Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Evolution -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Greg or e who wrote (34039)	3/9/2013 2:45:28 PM
From: average joe	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 69300

Tiny monkey teeth suggest Flores hobbit was a dwarf Much smaller than its ancestors (Image: Jared Hobbs/All Canada Photos/Corbis) 06 March 2013 by Colin Barras Magazine issue 2907. Subscribe and save For similar stories, visit the Human Evolution Topic Guide COULD the world's tiniest monkey help unravel the mysterious origins of Homo floresiensis, the "hobbit" human relative? The hobbit's skull is similar to that of a taller hominin, Homo erectus. This suggests to some that H. floresiensis, whose remains were found on an Indonesian island 10 years ago, was a dwarf species that evolved from this larger one. However, its brain and teeth are proportionally much smaller than in typical dwarf species, which others say indicates the hobbit is merely an unusual form of our species. But perhaps the hobbit was not a typical dwarf. Stephen Montgomery and Nicholas Mundy at the University of Cambridge looked at pygmy marmosets (Callithrix pygmaea). They too have previously been put forward as a dwarf species but, again, have unusually small teeth. "This pointed against dwarfism," says Montgomery. Now, using a primate evolutionary tree, the pair have confirmed that these monkeys did indeed evolve from larger ancestors and undergo dwarfism. So why the small teeth? The evolution of a dwarf species usually involves shortening the length of pregnancy or infancy, but recently it has been suggested that there might be a more unusual route: pregnancy length stays the same but the growth of the fetus slows down. This might influence brain and tooth size as these develop early. Montgomery and Mundy found that the pygmy marmoset's pregnancy and infancy are similar in length to their evolutionarily close, larger relations. This suggests they took the unconventional route to small stature (Journal of Evolutionary Biology, doi.org/kpc). "If H. floresiensis is a dwarf, one of the controversies has been whether it fits with previous patterns of dwarfism," says Montgomery. The new analysis suggests it may fit with what is seen in pygmy marmosets. Robert Eckhardt at Pennsylvania State University is not convinced. He is adamant that the hobbit is simply a diseased member of our species. But Dean Falk at the Florida State University in Tallahassee thinks the analysis makes a strong case that primates can undergo unusual dwarfism. This article appeared in print under the headline "Mini monkey holds clue to Flores hobbit evolution" newscientist.com

To: Greg or e who wrote (34039)	3/9/2013 3:25:40 PM
From: Solon	2 Recommendations Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 69300

"Philosophy is dead" is itself a philosophical statement." Nonsense. You are simply pretending that every statement is philosophical. For instance, "my cat is dead". Perhaps if you study higher education for a dozen years or so and write hundreds of Scientific publications and books and get lauded by your peers all over the world--perhaps then I will consider your flippant dismissals of great human teachers as something I should be concerned with! The fact that the great discoveries and teachings of these Masters in their respective fields DO provoke controversy and argument is simply evidence that they take their Mastery to the leading edge of their disciplines. It has often been said that there is more to the truth than just the facts. And when philosophers were also world class scientists, they were able to bring new facts into existence and enlarge our idea of what is Truth. However, in modern theoretical physics, Scientists and philosophers have developed a chasm of separation. Most philosophers have not kept pace with Science--and they add absolutely nothing to the dictum that there is "more to the truth than just the facts". Indeed...they are more clueless about the FACTS than they ever were! So how can they possibly pretend to move beyond what Science has explored and discovered through sense experience?? This is what Hawking meant. Philosophy used to be the efforts of the best thinkers expanding the horizons of human thought and knowledge in terms of what actually constitutes Reality and Existence (and Knowledge, itself). They used to use the FACTS to suggest the unknown. Now they use fictions and ignorance to suggest the unknown. At least...most of them do. "Philosophy is dead" is more provocative than "philosophy is in a coma"! Your flippant dismissal of Hawking, Dawkins, and Krauss makes you either a genius in several disciplines--and certainly more qualified than these recognised authorities with all their awards -g-...or it makes you an uneducated little man nobody has ever heard of who has never written a book or advanced knowledge in any field! I believe you said you were a Sunday School Teacher?! YES?? NO?? And this qualifies you to over-ride the opinions of experts...HOW?? "You are repeating your bigoted response" There was no bigotry in my response. Having an opinion about superstition is not bigotry. Believing that superstition is irrational, uneducated, and foolish is not bigotry. But hey! You got off your Christian insults to derail the discussion! Good on you!!