Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Oldest Fossils of Homo Sapiens Found in Morocco

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 76 posts

Re: Oldest Fossils of Homo Sapiens Found in Morocco

#41

Post by nkrisc »

jansho wrote: post #38
nkrisc wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not evolution as "God's" way of creating things? Well, why not anything? You can posit anything you want, can you test it? Is there evidence to support it? Why monotheist? How do you know for certain there aren't more gods? How did you arrive at that conclusion? Can you test it? Could you admit your belief in monotheism could possibly be mistaken? We can ask "why not anything?" all day and not get anywhere so it'…

Well, "Why not" is one way to keep an open mind. Why not this world in a multiverse. Why not this world in a simulation. Why not a simulation within a simulation. Why not a programmer who wrote the code for this world - and how is this any stranger than our other what ifs. We're human, we don't just operate on facts - we rely on educated assumptions that we make, some of which may be strong enough to translate into b…

That's great but it doesn't prove anything. You're free to believe anything you like, or anything you intuit, but that has no bearing on whether it's true or not.

So, the reason I find those two origin stories can't coexist? Simply because there is no evidence to suggest one of them is remotely true. It's nothing personal. I too believe many things, but I'm happy to admit I may very well be wrong. Call them operating assumptions.

Re: Oldest Fossils of Homo Sapiens Found in Morocco

#42

Post by jansho »

Myrmornis wrote: post #39
jansho wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, "Why not" is one way to keep an open mind. Why not this world in a multiverse. Why not this world in a simulation. Why not a simulation within a simulation. Why not a programmer who wrote the code for this world - and how is this any stranger than our other what ifs. We're human, we don't just operate on facts - we rely on educated assumptions that we make, some of which may be strong enough to translate into b…

The thing is it's just not very interesting what you "intuit". You're free to do it, but it's of no consequence. Some things that are interesting are (1) observations of reality that allow us to choose among competing hypotheses for how reality works and what has happened in reality, and (2) such testable hypotheses.

If there is a god, of course there are consequences. (This opens up another mess of a rabbit hole so I'll stop here!)

You're right, I "intuit" it because it's unifying and seems to cover all bases, and therefore quite a comfortable position to be in. I also "intuit" it because of the vast indescribable complexity of this world, and it's not just the equations but the thrill, humility and beauty of it all is too much that I have to accept that it doesn't just happen.

But in my earlier point, I wanted to show that a belief in a 'Great Programmer' is not incompatible with a belief in science. I am free to be interested in those two things you mentioned, but I can also attribute the wonders to a god. In a way this is like enjoying an unfinished picture/ story, but knowing how the thread begins and ends: everything comes from him, and everything returns to him. It's like sitting in the privileged seat to witness a slice of this drama. And for me, the least I can do is to acknowledge the great auteur behind it.

Re: Oldest Fossils of Homo Sapiens Found in Morocco

#43

Post by yongjik »

genieyclo wrote: post #14
tqkxzugoaupvwqr wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As far as I know, the radiocarbon method is only reliable up to 50,000 years ago. Past that you need other dating methods.

Why?

Carbon 14 has a half-life of 5,730 years. After 57,300 years, only 1/1024 of the original carbon 14 will remain.

After 300,000 years, about 1.73 * 10^-16 of the original carbon will remain, which is obviously too little.

Re: Oldest Fossils of Homo Sapiens Found in Morocco

#44

Post by jansho »

nkrisc wrote: post #41
jansho wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, "Why not" is one way to keep an open mind. Why not this world in a multiverse. Why not this world in a simulation. Why not a simulation within a simulation. Why not a programmer who wrote the code for this world - and how is this any stranger than our other what ifs. We're human, we don't just operate on facts - we rely on educated assumptions that we make, some of which may be strong enough to translate into b…

That's great but it doesn't prove anything. You're free to believe anything you like, or anything you intuit, but that has no bearing on whether it's true or not. So, the reason I find those two origin stories can't coexist? Simply because there is no evidence to suggest one of them is remotely true. It's nothing personal. I too believe many things, but I'm happy to admit I may very well be wrong. Call them operating…

Yes but see, the same uncertainty also goes to you. Evidence may paint a picture, but evidence is also continuously fluid so there is never a correct picture. A more accurate picture, possibly. But even so, we're not just ruled by rational thinking. Even scientists are driven by a thing called wonder and curiosity - you need those facilities together to make progress. Call intuition as one tool to take advantage of.

But hey I may be wrong too. There's no telling unless He says "Game's up, now who amongst you could see me." I admit that there is that fear in me, but as I explained in another child post, I just can't put down the super complexity and beauty of this world to a chance.

(If my tone seems condescending, I apologise as this is not in my intention at all.)

Re: Oldest Fossils of Homo Sapiens Found in Morocco

#45

Post by ohazi »

gvd wrote: post #35
apeace wrote: post #18

> Since 2004, Dr. Hublin and his colleagues have been working through layers of rocks on a desert hillside at Jebel Irhoud. I have so much respect for archeologists. Spending over a decade in one spot, literally on hands and knees, digging and meticulously sifting through anything that is found, is to me the epitome of dedication to a craft. But another part of me thinks: there must be a better way! I know that exped…

It's called post docs

> or require less human toiling?

post-docs are humans too...

Re: Oldest Fossils of Homo Sapiens Found in Morocco

#46

Post by boneheadmed »

nkrisc wrote: post #28
jansho wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know, the inability to admit being wrong is a human trait and can apply to anyone, including scientists and believers. Why does everyone think that there's only two "origin" stories and they're both mutually exclusive? I believe in evolution, and I'm a monotheist. I don't reach this conclusion very easily. Why not evolution as God's* way of creating things. *I hesitate to use this word because of the baggage…

Why not evolution as "God's" way of creating things? Well, why not anything? You can posit anything you want, can you test it? Is there evidence to support it? Why monotheist? How do you know for certain there aren't more gods? How did you arrive at that conclusion? Can you test it? Could you admit your belief in monotheism could possibly be mistaken? We can ask "why not anything?" all day and not get anywhere so it'…

Unfortunately, you can't test evolution in the same way that you can test for example if an artificial organ will function in an animal. You can only speculate about the past.

Re: Oldest Fossils of Homo Sapiens Found in Morocco

#48

Post by eric_the_read »

roywiggins wrote: post #34
jansho wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know, the inability to admit being wrong is a human trait and can apply to anyone, including scientists and believers. Why does everyone think that there's only two "origin" stories and they're both mutually exclusive? I believe in evolution, and I'm a monotheist. I don't reach this conclusion very easily. Why not evolution as God's* way of creating things. *I hesitate to use this word because of the baggage…

The current Pope is cool with evolution. I think this is a common view, especially among religious scientists. Only some people think evolution is incompatible with divine creation.

Not that you're wrong, but this isn't exactly news. St Augustine, back in the late 4th century/early 5th, was "cool" with evolution, if you care to use those words:

"Th[e] tree surely did not spring forth suddenly in [a mature] size and form, but rather went through a process of growth with which we are familiar. …[It] took its shape as it [gradually] developed with all its parts. … One [form of tree] comes from the other [form of tree], therefore, in succession, but both come from earth and not earth from them. Earth, then, is prior and is their source. The same is true of animals." (http://www.historyandapologetics.com/2015/02/st-augustine-on...)

While he didn't think that a new genus could arise in this way, he was pretty clearly on the right track, especially given the rather sketchy knowledge on the subject of biology in his day.

Post reply on HN