?

Log in

sg1 poke

This guy makes my eyes bleed

jenlev, where are you??? Can you believe this stuff???

I got this by following a link pointed out by scaperdeage that was posted on mock_the_stupid. I just cannot believe that anyone can pretend to believe all this garbled stuff. It is so, so beyond messed up, mushed up. My anthropologist inner person is cringing. And then the guy deletes comments that ask him for proof saying that it behooves the doubter to refute and that research, archeological materials can be faked, so aren't proof. GAAAAHHH

Here's why Man Could Not Have Evolved In Africa... oh, and this is posted on the anthropologist community. Gotta say the guy has guts.

The African theory came up when people discovered an old skeletal remain in Africa. The assumption thus was "if this is the oldest, it has to be the origin of the species." Since then, every nutcase who stumbled over that idea began to spout it. Since this is an anthropology group, which archaeology is very entrenched in as a field of study, then I am sure that these commonly known facts will show why "glamwhorebunni," a poster here who will not listen to anything because she claims to be a "climate expert," is wrong on this issue and how people who agree with her are wrong.

1. To start off, he claims that she knows that man had to come from Africa because she is a climate expert. This has a lot of flaws. First, man's closest relatives, Neanderthal, and Homo Erectus, were not found in Africa. They were found in Europe, Asia and SouthEast Asia. This shows that man, genetically, was unfit for the African environment, as their genetic counterparts, who also lacked claws, fur, et al, did not survive in such a warm terrain as Africa, then man likely could not. Since we do not have a genetic trait that separates us (such as canines having different fur structures for different climates) then we would have to exist in the same climates.

2. Man cannot, archaeologically speaking, survive in Africa as primitive. As anyone who studied Anthropology and archaeology, man needed tools in order to evolve. Before tools, they could only exist off eating staple foods. As these staple foods, which man survives on for nutrition, can only come from temperate conditions that have inundations (annual flooding), then they could only have genetically rose from a river valley. Since Africa only has one, the Nile (which is not considered Africa anthropologically, but connected to the Middle East), which has conditions in this way, then Man could not have originated in Africa.

3. Why couldn't man survive in the jungles of Southern Africa? Well, first of all, the other river valleys aren't jungles. Second, jungles only provide fruits, which man cannot survive strictly off of. Three, man did not have the tools in jungles to hunt for meat, and flint and other tools were brought into Africa, not made in Africa.

4. If man did come from Africa, and had food, then he would have spread out slowly through rabid increase, or suddenly leave. If he spread out, then there would be far more remains found in Africa, as the population density would have to be significantly higher than the population density now, which has increased greatly in the past hundred years.

5. If they did spread out, they would have stopped at the Nile or Euphrates. Instead, there are traces of integration with neanderthal and a spread over Tibet and into China. Since China's culture is significantly more complex and older than many of the Nile/Eurphrates cultures, it would seem strange that man would move from the first (Nile and Euphrates) and into China, after going through such a harsh terrain with little technology.

6. Darwin says that if man does evolve, then original man must have every trait that comes apparent, unless it is through genetic mutation, which is very rare. Thus, man, in Africa, would need to have the same traits found in all other cultures, and many of these traits would have kept the population of man in Africa down, denying any "spread" out of Africa based on over population.

There are many more reasons, but it should be obvious that those who are so stuck on Africa really have no clue about anthropological, socialogical, evolutionary, genetic, or archaeological methods or understandings on Man's origins.


All I can say is now I see why our school systems are failing.
Tags:

Comments

I used many of those same steps of logic in my geometry class.

(i.e. "proof!?! Its obvious...)

They failed me too.

;'(
Okay, I'm not an archaeologist or anthropologist, but my scientifically trained mind can find many flaws in his "proof". I would have felt better if he had used the Bible in his argument, at least I would know where he got his ideas that man didn't come out of Africa.

People can be very scary.
You should see the drama he's causing on another journal. According to him poor people should not be allowed to go to college and the reason coleges are dumbing down is cuz they're letting those damn poor people in! He also apparently doesn't believe in sex and made it very clear that penis size doesn't matter (but he'd liked everyone to know his is 7 1/2 inches).

He's also been trolling the journals of many of those who's been pointing out his stupidity. Poor little drama llama is on his way towards getting his ass banned.
Not meaning to really hijack, but I love how in this one, he's suddenly an expert in English, with at least an MA, if not a PhD. And he's an anthropology researcher? Damn! This guy is a genius.[/sarcasm]

I notice that his journal is now friends only after all the 'friends' he's been making. What a hypocrite. I can troll other people's journals, but they can't do that to me.
As someone put it, "You can be anyones on teh interwebs!"
*headdesk*

yikes.

ps. i couldn't decide what icon to use: "oh shit" "wtf" or "pffft". ;)

pps. edited to say i still can't decide.
I know I am not an anthropoligist, either. However, even I have watched enough DISC and TLC, etc. (along with a ton of reading) to be able to argue the error in each of these points.

What do you suppose it is which makes some people so afraid of science? What do our origins matter, as long as we apply the knowledge to better understanding our future as a species?

I'm afraid of spiders, but I don't yell and scream for a total eradication policy. Even the religious fanatics who argue against natural selection are a mystery to me. You would think as the complex mysteries in our orgins are slowly understood, while presenting even more questions, it would prove God even greater than we could have ever imagined. I never understood why many are happy with their God as a "Snap his fingers-type magician." It's the complexity which is truly spiritual.

I suppose ignorance (or the refusal to be educated) is more scary than spiders.
OK, I actually DO know how to spell, but I typed this reply very quickly. Forgive the errors :) But you get the gist, I hope :)
Christi, as usual, you are very wise. I think this "drama llama" (I love that ) is mentally ill. There are "groupies" in every science who read alot but do not process what they read. They then can spout lots of stuff back without comprehension and it ends up gobbledigook. I agree that if this guy had quoted the Bible at least we would know where he stood and could refute, but he is so stubborn and just shear dumb that I am surprised that the science guys will even engage him in discussion.

I also agree with your very cogent statement that it really doesn't matter where we came from but only where we are going--namely that through research and comprehension we can understand our past to better our future. Yes, the complexity of the universe is spiritual to me as well. Maybe that is why we are friends.
The science guys engage him in conversation because there is always hope of teaching someone a bit of truth. Isn't that the really scary thing...truth?

I believe some people are frightened of anything so much bigger than they are, they must fly against it. It's like hearing someone argue the moon landings were staged. It's just too big to be an achievement of man.

The origins of Man is the same thing. Either these people perceive it to be the vanity of trying to look into the mind of God (a scary thought for them...which it may or may not be) or they are stuck on some type of fantasy that we, as a species, are some super life form and could not have sprung from much more humble origin...another form of fear.

I have always hoped we would discover other forms of life in the cosmos. It won't diminish us in any way, but may lay to rest our singularity and hopefully, our inner conceit. Although, until we are able to decipher what our cat is thinking, I doubt we'll have much luck with any other sentient beings. Our conceit, as a species, is pretty huge.
This guy sounds like, as my hubby would say, "a half-bright waterhead." It sounds like he's copying pseudo-scientific drivel from another source and then badly pasting it together with a thin veneer of his own prose. There's no original thought here, but there does appear to be an agenda of sorts. Why is he so torqued out over the thought that man originated in Africa?

All I can say is now I see why our school systems are failing.

Well, if schools have to resort to a "warm body" approach to filling vacancies, then yes. We're in a teacher-crunch again here, in part because the best and brightest are going typically are choosing money and prestige over low entry wages, unpaid extra hours, and extra duty assignments that aren't even part of a teacher's contract. *sigh*
I am not a scientist BUT....you can be so brave and smart when you sit behind a keyboard and no one can see who or what you really are. *snecker* And a man who have to advertize how big they are is general NOT.