Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 06/25/2017 in all areas

  1. Its a minuscule stretch. If you can name a species of Homo that is more closely related to Homo Sapiens than Neanderthals? Im all ears! I can see differences between Homo Sapiens and Homo Neanderthals, absolutely. But when compared to say a Homo Sapiens skull and a Gorilla or a Gigantopethicus skull? It's minuscule. A Neanderthal unlike a Gorilla could walk into any bar in the US and order a beer without causing a riot. Danny Vendramini is not a scientist and his theory is fantasy. It's that simple. If he would like to state how he got to the conclusion Neanderthals possessed cat eyes or any of his other supposed super attributes? State them in a peer reviewed article. The only conjecture concerning Neanderthals is his theory. The rest? Is backed by science's best evidence to date. There is a massive difference between pure fantasy and science. Science by definition can and will change based on the newest evidence at hand. But it's based on real current evidence that is the best at any given moment in time. Just because science has blank spots in its vision doesn't mean we can just prop up anything we want with nothing to support it.
    1 point
  2. The thing to keep in mind is that we are discussing an ology. The definition of ology is "the study of". The definition itself acknowledges that the knowledge of any subject that ends in ology is a finite snapshot in an open-ended exploration. What was once believed to be true is often, and should often be, refined by what is learned today; and what is learned today should be expected to undergo future refinement. It's at any given moment an incomplete puzzle of necessity based on incomplete information and incomplete perspectives. Remember the three blind men describing the elephant.
    1 point
  3. Because it chaps their butts. Can't stand it. Can't tolerate that someone else - knows something they don't. Thomas Fuller said, "Zeal is only fit for wise men, but is found mostly in fools." Ever note who work this site with zeal?
    1 point
  4. Peter Byrne got $5,000,000 for Bigfootin in 1993 from the Academy of Applied Science. http://www.bigfootencounters.com/interviews/franzoni.htm Richard Greenwell in 1999 completed a well documented expedition into the Six Rivers National Forest. http://sbwm.erols.com/bdwilner/.../cryptozoo/sixrivers.html Regardless of newbie claims, serious money and expertise has been invested in the search for bigfoot.
    1 point
This leaderboard is set to New York/GMT-05:00
×
×
  • Create New...