Previously Unknown Subspecies of Human Discovered in Siberia

All other historical discussion, ancient or modern, falls here.
Post Reply
User avatar
Peter Kirby
Site Admin
Posts: 4999
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:13 pm
Location: Santa Clara
Contact:

Previously Unknown Subspecies of Human Discovered in Siberia

Post by Peter Kirby » Sun Sep 03, 2017 12:37 pm

Wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denisovan

The jury's still out on whether we want to consider them a subspecies or separate species.
"... almost every critical biblical position was earlier advanced by skeptics." - Raymond Brown

neilgodfrey
Posts: 2899
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 4:08 pm

Re: Previously Unknown Subspecies of Human Discovered in Siberia

Post by neilgodfrey » Sun Sep 03, 2017 1:08 pm

Related, a BBC doco ... : Lost Tribes of Humanity

nrg3625-f1-768x434.jpg
nrg3625-f1-768x434.jpg (53.19 KiB) Viewed 181 times

User avatar
John T
Posts: 765
Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 8:57 am

Re: Previously Unknown Subspecies of Human Discovered in Siberia

Post by John T » Sun Sep 17, 2017 8:11 am

"A detailed comparison of the Denisovan, Neanderthal, and human genomes has revealed evidence for a complex web of interbreeding among the lineages."...wiki

What evidence?

Do you remember when DNA would prove that humans interbreed with chimps until real scientists used DNA and proved otherwise? Then it was Neanderthal DNA would prove they interbreed with humans until real scientists used DNA evidence and proved otherwise. Now the pseudo-scientists suggest that DNA evidence suggests that Denisovan interbreed with everyone else?

Suggestions/hunches are now considered proof of evolution?

I see the makings of another bad sci-fi movie. :facepalm:
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into."...Jonathan Swift

User avatar
Peter Kirby
Site Admin
Posts: 4999
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:13 pm
Location: Santa Clara
Contact:

Re: Previously Unknown Subspecies of Human Discovered in Siberia

Post by Peter Kirby » Mon Sep 18, 2017 7:19 pm

John T wrote:
Sun Sep 17, 2017 8:11 am
proof of evolution?
I didn’t even consider that angle. It’s easy to forget that some people are still creationists.
"... almost every critical biblical position was earlier advanced by skeptics." - Raymond Brown

User avatar
John T
Posts: 765
Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 8:57 am

Re: Previously Unknown Subspecies of Human Discovered in Siberia

Post by John T » Tue Sep 19, 2017 8:16 am

Peter Kirby wrote:
Mon Sep 18, 2017 7:19 pm
John T wrote:
Sun Sep 17, 2017 8:11 am
proof of evolution?
I didn’t even consider that angle. It’s easy to forget that some people are still creationists.
And there it is, the obligatory snide remark that anyone who questions the so-called science of evolution (e.g. Piltdown Man) is automatically a creationists.

Just like anyone that points out the falsification of data by so-called climate scientists (e.g. IPCC) must be a flat-earther.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government ... l-warming/

:lol:
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into."...Jonathan Swift

User avatar
Peter Kirby
Site Admin
Posts: 4999
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2013 2:13 pm
Location: Santa Clara
Contact:

Re: Previously Unknown Subspecies of Human Discovered in Siberia

Post by Peter Kirby » Tue Sep 19, 2017 3:57 pm

John T wrote:
Tue Sep 19, 2017 8:16 am
Peter Kirby wrote:
Mon Sep 18, 2017 7:19 pm
John T wrote:
Sun Sep 17, 2017 8:11 am
proof of evolution?
I didn’t even consider that angle. It’s easy to forget that some people are still creationists.
And there it is, the obligatory snide remark that anyone who questions the so-called science of evolution (e.g. Piltdown Man) is automatically a creationists.
I didn’t even consider that angle. It’s easy to forget that some people are just dumb.
"... almost every critical biblical position was earlier advanced by skeptics." - Raymond Brown

User avatar
John T
Posts: 765
Joined: Thu May 15, 2014 8:57 am

Re: Previously Unknown Subspecies of Human Discovered in Siberia

Post by John T » Wed Sep 20, 2017 5:20 am

Then consider this angle.

They want you to believe they found the missing link, based on a tooth and a finger bone that contains similar DNA as modern humans? Keep in mind, chimps share over 99% of our DNA. It is more likely that Denisovan is more closely related to chimp/bonobo than human, if it existed at all.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/arti ... he-genome/

Sorry Peter, the jury is not still out, the district attorney doesn't even have enough evidence to call for a grand jury to begin with.
But keep digging, perhaps one day they will find a skull or a pelvic bone to pull DNA from, then get back to me.

To paraphrase Francis Bacon...Arrogant people tend to believe what they want to believe based on their own world view and although they feel their opinion is based on science, it is nothing more than an idol of the tribe.


"I know you won't believe me, but the highest form of Human Excellence is to question oneself and others."...Socrates
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into."...Jonathan Swift

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: austendw, Baidu [Spider], John T and 1 guest