Darwinist
Out of context: Reply #289
- Started
- Last post
- 592 Responses
- KuzII0
And are you suggesting that for 150,000 years the homo sapien species experienced total social and technological stasis? That in only 6,000 years of recorded history, in an evolutionary instant, we went from scraping on stone to sending astronauts to the moon?
Doesn't add up.
discipler
(Jan 5 06, 10:26)see, now that just demonstrates your lack of intelligence and ability to think properly. check dis from the economist:
"The killer application that led to humanity's rise is easy to identify. It is agriculture. When the glaciers began to melt and the climate to improve, several groups learned how to grow crops and domesticate animals. Once they had done that, there was no going back. Agriculture enabled man to shape his environment in a way no species had done before.
In truth, agriculture turned out to be a Faustian bargain. Both modern and fossil evidence suggests that hunter-gatherers led longer, healthier and more leisured lives than did farmers until less than a century ago. But farmers have numbers on their side. And numbers beget numbers, which in turn beget cities. The path from Catalhoyuk in Anatolia, the oldest known town, to the streets of Manhattan is but a short one, and the lives of people today, no matter how urbane and civilised, are shaped in large measure by the necessities of their evolutionary past."
So you see, it was the agricultural revolution that occurred when the environment was just right at the dawning of the ice age, that the neolithic revolution occurred in some societies, that led to vast and fast changes.
you could also say, using your stupid logic, that for 6,000 years little changed techonologically, with humans still using primitive farming techniques, until in about mid 18th century, the Industrial revolution suddenly paved the way for the man on the moon. Now you can frame that as incredulous if you want to, but we all know that that is exactly what happened. The last 200 years have seen phenmoneal changes due to the spark of an isolated event in Britain. Does that, by your logic, mean that the homo sapien species could only have existed on this earth from the 1760s onwards, at the dawn of the industrial revolution? Clearly you are being stupid with such stupid arguments you stupid stupid man.
plus you are undersestimating the potential of pre-neolitihic man who produced vastly complicated and sophisticated tools, as well as art and music. you should also note that there are societies out there who practice a prehistoric form of hunting-gathering, and have not seen it necessary to adapt to the agricultural methods of 7-10,000 years ago, or the industrial methods of 200 years ago.
ipso facto.