The old theory was that the first and oldest species in our family tree, Homo habilis, evolved into Homo erectus, which then became us, Homo sapiens. But those two earlier species lived side-by-side about 1.5 million years ago in parts of Kenya for at least half a million years, Leakey and colleagues report in a paper published in Thursday’s issue of the journal Nature.
2007-08-09 03:30:54 · 16 answers · asked by I Wanna Know 3 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
But those two earlier species lived side by side not...now we have a problem with reading...shame!
2007-08-09 03:44:07 · update #1
This doesn't disprove evolution at all. It only proves that evolution didn't happen exactly the way we thought it did. It actually gives more weight to the evolutionists. I'm not a scientist, so forgive my imprecise language, but maybe some strains of H. habilus evolved into H. erectus and others didn't, which would account for their coexistence.
Let's remember that what we know of science is always changing. Scientists are making discoveries every day, some which disprove what they long thought to be true.
2007-08-09 04:07:10 · answer #1 · answered by VeggieTart -- Let's Go Caps! 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I'm sorry if I'm not getting your point completely, but the wordage of the question was... off a bit.
As for the "living side by side" thing, try to wrap your mind around this more relevant, easier to grasp idea of how that works.
Evolution is happening today. It is easier to see in short lived things like bacteria and such. We get certain bacteria that are resistant to antibacterials that they were never resistant to before. That is because when we use antibiotics, they kill the week bacteria, but the ones that can live through it get to reproduce and have babies that are resistant. That's how the process works. We still have the old bacteria, but eventually, the stronger bacteria will be the most dominant and even later the only stuff around. It takes time. And yes that time is more than 6,000 years.
2007-08-09 10:53:11 · answer #2 · answered by stevenhendon 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
LOL...
So you're saying the Bible is a lie??
On which of the 6 days that God supposedly created the universe in did he create Homo-Habilis and Homo-Erectus? What about Australopithecus?? Was one Adam...and the other Eve???
You cannot have it both ways!!! You can either see this report...which has yet to be reviewed and validated by the larger scientific community...as further proof of evolution and our ever expanding knowledge about it...or you can rely on your faith...and categorically denounce it.
I'll take a well-substantiated and ever-expanding theory...even one w/ inaccuracies...over blind faith and hypocrisy any day!!
2007-08-09 10:54:55 · answer #3 · answered by widewillie 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There is no evidence that it did not happen. It's just clear that at one point in time, both existed. There is no reason not to believe that the H. habilis of 2.5 million years ago did not give rise to both. Scientists never assumed that evolutionary tree was linear, and now there's proof.
2007-08-09 11:04:48 · answer #4 · answered by novangelis 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
you should have watched the bbc tv programme about this subject. it explained it in easy to understand terms. in it maeve leakey explains why this validates the theory of evolution even more because the family tree of humanity includes adaptive radiation like most other species of animal. whereas before it was thought humanity followed a untypical single line of descent. it makes us even more like the rest of nature. but i expect it will get distorted and misreported by the creationists, this type of thing usually is.
2007-08-09 10:51:03 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because if the best you can do is latch onto some fact that you really don't understand in order to construct a straw man argument for your position then clearly you have no decent evidence to support it.
2007-08-09 10:34:23 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
*Yawn*
I'm just glad you're finished with the whole 6,000 years ago BS.
Science allows for new verifiable data to alter previous explanations. Just because theories can change does not mean they are not the best source of understanding we currently possess.
2007-08-09 10:41:03 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
if you understand evolution then you dont feel you need a creator to explain the universe. sort of if you understand the unchanging laws of physics, like gravity, then you dont attribute natural disasters to an angry god. Calling Nature "God" is putting too much of a human character onto it.
2007-08-09 10:35:40 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Well, you're right, the evidence does clearly indicate that we all evolved. All of us, I say, except for ME. I was created by God. My mom claims to have given birth to me but that's crazy, because I don't remember that at ALL.
2007-08-09 10:37:26 · answer #9 · answered by The Instigator 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
It still points to evolution. 1.5 million years ago, not 6,000. Cool thing about science, it allows for new information.
2007-08-09 10:34:40 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 0⤋