The Story of Us

[chesters1]

good job they had glasses

we had bears once possibly oz did as well?

Edited July 9, 2011 by chesters1

[Renrag39]

What more proof do you need? We have Mitochondrial DNA evidence tracking our migration.

And crossing the Bering in an Ice age, while a bit nippy, would be more than possible and as has already been stated, the movement southwards would also have been relatively easy.

 

The racial differences have occurred independently during and after the initial migration.

Black skinned people are black to protect them from harsh sun. Northern Europeans are white to absorb sun to produce Vitamin D. Japanese/'Eskimoes' have yellowish skin as they have a cultural tradition of living off of seafood high in Vitamin D. People of the Andes and Himalayas have more efficient red blood cells to cope with high altitude and reduced facial profiling to protect from damage from cold weather and harsh winds.

 

These 'racial traits' have evolved quickly but with purpose. Those that posessed them initially did better in their environment, were stronger and healthier and so made better breeding stock. It wouldn't take long for an entire area to be populated by people with similar traits.

A cultural example can be found in China where the female foot size is far smaller than is to be expected compared to stature. I do not mean the practice of foot binding, but culturally, smaller feet were desirable before this and so reduced 'overall' foot sizes in female ethnic Chinese. That took less than 2000 years to achieve.

 

Renrag

[corydoras]

i never said they were wrong i would just like to see proof they are right

But by your own admission there is no proof you will accept as being proof. Any 'proof' that is presented to you, you dismiss as mere opinion.

[corydoras]

What more proof do you need? We have Mitochondrial DNA evidence tracking our migration.

To chester's that's not proof, that's mere opinion. Edited July 9, 2011 by corydoras

[Renrag39]

Yeah I guess so Cory. If someone doesn't want to accept it they don't have to. But...

 

Chesters, What would you require as proof?

If you can't answer me that, then surely your contrarian stance is moot. Surely your viewpoint will blind you to what proof actually is.

No-one wins, no-one is right, everyone is wrong. About everything... Ever...

 

Renrag

[corydoras]

A cultural example can be found in China where the female foot size is far smaller than is to be expected compared to stature. I do not mean the practice of foot binding, but culturally, smaller feet were desirable before this and so reduced 'overall' foot sizes in female ethnic Chinese. That took less than 2000 years to achieve.

A similar trait can be observed today in male African Elephants. They have smaller tusks in comparison to their ancestors because big tusks are a bad thing to have these days. This adaptation has occurred over just a few generations. People who live at high altitudes have larger lung capacities and more haemoglobin in there blood to help them cope with the decreased levels of oxygen experienced living at high altitudes.

[corydoras]

Yeah I guess so Cory. If someone doesn't want to accept it they don't have to. But...

 

Chesters, What would you require as proof?

If you can't answer me that, then surely your contrarian stance is moot. Surely your viewpoint will blind you to what proof actually is.

No-one wins, no-one is right, everyone is wrong. About everything... Ever...

 

Renrag

It's like arguing with a thrawn wean.

[chesters1]

Yeah I guess so Cory. If someone doesn't want to accept it they don't have to. But...

 

Chesters, What would you require as proof?

If you can't answer me that, then surely your contrarian stance is moot. Surely your viewpoint will blind you to what proof actually is.

No-one wins, no-one is right, everyone is wrong. About everything... Ever...

 

Renrag

 

something 100% of "scientists" can prove ,its a bit pointless if half the scientists disagree ,its pointless if one disagrees

to me its simple if you say something is thus ,prove it .

when a research paper contains words such as "may" "could" "should" "perhaps" then its nothing more than supposition.

its not easy to prove i know that but doubting something thrusts forward research not holds it back ,if we all believed something how could we find out if it was true and not just a clever tall tale

 

its those that dont challenge the available "facts" (not truth even false is fact if enough believe it) we would would still be burning witches and kissing bishops rings

cory (and i) cannot prove god does not exist but it would be nice to have proof either way ,i like my 50-50 outlook ,i may just end up in heaven

Edited July 9, 2011 by chesters1

[Renrag39]

But unfortunately, even though say 99% of Scientists may agree on something, there may be 1%, who like you, have their own thoeries and throw a spanner in the works. Thus 100% can never be attained, whatever branch you subscribe to. Thus nothing can be proven.

 

I could get a Degree, (probably not but imagine I had the capacity) take a well known fact, deny it and provide a contrary theory and then you'd have to take that into account. I wouldn't even have to provide proof of any sort for you to have to acknowledge what I say as possibly true as I've presented another theory, even though its definitely not factual.

 

Renrag

[chesters1]

But unfortunately, even though say 99% of Scientists may agree on something, there may be 1%, who like you, have their own thoeries and throw a spanner in the works. Thus 100% can never be attained, whatever branch you subscribe to. Thus nothing can be proven.

 

I could get a Degree, (probably not but imagine I had the capacity) take a well known fact, deny it and provide a contrary theory and then you'd have to take that into account. I wouldn't even have to provide proof of any sort for you to have to acknowledge what I say as possibly true as I've presented another theory, even though its definitely not factual.

 

Renrag

 

its not just disagreeing even if your right its taking on the established "scientists" whose name depe4nds on them being believed ,and of course their sponsors with probably more to lose .

remember the chap that said something or other could exist in the gut ,how they pulled him apart ,how they laughed and scorned ,turned out to be true i believe

everything is possibly true ,proof takes the possible out of it

Edited July 9, 2011 by chesters1