Exactly How Old Are Homo Sapiens?

[Total Science]

When did Homo sapiens evolve?

Mainstream evolutionists claim Homo sapiens evolved in Ethiopia 195,000 years ago.

See here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human

DNA and fossil evidence indicates that modern humans originated in east Africa about 200,000 years ago.

However it is obvious this is simply religion based upon no evidence whatsoever.

Homo sapiens in Mexico have been zircon dated to 985,000 years old and anatomically modern footprints millions of years old have been discovered in Africa.

2 Questions

(1) why do some evolutionists say man magically and miraculously appeared for no reason 195,000 years ago?

(2) why do some evolutionist apologists deny the claims of mainstream evolutionists?

[Grey Cloud]

Hi Total Science,
As I understand things, and I keep my eye on this subject, the experts date the appearance of anatomically modern humans to between 100,000 and 200,000 years ago. They then have their little arguments between themselves as to what constitutes 'modern' in the sense of levels of sophistication, e.g. technology and social organisation etc. These dates change on an almost monthly basis but are always in nice round figures.

Up until fairly recently, said experts believed that homo saps superceded neanderthals. But then they found evidence that the two co-existed for a period. So now they think that homo saps were responsible for the demise of the neanderthals, either through being smarter and better organised or by carrying diseases out of Africa and into Europe etc (homo sap being immune but neanderthal being new to the disease). There are other scenarios too.

I think I'm correct in saying that the reason the experts 'know' that humans emerged from Africa is because the earliest remains have come from there. I'll not insult your intelligence by stating the obvious flaw in that logic (I'm assuming you are over five years old).

I'm not quite sure what you are referring to in Q2. hat do you mean by 'evolutionary apologist'?
There are Darwinists and there are Neo-Darwinists but I don't really know what the differences are between the two (I tar 'em both with same brush). Evolutionary theory in biology is like the Big Bang in cosmology, you have to subscribe to it or you are gone.

[Osmosis]

GC, Could "Evolutionary Apologist" be a relative of S.A.?

[Grey Cloud]

GC, Could "Evolutionary Apologist" be a relative of S.A.?

Who is S.A?

[Osmosis]

Science Apologist, a "friend" from Wikipedia, it seems.

[Grey Cloud]

Science Apologist, a "friend" from Wikipedia, it seems.

I'm none the wiser but thanks

[junglelord]

Exactly How Old Are Homo Sapiens?

47 yrs old.

[Grey Cloud]

Exactly How Old Are Homo Sapiens?

47 yrs old.

There's always one isn't there?

[Osmosis]

Science Apologist, a "friend" from Wikipedia, it seems.

I'm none the wiser but thanks

Hi GC, just to finish the conversation: Science Apologist is a student, who seems to fancy himself a keeper of all holy in the Conventional, steady-state universe. Google will give one more information than a person can stomach, on this guy.
Cheers from too sunny California, Osmosis.

[KickLaBuka]

Homo sapiens in Mexico have been zircon dated to 985,000 years old and anatomically modern footprints millions of years old have been discovered in Africa. – Total Science

OK, I bought into the 100-200k years ago. I buy into the evolution and splitting of races based on geographical isolation due to forced migration.

I think I'm correct in saying that the reason the experts 'know' that humans emerged from Africa is because the earliest remains have come from there. I'll not insult your intelligence by stating the obvious flaw in that logic – Grey Cloud

Since I bought into it, I'll defend the logic. It is the best they have in geology. Please correct me. And this 985,000 years ago, this is shocking. It doesn't follow evolution (based on decay and genetic similarities). Is evolution at stake in this discussion?

[Grey Cloud]

Hi Kick,
My comments re the 'out of Africa' thing being based on the earliest finds: Leaving asdie the not totally reliable dating methods, most civilisations/communities spring up near major rivers and on coastlines. Most of the rivers from that long ago will have long since dried up and the coasts will be under water. The area of Africa where these finds originated has not, to the best of our knowledge, ever been heavily populated so the remains are found close to the surface and not buried under several levels of habitation, etc.

The theory also contains a lot of C19th racism. The sick, the lame and the lazy stayed behind in Africa and the bright, curious, intrepid explorer types moved out eventually becoming whitey. Same reason the experts insisted that the Egyptians copied form the Greeks despite the ancient Greeks making frequent reference to what they had learned from the Egyptians. Same reason they continue to ignore the Vedas as a source of knowledge. And the same reason they continue to hold onto this ridiculous Aryan invasion of India business.

A simialr situation arose in archaeology. Up to, say, the middle of the last century, the oldest civilisations were thought to be in the Middle East. Steadily, over the ensuing decades, they have gradually moved north. They have gone through Turkey and are now finding stuff even more ancient in the Black Sea area and heading across to the 'stans.
I don't know where Total Science is going with this but I don't subscribe to Darwinism. Terms such as Homo Sapien Sapien, Cro-Magnon and Neanderthal are just labels used by modern experts based on their theories/prejudices (e.g. larger skull/brain capacity = smarter individual; pronounced supra-orbital ridge = low brow thicko, etc).
They are trying to back up all this nonsense with DNA but they don't know jack about that either.
- - - end rant - - -

[Grey Cloud]

Don't know if this of interest:
Primate archaeology, proposal of a new research field
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/ ... 071609.php

Or this:
Neanderthals Were Few and Poised for Extinction
http://www.livescience.com/culture/0907 ... ation.html

[bboyer]

- - - end rant - - -

Not badly ranted, at that.

[Grey Cloud]

- - - end rant - - -

Not badly ranted, at that.

Thank you. I have my moments.

[MarcusDrake]

A bit late to the game I know, but this is an interesting topic to me.

It seems to me that there are two distinct species of Homo Sapien on this planet. There are the natives and there are transplants.


The natives share common characteristics across the face of the globe. Dark hair, dark eyes, dark skin. Commonly, when left to their own devices, these people live the same as their ancestors have for thousands of years. Good examples of these people live deep in the Amazon and remote African villages. Contrary to the "civilized" peoples who congregate in large cites and have creative, inventive minds, these native peoples remain static, unchanged and simple. They use the same tools and techniques handed down from generation to generation with no desire nor impulse to create new ways or ideas.

The native people over millions of years have demonstrated how traditional evolutionary processes take a great deal of time to change a species. Ancient stone tools can be found that date to 2 million years ago. Nearly a million years later those same people learned they could sharpen and shape stones by hitting them with other stones. It took another half million years to advance that into using specialized stone tools to create other tools, like spears and spear points.

Then, abruptly, roughly 10,000 years ago we find the introduction of agriculture, cities, domestication of animals, metal working, pottery, masonry and wine making. Something had to change rather drastically in order to cause this substantial shift in society. A look at modern human bones compared to Neanderthal show significant differences, not the subtle shifts as we are used to seeing in the diversification and evolution of species.

More important than the question of when did modern humans come about is the question of HOW did they come about and so rapidly form complex and huge civilizations?