Log in

No account? Create an account
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.


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.