News Massive "Dragon Man" skull found in China might be a new human evolutionary branch

[Fanatical Meat]

I have a theory about these forums and Anime.
You guys are currently proving it (no it is not a bad thing)

 

[sdifox]

I have a theory about these forums and Anime.
You guys are currently proving it (no it is not a bad thing)

What is your theory?

 

[chowderhead]

Obviously put there by god to test us.

God was the original player of populus.

 

[zinfamous]

Personally I don’t understand why some folks cite God doesn’t allow evolution to me the two can easily exist in tandem.

I read about this find Sunday(?) seems really cool to me.
I think an @zinfamous extinction of how this could be a different branch or a completely unrelated branch of Humanity would be helpful.

It's not an issue with their religion: a system of belief and imagination can change and create anything they want to, in any way, to align with their belief. That's how it works. Of course any Christian can square their religion and their god with any concept they choose to, in any way they want, and be comfortable with it. That's how things entirely created within the human imagination work.

But it doesn't mean that something as immutable as evolution ever bends that way.

Simply: the concept of a divine creator inherently rejects the process of evolution, because there is no rational or logical way to believe in a divine creator without also believing that this creator has intent. --there. Just stop there. Read that last bit. It's the most important, and can't be made any clearer.

Evolution has no goal. It isn't even "a thing" in itself. It describes a process that is governed by millions of biochemical and geological processes, just doing their things, as they do, for billions of years. And here we are. Because we are.

There is no rational reason for a human-created deity to have no interest in the creation of humans, correct? Otherwise, if you just believe that this "Creator" pooped into existence one millisecond, created everything, and then just disappeared or now remains dormant or simply uninterested in everything, for what, 12 billion years?, then why not just believe it doesn't exist? What is the reason for wasting your time and what you already know is a merely a placeholder for what we simply don't know yet?

I'm methodist, too, and I grew up with this a lot. Plenty of brilliant scientists and otherwise in the church and community that I am most familiar with, that are still faithful; or at least value the community aspects of the church. Which I think is great. But if such a faithful person holds such a belief that evolution is merely one of god's tools, then they aren't really talking about evolution. They are referring to some other invention of theirs that can't be approached from science. It isn't evolution.

 

[Mai72]

Personally I don’t understand why some folks cite God doesn’t allow evolution to me the two can easily exist in tandem.

I read about this find Sunday(?) seems really cool to me.
I think an @zinfamous extinction of how this could be a different branch or a completely unrelated branch of Humanity would be helpful.

Are we talking about just a Deity, or the biblical God or Allah? Muslim and Christian religions carry a ton of baggage.

Most Muslims will flat out deny evolution. In regard to Christanity, you can't have the story of Adam and Eve and evolution co-mingling. Its why most Christians will deny evolution as well. Evolution destroys the sin myth. That we are all sinners. Catholics have accepted (after many years) micro evolution, but won't accept macro evolution. The only difference is time. Macro evolution happened over billions of years. We have a very difficult time imagining billions of years ago.

Oh. and another issue is morals. Christians will tell you that God stamped morals on your heart, and our morals come from the bible. Well, evolution would say otherwise. And, that our moral system evolved over time. It was evolution that construced our moral system, and not a God. Think back to our ancestors. If you were a bad person and the tribe disliked you, the tribe would send you out of the pack. That meant death. Our ancestors survived within large groups in the beginning. Not by being a lone wolf. So, it evolved to modern day. Being a good moral person has many benefits. One would be having a much happier and healthier life. We evolved our moral code over generations. No God needed.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Are we talking about just a Deity, or the biblical God or Allah? Muslim and Christian religions carry a ton of baggage.

Most Muslims will flat out deny evolution. In regard to Christanity, you can't have the story of Adam and Eve and evolution co-mingling. Its why most Christians will deny evolution as well. Evolution destroys the sin myth. That we are all sinners. Catholics have accepted (after many years) micro evolution, but won't accept macro evolution. The only difference is time. Macro evolution happened over billions of years. We have a very difficult time imagining billions of years ago.

Oh. and another issue is morals. Christians will tell you that God stamped morals on your heart, and our morals come from the bible. Well, evolution would say otherwise. And, that our moral system evolved over time. It was evolution that construced our moral system, and not a God. Think back to our ancestors. If you were a bad person and the tribe disliked you, the tribe would send you out of the pack. That meant death. Our ancestors survived within large groups in the beginning. Not by being a lone wolf. So, it evolved to modern day. Being a good moral person has many benefits. One would be having a much happier and healthier life. We evolved our moral code over generations. No God needed.

really the question is does one view the Old Testament as exactly as written or as a general rule about how to act
Is Adam & Eve specifically about the first humans or a story of respect?

 

[ch33zw1z]

really the question is does one view the Old Testament as exactly as written or as a general rule about how to act
Is Adam & Eve specifically about the first humans or a story of respect?

Adam and eve is about the obedience to your creator.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Adam and eve is about the obedience to your creator.

or about violating trust

or *this part may be off* the word used in old texts was spoiled or evil or fruit, word was the same.
Was there one specific plant at one specific place that wasn’t to be ingested or is it a concept. Like free from bad thoughts until....
Bible is full of metaphors the question is why would someone accept the words but not the metaphor.

Pretty obvious to me Adam & Eve metaphor can easily coexist with evolution.

 

[ch33zw1z]

or about violating trust

or *this part may be off* the word used in old texts was spoiled or evil or fruit, word was the same.
Was there one specific plant at one specific place that wasn’t to be ingested or is it a concept. Like free from bad thoughts until....
Bible is full of metaphors the question is why would someone accept the words but not the metaphor.

Pretty obvious to me Adam & Eve metaphor can easily coexist with evolution.

Authoritarian trust is all about blind obedience. There's no explanation as to why you don't eat the fruit, because that's not the point. Blind obedience is.

The problem here is that the text can be interpreted however an individual wants, and they can argue all they want. That's how a single religious text can yield numerous denominations.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Authoritarian trust is all about blind obedience. There's no explanation as to why you don't eat the fruit, because that's not the point. Blind obedience is.

The problem here is that the text can be interpreted however an individual wants, and they can argue all they want. That's how a single religious text can yield numerous denominations.

meh we could dig into this a lot further but I don’t want to go way off topic.
Love you man.

 

[ch33zw1z]

meh we could dig into this a lot further but I don’t want to go way off topic.
Love you man.

Yea, it gets pretty crazy. For all the arguing I did as a younger man, there's no "real" answers in religion, it's feels all the way down.

 

[nakedfrog]

Are we talking about just a Deity, or the biblical God or Allah? Muslim and Christian religions carry a ton of baggage.

Most Muslims will flat out deny evolution. In regard to Christanity, you can't have the story of Adam and Eve and evolution co-mingling. Its why most Christians will deny evolution as well. Evolution destroys the sin myth. That we are all sinners. Catholics have accepted (after many years) micro evolution, but won't accept macro evolution. The only difference is time. Macro evolution happened over billions of years. We have a very difficult time imagining billions of years ago.

Oh. and another issue is morals. Christians will tell you that God stamped morals on your heart, and our morals come from the bible. Well, evolution would say otherwise. And, that our moral system evolved over time. It was evolution that construced our moral system, and not a God. Think back to our ancestors. If you were a bad person and the tribe disliked you, the tribe would send you out of the pack. That meant death. Our ancestors survived within large groups in the beginning. Not by being a lone wolf. So, it evolved to modern day. Being a good moral person has many benefits. One would be having a much happier and healthier life. We evolved our moral code over generations. No God needed.

I'm pretty sure the Catholic church's official position is that there's no conflict with evolution, I don't believe there's a quibble about "microevolution".

 

[Ajay]

I'm pretty sure the Catholic church's official position is that there's no conflict with evolution, I don't believe there's a quibble about "microevolution".

Pretty well summed up by Pope Pius XII:

36. For these reasons the Teaching Authority of the Church does not forbid that, in conformity with the present state of human sciences and sacred theology, research and discussions, on the part of men experienced in both fields, take place with regard to the doctrine of evolution, in as far as it inquires into the origin of the human body as coming from pre-existent and living matter - for the Catholic faith obliges us to hold that souls are immediately created by God. However, this must be done in such a way that the reasons for both opinions, that is, those favorable and those unfavorable to evolution, be weighed and judged with the necessary seriousness, moderation and measure, and provided that all are prepared to submit to the judgment of the Church, to whom Christ has given the mission of interpreting authentically the Sacred Scriptures and of defending the dogmas of faith.[11] Some however, rashly transgress this liberty of discussion, when they act as if the origin of the human body from pre-existing and living matter were already completely certain and proved by the facts which have been discovered up to now and by reasoning on those facts, and as if there were nothing in the sources of divine revelation which demands the greatest moderation and caution in this question.

Humani Generis (August 12, 1950) | PIUS XII

Encyclical Humani Generis of Pius XII, 12 August 1950

www.vatican.va

Some slightly more modern insights into Catholic understanding:

JPII:

There are no difficulties in explaining the origin of man in regard to the body by means of the theory of evolution. According to the hypothesis mentioned it is possible that the human body, following the order impressed by the Creator on the energies of life, could have gradually been prepared in the form of antecedent living beings [i.e. living beings that existed prior to humanity].

Benedict XVI:

But the doctrine of evolution does not answer everything and does not answer the great philosophical question: Where does everything come from? And how does everything take a path that ultimately leads to the person? It seems to me that it is very important that reason opens up even more, that it sees this information [about evolution], but that it also sees that this information is not enough to explain all of reality.

 

[zinfamous]

really the question is does one view the Old Testament as exactly as written or as a general rule about how to act
Is Adam & Eve specifically about the first humans or a story of respect?

It used to be a story, and was never literal (per Catholic Doctrine), then that letch, Thomas Aquinus showed up, decided he would spend the rest of his life repenting his past and hating himself for being himself, turned to celibate monkery, and drafted many treatise on faith and doctrine, the most important being that the Garden of Eden is literal truth. The church eventually adopted this, and only then was the concept of "original sin" born. I think this was after the Council of Nicea had essentially established Catholic sacrament, ritual, and doctrine (so it is a major thing for this late-life incel to influence something like the church into changing what were established and accepted as simple "moral guides" into matters of literal truth that were deployed only to subjugate women) ...I could be wrong about that timing, though. It probably takes 3 minutes to confirm, lol.

 

[zinfamous]

I'm pretty sure the Catholic church's official position is that there's no conflict with evolution, I don't believe there's a quibble about "microevolution".

right, but they have to invent a version of evolution that isn't evolution, in order to accept that.

I don't see the Catholic Church being keen on the idea of a creator that gives no shits about anything, and certainly doesn't place humans on any greater place than say, the sea sponge. Because that is evolution. Whatever people of faith that believe in a loving god that is really into humans, want to square with evolution, is fine with them.

but it isn't evolution as it actually works. Their version, like any piece of natural law that the religious must square with, still has an "end of questions." Science simply exists to generate questions. When you stop asking questions, you stop doing science. "God did it," at any point, is the end of empirical investigation, so it abandons the scientific method.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

@zinfamous I am more interested in the genetic line of the “Dragon Man”
Is he one of our ancestors or something different.
Were there pre-humans before humans that went extinct?

I am not super good with when humans were known to exist in history.

 

[hal2kilo]

Old Testament which to my admittedly novice knowledge nobody follows the Old Testament exclusively.

Jews are nobody?

 

[Fanatical Meat]

Jews are nobody?

point taken however to my understanding they don’t follow it verbatim as written
It is a book of metaphors, what is written isn’t the point. The point is to think about what the story is telling.

 

[Ajay]

So, I haven't reviewed human evolution in a some time. I became dissolutioned by the sparsity of fossil evidence and the lack of quality therein. From below, the two oldest fossils have an average volume of 1350 cm3 - this does not me that the average human brain volume is 1350 cm3. Such a deduction is strictly impossible to make based on two specimens.

The points in history that pique my interest, in terms of the potential action of God wrt the development of modern humans are below (from the New Scientist):

195,000 YA

>> Our own species Homo sapiens appears on the scene – and shortly after begins to migrate across Asia and Europe. Oldest modern human remains are two skulls found in Ethiopia that date to this period.
>> Average human brain volume is 1350 cm3

170,000 YA

>> Mitochondrial Eve, the direct ancestor to all living people today, may have been living in Africa

50,000 YA

>> “Great leap forward”: human culture starts to change much more rapidly than before; people begin burying their dead ritually; create clothes from animal hides; and develop complex hunting techniques, such as pit-traps.

Did God, at some point, imbue hominid bodies with spiritual souls and spiritual powers therein? I don't know, but I surely would like to.

 

[nakedfrog]

So, I haven't reviewed human evolution in a some time. I became dissolutioned by the sparsity of fossil evidence and the lack of quality therein. From below, the two oldest fossils have an average volume of 1350 cm3 - this does not me that the average human brain volume is 1350 cm3. Such a deduction is strictly impossible to make based on two specimens.

The points in history that pique my interest, in terms of the potential action of God wrt the development of modern humans are below (from the New Scientist):



Did God, at some point, imbue hominid bodies with spiritual souls and spiritual powers therein? I don't know, but I surely would like to.

Until we find some way to scientifically define, detect, and quantify a "soul", you're probably better off not trying to square up the scientific approach with the religious one. Without some fashion of including a deity in the process, you're trying to introduce variables that can't be known.

 

[Ajay]

Until we find some way to scientifically define, detect, and quantify a "soul", you're probably better off not trying to square up the scientific approach with the religious one. Without some fashion of including a deity in the process, you're trying to introduce variables that can't be known.

Thanks, realized how this might come out while having lunch. "I'd like to know", but I'm not going to find out since it's impossible. Dumb of me to complained about the stuff put out on common public internet sites, like the average volume bit, and not see my own folly. Plus, I'm taking this thread in the wrong direction.

 

[nakedfrog]

Thanks, realized how this might come out while having lunch. "I'd like to know", but I'm not going to find out since it's impossible. Dumb of me to complained about the stuff put out on common public internet sites, like the average volume bit, and not see my own folly. Plus, I'm taking this thread in the wrong direction.

Fair enough
Perhaps you'll be fortunate about whatever afterlife you believe in existing and will get to find out then.

 

[hal2kilo]

Massive "Dragon Man" skull found in China might be a new human evolutionary branch

The skull was hidden in a well for 90 years and just recently rediscovered.

www.cbsnews.com

They are labeling it as distinct separation in the "homo" species lineage.
Named after the region it was found in, translated to English The Black Dragon River.
It is quite a bit larger than modern human skulls but still has primitive features. The cranial capacity, or brain size would equal to modern human skull capacities.

Found it to be quite interesting article and am going to read into the links inside the article for further information.

PS. Let me know if formatting needs any corrections. Especially for dark themed users. Some of the copy paste did not have plain text option.

EDIT: my apologies for throwing the missing link phrase in there. Removing due to no supporting terminology in the article or 3 additional links inside article.

Just ran across this article, plus I had also read another article in Archeology News on this subject. It may just be Denisovan skull which never been found before.

Not everyone is convinced "Dragon Man" is a new species of archaic human | Salon.com

 

[cytg111]

Authoritarian trust is all about blind obedience. There's no explanation as to why you don't eat the fruit, because that's not the point. Blind obedience is.

The problem here is that the text can be interpreted however an individual wants, and they can argue all they want. That's how a single religious text can yield numerous denominations.

Yes yes yes.
Its a measure of control.
Now that doesnt mean its a bad thing, at least for its time, if sapiens wasnt taught to walk in tandem we wouldnt be living in a world of mRNA vaccines and imminent colonies on the moon and mars…

 

[ch33zw1z]

Yes yes yes.
Its a measure of control.
Now that doesnt mean its a bad thing, at least for its time, if sapiens wasnt taught to walk in tandem we wouldnt be living in a world of mRNA vaccines and imminent colonies on the moon and mars…

Maybe, maybe not. Societies need structure, no argument from me, but to what extent. Since authoritarian religions have had their way with our societies for most of our history, we will never really know otherwise. Sure, we got to vaccines, I guess we can say "we made it" while millions doubt the science and don't get vax'd because of religious cult-like beliefs anyways