I didn't know land cetacea feces could do science.
Science hate thread
Julian Campbell
Kayden Morgan
There's a reason Darwin called it the theory of evolution by natural selection. If a population has been selected for a certain set of traits over a time period, those traits become prevalent while mutually exclusive traits diminish in frequency. That population has now "evolved," as descendants of that population will reflect that selective process.
Usually trolls as dedicated as you are tend to avoid missteps such as this. You want to appear to be just on the edge of the in-group, cite trusted sources, then challenge paradigms through dialectical reasoning masquerading as logic. With this post you essentially out yourself as having no logical basis for anything at all by making a nonsensical equivalency that's too easy to identify. Good luck with your future efforts, I'm sure I'll see you around.
My money has been on the Dmanisi, Georgia finds from the 90s. Fully-fledged H. erectus in the Caucasus mountains 1.8mya is, to me at least, strong evidence of a Eurasian origin for Neanderthalensis, among others. Divergence of "human" lineages happened far longer ago than most people know.
As an aside, whenever any user hears someone use the term "anatomically modern human" (AMH in many publications) in reference to anthropology, ask them to define the term or, for greater effect, the negative definition of the term.
If they're informed but bluepilled they'll tell you it's largely down to craniometrics and pelvic shape to accommodate encephalization, namely
Then ask, with a puzzled look, at what point in our development we lost those things, or simply ask them why certain extant populations of "humans" still exhibit one or all of them. Pic related. As a second aside, ask them at what point in the human lineage we stop associating larger endocranial volume with an increase in intelligence, which is the single defining trend in human evolution.
Best part is, that isn't even a meme. Jewgle still shows nothing but blacks when that phrase is searched and still hasn't removed the obvious redpill of a suggestion.
Luke Lopez
This much shitposting from one OP should be your clue it's a mod. I pretty sure I have a ban on the way now.
Connor Reed
Understood. I was interpreting on a resource production and consumption; You were referring to a belief side. Fair enough. That 'ism' on the end of 'materialism' I had ignored to focus on the 'material' part. Nevertheless:
I assume nothing of the sort. And regard such sentences as being bizarre. Spirit is. Material is. Material is not spirit, though spirit is material – the former being substance, the latter being of substantial guiding importance. Substance != substantial. Is this not word play? Should sentences like the above not take care to define themselves away from the artificial classist and marxist models of thought? Ex: gender vs sex (academic abstraction that can't exist in a vacuum, vs what actual totality).
William Turner
Who is the real science denier here? We have decades of years of studies on race and IQ, links between race and crime yet the left when confronted with it crys and shits it pants while yelling RACCIIIIIIST
Xavier Bennett
This is why there can only be one party.
Josiah Smith
What most people don't seem to understand is that "science" is a philosophical school of thought, not an objective institution unrelated to social circles
Owen Allen
I don't regard that as an assumption. It's an observation. Proponents of materialism often outright mock spirituality.
Sebastian Price
Oh, right. The oxytocin deficiency is merely a symptom. They also likely have damaged hypothalamuses and limbic systems.
Eli Sullivan
Thank you.