chimps, and orangutans among the Hominidae. I've seen Pongidae merged into Hominidae in some other places also.

So what's so special about Pongidae vs. Hominidae?

Duvenoy

Let's give it up for Ed!

He did it! He has led us through this amazing, informative, and wonderously tedious thread clear out to it's twentith page! Hip, hip, HOORAY!!

(Duvenoy applauds hystericly)

But what does it all mean? When will it end?

doov

Ed

No, 65 mya there were no deep oceans.

Duvenoy

"No, 65 mya there were no deep oceans."
---------------------------

If true, so what? The coelacanth's lineage goes back a LOT farther than a mere 65 mil. Go to <a href="http://www.dinofish.com" target="_blank">www.dinofish.com</a> for more info on this remarkable survivor. And give the guys a little contribution, won't you please. I like the Dinofish tees.

Even the coelacanth has evolved to keep up with changing conditions, although the changes are not obvious (adapting to different tempertures and so forth. Today, it is a mid-depth predator in the 300 to 600 foot range, usually below reefs.

The coelacanth is not one of the lobe fins that came ashore in the Devonian. Rather, it might be compared to Neandertal Man, a branch in the tree that went it's own way, as did many. Unlike Neandertal, it survived.

Were there really no deep oceans back in the Cretatious? I've not read anything about that. Where might I find that info?

doov

[ July 06, 2002: Message edited by: Duvenoy ]</p>