Guest COGrizzly Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 "There's no logic to your argument." -fenris Just my opinion here, but I see the logic in what DDA is saying. No offense to you fenris. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest fenris Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 (edited) "There's no logic to your argument." -fenris Just my opinion here, but I see the logic in what DDA is saying. No offense to you fenris. I don't, just too many things have to come together and then the monkey has do a whole lot of adapting to end up with a squatchy looking end product. But the killer is the need for the relic population, what specific proof is there that there was one? 10,000 year old tooth power isn't going to cut it imo Edited March 16, 2011 by fenris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 Giganto has two species and four lower mandibles attributed to it. One reason Giganto may have moved is that one of it's dietary favorites was dying out... Bamboo. A viable population of pandas is between 50 and 60 with a 90 to 95% chance of survival on this factor alone. This is not a huge number for such a large animal. Other species have been listed a from 500 to 1,000 members needed, ones that don't have a long life span. I don't follow all of your posting... too many misspelled words. Where do you think monkeys originated from in the americas? The first primate-like mammals, or proto-primates, were roughly similar to squirrels and tree shrews in size and appearance. The existing, very fragmentary fossil evidence (mostly from North Africa) suggests that they were adapted to an arboreal way of life in warm, moist climates. They probably were equipped with relatively good eyesight as well as hands and feet with pads and claws for climbing. These proto-primates will remain rather shadowy creatures for us until more fossil data becomes available. Early primate-like mammals do not seem to have played an important role in the general transformation of terrestrial animal life immediately following the massive global extinctions of plants and animals that occurred approximately 65,000,000 years ago. The most dramatic changes were brought about by the emergence of large grazing and browsing mammals with tough hoofs, grinding teeth, and digestive tracts specialized for the processing of grass, leaves, and other fibrous plant materials. The evolution of these herbivorous mammals provided the opportunity for the evolution of the carnivorous mammals specialized to eat them. These new hunters and scavengers included the dogs, cats, and bears. Adaptive radiation was resulting in the evolution of new species to fill expanding ecological niches, or food getting opportunities. Most of these new animals were placental mammals. With the exception of bats, none of them reached Australia and New Guinea. This explains why they did not exist there until people brought them in recent times. South America had also drifted away from Africa and was not connected to North America after 80,000,000 years ago. However, around 20,000,000 years ago, South America reconnected with North America and placental mammals streamed in for the first time, resulting in the extinction of most of the existing marsupial fauna there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest fenris Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 Giganto has two species and four lower mandibles attributed to it. One reason Giganto may have moved is that one of it's dietary favorites was dying out... Bamboo. A viable population of pandas is between 50 and 60 with a 90 to 95% chance of survival on this factor alone. This is not a huge number for such a large animal. Other species have been listed a from 500 to 1,000 members needed, ones that don't have a long life span. I don't follow all of your posting... too many misspelled words. Where do you think monkeys originated from in the americas? The first primate-like mammals, or proto-primates, were roughly similar to squirrels and tree shrews in size and appearance. The existing, very fragmentary fossil evidence (mostly from North Africa) suggests that they were adapted to an arboreal way of life in warm, moist climates. They probably were equipped with relatively good eyesight as well as hands and feet with pads and claws for climbing. These proto-primates will remain rather shadowy creatures for us until more fossil data becomes available. Early primate-like mammals do not seem to have played an important role in the general transformation of terrestrial animal life immediately following the massive global extinctions of plants and animals that occurred approximately 65,000,000 years ago. The most dramatic changes were brought about by the emergence of large grazing and browsing mammals with tough hoofs, grinding teeth, and digestive tracts specialized for the processing of grass, leaves, and other fibrous plant materials. The evolution of these herbivorous mammals provided the opportunity for the evolution of the carnivorous mammals specialized to eat them. These new hunters and scavengers included the dogs, cats, and bears. Adaptive radiation was resulting in the evolution of new species to fill expanding ecological niches, or food getting opportunities. Most of these new animals were placental mammals. With the exception of bats, none of them reached Australia and New Guinea. This explains why they did not exist there until people brought them in recent times. South America had also drifted away from Africa and was not connected to North America after 80,000,000 years ago. However, around 20,000,000 years ago, South America reconnected with North America and placental mammals streamed in for the first time, resulting in the extinction of most of the existing marsupial fauna there. 1) Cite the source of this 2) Cite evidence for monkey evience that old in the America's Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 The quote is the link. It is an APA approved site as well. http://anthro.palomar.edu/earlyprimates/first_primates.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest fenris Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 The quote is the link. It is an APA approved site as well. http://anthro.palomar.edu/earlyprimates/first_primates.htm let me read the whole thing and I'll be back... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 To check on the Bering Land Bridge... reference: The Bering Land bridge, 1967, edited by David M. Hopkins, Stanford University Press The Last Giant of Beringia, The Mystery of the Bering Land Bridge , 2004, written by Dan O'Neill, Westviewpress Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest fenris Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 The quote is the link. It is an APA approved site as well. http://anthro.palomar.edu/earlyprimates/first_primates.htm So it's a link to a COmmunity College and mentions monkies beginning as squirrels and the like, and makes a single assertion of primate bones in the americas, no comment on where, by who, ho old by carbon dating or any other method, very vague sir. And your challenges remain the same: You need proof of a relic population of Giganto,and then you have to get them to America in breedable and evolvbale numbers, otherise they evolved from squirrels. Nope............ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 Other Origins, The Search for the Giant Ape in Human Prehistory by Russel Ciochon, John Olsen and Jamie James, on page 198 shows a map of Asia with the ranges of the giant panda and the Orangutan... with a little dot indicating a cave system (Lang Trang) where fossils of Giganto were found. Yes it is in what is now called N. Viet Nam. But surely you don't think their range was not equal to the other two species depicted in it? The authors didn't have a problem with that distribution. Now in the description of this map it is stated... "The current distribution of the giant panda and the orangutan, as opposed to their probable range in the Pleistocene, several hundred thousand years ago: human hunting and habitat destruction were the principal reasons for the decline of these animals. Was a similar scenario responsible for the extinction of Gigantopithecus?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest fenris Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 human hunting and habitat destruction were the principal reasons for the decline of these animals. Was a similar scenario responsible for the extinction of Gigantopithecus?" still need to get them into the future and over the straight, you are stretching a bit thin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 Another source of where monkeys in america came from can be found in this book... on this page... first paragraph... half way down it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 still need to get them into the future and over the straight, you are stretching a bit thin. No... I think you're arguments are getting less numerous. Everyone knows that nothing has been found about them existing contemporaneously. If a fossil is found in one of these cave systems both the future and route will have been answered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest fenris Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 Another source of where monkeys in america came from can be found in this book... on this page... first paragraph... half way down it. Maybe as a suggestion you should cite your sources at the same time of the argument instead after the fact, it would look better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 For a general discussion, I rarely feel the need to constantly prove points to the extent I must provide citations. These arguments have been made in the past... origin, ancestor and route... with referenced material. If I were writing a paper on the subject, of course I would include them, but this is just an online forum. I will keep your recommendation in mind though for the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest fenris Posted March 16, 2011 Share Posted March 16, 2011 No... I think you're arguments are getting less numerous. Everyone knows that nothing has been found about them existing contemporaneously. If a fossil is found in one of these cave systems both the future and route will have been answered. You assume a lot.... 1) You need it to actually happen 2) You have to make the fossil an ape; not clovis people, not a maybe, not more crap conjecture, you need an ape tooth, a big ape tooth, I will wish you luck with that 3) You have to prove it wasn't a hoax ala piltdown man and thats for starters... tally ho, sir. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts