All categories - 23 June 2006

This question should be self explanatory.

In your personal life......

When a man sets aside his pride to let you do whatever you pleased with him, what did he allow you to do?

As a woman, are you too much to handle?

As a woman, have your fantasies been fullfilled or are you still waiting for the ultimate night when you slay a man to a point where still learning about himself?

2006-06-23 14:00:01 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Philosophy

due to being a heavy drinker is there any way for her to loose the gut.Please be serious. This is a very serious question. Thank-you.

2006-06-23 13:59:47 · 4 answers · asked by jackson51 2 in Women's Health

I want to sell custom boards on ebay.
In today's crazy world, I'm a bit afraid of being sued. If they can find in favor of a woman who spills coffee on her lap, I can certainly get in trouble if someone wipes out on one of my boards and blames the board. It happens - and I have assets to protect.
Another thing is privacy from my ex, my creditors etc.

One way around it would be to incorporate, get product liability insurance - etc etc etc. I really don't want the hassle since I don't even know if it would sell well.

I just want to run a respectable business with the ability to keep my privacy.

Anyone know how?

2006-06-23 13:59:28 · 4 answers · asked by aosoft 1 in Other - Business & Finance

I need steps!

2006-06-23 13:59:20 · 3 answers · asked by jane_butterfeild 1 in Singles & Dating

2006-06-23 13:59:16 · 5 answers · asked by crazy_brunette9 1 in Internet

Thanks, for answering, in advance!:) ..

2006-06-23 13:59:14 · 9 answers · asked by Kimberly 6 in Psychology

i have been having a few issues my stomach cramps most of the day and my breast are sore from time to time also my face has broke out and my hair is oily i wash my hair every day so i cant fiqure out why it is oily and my face hasnt had brake outs in 17 months after the birth of my youngest daughter i go to the docter monday and was just kinda wondering if any one else has had this problem or what some of you may think it is
just wondering and like i said i go to the docter monday

2006-06-23 13:59:03 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Women's Health

2006-06-23 13:59:01 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Hair

I really like this one guy and we've went out for about 6 months everything was going good then one day he called me up on the phone and we were just talking like we normally do and he asked me if i liked the fact that we were dating and i was like ya i do he was like well i really like you but i wanna just be friends .. I waz like Ummm ok :-( I was very very sad ... But me and this guy are like best friends .. Its been about 6 month since we have went out but i still have so so sooooooooooo Much feelings for him i mean i tell this guy everything and he knows more about me then my "girl" friends do ...I stilll really like him alot and idk if i should tell him that i still like him or not .. I dont want it to ruin our friendship ... So my questions are ... Should i tell him how i feel ?
and what should i say ?
Do i just bring it up or what ?
I like him alot and idk what to do or say to him

Please Help !

~Ashley

2006-06-23 13:58:51 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous in Adolescent

2006-06-23 13:58:48 · 39 answers · asked by Anonymous in Other - Entertainment

About our recent 2 military men being tortured & killed.
One general said...
"The torture was something unnatural"

And yet the 'Bush Jesus Juice drinkers'
didn't go into any type of outrage like they
do with simple "liberal comments".

Or was it just deaths #2501 and #2502 to them?

2006-06-23 13:58:48 · 15 answers · asked by Anonymous in Other - Politics & Government

Hes sooo hot, espacially without the mask. Can i have sum fries with that shake!!!lol

2006-06-23 13:58:46 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Comics & Animation

Anyone know the song from the advertisement on paramount comedy for dave gorman or sometin. It goes sometin like- keep smilin, keep laughin... ho ho ha... Its a woman singing

2006-06-23 13:58:29 · 2 answers · asked by mrlynamdb9 1 in Music

sometimes I am mean to her and say alot of things that I dont mean, I say them b/c some things she says really hurts my feelings...but in the long run I make things worse and end up hurting our relationship more than fixing it...what should I do and what do you think I need to try to control my temper...??

2006-06-23 13:58:28 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous in Weddings

i wish i did

2006-06-23 13:58:25 · 29 answers · asked by magictanya2003 2 in Celebrities

and aiming it at another one connected to an oscilloscope?
Do I have to worry about it being a receiver or transmitter? or can one do both functions?

2006-06-23 13:58:21 · 2 answers · asked by Anonymous in Engineering

I really need to know.....it's for my PhD paper....

2006-06-23 13:58:03 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Polls & Surveys

2006-06-23 13:57:59 · 19 answers · asked by desolate woman 2 in Diet & Fitness

Does the distinction actually matter?

2006-06-23 13:57:55 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Law & Ethics

how does the movie start like what scene is it and what going on

2006-06-23 13:57:50 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Movies

What I'm thinking is when you have no laws and no prisons, what do you do when someone commits murder?

2006-06-23 13:57:45 · 10 answers · asked by ambisinister 2 in Philosophy

Creationist Arguments: Homo erectus
Exciting new evidence about Homo erectus, see below!
The only Homo erectus fossils mentioned by many creationists (Huse 1983; Morris and Parker 1982; Taylor 1992) are the Java Man and Peking Man fossils. Many creationists traditionally considered both to be apes, but Lubenow (1992) considers both human, and that is becoming the accepted opinion in creationist circles. There are even a few creationists who consider Java Man an ape and Peking Man a human, despite the fact that many books stress their very close similarity.
A few authors do mention other erectus fossils in passing. Morris suggests, although it is not clear which specimens he is referring to, that they are degenerate humans:

"It may well be that Homo erectus was a true man, but somewhat degenerate in size and culture, possibly because of inbreeding, poor diet and a hostile environment" (Morris 1974).
Gish (1985) suggests that many erectus fossils would have been attributed to Neandertal Man were it not for their supposed age, and hence probably also considers the erectus morphology, like that of the Neandertals, to be caused by disease.

There is no explanation of why these adverse conditions would cause H. erectus to be so physically powerful, and in fact many erectus may have been of average human size (see the entry on the Turkana Boy fossil). Nor is it explained why all human skulls over 500,000 years old are erectus, and why, given the number of modern people who face a poor diet and a hostile environment, no erectus specimens are found nowadays.

Bowden (1981) briefly discusses ER 3733, but so vaguely that it is difficult to determine whether he thinks it is an ape or a human! This fossil, despite massive brow ridges and other primitive features, is so complete and looks so human that it seems unlikely anyone would call it an ape (and no other creationists have done so). It seems equally unlikely that Bowden would call it a human, since he acknowledges its similarity to the Peking Man skulls which he claims are apes, and all of which are larger than 3733. Bowden escapes this dilemma by instead casting aspersions on the accuracy of ER 3733's reconstruction (almost all other creationists solve it by not mentioning ER 3733).

Bowden's even briefer mention of OH 9 is just as cryptic. He notes its similarities to both Pithecanthropus [ape] and a Neandertal [human] skull. In one sentence he refers to it as "surprisingly advanced", but the next paragraph starts: "Reviewing all these fossil apes, ...". Bowden's description of OH 9 makes it sound so intermediate in nature between apes and humans that, once again, it is difficult to decide what he thinks it is.

One Homo erectus specimen, the Turkana Boy, is recognized by Gish as human. Unavoidably, since it is an erectus skull attached to a body that is almost completely modern. Gish (1985), writing soon after it was discovered, cautiously suggests that except for the brain size, all major aspects of the skeleton are within the limits of Homo sapiens, and that were it not for the estimated age of 1.6 million years it would be assigned to that species. In a later assessment (1995) Gish says that the size and shape of the braincase and a few characteristics of the body were the only differences from a modern human. Menton (1988) similarly states that WT 15000 was classified as H. erectus only because of its age.

That is incorrect; the Turkana Boy has a typical erectus skull, differing from modern humans in many aspects other than brain size. It is more similar to 1470 (H. habilis), or to other erectus specimens such as the Peking Man braincases, than it is to modern humans. It is strikingly similar to the Peking Man reconstruction made by Weidenreich, which even Gish agrees looks to be "intermediate between the Anthropoid Apes and Man".

The skeletal differences are less obvious, but in combination they show a skeleton with small but significant differences from modern humans. The length of the neck and the neck-shaft angle in the femur are respectively "well over 3" and 5 standard deviations from the modern human norm (Brown et al. 1985). The boy was extraordinarily strong, and his spinal cord had less than half the cross-sectional area of ours (Walker and Shipman 1996). According to Richard Leakey, "practically every piece of bone shows minute but unquestionable differences from modern man" (Angela 1993). Gish stresses the skeletal similarities but ignores these differences.

Menton (1988) states that the Turkana Boy was like a modern human "except for certain details of the skull", and then adds that:

"He had a low forehead and pronounced brow ridges not unlike some races of modern man. Richard Leaky [sic] said that this boy would go unnoticed in a crowd today." (Menton 1988)
Menton has taken this quote out of context, omitting some text that significantly changes its meaning:
"Suitably clothed and with a cap to obscure his low forehead and beetle brow, he would probably go unnoticed in a crowd today." (Leakey and Walker 1985)
Are erectus and sapiens the same species?
Lubenow (1992) and Mehlert (1994) have argued that Homo erectus is similar enough to H. sapiens that it should be merged into it. For example, Lubenow quotes Wolpoff et al. (1984):
"In our view, there are two alternatives. We should either admit that the Homo erectus/Homo sapiens boundary is arbitrary and use nonmorphological (i.e. temporal) criteria for determining it, or Homo erectus should be sunk [into H. sapiens]."
Wolpoff and his colleagues support what is known as the multiregional theory, which holds that populations of H. erectus throughout the world evolved together towards H. sapiens (as opposed to the "out of Africa" theory, which holds that one population of H. erectus gave rise to all modern humans).

Wolpoff et al. are not saying that H. erectus cannot be distinguished from modern humans; in fact they point out that it "on the average shows clear morphological distinctions from Homo sapiens". Nor do they dispute that H. sapiens evolved from H. erectus. Wolpoff and his colleagues explain clearly why they propose that H. erectus should not be a separate species:

We regard the species distinction between Homo erectus and Homo sapiens as being problematic. The issue we address stems from the difficult in clearly distinguishing an actual boundary between Homo erectus and Homo sapiens. ... From a purely cladistic outlook, Homo erectus should be sunk, since species originating through anagenesis (ie, without branching) are not recognized as separate species according to the criteria of phylogenetic systematics. (Wolpoff et al. 1984)
In other words, they propose sinking H. erectus into H. sapiens only because there are so many intermediate fossils that it is difficult to define a boundary between them, and because there are theoretical reasons for calling them the same species (no matter how much anatomical difference there is) if, as the multiregionalists believe, H. sapiens did not branch off from a subset of the H. erectus population. Wolpoff and his colleagues are not saying that the two species should be merged because there is insufficient difference between them, and Wolpoff has confirmed to me (in an email) that the amount of difference is not the issue.

Most scientists disagree with the idea of sinking H. erectus into H. sapiens, believing that the differences are clearly enough to merit a species distinction. A growing number would go further, and argue that there is room for another species between them, Homo heidelbergensis, which would contain many of the fossils often called "archaic" Homo sapiens (Tattersall 1995). It is also far from certain that the multiregional theory is correct, in which case even the theoretical reasons for sinking H. erectus would disappear.

Scientists who propose sinking H. erectus therefore provide no comfort for creationists, since their reasons totally contradict creationists who would claim that the H. erectus morphology is caused by diseases of, or racial variation in, H. sapiens.

One occasionally sees creationists claiming that many scientists now believe that H. erectus is no longer a valid species. This was never true. Shipman (2003) discusses a conference in 1991 at which a proposal by Wolpoff, Thorne and their colleagues to abandon H. erectus as a species was a contentious topic. Even then, the proposal did not get far and since then it has faded away. As Shipman says, "The move to eliminate Homo erectus is largely defunct...".

New evidence
Both Lubenow and Mehlert have stated, in support of the claim that erectus fossils should be classified as H. sapiens, that H. erectus brain sizes fall within the modern human range. Although this ignored the huge difference in statistical distribution of brain size between the two species (see my brain sizes page for more details), and the clear anatomical differences (see here), it was, strictly speaking, true, in that an extremely small percentage of living humans did overlap the brain sizes of erectus. Now, however, even that slender rationale has disappeared.
In 2002, Vekua et al. announced the discovery of D2700, a new hominid skull from Georgia (in the ex-USSR), following the discovery of two earlier skulls (Gabunia et al. 2000). These three skulls are most similar to those of early African H. erectus specimens, but are quite primitive and also share a number of characteristics with H. habilis skulls. Their brain sizes range from 780 cc (previously the lower end of the erectus range) down to 600 cc, which is in the middle of the H. habilis range. Taken as a group, these three skulls extend the anatomical range of erectus beyond anything that could conceivably be attributed to Homo sapiens. Both in anatomy and brain size, they bridge the gap between H. erectus and H. habilis.

See the D2700 page for more information about these fossils.

References
Angela P. & P. (1993): The extraordinary story of human origins. Buffalo NY: Prometheus Books.

Bowden M. (1981): Ape-men: fact or fallacy? Ed. 2. Bromley,Kent: Sovereign.

Brown F., Harris J., Leakey R.E., and Walker A.C. (1985): Early Homo erectus skeleton from west lake Turkana, Kenya. Nature, 316:788-92. (announcement of the discovery of the Turkana Boy skeleton)

Gabunia L., Vekua A., Swisher C.C., III, Ferring R., Justus A., Nioradze M. et al. (2000): Earliest Pleistocene hominid cranial remains from Dmanisi, Republic of Georgia: taxonomy, geological setting, and age. Science, 288:1019-25.

Gish D.T. (1985): Evolution: the challenge of the fossil record. El Cajon, CA: Creation-Life Publishers.

Huse S.M. (1983): The collapse of evolution. Baker Book House Company.

Lubenow M.L. (1992): Bones of contention: a creationist assessment of human fossils. Grand Rapids,MI: Baker Books.

Mehlert A.W. (1994): Homo erectus 'to' modern man: evolution or variability? Creation Ex Nihilo Technical Journal, 8(1):105-16.

Menton D.N. (1988): The scientific evidence for the origin of man. (a creationist article)

Morris H.M. (1974): Scientific creationism. Santee,California: Master Books.

Morris H.M. and Parker G.E. (1982): What is creation science? San Diego: Creation-Life Publishers.

Shipman P. (2000): Doubting Dmanisi. American Scientist, Nov-Dec 2000

Taylor P.S. (1992): The illustrated origins answer book. Ed. 4. Mesa,Arizona: Eden Productions.

Vekua A., Lordkipanidze D., Rightmire G.P., Agusti J., Ferring R., Maisuradze G. et al. (2002): A new skull of early Homo from Dmanisi, Georgia. Science, 297:85-9. (D2700)

Walker A.C. and Shipman P. (1996): The wisdom of the bones. New York: Alfred E. Knopf. (a popular history of Homo erectus and the discovery and analysis of the Turkana Boy skeleton)

Wolpoff M.H., Wu X.Z., and Thorne A.G. (1984): Modern Homo sapiens origins: a general theory of hominid evolution involving the fossil evidence from east Asia. In F.H. Smith & F. Spencer (Eds.), The origins of modern humans. (pp. 465-7). New York: Alan R. Liss.

2006-06-23 13:57:38 · 6 answers · asked by pope 2 in Religion & Spirituality

2006-06-23 13:57:32 · 2 answers · asked by Anonymous in Other - Diseases

We are a christian family with a Small Business trying to make a honest living unfortunatly the government takes it"s fair share and has took till the business cant give any more. Many things Have hurt us finacialy also,we are praying God will continue to guide us through our hard times and continue to Bless us. I know with Prayer all things are Possible. Thank you for your Prayers. in advance.

2006-06-23 13:57:29 · 14 answers · asked by sugerglaze28 3 in Religion & Spirituality

2006-06-23 13:57:29 · 16 answers · asked by ado41156 1 in Cats

Meat eaters, GO AWAY !!!!!!

2006-06-23 13:57:29 · 15 answers · asked by Annie 6 in Vegetarian & Vegan

2006-06-23 13:57:12 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Mathematics

And no, before you ask, this isn't for the purpose of spamming. I want to get something verified for a company so I can get a discount...and they want an e-mail sent from a manager at suchandsuch address as proof of my employment. Is there an easy program or way to make an e-mail look like it came from a certain place? Obviously spammers all seem to know the trick, based on all the fake addresses in my inbox.

2006-06-23 13:57:05 · 1 answers · asked by CocoaBean316 2 in Internet

write a song name

2006-06-23 13:56:55 · 4 answers · asked by madcow m 1 in Music

I have a Kyocera Slider Remix that has bluetooth. I want to buy the headphones for it, but none of the articles say it will work but my phone says headsets work with it. Anyone know if it will work?

2006-06-23 13:56:54 · 3 answers · asked by phoenix_blaze_3 1 in Cell Phones & Plans