Little girl's encounter with Pope a farce

[Benton]

(09-29-2015, 12:30 PM)Naranja Tigre Wrote: Ok. If I read it all, and it says nothing about eating the weak, as you claim, will you apologize?

[Naranja Tigre]

(09-29-2015, 01:15 PM)Benton Wrote:

Don't Gimmie that look. You said you had "scientific evidence" that cavemen ate their own when they were weak. You specifically said that.

But your evidence didn't say that at all.

[Benton]

(09-29-2015, 02:23 PM)Naranja Tigre Wrote: Don't Gimmie that look. You said you had "scientific evidence" that cavemen ate their own when they were weak. You specifically said that.

But your evidence didn't say that at all.

Oh no, the look stands.

You made a silly statement. You were provided links contrary. You declined to read them and asked for an apology.

Matlock would be .

[Naranja Tigre]

(09-29-2015, 12:32 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: If it doesn't say it, we can just assume it happened.  Right?

He said it, but his "evidence doesn't support it"

I'm having fun with how seriously you guys take this stuff.

[Naranja Tigre]

(09-29-2015, 02:26 PM)Benton Wrote: Oh no, the look stands.

You made a silly statement. You were provided links contrary. You declined to read them and asked for an apology.

Matlock would be .

He still can't provide evidence to the contrary.

All he showed is that some cavemen somewhere ate some other cavemen, specifically after they had already died.

He claimed early man would slaughter and eat their own when they were weak, his evidence didn't support that.

[Naranja Tigre]

(09-29-2015, 12:50 PM)Rotobeast Wrote: While important,  no.
If it were a constant,  I would be more inclined.

Imagine your lifestyle today if they were never developed.

[Benton]

(09-29-2015, 02:36 PM)Naranja Tigre Wrote: He still can't provide evidence to the contrary.

All he showed is that some cavemen somewhere ate some other cavemen, specifically after they had already died.

He claimed early man would slaughter and eat their own when they were weak, his evidence didn't support that.

http://news.discovery.com/history/archaeology/cannibalism-early-humans-bones-101213.htm

Quote:"Think that a member of your group dies," Fernandez-Jalvo told Discovery News. "The body can give one day off from hunting, which was always dangerous at that time, and what to do with the dead body that may attract other dangerous carnivores that may attack the group."

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/04/0410_030410_cannibal.html

Quote:A growing body of evidence, such as piles of human bones with clear signs of human butchery, suggests cannibalism was widespread among ancient cultures. The discovery of this genetic resistance, which shows signs of having spread as a result of natural selection, supports the physical evidence for cannibalism, say the scientists.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1307936/Early-man-butchered-ate-brains-children-everyday-diet.html

Quote:Among the bones of bison, deer, wild sheep and other animals, scientists discovered the butchered remains of at least 11 human children and adolescents.... Scientists believe that early man ate fellow humans both to fulfill his nutritional needs and to kill off neighbouring enemy tribes.... And the fact that the bones were discarded with those of other animals suggests that there was no religious significance to the practice....Children will have been targeted as they would have been less capable of defending themselves, the study suggests.

Stop posting goofball stuff.

[SteelCitySouth]

(09-29-2015, 02:38 PM)Naranja Tigre Wrote: Imagine your lifestyle today if they were never developed.

I agree about Maxwell's equation.  Benton would never have been able to do the simple (we call it simple) google search below without it.

(09-29-2015, 03:08 PM)Benton Wrote: http://news.discovery.com/history/archaeology/cannibalism-early-humans-bones-101213.htm



http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/04/0410_030410_cannibal.html



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1307936/Early-man-butchered-ate-brains-children-everyday-diet.html


Stop posting goofball stuff.

[Naranja Tigre]

(09-29-2015, 03:08 PM)Benton Wrote: http://news.discovery.com/history/archaeology/cannibalism-early-humans-bones-101213.htm



http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/04/0410_030410_cannibal.html



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1307936/Early-man-butchered-ate-brains-children-everyday-diet.html


Stop posting goofball stuff.

None of that says they ate thier own when they were weak. In fact it confirms what I said, they ate their enemies, which is believed to still happen in parts of the world.

Would you like a mulligan?

[Naranja Tigre]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1317867/Prehistoric-humans-compassion-cared-others.html


Booyah.

You guys are a joke.

[fredtoast]

(09-29-2015, 03:12 PM)Naranja Tigre Wrote:  In fact it confirms what I said, they ate their enemies,

So you think the stronger cavemen were the ones that got eaten?

My opinion would be that the ones doing the eating were the stronger ones.

[Naranja Tigre]

(09-29-2015, 03:26 PM)fredtoast Wrote: So you think the stronger cavemen were the ones that got eaten?

My opinion would be that the ones doing the eating were the stronger ones.

No. I think you had your family, your group, and made war on your enemies and ate them.

When one of yours was sick or hurt, you didn't slaughter them, because they're more useful alive than as food. If they died, you could eat them, but if they heal, they'll be there to help you hunt/fight.

[Rotobeast]

(09-29-2015, 02:38 PM)Naranja Tigre Wrote: Imagine your lifestyle today if they were never developed.

Oh, I know.
I was not discounting it, in the slightest.
It was asked if I thought it the #1 theory of all time.
I'd think I regard Quantum Field Theory higher, as I feel the modern methods of statistical mechanics emerged from QFT (Parisi-Sourlas Theorem).
I'm kind of big on Game Theory, as well.
(yeah I know)

[Naranja Tigre]

(09-29-2015, 03:34 PM)Rotobeast Wrote: Oh, I know.
I was not discounting it, in the slightest.
It was asked if I thought it the #1 theory of all time.
I'd think I regard Quantum Field Theory higher, as I feel the modern methods of statistical mechanics emerged from QFT (Parisi-Sourlas Theorem).
I'm kind of big on Game Theory, as well.
(yeah I know)

Ok that's cool. I love my E-mag equations.

[Rotobeast]

(09-29-2015, 03:24 PM)Naranja Tigre Wrote: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1317867/Prehistoric-humans-compassion-cared-others.html


Booyah.

You guys are a joke.

You should be kind enough to be more specific.
Besides.... you're "new" and vetting is important.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pecking_order

[Benton]

(09-29-2015, 03:12 PM)Naranja Tigre Wrote: None of that says they ate thier own when they were weak. In fact it confirms what I said, they ate their enemies, which is believed to still happen in parts of the world.

Would you like a mulligan?

You don't know what natural selection is? Killing off enemies? The part where it says they killed children because they were unable to defend themselves?

You've shifted from "cavemen took care of their own" to "weaker cavemen ate stronger enemy cavemen of their own group."

[Naranja Tigre]

(09-29-2015, 03:37 PM)Rotobeast Wrote: You should be kind enough to be more specific.
Besides.... you're "new" and vetting is important.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pecking_order

You're alright beast, they know who they are.

[Naranja Tigre]

(09-29-2015, 03:38 PM)Benton Wrote:

You don't know what natural selection is? Killing off enemies? The part where it says they killed children because they were unable to defend themselves?

You've shifted from "cavemen took care of their own" to "weaker cavemen ate stronger enemy cavemen of their own group."

I said many many posts ago that they killed their enemies.

This all started because somebody said it went against nature to care for those who couldn't care for themselves, I said cave men did it, and you said no, they ate eachother.

Now Ive shown you they did care for eachother, with your precious scientific evidence, but I'm not going to hold my breath waiting on an apology for all the crap you've talked.

[fredtoast]

(09-29-2015, 03:24 PM)Naranja Tigre Wrote: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1317867/Prehistoric-humans-compassion-cared-others.html


Booyah.

You guys are a joke.

The conclusions from this research is a joke.

The crippled who were cared for could just have been members of the leaders family, and given special treatment because of that.

[Naranja Tigre]

(09-29-2015, 03:46 PM)fredtoast Wrote: The conclusions from this research is a joke.

The crippled who were cared for could just have been members of the leaders family, and given special treatment because of that.

Of course they were members of the family. You cared for your own, just like people who pay for their family members to be on respirators today.