Man's Earliest Ancestor

1. 65

   Ralph Deedsposted 11 years ago

   "Humankind’s common ancestor with other mammals may have been a roughly rat-size animal that weighed no more than a half a pound, had a long furry tail and lived on insects. "
   
   
   
   
   http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/08/scien … l&_r=0

   replyreport
   1. 59

      MelissaBarrettposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I can see it.  Looks just like my ex-husband.

      replyreport
      1. 65

         Ralph Deedsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         Ha!

         replyreport
      2. 0

         Ghaelachposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         Melissa that was naughty, but may be nice for you

         replyreport
   2. 0

      Brenda Durhamposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Wow.   "Man's ancestor"?   
      I thought all scientists and doctors had common sense........

      replyreport
      1. 59

         MelissaBarrettposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         I thought all Christians were kind and temperate in speech and action too.
         
         Go figure.

         replyreport
      2. 0

         Rad Manposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         That's interesting... What's your common sense telling you?

         replyreport
         1. 0

            riddle666posted 11 years agoin reply to this

            Earth is flat, what else?

            replyreport
      3. 57

         A Troubled Manposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         From the OP link...
         
         "Scientists had been searching for just such a common genealogical link and have found it in a lowly occupant of the fossil record, Protungulatum donnae, that until now has been so obscure that it lacks a colloquial nickname. But as researchers reported Thursday in the journal Science, the animal had several anatomical characteristics for live births that anticipated all placental mammals and led to some 5,400 living species, from shrews to elephants, bats to whales, cats to dogs and, not least, humans."
         
         Notice, Brenda, how many species had the same common ancestor? 5400! All of them, mammals.
         
         You see, scientists and doctors cannot deny that humans are mammals... common sense, as you say.
         
         They also can't deny the evidence of evolution and finds like this one that only serve to support evolution and common ancestors like the 'Protungulatum donnae' ... common sense, as you say.

         replyreport
         1. 94

            wildernessposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            All mammals are animals
            From the Christian dogma, humans are not animals.
            Therefore, humans are not mammals.

            replyreport
            1. 0

               Rad Manposted 11 years agoin reply to this

               Well if it looks like a duck and talks like a duck, then...

               replyreport
               1. 94

                  wildernessposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                  Shhh!  It is demeaning and degrading to be called an animal.  Next thing you know they'll be claim you are a monkey!
                  
                  People are not animals
                  People are not animals
                  People are not animals.  Repeat 10 times for true understanding.

                  replyreport
            2. 59

               MelissaBarrettposted 11 years agoin reply to this

               Boobs?  Check.
               Milk?  Check.
               Give birth to live offspring? Check.
               
               Yes, I am a mammal.  If you don't believe me, I'll squirt you in the eye.

               replyreport
               1. 94

                  wildernessposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                    Squirt away, Melissa, squirt away.
                  
                  Of course, you do understand that you have just proven that only women are animals, that the superior male is far above that lowly designation?

                  replyreport
                  1. 59

                     MelissaBarrettposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                     Ah yes.  That must truly be the case.
                     
                     Of course that means that all men who have ever had sex with a women are guilty of zoophilia and are going to burn in hell forever.
                     
                     And women are not going to heaven or hell... because animals have no soul.
                     
                     So basically:
                     
                     Hell: Asses and elbows
                     Heaven: A few priests and eniochs.

                     replyreport
                     1. 0

                        Rad Manposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                        I'm guilty and I'm not going to stop.

                        replyreport
                        1. 94

                           wildernessposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                           Me, too.  Maybe they'll let us visit the zoo once a year.

                           replyreport
               2. 0

                  Rad Manposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                  LOL

                  replyreport
   3. 87

      IzzyMposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Thankyou for this link. I had been trying to find out the name of this mammal, unsuccessfully until now.

      replyreport
   4. 0

      brotheryochananposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      and in that statement you totally miss the tragic flaw in darwins theory of evolution concerning cross species evolution.

      replyreport
      1. 57

         A Troubled Manposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         Please explain that flaw? We know you can't, of course, but it would be entertaining to hear your rendition.

         replyreport
         1. 84

            psycheskinnerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            Don't you know, genes respect semantics boundaries? The don't cross the arbitrary line of what we consider a different species.... clever little blighters.

            replyreport
         2. 0

            brotheryochananposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            Read my hub loser

            replyreport
            1. 84

               psycheskinnerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

               Wow, breaking two forum guidelines in one line. Well done!

               replyreport
2. 45

   Ericdierkerposted 11 years ago

   And I wonder if those who act like rats will be returned to being a rat.

   replyreport
   1. 65

      Ralph Deedsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Don't we wish? That'd be poetic justice.

      replyreport
      1. 84

         psycheskinnerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         Behaviorally rat communities are actually quite peaceful, respect elders and nice to their kids.  We could do worse.

         replyreport
         1. 94

            wildernessposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            At least until there are too many crowded into too small a space.  Whereupon they fight, destroy and eat each other.
            
            We need to re-think the concept of cities and high-rises.

            replyreport
            1. 77

               Kathryn L Hillposted 11 years agoin reply to this

               Its better than a slug.

               replyreport
   2. 0

      brotheryochananposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      no. but they will get a rats reward

      replyreport