Skip to main content

TR Memescape

  • TalkRational: One of the five most chickenshit supposedly rationalist sites on the Internet.

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Faid

1
BTW dave, I found your new wallpaper:

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Read the article while you're at it:

How Martin Luther Paved the Way for Donald Trump
2
"So um, could you just check to see, that is make sure that the Russians don't have that, I mean, confirm that they don't have that thing that definitely doesn't exist? You know, to ease my wife's mind."
3
Trump insists lawyer Michael Cohen will not 'flip' against him as he hits out at former aide


OK. I believe I speak for the rest of the planet when I ask...

...'Flip' about what?

You can't "flip against" someone if you don't have anything against them in the first place.
4
Dave, did you read the article I linked to you? Do you believe it? Find it plausible even?
5
Also

Quote
For me personally, I continue to be ridiculed for writing and speaking about a vision I had regarding the 40 days after the resurrection.
Ohhhhkay.
8
And now Trump is actually defending Flynn again. Amazing.

Does he have any sane advisors left? Does he listen to them? Or, if he does, is their advice meant to protect him, or...

:popcorn:
10
Well that is that. The Out of Africa theory does not stand up. You folks can continue your "yes but" excuses and insults.
L0.

Omo I.

Bye. :wave:
11
Just take the phone off of me
I just can't use it anymore
There's a yellow cloud following me
Feels like I'm knocking on Mueller's door

Ima put the remote to the ground
I can't watch Fox news anymore
That yellow cloud is coming down
Feels like I'm knocking on Mueller's door
12
Copying my post from the Dave Hawkins MAGA vanity thread...
https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/04/why-were-republicans-so-desperate-to-release-the-embarrassing-comey-memos-heres-one-explanation.html

This whole thing is worth reading, but tldr, Republicans pushed hard to release Comey memos that say Trump talked about Putin's hookers, apparently because of a likely inaccurate Fox News report that if it were accurate might possibly justify Trump's dumb tweet about Comey leaking classified information.

If that's true, it's hard to think of a better example of this...

https://splinternews.com/the-long-lucrative-right-wing-grift-is-blowing-up-in-t-1793944216
You gotta be fucking kidding me.

Ok, either Trump's arrogant stupidity is highly contagious, or republicans are now actively trying to undermine him while pretending to be on his side.
13
Okay let me back up. Yes I am too lazy to read the indictment myself. I appreciate those who read it for me and give me the cliff notes. Were or were not manafort and Gates indicted for doing work for Donald Trump? That was the interesting part of that tweet to me.
Really?
Up till now you thought they were indicted "for doing work for Donald Trump"?
Why did you think that?

He doesn't read much besides His Buddy Sundance (and the links he provides).
14
Also, speaking of "time travel machines"...
Quote
We generated 225 whole-genome sequences (225 at 8× depth, of which 8 were increased to 30×; Illumina HiSeq 2000) from six modern Northeast African populations (100 Egyptians and five Ethiopian populations each represented by 25 individuals). West Eurasian components were masked out, and the remaining African haplotypes were compared with a panel of sub-Saharan African and non-African genomes. We showed that masked Northeast African haplotypes overall were more similar to non-African haplotypes and more frequently present outside Africa than were any sets of haplotypes derived from a West African population. Furthermore, the masked Egyptian haplotypes showed these properties more markedly than the masked Ethiopian haplotypes, pointing to Egypt as the more likely gateway in the exodus to the rest of the world. Using five Ethiopian and three Egyptian high-coverage masked genomes and the multiple sequentially Markovian coalescent (MSMC) approach, we estimated the genetic split times of Egyptians and Ethiopians from non-African populations at 55,000 and 65,000 years ago, respectively, whereas that of West Africans was estimated to be 75,000 years ago. Both the haplotype and MSMC analyses thus suggest a predominant northern route out of Africa via Egypt.

The bolded part supports a migration from the Levant
Notice the next bolded part. Again this supports a migration from the Levant.
Note that as with all the articles the researchers are working within an Out of Africa theory. I am interested in the actual evidence and not their interpretations.
Notice the actual evidence. :rofl:

:rofl:
15

As a sidenote:
The Omo I date calculation is more suspect due to the presence of the primitive Omo II with it. This implies that both were washed in together from different places. That is why the reference I gave earlier suggests that the Omo I and II may be from some other places. In which case we do not know their dating.
Bullshit. Already addressed multiple times:
The evidence supports the idea that the migration was from the Levant into Egypt.
::)

Wishful thinking is not evidence.
For Omo 1 to be an ancestor requires re-dating all the Nile sites and the Levant sites.
:facepalm:

Because, as we all know, all humans did was pass through the Nile region into the Levant, leaving Africa forever.

That's why the continent was unoccupied until the 18th century, when humans returned. ::)
Compare that with the idea that Omo 1 has been incorrectly dated.
I have to say, doug, you're making progress at last! No more intimation that Omo I was not AMH!
You have finally moved on to the Begrudging Acceptance Stage for that issue! Excellent!

Too bad your other "idea' is also BS, though. Once again:

The Oldest Homo Sapiens: Fossils Push Human Emergence Back To 195,000 Years Ago
Quote
"It is pretty conclusive," says Brown

But hey, I'm optimistic about this. I'm sure that, eventually, in a few years or so, you'll move on to the Begrudging Acceptance Stage on that as well.

Patience, champ. You'll get there.

The published material doesn't change, no matter how loud some uneducated nobody whines on the internet.
Quote
Other date calculations such as Misliya are not like that.
And you know this HOW?

Qafzeh has "the layers dated" as well.
Quote
As a further point the Omo I fossil is not a human.
More already refuted bullshit:
Quote
A 195,000 year old fossil from the Omo 1 site in Ethiopia shows the beginnings of the skull changes that we associate with modern people, including a rounded skull case and possibly a projecting chin.
So not a homo sapiens sapiens (anatomically modern human).
Nice try, Liar:
Quote
Undeniably modern in its anatomy, the specimen from the Omo basin[...]
Quote
In addition to the skull, the associated postcranial bones [...] display fully modern human anatomy.
Your OWN SOURCE, doug.

Ready to cry "uncle" yet?
Quote
The obvious modern traits of the Omo I skull include[...]


It may be that you don't understand this.

(j/k: You understand it just fine. You're just Pretending. As usual.)
16
So wait- The GOP pressed for the leak? WTF?
17
It seems that people still do not know the problem with the Omo I and Omo II fossils. Even though I earlier gave you the reference link. You should have appreciated it at the time since I am no longer spoon feeding you.
Everyone knows the old reference link you gave (which you are understandably too afraid to give again) showed the state of the knowledge before the 2005 stratigraphic study Faid keeps rubbing your face in.
It's really fascinating. It's almost as if doug actually thinks "people forget from page to page".

"Oh it's been two pages, I guess I can once again claim that Omo I could be misdated, I'm sure no one remembers the 2005 stratigraphical study by now. If people post it again, I'll just wait a few more pages until people have forgotten about it".

Weird.
18
Say what you want about the New Yorker, but they have their eye on the ball.

https://www.newyorker.com/culture/culture-desk/when-we-think-about-the-pee-tape
Quote
A friend told me that, when she envisions the scene at the Ritz Carlton, she always pictures Trump in an undershirt and boxer shorts, with sock garters and brown shoes.
OMG this ^^^
19
Our guests do not need to be reminded- They are fully aware of the actual published material at this point.

And merely enjoying the ride with the rest of us. ;)
20
Time to remind "socrates" again:
Since "socrates" tends to forget from page to page:
Quote
A 195,000 year old fossil from the Omo 1 site in Ethiopia shows the beginnings of the skull changes that we associate with modern people, including a rounded skull case and possibly a projecting chin.
So not a homo sapiens sapiens (anatomically modern human).
Nice try, Liar:
Quote
Undeniably modern in its anatomy, the specimen from the Omo basin[...]
Quote
In addition to the skull, the associated postcranial bones [...] display fully modern human anatomy.
Your OWN SOURCE, doug.

Ready to cry "uncle" yet?
Quote
The obvious modern traits of the Omo I skull include[...]

Quote
Researchers largely agree Omo I was a modern human; it had the human hallmarks of a flat face, fully formed chin, high forehead and globular braincase.
:rofl:
Quote
The taxonomic identity of the Nubian Complex toolmakers is unknown, as no skeletal evidence has been discovered in association with any such assemblage. Although some archaic forms may have persisted in other parts of Africa at that time [79], the distribution of early [size=7anatomically modern human (AMH) [/size]remains suggest this species is the most likely candidate to have occupied northeast Africa during the Late Pleistocene. Cranial fragments of Homo sapiens found in the Omo river valley, Ethiopia (Fig. 1), represent the first appearance of AMH in East Africa ~195 ka [80].
:rofl: :rofl:
Is everyone confused like Faid? The issue is not the dating of the rock layers. The issue is that the fossils were from somewhere else so we do not know how old they are. How many times do these things have to be explained?


"Socrates" remains terminally confused.

The 2005 stratigraphic study shows JUST THAT.

Once again:
Quote
Brown says potassium-argon dating shows that a layer of ash no more than 10 feet (3 meters) below Omo I's and Omo II's burial place is 196,000 years old, give or take 2,000 years. Another layer is 104,000 years old. It is almost 160 feet (50 meters) above the layer that yielded the Omo humans. The unconformities represent periods of time when rock was eroded, so the fossils must be much older than the 104,000-year-old layer and close in age to the 196,000-year-old layer, Brown says.

The clinching evidence, he says, comes from sapropels, which are dark rock layers on the Mediterranean seafloor that were deposited when floods of fresh water poured out of the Nile River during rainy times. The Blue Nile and White Nile tributaries share a drainage divide with the Omo River. During ancient wet periods, monsoons on the Ethiopian highlands sent annual floods surging down the Nile system, causing sapropels to form on the seafloor, and sent floods down the Omo, making Lake Turkana rise and depositing Kibish Formation sediments on the river's ancient delta. (During dry periods, Lake Turkana was smaller, flood sediments were deposited farther south and rocks at Kibish were eroded.)

No other sediments on land have been found to record wet and dry periods that correlate so well with the same climate pattern in ocean sediments, Brown says. The new study found that the "members" - or groups of rock layers - of the Kibish formation were laid down at the same time as the Mediterranean sapropels. In particular, the volcanic layer right beneath Omo I and II dates to 196,000 years ago by potassium-argon dating, and it corresponds almost perfectly to a sapropel layer previously dated as 195,000 years old, Brown says.

"It is pretty conclusive," says Brown, who disputes any contention that the fossils might be closer to 104,000 years old.
21
Would you prefer "washed together"?
22
I am in fact a scientist and understand evolution better than most folks here. But not worth arguing. Just another silly slur from you folks.
IOW, "WHAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!" :rofl:

Poor "socrates".
23
To repeat, this is an issue for the dating of Omo I because the primitive Omo II is at the same depth. But not worth arguing. People here seem unable to grasp this point.
Funny how you don't seem to have that problem for Skhul and Qafzeh, and in THAT case the obvious Neanderthal traits amount to direct ancestry and not "washing up". ::)

But it doesn't matter. No matter how hard you stomp your little foot, champ, the dating issue for the Omo fossils has been "quite conclusively" resolved in 2005. See above. :D
24
Quote
Studies of the postcranial remains of Omo I indicate an overall modern human morphology with a number of primitive features.

Yup - a number of primitive features means it is not a human.
Nope- Again:
Quote
In addition to the skull, the associated postcranial bones [...] display fully modern human anatomy.
Your OWN SOURCE, doug.

Sucks to be you.
25
Worth repeating:

The published material doesn't change, no matter how loud some uneducated nobody whines on the internet.