RE: Sub-Saharan Africans Interbred With Nonhumans?

RE: Sub-Saharan Africans Interbred With Nonhumans? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

BoscoX -> RE: Sub-Saharan Africans Interbred With Nonhumans? (7/26/2017 4:16:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery He's acting out because he doesn't have an answer to why this topic is political. Except the school child's "I know something you don't know" game. That's Imax-level projection there, moose! Never stop posting, you are hysterical!!! [:D]

heavyblinker -> RE: Sub-Saharan Africans Interbred With Nonhumans? (7/26/2017 5:34:20 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BoscoX quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery Why does more clarification in discoveries about early human species strike you as politically charged and proof all the other posters are stupid? You are confused. That it is politically charged is abundantly obvious by the personal attacks I have taken here, many with claims that the attacks are for things that your little troll friends pretend or imagine about me (because there is nothing racist in any way about the article or the OP or anything that I have ever posted) And your stupidity is abundantly clear, as well, Why do I have to spell these things out for you Yes, it's not like any of your other troll threads almost immediately become a series of personal attacks... the same goes for all other threads you participate in. You're so innocent, polite and sensitive... I don't know why anyone would ever have a problem with you. This is the only thread I've seen here that has gone this way and you have never gotten this reaction before, therefore it must be PC liberals attacking science.

BoscoX -> RE: Sub-Saharan Africans Interbred With Nonhumans? (7/26/2017 5:56:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: heavyblinker quote: ORIGINAL: BoscoX quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery Why does more clarification in discoveries about early human species strike you as politically charged and proof all the other posters are stupid? You are confused. That it is politically charged is abundantly obvious by the personal attacks I have taken here, many with claims that the attacks are for things that your little troll friends pretend or imagine about me (because there is nothing racist in any way about the article or the OP or anything that I have ever posted) And your stupidity is abundantly clear, as well, Why do I have to spell these things out for you Yes, it's not like any of your other troll threads almost immediately become a series of personal attacks... the same goes for all other threads you participate in. You're so innocent, polite and sensitive... I don't know why anyone would ever have a problem with you. This is the only thread I've seen here that has gone this way and you have never gotten this reaction before, therefore it must be PC liberals attacking science. You're a moron [:D] Leftist trash (including yourself) began your lowlife personal attacks against me immediately after I posted my OP on page one, because that's the very best "debate" you fools ever have to offer I've never claimed to be innocent or polite, you fucking little trollish imbecile Now go upstairs and scream at your mom, little boy. Tell her to make you a sandwich

heavyblinker -> RE: Sub-Saharan Africans Interbred With Nonhumans? (7/26/2017 6:12:47 PM)
They attacked you because they know who you are. You're a shitty person and you say shitty things every time you post. You created a thread that misrepresented an article to make it sound like Sub-Saharan Africans are lesser beings. You then posited a totally imaginary liberal conspiracy to silence your version of the article. Now you have convinced yourself that this isn't the case. You have serious issues.

BoscoX -> RE: Sub-Saharan Africans Interbred With Nonhumans? (7/26/2017 6:21:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: heavyblinker They attacked you because they know who you are. You're a shitty person and you say shitty things every time you post. You created a thread that misrepresented an article to make it sound like Sub-Saharan Africans are lesser beings. You then posited a totally imaginary liberal conspiracy to silence your version of the article. Now you have convinced yourself that this isn't the case. You have serious issues. They attacked me because of who they are, they are leftist trash just like you, fool. [:D] That's the only kind of "debate" trash like you know how to do That, and copy & paste mindless propaganda... Call people "faggot" and "racist" for disagreeing on any of your moronic brainwash

BoscoX -> RE: Sub-Saharan Africans Interbred With Nonhumans? (7/26/2017 6:26:22 PM)
The topic: Can of worms here: I thought that "science" had to be more PC than this [image]https://media.eurekalert.org/multimedia_prod/pub/homepage/146099_homepage.jpg[/image] Clue to ancient "ghost species" of humans discovered in saliva A new discovery by a team at the University of Buffalo has revealed the genetic trace of a mysterious, and possibly undiscovered, ancient sub-species of human present in the modern-day genome of Sub-Saharan Africans. The discovery also indicates that interbreeding between ancient human species was a lot more widespread than previously thought. Scientists made the discovery while investigating the origins of the MUC7 protein. This is a mucin protein found in saliva that gives our spit its slimy consistency. A previous study indicated that MUC7 may have conferred an evolutionary advantage in early humans due to its ability in binding to microbes, helping the body rid itself of disease-causing bacteria. In studying the evolution of the protein, the team looked at the MUC7 gene across 2,500 modern human genomes. In a surprising discovery, a drastically different version of the MUC7 gene was found in the genomes of people from Sub-Saharan Africa. "When we looked at the history of the gene that codes for the protein, we see the signature of archaic admixture in modern day Sub-Saharan African populations," says Omer Gokcumen assistant professor of biological sciences in the University at Buffalo College of Arts and Sciences. This Sub-Saharan MUC7 gene variant was so distinctive that it led researchers to conclude that it was the result of interbreeding with another human species as recently as 150,000 years ago. "This unknown human relative could be a species that has been discovered, such as a subspecies of Homo erectus, or an undiscovered hominin," says Gokcumen. "We call it a 'ghost' species because we don't have the fossils." More

heavyblinker -> RE: Sub-Saharan Africans Interbred With Nonhumans? (7/26/2017 6:32:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BoscoX The topic: Can of worms here: I thought that "science" had to be more PC than this You were wrong. That's all.

BoscoX -> RE: Sub-Saharan Africans Interbred With Nonhumans? (9/2/2017 4:49:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BoscoX The last three paragraphs: quote: For Wood, though, Hublin’s use of “early modern humans” makes sense. And regardless of precise labels, he says, the Jebel Irhoud fossils have their place in the tapestry of humankind. “Three hundred thousand years ago, there is fossil evidence of a population that in a remarkable number of ways resembles modern humans, and you can make of that what you like,” says Wood. “You can either expand the definition of Homo sapiens to include [Jebel Irhoud], or these were creatures that were on their way to [becoming] modern humans.” (You can thank me later for clearing up a very small percentage of your vast ignorance) Another remarkable find, in the news: Footprint find on Crete may push back date humans began to walk upright HUMAN-like footprints have been found on an ancient sea shore. They shouldn’t be there. They’re in the wrong place at the wrong time. HUMAN-like footprints have been found stamped into an ancient sea shore fossilised beneath the Mediterranean island of Crete. They shouldn’t be there. Testing puts the rock’s age at 5.7 million years. That’s a time when palaeontologists believe our human ancestors had only apelike feet. And they lived in Africa. But a study into the Trachilos, western Crete, prints determines them to feature prominent human features and an upright stance. And that’s significant as the human foot has a unique shape. It combines a long sole, five short toes, no claws — and a big toe. In comparison, the foot of a Great Ape look much more like a human hand. And that step in evolution wasn’t believed to have taken place until some 4 million years ago... More

Musicmystery -> RE: Sub-Saharan Africans Interbred With Nonhumans? (9/2/2017 6:48:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: heavyblinker quote: ORIGINAL: BoscoX The topic: Can of worms here: I thought that "science" had to be more PC than this You were wrong. That's all. In a nutshell, yep.

vincentML -> RE: Sub-Saharan Africans Interbred With Nonhumans? (9/2/2017 6:58:46 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BoscoX quote: ORIGINAL: BoscoX The last three paragraphs: quote: For Wood, though, Hublin’s use of “early modern humans” makes sense. And regardless of precise labels, he says, the Jebel Irhoud fossils have their place in the tapestry of humankind. “Three hundred thousand years ago, there is fossil evidence of a population that in a remarkable number of ways resembles modern humans, and you can make of that what you like,” says Wood. “You can either expand the definition of Homo sapiens to include [Jebel Irhoud], or these were creatures that were on their way to [becoming] modern humans.” (You can thank me later for clearing up a very small percentage of your vast ignorance) Another remarkable find, in the news: Footprint find on Crete may push back date humans began to walk upright HUMAN-like footprints have been found on an ancient sea shore. They shouldn’t be there. They’re in the wrong place at the wrong time. HUMAN-like footprints have been found stamped into an ancient sea shore fossilised beneath the Mediterranean island of Crete. They shouldn’t be there. Testing puts the rock’s age at 5.7 million years. That’s a time when palaeontologists believe our human ancestors had only apelike feet. And they lived in Africa. But a study into the Trachilos, western Crete, prints determines them to feature prominent human features and an upright stance. And that’s significant as the human foot has a unique shape. It combines a long sole, five short toes, no claws — and a big toe. In comparison, the foot of a Great Ape look much more like a human hand. And that step in evolution wasn’t believed to have taken place until some 4 million years ago... More That is terrific news. New discoveries are mostly always exciting unless they are new and more horrible ways to die I guess. So what’s new in religion these days? Any of God’s footprints found roaming around in Alabama? You see, that’s why science is so much more exciting than that “old time religion.” And by the way, you’re the first one to mention political correctness so I don’t understand why you are bitching.

Page: << < prev 3 4 5 6 [7]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875