Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
rudolfensis; New fossils from Koobi Fora confirm taxonomic diversity in early Homo
206 views
Skip to first unread message
RichTravsky
Aug 12, 2012, 7:14:14 PM8/12/12
to
http://www.livescience.com/22198-new-human-species-discovered.html
New fossils from the dawn of the human lineage suggest our ancestors may
have lived alongside a diversity of extinct human species, researchers say.
...
Now fossils between 1.78 million and 1.95 million years old discovered in
2007 and 2009 in northern Kenya suggest that early Homo were quite a
diverse bunch, with at least one other extinct human species living at the
same time as H. erectus and H. habilis.
"Two species of the genus Homo, our own genus, lived alongside our direct
ancestor, Homo erectus, nearly 2 million years ago," researcher Meave
Leakey at the Turkana Basin Institute in Nairobi, Kenya, told LiveScience.
A skull known as KNM-ER 1470, found in 1972 in Kenya, was at the center of
the debate over the number of species of early Homo living nearly 2 million
years ago. It had a larger brain and a flatter face than H. habilis, leading
some researchers to declare it a distinct species they dubbed Homo
rudolfensis.
However, making comparisons between these fossils was difficult, because no
single purported H. rudolfensis specimen contained both the face and the
lower jaw, details needed to see if it was indeed separate from H. habilis.
Any supposed differences between H. habilis and H. rudolfensis might, for
instance, have been due to variations between the sexes of a single species.
The newly discovered face and lower-jaw fossils, uncovered within a radius
of just more than 6 miles (10 kilometers) from where KNM-ER 1470 was
unearthed, now suggest that KNM-ER 1470 and the novel finds are indeed members
of a distinct species of early Homo that stands out from others with its
uniquely built face.
"It had very flat facial features — you could draw a straight line from its
eye socket to where its incisor teeth would be," researcher Fred Spoor at the
Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig, Germany, told
LiveScience.
...
"The incisors are really rather small compared to what you'd find in other
early Homo," Spoor said. "In the back of the mouth, the teeth are large,
telling us a lot of food processing was going on there ... it may be possible
it ate more tough, plantlike foods than meat."
...
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v488/n7410/full/nature11322.html
New fossils from Koobi Fora in northern Kenya confirm taxonomic diversity in early
Homo
Meave G. Leakey, Fred Spoor, M. Christopher Dean, Craig S. Feibel,
Susan C. Antón, Christopher Kiarie & Louise N. Leakey
Nature 488, 201–204 (09 August 2012) doi:10.1038/nature11322
Since its discovery in 1972, the cranium KNM-ER 1470 has been at the centre
of the debate over the number of species of early Homo present in the early
Pleistocene epoch of eastern Africa. KNM-ER 1470 stands out among other
specimens attributed to early Homo because of its larger size, and its flat
and subnasally orthognathic face with anteriorly placed maxillary zygomatic
roots. This singular morphology and the incomplete preservation of the
fossil have led to different views as to whether KNM-ER 1470 can be
accommodated within a single species of early Homo that is highly variable
because of sexual, geographical and temporal factors, or whether it provides
evidence of species diversity marked by differences in cranial size and
facial or masticatory adaptation. Here we report on three newly discovered
fossils, aged between 1.78 and 1.95 million years (Myr) old, that clarify
the anatomy and taxonomic status of KNM-ER 1470. KNM-ER 62000, a
well-preserved face of a late juvenile hominin, closely resembles KNM-ER 1470
but is notably smaller. It preserves previously unknown morphology, including
moderately sized, mesiodistally long postcanine teeth. The nearly complete
mandible KNM-ER 60000 and mandibular fragment KNM-ER 62003 have a dental
arcade that is short anteroposteriorly and flat across the front, with small
incisors; these features are consistent with the arcade morphology of KNM-ER
1470 and KNM-ER 62000. The new fossils confirm the presence of two
contemporary species of early Homo, in addition to Homo erectus, in the early
Pleistocene of eastern Africa.
Claudius Denk
Aug 17, 2012, 10:47:22 AM8/17/12
to
On Aug 12, 4:14 pm, RichTravsky <traRvEskyM...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> http://www.livescience.com/22198-new-human-species-discovered.html
>
> New fossils from the dawn of the human lineage suggest our ancestors may
> have lived alongside a diversity of extinct human species, researchers say.
> ...
> Now fossils between 1.78 million and 1.95 million years old discovered in
> 2007 and 2009 in northern Kenya suggest that early Homo were quite a
> diverse bunch,
Hominids originally split up into different breeds, like dogs and/or
> http://www.livescience.com/22198-new-human-species-discovered.html
>
> New fossils from the dawn of the human lineage suggest our ancestors may
> have lived alongside a diversity of extinct human species, researchers say.
> ...
> Now fossils between 1.78 million and 1.95 million years old discovered in
> 2007 and 2009 in northern Kenya suggest that early Homo were quite a
> diverse bunch,
any species that have been domesticated by hominids/humans. This is a
direct result of the (genetic) isolation associated with the communal
territorialism that framed the lifestyle of early hominids. The
evidence has been greatly misinterpreted by modern anthropology. At
no time did hominids live contemporaneous to other species of
hominids. The bushiness of the hominid cladistic tree indicates
different "breeds" (or "races") of hominids. Not different species.
If we were looking back on canine evolution from millions of years
into the future we would conclude that toy terriers and great danes
were members of different species. But they aren't. The same
reasoning is applicable to hominids.
RichTravsky
Aug 19, 2012, 11:48:18 PM8/19/12
to
Claudius Denk wrote:
>
> On Aug 12, 4:14 pm, RichTravsky <traRvEskyM...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > http://www.livescience.com/22198-new-human-species-discovered.html
> >
> > New fossils from the dawn of the human lineage suggest our ancestors may
> > have lived alongside a diversity of extinct human species, researchers say.
> > ...
> > Now fossils between 1.78 million and 1.95 million years old discovered in
> > 2007 and 2009 in northern Kenya suggest that early Homo were quite a
> > diverse bunch,
>
> Hominids originally split up into different breeds, like dogs and/or
> any species that have been domesticated by hominids/humans. This is a
> direct result of the (genetic) isolation associated with the communal
> territorialism that framed the lifestyle of early hominids. The
No Dimmie, this is one of the well known mechanisms of speciation.
>
> On Aug 12, 4:14 pm, RichTravsky <traRvEskyM...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > http://www.livescience.com/22198-new-human-species-discovered.html
> >
> > New fossils from the dawn of the human lineage suggest our ancestors may
> > have lived alongside a diversity of extinct human species, researchers say.
> > ...
> > Now fossils between 1.78 million and 1.95 million years old discovered in
> > 2007 and 2009 in northern Kenya suggest that early Homo were quite a
> > diverse bunch,
>
> Hominids originally split up into different breeds, like dogs and/or
> any species that have been domesticated by hominids/humans. This is a
> direct result of the (genetic) isolation associated with the communal
> territorialism that framed the lifestyle of early hominids. The
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution
...
There are four mechanisms for speciation. The most common in animals is
allopatric speciation, which occurs in populations initially isolated
geographically, such as by habitat fragmentation or migration.
...
The second mechanism of speciation is peripatric speciation, which occurs
when small populations of organisms become isolated in a new environment.
This differs from allopatric speciation in that the isolated populations
are numerically much smaller than the parental population.
...
The third mechanism of speciation is parapatric speciation. This is similar
to peripatric speciation in that a small population enters a new habitat,
but differs in that there is no physical separation between these two
populations. Instead, speciation results from the evolution of mechanisms
that reduce gene flow between the two populations
...
Finally, in sympatric speciation species diverge without geographic
isolation or changes in habitat.
...
This is Science, Monsieur Clod.
Claudius Denk
Aug 20, 2012, 2:20:11 AM8/20/12
to
On Aug 19, 8:48 pm, RichTravsky <traRvEskyM...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Claudius Denk wrote:
>
> > On Aug 12, 4:14 pm, RichTravsky <traRvEskyM...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > >http://www.livescience.com/22198-new-human-species-discovered.html
>
> > > New fossils from the dawn of the human lineage suggest our ancestors may
> > > have lived alongside a diversity of extinct human species, researchers say.
> > > ...
> > > Now fossils between 1.78 million and 1.95 million years old discovered in
> > > 2007 and 2009 in northern Kenya suggest that early Homo were quite a
> > > diverse bunch,
>
> > Hominids originally split up into different breeds, like dogs and/or
> > any species that have been domesticated by hominids/humans. This is a
> > direct result of the (genetic) isolation associated with the communal
> > territorialism that framed the lifestyle of early hominids. The
>
> No Dimmie, this is one of the well known mechanisms of speciation.
Mechanisms? Show us the mechanism, you dufus.
> Claudius Denk wrote:
>
> > On Aug 12, 4:14 pm, RichTravsky <traRvEskyM...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > >http://www.livescience.com/22198-new-human-species-discovered.html
>
> > > New fossils from the dawn of the human lineage suggest our ancestors may
> > > have lived alongside a diversity of extinct human species, researchers say.
> > > ...
> > > Now fossils between 1.78 million and 1.95 million years old discovered in
> > > 2007 and 2009 in northern Kenya suggest that early Homo were quite a
> > > diverse bunch,
>
> > Hominids originally split up into different breeds, like dogs and/or
> > any species that have been domesticated by hominids/humans. This is a
> > direct result of the (genetic) isolation associated with the communal
> > territorialism that framed the lifestyle of early hominids. The
>
> No Dimmie, this is one of the well known mechanisms of speciation.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution
> ...
> There are four mechanisms for speciation. The most common in animals is
> allopatric speciation, which occurs in populations initially isolated
> geographically, such as by habitat fragmentation or migration.
> ...
> The second mechanism of speciation is peripatric speciation, which occurs
> when small populations of organisms become isolated in a new environment.
> This differs from allopatric speciation in that the isolated populations
> are numerically much smaller than the parental population.
> ...
> The third mechanism of speciation is parapatric speciation. This is similar
> to peripatric speciation in that a small population enters a new habitat,
> but differs in that there is no physical separation between these two
> populations. Instead, speciation results from the evolution of mechanisms
> that reduce gene flow between the two populations
> ...
> Finally, in sympatric speciation species diverge without geographic
> isolation or changes in habitat.
your imagination.
> This is Science, Monsieur Clod.
RichTravsky
Aug 26, 2012, 11:36:50 PM8/26/12
to
Claudius Denk wrote:
> On Aug 19, 8:48 pm, RichTravsky <traRvEskyM...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > Claudius Denk wrote:
> > > On Aug 12, 4:14 pm, RichTravsky <traRvEskyM...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > >http://www.livescience.com/22198-new-human-species-discovered.html
> >
> > > > New fossils from the dawn of the human lineage suggest our ancestors may
> > > > have lived alongside a diversity of extinct human species, researchers say.
> > > > ...
> > > > Now fossils between 1.78 million and 1.95 million years old discovered in
> > > > 2007 and 2009 in northern Kenya suggest that early Homo were quite a
> > > > diverse bunch,
> >
> > > Hominids originally split up into different breeds, like dogs and/or
> > > any species that have been domesticated by hominids/humans. This is a
> > > direct result of the (genetic) isolation associated with the communal
> > > territorialism that framed the lifestyle of early hominids. The
> >
> > No Dimmie, this is one of the well known mechanisms of speciation.
>
> Mechanisms? Show us the mechanism, you dufus.
Why, your wish is my command! Read below:
> On Aug 19, 8:48 pm, RichTravsky <traRvEskyM...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > Claudius Denk wrote:
> > > On Aug 12, 4:14 pm, RichTravsky <traRvEskyM...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > > >http://www.livescience.com/22198-new-human-species-discovered.html
> >
> > > > New fossils from the dawn of the human lineage suggest our ancestors may
> > > > have lived alongside a diversity of extinct human species, researchers say.
> > > > ...
> > > > Now fossils between 1.78 million and 1.95 million years old discovered in
> > > > 2007 and 2009 in northern Kenya suggest that early Homo were quite a
> > > > diverse bunch,
> >
> > > Hominids originally split up into different breeds, like dogs and/or
> > > any species that have been domesticated by hominids/humans. This is a
> > > direct result of the (genetic) isolation associated with the communal
> > > territorialism that framed the lifestyle of early hominids. The
> >
> > No Dimmie, this is one of the well known mechanisms of speciation.
>
> Mechanisms? Show us the mechanism, you dufus.
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution
> > ...
> > There are four mechanisms for speciation. The most common in animals is
> > allopatric speciation, which occurs in populations initially isolated
> > geographically, such as by habitat fragmentation or migration.
> > ...
> > The second mechanism of speciation is peripatric speciation, which occurs
> > when small populations of organisms become isolated in a new environment.
> > This differs from allopatric speciation in that the isolated populations
> > are numerically much smaller than the parental population.
> > ...
> > The third mechanism of speciation is parapatric speciation. This is similar
> > to peripatric speciation in that a small population enters a new habitat,
> > but differs in that there is no physical separation between these two
> > populations. Instead, speciation results from the evolution of mechanisms
> > that reduce gene flow between the two populations
> > ...
> > Finally, in sympatric speciation species diverge without geographic
> > isolation or changes in habitat.
>
> Relevance? Keep in mind the rest of us don't have direct access to
> your imagination.
> > This is Science, Monsieur Clod.
>
> IOW, you really don't have a point, as usual.
in the wiki article excerpts?
Claudius Denk
Aug 26, 2012, 11:47:52 PM8/26/12
to
RichTravsky
Sep 4, 2012, 11:49:46 PM9/4/12
to
of speciation have been around for some time.
Did you note the use of the word "isolation" in the wiki excerpt? Hmmm?
Claudius Denk
Sep 5, 2012, 3:04:37 AM9/5/12
to
> Did you note the use of the word "isolation" in the wiki excerpt? Hmmm?
scenario has more to do with indigestion than it does evidence.
RichTravsky
Sep 9, 2012, 11:40:57 PM9/9/12
to
> > Did you note the use of the word "isolation" in the wiki excerpt? Hmmm?
>
> You seem to never have a point. It would seem your dispute with my
> scenario has more to do with indigestion than it does evidence.
Claudius Denk
Sep 10, 2012, 12:43:41 AM9/10/12
to
RichTravsky
Sep 16, 2012, 12:50:01 AM9/16/12
to
You have come up with *nothing* new. The mechanisms of speciation are
briefly outlined above, and they've been known for some time. So
your "Hominids originally split up into different breeds..." claptrap
is hardly earth shaking.
Claudius Denk
Sep 16, 2012, 5:58:20 PM9/16/12
to
argument to that effect.
RichTravsky
Sep 21, 2012, 8:17:11 PM9/21/12
to
Two things you don't have.
Here's a review for you:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution
...
There are four mechanisms for speciation. The most common in animals is
allopatric speciation, which occurs in populations initially isolated
geographically, such as by habitat fragmentation or migration.
...
The second mechanism of speciation is peripatric speciation, which occurs
when small populations of organisms become isolated in a new environment.
This differs from allopatric speciation in that the isolated populations
are numerically much smaller than the parental population.
...
The third mechanism of speciation is parapatric speciation. This is similar
to peripatric speciation in that a small population enters a new habitat,
but differs in that there is no physical separation between these two
populations. Instead, speciation results from the evolution of mechanisms
that reduce gene flow between the two populations
...
Finally, in sympatric speciation species diverge without geographic
isolation or changes in habitat.
RichTravsky
Sep 28, 2012, 10:59:28 PM9/28/12
to
you to digest:
Claudius Denk
Sep 30, 2012, 10:17:57 AM9/30/12
to
move on.
JTEM
Oct 1, 2012, 2:47:38 AM10/1/12
to
Claudius Denk <claudiusd...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> If we were looking back on canine evolution from millions of years
> into the future we would conclude that toy terriers and great danes
> were members of different species. But they aren't. The same
> reasoning is applicable to hominids.
I hate to admit it, but you do have a point here. In
> If we were looking back on canine evolution from millions of years
> into the future we would conclude that toy terriers and great danes
> were members of different species. But they aren't. The same
> reasoning is applicable to hominids.
fact, it's worse than you make it out to be...
One COMMON argument against Neanderthal/Modern
interbreeding was that they were two different species,
and different species can't interbreed...
It was a seriously dumb argument even before all the
evidence for interbreeding, but there's an even more
comical example: The Triceratops Dinosaur!
Presently, the popular belief is that what was at one
time thought of as three separate species are actually
all members of the same species -- only at different
life stages!
And I have used the dog argument myself, many times.
It is undeniably true that, had all our current breeds
of dogs lived 50 million years ago instead of today,
"Scientist" would be claiming that they were all different
species... and just think of what they would have made
of our mutts!
Lee Olsen
Oct 1, 2012, 1:05:24 PM10/1/12
to
"JTEM" <j_deerfi...@hotmail.com>
Jack Teehan <deerfieldproducti...@gmail.com>
Seth Dwight <deerfieldproducti...@gmail.com>
Seth Dwight: NNTP-Posting-Host: 71.232.83.153
In His Glory: NNTP-Posting-Host: 71.232.83.153
On Sep 30, 11:47 pm, JTEM <jte...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I hate to admit it
http://tinyurl.com/cs2e8pg
Jack Teehan <deerfieldproducti...@gmail.com>
Seth Dwight <deerfieldproducti...@gmail.com>
Seth Dwight: NNTP-Posting-Host: 71.232.83.153
In His Glory: NNTP-Posting-Host: 71.232.83.153
On Sep 30, 11:47 pm, JTEM <jte...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I hate to admit it
http://tinyurl.com/cs2e8pg
JTEM
Oct 2, 2012, 1:21:29 AM10/2/12
to
I'm sorry, mental case, but no matter how
much you want those I.P. Addresses to be
mine they are never going to be. Your
mental illness is steering you wrong, AGAIN!
Now, I repeat for you to not understand:
much you want those I.P. Addresses to be
mine they are never going to be. Your
mental illness is steering you wrong, AGAIN!
Now, I repeat for you to not understand:
Lee Olsen
Oct 2, 2012, 10:50:33 AM10/2/12
to
"JTEM" <j_deerfi...@hotmail.com>
Jack Teehan <deerfieldproducti...@gmail.com>
Seth Dwight <deerfieldproducti...@gmail.com>
Seth Dwight: NNTP-Posting-Host: 71.232.83.153
In His Glory: NNTP-Posting-Host: 71.232.83.153
On Oct 1, 10:21 pm, JTEM <jte...@gmail.com> wrote:
Jack Teehan <deerfieldproducti...@gmail.com>
Seth Dwight <deerfieldproducti...@gmail.com>
Seth Dwight: NNTP-Posting-Host: 71.232.83.153
In His Glory: NNTP-Posting-Host: 71.232.83.153
> I'm sorry
JTEM 12 Dec 2007 04:18 GMT
"I've also posted many, many, many other "fake" articles in
other groups, which few people didn't recognize as parody.
Yes, even when posted under a different name people had
no problems seeing that they were parodies."
Yes, you should be sorry.
JTEM
Oct 6, 2012, 1:15:39 AM10/6/12
to
Lee Olsen
Oct 6, 2012, 10:22:51 AM10/6/12
to
"JTEM" <j_deerfi...@hotmail.com>
Jack Teehan <deerfieldproducti...@gmail.com>
Seth Dwight <deerfieldproducti...@gmail.com>
Seth Dwight: NNTP-Posting-Host: 71.232.83.153
In His Glory: NNTP-Posting-Host: 71.232.83.153
Jack Teehan <deerfieldproducti...@gmail.com>
Seth Dwight <deerfieldproducti...@gmail.com>
Seth Dwight: NNTP-Posting-Host: 71.232.83.153
In His Glory: NNTP-Posting-Host: 71.232.83.153
On Oct 5, 10:15 pm, JTEM <jte...@gmail.com> wrote:
>And I have used the dog argument myself, many times.
Message-ID: <87ocvgs2...@nospam.pacbell.net>
>And I have used the dog argument myself, many times.
Date: Wed, 01 Apr 2009
"JTEM is repeating a number of his lies, hoping some will
stick including
1. lies about my identity (Bill Taylor is someone
else.)
(and, depending on the post)
2. lies about what I posted.
3. lies about what a discussion is about.
The extent to which he is lying is strong evidence that
he is in fact a pathlogical liar. He has reduced himself
to figuratively getting into bed with Bill Taylor, one of
the most rabid homophobes plaguing this/these newsgroups
while pretending to be just the opposite.
And he's been complaining that I'm giving him a default
response when he posts the same lies over and over in spite
of the obvious fact that he is posting his garbage merely
as harassment (and possibly as an indication that he suffers
from Tourette syndrome given the language he often uses).
Until he has something substantial to contribute and can
express himself civilly, this idiot will get this canned
reply."
RichTravsky
Oct 7, 2012, 1:18:14 AM10/7/12
to
Why don't you admit you blew it? That you have nothing new? That real
scientists have already studied it?
And that you're a fool?
JTEM
Oct 7, 2012, 1:31:26 AM10/7/12
to
I'm sorry, mental case, but no matter how
much you want those I.P. Addresses to be
mine they are never going to be. Your
mental illness is steering you wrong, AGAIN!
Now, I repeat for you to not understand:
Claudius Denk <claudiusd...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> If we were looking back on canine evolution from millions of years
> into the future we would conclude that toy terriers and great danes
> were members of different species. But they aren't. The same
> reasoning is applicable to hominids.
I hate to admit it, but you do have a point here. In
fact, it's worse than you make it out to be...
One COMMON argument against Neanderthal/Modern
interbreeding was that they were two different species,
and different species can't interbreed...
It was a seriously dumb argument even before all the
evidence for interbreeding, but there's an even more
comical example: The Triceratops Dinosaur!
Presently, the popular belief is that what was at one
time thought of as three separate species are actually
all members of the same species -- only at different
life stages!
much you want those I.P. Addresses to be
mine they are never going to be. Your
mental illness is steering you wrong, AGAIN!
Now, I repeat for you to not understand:
Claudius Denk <claudiusd...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> If we were looking back on canine evolution from millions of years
> into the future we would conclude that toy terriers and great danes
> were members of different species. But they aren't. The same
> reasoning is applicable to hominids.
I hate to admit it, but you do have a point here. In
fact, it's worse than you make it out to be...
One COMMON argument against Neanderthal/Modern
interbreeding was that they were two different species,
and different species can't interbreed...
It was a seriously dumb argument even before all the
evidence for interbreeding, but there's an even more
comical example: The Triceratops Dinosaur!
Presently, the popular belief is that what was at one
time thought of as three separate species are actually
all members of the same species -- only at different
life stages!
And I have used the dog argument myself, many times.
Lee Olsen
Oct 7, 2012, 9:30:55 AM10/7/12
to
Why this is marked as abuse? It has been marked as abuse.
Report not abuse
"JTEM" <j_deerfi...@hotmail.com>
Jack Teehan <deerfieldproducti...@gmail.com>
Seth Dwight <deerfieldproducti...@gmail.com>
Seth Dwight: NNTP-Posting-Host: 71.232.83.153
In His Glory: NNTP-Posting-Host: 71.232.83.153
On Oct 6, 10:31 pm, JTEM <jte...@gmail.com> wrote:
Jack Teehan <deerfieldproducti...@gmail.com>
Seth Dwight <deerfieldproducti...@gmail.com>
Seth Dwight: NNTP-Posting-Host: 71.232.83.153
In His Glory: NNTP-Posting-Host: 71.232.83.153
> Now, I repeat
Repeating your stupidity isn't going to make it come true.
JTEM
Oct 8, 2012, 3:06:33 PM10/8/12
to
Lee Olsen
Oct 8, 2012, 3:45:01 PM10/8/12
to
Why this is marked as abuse? It has been marked as abuse.
Report not abuse
"JTEM" <j_deerfi...@hotmail.com>
Jack Teehan <deerfieldproducti...@gmail.com>
Seth Dwight <deerfieldproducti...@gmail.com>
Seth Dwight: NNTP-Posting-Host: 71.232.83.153
In His Glory: NNTP-Posting-Host: 71.232.83.153
Confession 1
Jack Teehan <deerfieldproducti...@gmail.com>
Seth Dwight <deerfieldproducti...@gmail.com>
Seth Dwight: NNTP-Posting-Host: 71.232.83.153
In His Glory: NNTP-Posting-Host: 71.232.83.153
JTEM 12 Dec 2007 04:18 GMT
"I've also posted many, many, many other "fake" articles in
other groups, which few people didn't recognize as parody.
Yes, even when posted under a different name people had
no problems seeing that they were parodies."
Confession 2
"I've also posted many, many, many other "fake" articles in
other groups, which few people didn't recognize as parody.
Yes, even when posted under a different name people had
no problems seeing that they were parodies."
From: Seth Dwight <deerfieldproducti...@gmail.com>
>I need only crank the organ and the monkey will dance!
Mar 24, 5:23 pm
Lee Olsen wrote:
> > Cranking your organ is the only job you ever had.
JTEM replies with this classic:
On Mar 25, 5:03 pm, JTEM <jte...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Are you a sick fuck because you sexualize everything
> I say, or do you sexualize everything I say because
> you're a sick fuck?
"I"? You are so stupid you forgot which pseud you were using.
C. Jackson Rogers
Oct 11, 2012, 8:06:41 PM10/11/12
to
Jtem wasn't kidding. The rich/mike/lee retard really
did cherry pick a quote from a cite, a quote that the
cite itself refutes!
And Jtem really did point this out and retard really did
post the exact same refuted quote in response.
Disgusting.
On Oct 11, 4:33 am, JTEM <jte...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Check this out. The Lee/Rich/Steve/Larry/etc
> psycho dishonestly cherry picks the following:
>
> Sick fuck, Lee Olsen <paleoc...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > And you can't read:http://www.scseagrant.org/Content/?cid=139
> > "The problem with the boat-migration model, says David Meltzer,
> > an anthropologist at Southern Methodist University, is that
> > boats do not exist in the archaeological record that far back.
> > “We lack any evidence of boats until the mid-Holocene times
> > (5,000 to 6,000 years ago)
>
> But a little further down WITHIN THE EXACT SAME CITE
> we find this contradiction:
>
> : Maritime people did have boats off the North American
> : West Coast at least 13,000 years ago—or about the
> : same time as Clovis people arrived. Archaeologists
> : have excavated shell middens dated to 12,000 to
> : 13,000 years old in the Channel Islands off California,
> : which could have only been reached by boat from the
> : mainland. The oldest human bones—a woman’s—
> : found in North America, excavated in the Channel
> : Islands, are about 13,000 years old
>
> So he's making a claim that his own site destroys.
>
> Worse, much worse is the fact that the cite talks about
> much, much, much, much, much earlier evidence for
> boats everywhere from Japan to Australia. His cite
> supports boats. His cite concludes that boats had been
> around for a very, very long time before the first
> settlers to the America's arrived. And, as i quote above,
> his cite absolute-positively confirms that boats where in
> use in the Americas at least 13,000 years ago.
>
> ....and yet he repeatedly (even habitually) posted a
> cherry-picked quote saying that there is no evidence of
> boats until 6,000 years ago. It's a quote that the cite he
> lifted it from refutes, but he doesn't care.
>
> Some people are mentally ill, and the Lee/etc sick fuck
> is amongst the worst... and the stupidest.
did cherry pick a quote from a cite, a quote that the
cite itself refutes!
And Jtem really did point this out and retard really did
post the exact same refuted quote in response.
Disgusting.
On Oct 11, 4:33 am, JTEM <jte...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Check this out. The Lee/Rich/Steve/Larry/etc
> psycho dishonestly cherry picks the following:
>
> Sick fuck, Lee Olsen <paleoc...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > And you can't read:http://www.scseagrant.org/Content/?cid=139
> > "The problem with the boat-migration model, says David Meltzer,
> > an anthropologist at Southern Methodist University, is that
> > boats do not exist in the archaeological record that far back.
> > “We lack any evidence of boats until the mid-Holocene times
> > (5,000 to 6,000 years ago)
>
> But a little further down WITHIN THE EXACT SAME CITE
> we find this contradiction:
>
> : Maritime people did have boats off the North American
> : West Coast at least 13,000 years ago—or about the
> : same time as Clovis people arrived. Archaeologists
> : have excavated shell middens dated to 12,000 to
> : 13,000 years old in the Channel Islands off California,
> : which could have only been reached by boat from the
> : mainland. The oldest human bones—a woman’s—
> : found in North America, excavated in the Channel
> : Islands, are about 13,000 years old
>
> So he's making a claim that his own site destroys.
>
> Worse, much worse is the fact that the cite talks about
> much, much, much, much, much earlier evidence for
> boats everywhere from Japan to Australia. His cite
> supports boats. His cite concludes that boats had been
> around for a very, very long time before the first
> settlers to the America's arrived. And, as i quote above,
> his cite absolute-positively confirms that boats where in
> use in the Americas at least 13,000 years ago.
>
> ....and yet he repeatedly (even habitually) posted a
> cherry-picked quote saying that there is no evidence of
> boats until 6,000 years ago. It's a quote that the cite he
> lifted it from refutes, but he doesn't care.
>
> Some people are mentally ill, and the Lee/etc sick fuck
> is amongst the worst... and the stupidest.
Lee Olsen
Oct 11, 2012, 8:49:15 PM10/11/12
to
Why this is marked as abuse? It has been marked as abuse.
Report not abuse
http://tinyurl.com/39hlw25
"Ooooh, lookee here! Turns out JTEM has been accusing anyone and
everyone, for years now, of being sock puppets. What is it with JTEM
and sock puppets? Does JTEM harbour a sock-puppet fetish? Is he in an
illicit relationship with a muppet? Perhaps he was caught cheating on
Mrs Piggy, in bed with Lamb Chop. Clearly, his interest has nothing to
do with the Internet usage of the word, no matter how much he might
claim otherwise. He makes the accusations wildly, without any
rationale behind them, so clearly he does not actually believe the
Internet usage even applies.
So, given that he can only be thinking of physical sock puppets, we
can see JTEM is a very, very sick person indeed."
"Ooooh, lookee here! Turns out JTEM has been accusing anyone and
everyone, for years now, of being sock puppets. What is it with JTEM
and sock puppets? Does JTEM harbour a sock-puppet fetish? Is he in an
illicit relationship with a muppet? Perhaps he was caught cheating on
Mrs Piggy, in bed with Lamb Chop. Clearly, his interest has nothing to
do with the Internet usage of the word, no matter how much he might
claim otherwise. He makes the accusations wildly, without any
rationale behind them, so clearly he does not actually believe the
Internet usage even applies.
So, given that he can only be thinking of physical sock puppets, we
can see JTEM is a very, very sick person indeed."
JTEM
Oct 14, 2012, 5:33:30 AM10/14/12
to
Lee Olsen
Oct 14, 2012, 8:08:19 AM10/14/12
to
On Oct 14, 2:33 am, JTEM <jte...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'm sorry
> I'm sorry
"JTEM" <j_deerfi...@hotmail.com>
Jack Teehan <deerfieldproducti...@gmail.com>
Seth Dwight <deerfieldproducti...@gmail.com>
Seth Dwight: NNTP-Posting-Host: 71.232.83.153
In His Glory: NNTP-Posting-Host: 71.232.83.153
Confession 1
Jack Teehan <deerfieldproducti...@gmail.com>
Seth Dwight <deerfieldproducti...@gmail.com>
Seth Dwight: NNTP-Posting-Host: 71.232.83.153
In His Glory: NNTP-Posting-Host: 71.232.83.153
JTEM 12 Dec 2007 04:18 GMT
"I've also posted many, many, many other "fake" articles in
other groups, which few people didn't recognize as parody.
Yes, even when posted under a different name people had
no problems seeing that they were parodies."
"I've also posted many, many, many other "fake" articles in
other groups, which few people didn't recognize as parody.
Yes, even when posted under a different name people had
no problems seeing that they were parodies."
RichTravsky
Oct 14, 2012, 11:25:57 PM10/14/12
to
JTEM
Oct 15, 2012, 12:53:17 AM10/15/12
to
Lee Olsen
Oct 15, 2012, 11:03:29 AM10/15/12
to
"JTEM" <j_deerfi...@hotmail.com>
Jack Teehan <deerfieldproducti...@gmail.com>
Seth Dwight <deerfieldproducti...@gmail.com>
Seth Dwight: NNTP-Posting-Host: 71.232.83.153
In His Glory: NNTP-Posting-Host: 71.232.83.153
Jack Teehan <deerfieldproducti...@gmail.com>
Seth Dwight <deerfieldproducti...@gmail.com>
Seth Dwight: NNTP-Posting-Host: 71.232.83.153
In His Glory: NNTP-Posting-Host: 71.232.83.153
>And I have used the dog argument myself, many times.
Yes, and you have tried to deceive people using multiple names many
times also.
http://tinyurl.com/2bclbfy
JTEM
Oct 15, 2012, 6:29:43 PM10/15/12
to
I'm sorry, mental case, but no matter how
much you want those I.P. Addresses to be
mine they are never going to be. Your
mental illness is steering you wrong, AGAIN!
Now, I repeat for you to not understand:
Claudius Denk <claudiusd...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> If we were looking back on canine evolution from millions of years
> into the future we would conclude that toy terriers and great danes
> were members of different species. But they aren't. The same
> reasoning is applicable to hominids.
I hate to admit it, but you do have a point here. In
fact, it's worse than you make it out to be...
One COMMON argument against Neanderthal/Modern
interbreeding was that they were two different species,
and different species can't interbreed...
It was a seriously dumb argument even before all the
evidence for interbreeding, but there's an even more
comical example: The Triceratops Dinosaur!
Presently, the popular belief is that what was at one
time thought of as three separate species are actually
all members of the same species -- only at different
life stages!
much you want those I.P. Addresses to be
mine they are never going to be. Your
mental illness is steering you wrong, AGAIN!
Now, I repeat for you to not understand:
Claudius Denk <claudiusd...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> If we were looking back on canine evolution from millions of years
> into the future we would conclude that toy terriers and great danes
> were members of different species. But they aren't. The same
> reasoning is applicable to hominids.
I hate to admit it, but you do have a point here. In
fact, it's worse than you make it out to be...
One COMMON argument against Neanderthal/Modern
interbreeding was that they were two different species,
and different species can't interbreed...
It was a seriously dumb argument even before all the
evidence for interbreeding, but there's an even more
comical example: The Triceratops Dinosaur!
Presently, the popular belief is that what was at one
time thought of as three separate species are actually
all members of the same species -- only at different
life stages!
And I have used the dog argument myself, many times.
Lee Olsen
Oct 15, 2012, 7:47:01 PM10/15/12
to
JTEM <jte...@gmail.com> wrote:
http://tinyurl.com/4v2ed4s
>Like I said, go on: Jump!
http://tinyurl.com/7vflru7
Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2011 20:36:39 -0800 (PST)
JTEM wrote:
>You must cut open your tongue with a razor.
On Oct 15, 3:29 pm
JTEM wrote:
> I'm sorry
No you're not.
http://tinyurl.com/4v2ed4s
>Like I said, go on: Jump!
http://tinyurl.com/7vflru7
Date: Sun, 20 Nov 2011 20:36:39 -0800 (PST)
JTEM wrote:
>You must cut open your tongue with a razor.
On Oct 15, 3:29 pm
JTEM wrote:
> I'm sorry
No you're not.
JTEM
Oct 18, 2012, 10:45:51 AM10/18/12
to
RichTravsky
Oct 21, 2012, 10:46:45 PM10/21/12
to
JTEM
Oct 24, 2012, 12:10:23 AM10/24/12
to
Lee Olsen
Oct 24, 2012, 12:56:48 AM10/24/12
to
On Oct 23, 9:10 pm, JTEM <jte...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sick fuck
JTEM <jte...@gmail.com> wrote:
Message-ID: <9d955fbd-9672-4d43-a554-
f45c5d...@q12g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>
"The point is that the remains do not match those of the supposed
Beringer
population."
Archaeologists
> : have excavated shell middens dated to 12,000 to
> : 13,000 years old in the Channel Islands off California,
> : which could have only been reached by boat
"only" by boat? So he's making a false claim and only illiterate sock
puppets would believe such tripe:
http://sanjuancapistrano.patch.com/articles/teen-sets-record-in-swim-from-channel-islands-to-mainland
"Fiona Goh, 13, swims more than 12 miles in about 10 hours. She's the
youngest to complete a swim from one of the Channel Islands."
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/08/21/us-cuba-swim-idUSBRE87K0J120120821
"Nyad's latest swim followed that of Penny Palfrey, a British-born 49-
year-old grandmother from Australia, who tried the Cuba-Florida
crossing in late June and swam 93 miles before the Gulf Stream forced
her to stop.
Palfrey holds the record for the longest unassisted swim, 67.5 miles
in the Cayman Islands last summer."
And let's not forget that at the end of the Pleistocene the distance
to Santa Rosae was only about a third of what it is today.
> Sick fuck
JTEM <jte...@gmail.com> wrote:
Message-ID: <9d955fbd-9672-4d43-a554-
f45c5d...@q12g2000yqj.googlegroups.com>
"The point is that the remains do not match those of the supposed
Beringer
population."
Archaeologists
> : have excavated shell middens dated to 12,000 to
> : 13,000 years old in the Channel Islands off California,
> : which could have only been reached by boat
puppets would believe such tripe:
http://sanjuancapistrano.patch.com/articles/teen-sets-record-in-swim-from-channel-islands-to-mainland
"Fiona Goh, 13, swims more than 12 miles in about 10 hours. She's the
youngest to complete a swim from one of the Channel Islands."
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/08/21/us-cuba-swim-idUSBRE87K0J120120821
"Nyad's latest swim followed that of Penny Palfrey, a British-born 49-
year-old grandmother from Australia, who tried the Cuba-Florida
crossing in late June and swam 93 miles before the Gulf Stream forced
her to stop.
Palfrey holds the record for the longest unassisted swim, 67.5 miles
in the Cayman Islands last summer."
And let's not forget that at the end of the Pleistocene the distance
to Santa Rosae was only about a third of what it is today.
RichTravsky
Oct 29, 2012, 12:35:49 AM10/29/12
to
Claudius Denk
Oct 29, 2012, 2:24:15 AM10/29/12
to
Do you have a point?
> Why don't you admit you blew it? That you have nothing new? That real
> scientists have already studied it?
maybe, they might volunteer some time to help you formulate a
hypothesis or, at least, a point.
Until then . . .
JTEM
Oct 29, 2012, 5:54:52 AM10/29/12
to
Lee Olsen
Oct 29, 2012, 10:18:34 AM10/29/12
to
> psycho
>
> Sick fuck
can't swim.
the mainland at the end of the Pleistocene as they are today.
http://tinyurl.com/8nrkvbl
>
> Sick fuck
"JTEM" <j_deerfi...@hotmail.com>
Jack Teehan <deerfieldproducti...@gmail.com>
Seth Dwight <deerfieldproducti...@gmail.com>
Seth Dwight: NNTP-Posting-Host: 71.232.83.153
In His Glory: NNTP-Posting-Host: 71.232.83.153
wrote:
Jack Teehan <deerfieldproducti...@gmail.com>
Seth Dwight <deerfieldproducti...@gmail.com>
Seth Dwight: NNTP-Posting-Host: 71.232.83.153
In His Glory: NNTP-Posting-Host: 71.232.83.153
>
> : Maritime people did have boats off the North American
> : West Coast at least 13,000 years ago
> : Archaeologists
> : Maritime people did have boats off the North American
> : West Coast at least 13,000 years ago
> : have excavated shell middens dated to 12,000 to
> : 13,000 years old in the Channel Islands off California,
> : which could have only been reached by boat from the
> : mainland.
Too bad some idiots still think shell middens are boats and people
> : 13,000 years old in the Channel Islands off California,
> : which could have only been reached by boat from the
> : mainland.
can't swim.
http://sanjuancapistrano.patch.com/articles/teen-sets-record-in-swim-from-channel-islands-to-mainland
"Fiona Goh, 13, swims more than 12 miles in about 10 hours. She's the
youngest to complete a swim from one of the Channel Islands."
Not to mention the islands were only about a third the distance from
"Fiona Goh, 13, swims more than 12 miles in about 10 hours. She's the
youngest to complete a swim from one of the Channel Islands."
the mainland at the end of the Pleistocene as they are today.
http://tinyurl.com/8nrkvbl
Claudius Denk
Oct 29, 2012, 1:35:21 PM10/29/12
to
JTEM
Oct 30, 2012, 2:43:08 AM10/30/12
to
Lee Olsen
Oct 30, 2012, 2:56:41 AM10/30/12
to
"JTEM" <j_deerfi...@hotmail.com>
Jack Teehan <deerfieldproducti...@gmail.com>
Seth Dwight <deerfieldproducti...@gmail.com>
Seth Dwight: NNTP-Posting-Host: 71.232.83.153
In His Glory: NNTP-Posting-Host: 71.232.83.153
wrote:
Jack Teehan <deerfieldproducti...@gmail.com>
Seth Dwight <deerfieldproducti...@gmail.com>
Seth Dwight: NNTP-Posting-Host: 71.232.83.153
In His Glory: NNTP-Posting-Host: 71.232.83.153
> : Maritime people did have boats off the North American
> : West Coast at least 13,000 years ago
> : Archaeologists
> : West Coast at least 13,000 years ago
> : have excavated shell middens dated to 12,000 to
> : 13,000 years old in the Channel Islands off California,
> : which could have only been reached by boat from the
> : mainland.
> : 13,000 years old in the Channel Islands off California,
> : which could have only been reached by boat from the
> : mainland.
Claudius Denk
Oct 30, 2012, 4:49:23 AM10/30/12
to
JTEM
Oct 30, 2012, 6:34:00 AM10/30/12
to
If you don't know a thing about anthropology
but insist on posting anyways, you end up
making a fool out of yourself. Take a look:
but insist on posting anyways, you end up
making a fool out of yourself. Take a look:
Claudius Denk
Oct 30, 2012, 11:38:05 AM10/30/12
to
Lee Olsen
Oct 30, 2012, 11:41:03 AM10/30/12
to
"JTEM" <j_deerfi...@hotmail.com>
Jack Teehan <deerfieldproducti...@gmail.com>
Seth Dwight <deerfieldproducti...@gmail.com>
Seth Dwight: NNTP-Posting-Host: 71.232.83.153
In His Glory: NNTP-Posting-Host: 71.232.83.153
Jack Teehan <deerfieldproducti...@gmail.com>
Seth Dwight <deerfieldproducti...@gmail.com>
Seth Dwight: NNTP-Posting-Host: 71.232.83.153
In His Glory: NNTP-Posting-Host: 71.232.83.153
> wrote:
> : Maritime people did have boats off the North American
> : West Coast at least 13,000 years ago
Oh really, just exactly where are they hiding all this imaginary boat
> : Maritime people did have boats off the North American
> : West Coast at least 13,000 years ago
evidence?
> : Archaeologists
> : have excavated shell middens dated to 12,000 to
> : 13,000 years old in the Channel Islands off California,
> : which could have only been reached by boat from the
> : mainland.
> : 13,000 years old in the Channel Islands off California,
> : which could have only been reached by boat from the
> : mainland.
Claudius Denk
Oct 30, 2012, 11:57:26 AM10/30/12
to
RichTravsky
Nov 4, 2012, 11:54:50 PM11/4/12
to
> > Why don't you admit you blew it? That you have nothing new? That real
> > scientists have already studied it?
>
> Why don't you contact these, "real," scientists (names?) to see if,
> maybe, they might volunteer some time to help you formulate a
> hypothesis or, at least, a point.
>
> Until then . . .
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution
has the references at the bottom. There's almost THREE HUNDRED as well as a
list
of things for further reading.
That just blew your "hypothesis" out of the water.
0 new messages