Open Thread


What's Your Take? Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

  1. Yes…BSM is right. that’s where the whole debate comes in as to whether we evolved from neanderthal or cro-magnon and why one species died off.

    It’s easier to envision in the plant world where species don’t typically kill each other off…that’s why an eggplant (aubergine for the brits) is related to an onion but why all onions except chives have underground bulbs.

    Darwin’s “Origin of the Species” is an excellent read, all about the finches of the different Galapagos islands.

  2. By daveinbedstuy on March 14, 2011 4:26 PM

    I get a hardon for “monkey-faced” Asians. I’m also partial to that “neanderthal hair line” on a lot of latins.

    What? The dos dedos? Two fingers between the eyebrows and the hairline? I interviewed once with a guy with two inches of forehead. No way, he could have offered me 7 figures but no way was I working with somebody with that kind of prehistoric head.

  3. “Survival of the Fittest”

    That’s a misstatement of evolutionary theory. It’s not the fittest that survives. It’s the one that reproduces best. Related, but sometimes different.

  4. “What about when lech and Charlie Sheen evolved from humans?”
    That’s “devolution” 😉

    “shouldn’t there be some sort of lifeform btw monkeys and humans tho? why did the in-between links all die off?”

    there are fossilized remains that are links but you have to think of them as transitional species. As species evolve, usually within the same local ecosystem, the more successful group replaces the former. As the ecology of the earth changed, different species responded more successfully than others, so they superseded the earlier ones. Elementary Darwin. And lech is right about speciation and branching. If 3 branches of monkey could successfully live in an environment, they survived. And there is an added factor of symbiology.Not just bacteria and our digestive tracts, but between species. Bees and flowers, for example.

1 21 22 23 24 25 60