Jump to content

Human Evolution Cladogram - Need Input


megabass22

Recommended Posts

The problem is that there weren't any australopithecines in Florida (actually they were never outside Africa).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem is that there weren't any australopithecines in Florida (actually they were never outside Africa).

The thought experiment before us would be "How do we know that there weren't any australopithecines in Florida?

It is taken as a given that there were not, but by what means do we come to accept this as true?

That there is an complete lack of physical evidence would place this idea in the realm of 'extraordinary claim', and the burden of proof would fall to the claimant. He would need to disprove the null hypothesis, by producing physical evidence of their presence.

"There has been an alarming increase in the number of things I know nothing about." - Ashleigh Ellwood Brilliant

“Try to learn something about everything and everything about something.” - Thomas Henry Huxley

>Paleontology is an evolving science.

>May your wonders never cease!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ahhh, this stuff is always fun. :D

The argument above is a non-sequitur. It doesn't logically follow that the extinction of a species is evidence of the demise of it's prey.

Even if this were true (we've seen no evidence for such), correlation does not imply causation.

Also, the burden of proof lies upon the person making the claim. And there's a popular quote that goes something like this: "What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence." -Christopher Hitchens

Excellent points, Cris. :D

Once one wanders into the 'correlation DOES imply causation' foggy forest, many fantasies become 'possible'. ...then again, you won't be able to "see the forest for the trees." The sciences use different standards to determine ancestral relationships. ;)

The human mind has the ability to believe anything is true.  -  JJ

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Auspex: i do not deny that they are possible, but they are unlikely. Since Harry Pristis created an hypothesis based on no physical evidence (that no scientists accept) i will not add these two "species" to the evolutionary tree :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Foggy forest, indeed! Some of you are blinded to the truth by rigid adherence to scientific method. Man cannot live in a cage of facts when there is other truth to be found outside that cage. You must have faith.

There is so much circumstantial evidence for the aquatic ape and its descendants, the skunk apes, that many people feel the urge to believe. There are the morphological and behavioral characters that humans have inherited from an aquatic ancestor. These features are well-documented in revered texts -- you can even read about them on-line.

There is the well-understood phenomenon of 'rafting' of species across oceans. This is how australopithecines reached the SE of North America.

There is the extinction of the megalodon in the Plio-Pleistocene just at the time of mega-hurricanes which forced the australopithecines out of their beach habitat. (Witness the vast shell beds in SW Florida.)

There are the rare sightings (or 'smellings') of the Florida skunk ape. And there are reports in other SE states of elusive, man-like creatures.

* * * * *

This is faith. This is not testable (falsifiable in the Popperian sense). When my faith challenges your faith (in your facts), ridicule or other forms of hostility may ensue. But, I won't poke fun at you anymore.

.

.

This was an exercise.

http://pristis.wix.com/the-demijohn-page

 

What seest thou else

In the dark backward and abysm of time?

---Shakespeare, The Tempest

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Auspex: i do not deny that they are possible, but they are unlikely. Since Harry Pristis created an hypothesis based on no physical evidence (that no scientists accept) i will not add these two "species" to the evolutionary tree :)

I agree with you completely :) . Should anyone reveal acceptable proof of the existence of a New-World australopithecene, I am sure that you would most gladly add it to the cladogram!

"There has been an alarming increase in the number of things I know nothing about." - Ashleigh Ellwood Brilliant

“Try to learn something about everything and everything about something.” - Thomas Henry Huxley

>Paleontology is an evolving science.

>May your wonders never cease!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...This was an exercise.

And a good one, especially since it avoided the high drama oft associated with untestable notions.

"There has been an alarming increase in the number of things I know nothing about." - Ashleigh Ellwood Brilliant

“Try to learn something about everything and everything about something.” - Thomas Henry Huxley

>Paleontology is an evolving science.

>May your wonders never cease!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would believe that if a megalodon ate a skunk ape the megalodon would have a bad case of gastroitis.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Though australopithecines would have been interesting to see in Florida, i hoped you weren't serious, an excellent exercise indeed :)

Auspex: Of course any new discoveries would be added ASAP to the evolutionary tree :)

Edited by megabass22
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...