User Controls
Apparently we were kings and shit
-
2017-11-17 at 2:14 AM UTC
-
2017-11-17 at 2:40 AM UTC
Originally posted by Captain Falcon https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/05/070509161829.htm
You are a nigger. Accept it. We all are.
all that really posits is that Australian Aborigines are/were genetically similar to the Africans at the time - I don't think that's really a surprise to anyone (even if their 'development' over the years was different).
Originally posted by Captain Falcon I don't have any problem with being from the middle East. It's you dullards that have an issue with it. Every time you try to go "hahaha u brown", it just makes my cock more erect because I can see you floundering to find a real insult.
nigger -
2017-11-17 at 2:45 AM UTC
-
2017-11-17 at 4:15 AM UTC
-
2017-11-17 at 5:11 AM UTC
-
2017-11-17 at 5:30 AM UTCwrong about what?
is that not what the study found? -
2017-11-17 at 11:11 AM UTC
-
2017-11-17 at 6:28 PM UTC
Originally posted by aldra all that really posits is that Australian Aborigines are/were genetically similar to the Africans at the time - I don't think that's really a surprise to anyone (even if their 'development' over the years was different).
Did you not actually read the abstract? There is little to no credible scientific evidence to dispute the OOA theory and the amount keeps shrinking, and the evidence to support it keeps growing. This specific study tears down one of the last remaining credible disputes. -
2017-11-17 at 7:17 PM UTC
Originally posted by Captain Falcon Did you not actually read the abstract? There is little to no credible scientific evidence to dispute the OOA theory and the amount keeps shrinking, and the jedievidence to support it keeps growing. This specific jedistudy tears down one of the last remaining credible disputes.
corrected. -
2017-11-20 at 9 PM UTC
-
2017-11-21 at 1:23 AM UTC
-
2017-11-21 at 1:28 AM UTC
Originally posted by Captain Falcon Did you not actually read the abstract? There is little to no credible scientific evidence to dispute the OOA theory and the amount keeps shrinking, and the evidence to support it keeps growing. This specific study tears down one of the last remaining credible disputes.
kek, why cite a study at all if the only part you're going to reference is the one part that it doesn't provide any evidence for -
2017-11-21 at 1:49 AM UTC
-
2017-11-21 at 1:58 AM UTC
-
2017-11-21 at 2:02 AM UTCor, to be clearer, you've never seen blatantly political, rather than scientific statements shoehorned into the abstract?
The study only provides evidence for Aboriginals being genetically linked to Africans. If you want to show that there is a comprehensive body of evidence that completely proves the 'Out of Africa' theory, find a study that actually demonstrates it. -
2017-11-21 at 2:27 AM UTC
Originally posted by aldra or, to be clearer, you've never seen blatantly political, rather than scientific statements shoehorned into the abstract?
The study only provides evidence for Aboriginals being genetically linked to Africans. If you want to show that there is a comprehensive body of evidence that completely proves the 'Out of Africa' theory, find a study that actually demonstrates it.
I'd argue that the burden of proof is on someone claiming there is valid evidence against the OOA theory, to do so. -
2017-11-21 at 2:34 AM UTCI don't care either way, nor have I really looked into the matter but you provided a study as evidence that's nothing of the sort
-
2017-11-21 at 3:08 AM UTCThe scientific consensus is in support of the OOA theory. If you want to disagree you need to, you know, science.
-
2017-11-21 at 5:54 AM UTCOut of Africa has a lot of empirical support and is most likely correct, but it was only the beginning of divergent human evolution. Africans are the original homo sapiens sapiens, Europeans are a new and superior subspecies.
-
2017-11-21 at 7:02 AM UTC
Originally posted by 霍比特人说中文不好 The scientific consensus is in support of the OOA theory. If you want to disagree you need to, you know, science.
the general consensus about scientific community is that their not your gotts and deities.
they're are scientific politicians and mercenaries, they dont survive and thrive on extracting nutriens from the air and sunshine, but monies. monies that came from non-scientific, non-neutral corporations and organizations.
stop being superstitious. santa clauses and unbiased scientists dont exist.