Samaris wrote: » An awful lot of these have explanations. "I don't understand this" doesn't actually mean that no-one does. And even the things that science hasn't yet explained; generally they -will- be explained according to the natural laws of the universe that "science" attempts to interpret and connect the dots with.
12Phase wrote: » Science is still struggling to explain Donald Trump's hair.
LordSutch wrote: » God. Love.
kneemos wrote: » What can science not explain?
Bongalongherb wrote: » How can a human being hold/contain so much personal gravity/magnetism ?
Capt'n Midnight wrote: » But what about all the others ? or that local extinctions happen around the same time humans arrive in a previously isolated area, worldwide, over tens of thousands of years ?
Tigger99 wrote: » Science can't explain love
Tigger99 wrote: » This post is brought to you by wine.
ScumLord wrote: » The likes of the giant sloth were on the way out from what I'm reading
While South America currently has no megaherbivore species weighing more than 1000 kg, prior to this event it had a menagerie of about 25 of them (consisting of gomphotheres, camelids, ground sloths, glyptodonts, and toxodontids – 75% of these being 'old-timers'), dwarfing Africa's present and recent total of 6
Capt'n Midnight wrote: » No I don't believe in this harmony with nature stuff. North America had camels and llamas and horses and giant sloths and "cheetahs" and mammoths and mastodons and tapirs and giant beavers and cave lions and glyptodons and sabre tooth cats and huge armadillos and short faced bears and lots of large birds. In North America the big animals now are pretty much bison, moose, elk, caribou, deer, pronghorn, muskox, bighorn sheep, mountain goat. All save the pronghorns descended from Asian ancestors that had evolved with human predators We pretty much wiped out the megafauna (stuff bigger than a cow) everywhere we went apart from Africa. Lots of islands had big animals Malta, New Zealand , Madagascar. All the places with pygmy elephants/mammoths.
Dughorm wrote: » How? That sounds like blind faith to me - I think blind faith in anything be it science, politics or religion is a bad thing.
ScumLord wrote: » Native north Americans seemed to have struck a balance after a shaky start once humans expanded into that continent.
Wibbs wrote: » One interesting thing about them is though they were serious level apex predators they didn't cause any wide scale large animal extinctions in all the time they were around. They hit a prey/predator ratio equilibrium and it stuck, like any other apex predator. We don't. Even without direct datable evidence like tools in situ you can pretty much track our progress across the world by the sudden extinctions of animals. So if an area only has evidence so far found of a later date, yet there's a sudden unexplained die off of animals before that date, then keep digging chances are you'll find us. Australian Aborigines are often seen as "one with nature" and all that stuff, yet they wiped out a shítload of species soon after they got there
EndaHonesty wrote: » How many species extinctions are Australian Aborigines responsible for?
ceecee14 wrote: » How can Salmon come in from the Atlantic Ocean and find its way miles up the tiny little stream it was born on.. Also, how come we can make crazy things like USB Memory sticks, CDs, Spaceships that can make it to Mars, bit no cure for cancer?
Wibbs wrote: » Oh it sure was complex W hence I said "So bit by bit, by small changes and large they became rarer and rarer in the landscape". Their demise was clearly multifactoral and would likely vary depending on geographical area too. Certain factors that likely had an impact are pretty evident and built on solid evidence though. Smaller sized groups, much smaller networks, a changing landscape and climate and us showing up. They would likely have survived everything but us showing up, as they had before for over 200,000 years, but we were the extra pressure. It didn't have to be much either. This didn't happen overnight. We were occupying the same areas for between 5 and 10,000 years depending on which dates we look at. That's quite a time period for two competing species to coexist, especially apex predators. So even if the only difference was that we had one more child to adulthood than they did, over such timeframes the population would shift in our favour. Even having kids with each other would be a pressure on them as our numbers grew. One interesting thing about them is though they were serious level apex predators they didn't cause any wide scale large animal extinctions in all the time they were around. They hit a prey/predator ratio equilibrium and it stuck, like any other apex predator. We don't. Even without direct datable evidence like tools in situ you can pretty much track our progress across the world by the sudden extinctions of animals. So if an area only has evidence so far found of a later date, yet there's a sudden unexplained die off of animals before that date, then keep digging chances are you'll find us. Australian Aborigines are often seen as "one with nature" and all that stuff, yet they wiped out a shítload of species soon after they got there(and may have changed the climate with their bush burning hunting techniques). Hell, New Zealand was only colonised by humans in the 10th -11th century and the Maori killed off all species of Moa and the giant Hasst(SP?) eagle before Europeans showed up. Something like 15% of bird species were wiped out as humans made their way across the Pacific islands. You can track other extinctions in the New World and Old as we make our way through it. That right there is a big difference with modern humans and it continues today. That Neandertals were able to hang around for a fair few thousand years alongside us says much for their survival skills and adaptability.
Maximus Alexander wrote: » There is no 'before' the big bang. Time begins at the moment of the big bang, and just like you can't go South from the South pole, you can't go before the big bang.
This was one of three Nike-Tomahawk rockets launched this season; 3 others had been launched in 1980-81. The rockets, weighing more than a ton, carried a 240-lb payload to 120 miles.
Mister Vain wrote: » Why does my piss come out in two different directions?
"The issue of Neanderthal extinction is very complex, and very little is agreed upon," Goldfield said
EndaHonesty wrote: » All of it wild speculation that is offered as definitive fact. No "I believe" or "in my opinion".
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wb.vanillicon.com/v2/b605825002726fa398519aca553ff0db.svg)
