1. says

    Darnit, I’m still not finished reading the last Tangled Bank. I’m not a slow reader by any stretch, but there is only so much reading I can get away with in the office without getting busted.

  2. RCP says


    Again off-topic, but that article is yet another example of DI taking quotes out of context and twisting the author’s intent.

    From the DI article:

    A recent study in the Journal of Molecular Biology and Evolution found that Homo and Australopithecus differ dramatically:

    That is not the purpose of the study. The purpose of the study (available at is to propose an explaination why Homo and Australopithecus are so different. They completely mis-represent the study to suit their own needs.

    DI article:

    The anatomy of the earliest H. sapiens [H. erectus and H. ergaster] sample indicates significant modifications of the ancestral genome and is not simply an extension of evolutionary trends in an earlier australopithecine lineage throughout the Pliocene. In fact, its combination of features never appears earlier…

    Uh-oh, an elipsis. With DI, that usually means they left out something important.

    From the Journal of Molecular Biology and Evolution

    In fact, its combination of features never appears earlier; some of its characteristics are unique, such as the very large body sizes and long legs described below, while others can be found in isolation in various different Pliocene and penecontemporary hominid species.

    Huh, early Homo Sapiens have characteristics from earlier species. Since that implies common descent, DI cuts it out of their article.

    The Journal paper suggests that a small group of hominids were isolated from the rest of their species around two million years ago. They then evolved quite rapidly to their surroundings. This is completely different than the Goddidit crap DI is pushing.

    From the DI site:

    The misreporting of the evolution issue is one key reason for this site.

    It certantly is.