"Moreover, you scorned our people, and compared the Albanese to sheep, and according to your custom think of us with insults. Nor have you shown yourself to have any knowledge of my race. Our elders were Epirotes, where this Pirro came from, whose force could scarcely support the Romans. This Pirro, who Taranto and many other places of Italy held back with armies. I do not have to speak for the Epiroti. They are very much stronger men than your Tarantini, a species of wet men who are born only to fish. If you want to say that Albania is part of Macedonia I would concede that a lot more of our ancestors were nobles who went as far as India under Alexander the Great and defeated all those peoples with incredible difficulty. From those men come these who you called sheep. But the nature of things is not changed. Why do your men run away in the faces of sheep?"
Letter from Skanderbeg to the Prince of Taranto ▬ Skanderbeg, October 31 1460

Darvinism crack

Here you can talk about anything that might not fit in one of the categories
Post Reply
User avatar
Zeus10
Grand Fighter Member
Grand Fighter Member
Posts: 4136
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2009 6:46 pm
Gender: Male
Location: CANADA
Contact:

Darvinism crack

#1

Post by Zeus10 » Thu Oct 22, 2009 12:48 pm

Not even a monkey's uncle: Analysis calls fossil primate only a distant relative of apes, us Module body
By Malcolm Ritter, The Associated Press

Remember Ida, the fossil discovery announced last May with its own book and TV documentary? A publicity blitz called it "the link" that would reveal the earliest evolutionary roots of monkeys, apes and humans.
Experts protested that Ida wasn't even a close relative. And now a new analysis supports their reaction.
In fact, Ida is as far removed from the monkey-ape-human ancestry as a primate could be, says Erik Seiffert of Stony Brook University in New York.
He and his colleagues compared 360 specific anatomical features of 117 living and extinct primate species to draw up a family tree. They report the results in Thursday's issue of the journal Nature.
Ida is a skeleton of a 47 million-year-old cat-sized creature found in Germany. It starred in a book, "The Link: Uncovering Our Earliest Ancestor."
Ida represents a previously unknown primate species called Darwinius. The scientists who formally announced the finding said they weren't claiming Darwinius was a direct ancestor of monkeys, apes and humans. But they did argue that it belongs in the same major evolutionary grouping, and that it showed what an actual ancestor of that era might have looked like.
The new analysis says Darwinius does not belong in the same primate category as monkeys, apes and humans. Instead, the analysis concluded, it falls into the other major grouping, which includes lemurs.
Experts agreed.
"This is a rigorous analysis based on many features," said Eric Sargis, an anthropology professor at Yale. He said he'd found the argument of the Darwinius researchers unconvincing, so the new result came as no surprise.
In fact, it confirms what most scientists think, said David Begun, a paleoanthropologist at the University of Toronto.
Jorn Hurum of the Natural History Museum in Oslo, Norway, an author of the Ida paper, said he welcomed the new analysis.
Darwinius is an example of a group of primates called adapoids, and "we are happy to start the scientific discussion" about what Ida means for where adapoids fit on the primate family tree, he wrote in an email.
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing

jay_albania_fan
Regular Member
Regular Member
Posts: 83
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2009 1:08 am
Gender: Male

Re: Darvinism crack

#2

Post by jay_albania_fan » Sat Oct 24, 2009 8:17 am

At first, they thought the fossil was a primitive member of the Haplorrhini (Tarsiers, New World Monkeys, Old World Monkeys/Apes), but more scientists now say it is in fact a member of Strepsirrhini (Bush Babies, Lorises, Lemurs). The Strepsirhini are the more "primitive" or "archaic" form of primates. Often scientists make conclusions too quickly before doing more study. I think the jury is still out on Homo floresiensis. Is it a different species or was it a human with a disease?
Image

Post Reply

Return to “General forum”