Divergent Evolution Of New Species Is Not Genetically Expensive

I spit in a drug dealers face.

why do you assume a drug dealer must be a vet?


that is some pretty low SMEAR of vets you gonad garggler
 
Watermark VII said:
In the out of Africa hypothesis, our common ancestor wasn't that distant, and it's not surprising we haven't diverged enough for breeding to be impossible, and besides there's been a lot of migration and interbreeding since then regardless. I'm not sure how the multiregional hypothesis explains us not diverging more than we have, but not that many people believe in it anyway.
Click to expand...

dude, in the out of Africa hypothesis it wasn't our common ancestors that came out of Africa......it was us.......Africans and Asians and Northern Europeans are not divergent species......
 
Watermark VII said:
I suppose I can copypasta from wikipedia:

The term "multiregional hypothesis" was coined in the early 1980s by Milford H. Wolpoff and colleagues, who used the theory to explain regional similarities between archaic humans and modern humans in various regions, in what they called regional continuity.[2][3] Wolpoff proposed that the mechanism of clinal variation allowed for the necessary balance between both local selection and overall evolution as a global species, with Homo erectus, Neanderthals, Homo sapiens and other human forms as subspecies. This species arose in Africa two million years ago as H. erectus and then spread out over the world, developing adaptations to regional conditions. Some populations became isolated for periods of time, developing in different directions, but through continuous interbreeding, replacement, genetic drift and selection, adaptations that were an advantage anywhere on earth would spread, keeping the development of the species in the same overall direction while maintaining adaptations to regional factors. By these mechanisms, surviving local varieties of the species evolved into modern humans, retaining some regional adaptations but with many features common to all regions.[3]

That's how the multiregional proponents attempt to explain the lack of significant divergence.
Click to expand...

except that the out of Africa hypothesis has now pinpointed the date of divergence to be less than 200,000 years ago based on DNA evidence......
 
Professor Baxter said:
I am arguing that it is possible that the entire population of the single species of homo evolved in the same direction.
Click to expand...
if true, why has it happened to no other species on earth?.......

Divergent evolution is less common.
Click to expand...

every other species on earth demonstrates divergent evolution except homo sapiens......how is that less common?......even creatures with longer lifespans than humans, such as turtles and parrots, deviated more than homo sapiens.......
 
go get the proof that you didn't beg him to stick his balls in your mouth and ended up paying him BIG MONEY to do it
 
well you did seem really out of it while you gargled his nuts on the street corner.

The neighbors told me you bought drugs from him before you begged him to allow you to gargle his nutsack and they saw money exchange hands
 
PostmodernProphet said:
dude, in the out of Africa hypothesis it wasn't our common ancestors that came out of Africa......it was us.......Africans and Asians and Northern Europeans are not divergent species......
Click to expand...

I have never been to Africa. lol... He stated it correctly. It was our common ancestors, dumbass.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
at least not for the last few hundred posts......you were certainly enamored of it when you brought it up......I guess having people point at you and say "Look......stupid!" tends to have that effect.........
Click to expand...

Link us to one single post where I claimed anything else, liar.
 
PostmodernProphet said:
if true, why has it happened to no other species on earth?.......



every other species on earth demonstrates divergent evolution except homo sapiens......how is that less common?......even creatures with longer lifespans than humans, such as turtles and parrots, deviated more than homo sapiens.......
Click to expand...

It has happened to every other species on earth. Again, give one example of a species where the entire population has not evolved from the archaic forms.

You are clueless and do not know what you are talking about. You confuse the language used, like "ancestor," "hybrid" and "recent." You are very arrogant in your vast ignorance and paranoid, so you remain undeterred by gentle correction.
 
Last edited:
evince said:
I spit in a drug dealers face.

why do you assume a drug dealer must be a vet?


that is some pretty low SMEAR of vets you gonad garggler
Click to expand...

How do you know he was a drug dealer?
Was he your connection and you just got pissed off?


<this explanation should be good>
 
evince said:
well you did seem really out of it while you gargled his nuts on the street corner.

The neighbors told me you bought drugs from him before you begged him to allow you to gargle his nutsack and they saw money exchange hands
Click to expand...

So your neighbor was a racist and used you to humiliate an innocent black man. :palm:
 
Professor Baxter said:
I have never been to Africa. lol... He stated it correctly. It was our common ancestors, dumbass.
Click to expand...

so, when DNA studies tell us that we all had a common ancestor in Africa within the last 200,000 years you are saying that ancestor was NOT a homo sapien?.....

why is it that the person examining the DNA was not aware of that?.....
 
Professor Baxter said:
It has happened to every other species on earth. Again, give one example of a species where the entire population has not evolved from the archaic forms.
Click to expand...

you mean one other example where the entire archaic form has not involved into a single species......the answer, once more, is that none of them have.....quit trying to dodge the question by pretending its a different question.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top