Re: Homo erectus: racial variants of Homo sapiens?

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: Darren: "Re: Easy Money on the NET"
• Previous message: Marc Line: "Re: Is the Swastika evidence of a common origin?"
• Maybe in reply to: A Pagano: "Homo erectus: racial variants of Homo sapiens?"

A Pagano (apagano@fast.net) wrote:
: The following is posted on behalf of David Buckna <dabuckna@awinc.com>:
(Snip)
: With Leakey's words still ringing in my ears, _The New York Times_
: reported
: three days later that scientists had re-examined two major fossil sites
: in Java,
: and found that Homo erectus may have lived there as recently as "27,000
: years ago". (December 13, P.A1) This dating analysis, conducted by
: McMaster
: University geologists Henry Schwarcz and Jack Rink, will serve to cast
: further doubt on the so-called evidence for human evolution. Why? If it
: can
: be shown that Homo erectus lived at the same time as modern man, Homo
: erectus may be no more than racial variants of Homo sapiens. That is
: what
(snip)
: Assessment of Human Fossils", Baker Book House, 1993. According to
: Lubenow,
:
: from the neck down, the differences between Homo erectus and modern
: humans
: are minor. (Erectus skeletons are usually smaller than moderns, but not
: always.) And while Homo erectus tended to have thicker skulls and
: smaller
: brains, we now know the human brain's organization is such that small
: size
: does not affect intelligence (eg. some Australian aboriginees). In fact,
: the actual range in humans is said to be a remarkable 700 to 2200 cubic
: centimetres. Lubenow states that other characteristics of Homo erectus
: skulls can be accounted for by poor diet and disease (especially
: rickets),inbreeding, and harsh living conditions, and that most,if not
: all,
: of these skull-shape characteristics can still be found within the
: current
: human population.
(Snip)
Your hypothesis is that H. erectus is a varient of H. sap. You say racial
but in fact you then describe conditions i.e. inbreeding and
malnutrition which produce familial variation. You have presented no
specific data to refute the converse hypothesis that H. sap. might be a
racial or familial variation of H. erectus.

Regardless of which hypothesis you choose you have no way to disprove
the fact that selection has acted in the favor of H. sap. until you can
show a modern population where the predominant "racial" type is H. erectus.
H. sap. has proven to be a prolific breeder, while H. erectus, if still
present, is confined to the back wards of mental hospitals and the back
roads of insular civilizations. (BTW, I've seen individuals who would
appear to be H. erectus, H. habilis and H. sap. var. neandertalis. at our
local retarded citizens' center, however the comparison is flawed as they
have H. sap. jaw, tooth and acetabular anatomy. Resemblence is merely
cosmetic.)

In a nutshell you've not disproven the these events: A species
exists. Variation arises within it. Different family lines arise which
have different fitness. In the course of time some variations reproduce
more or less than others so as to change their population frequency.
Populations are separated by geography over time. As they are separated
sometimes different family lines in different isolated areas are the ones
which reproduce faster. Then within these subpopulations or races the entire
process occurrs again and again over geologic time periods. Like
shuffling a deck of cards the results are soon unlike the initial
condition. Once they are sufficiently unlike to the point where
interbreeding is no longer possible then "new" species have arisen.

You are anxiously trying to sort out information based on half
knowledge and half understanding in a circular argument of trying to
"prove" your religious theses by "proving" crank theories by their
correlation with your religion. It would be more rewarding to view
religion as a separate area of life, taking on the Biblical attribute of
Faith instead. Jesus said "My Kingdom is not of this world," and never
once had a recorded conversation on evolutionary theory. Or it might be
more rewarding to sit down and actually learn enough biology so it won't
frighten you and disturb your faith.

Georgie

##########################################################################

• Next message: Darren: "Re: Easy Money on the NET"
• Previous message: Marc Line: "Re: Is the Swastika evidence of a common origin?"
• Maybe in reply to: A Pagano: "Homo erectus: racial variants of Homo sapiens?"