*
Because modern humans are believed to have originated in Africa, if Neandertals diverged from modern humans before present - day populations began to differentiate, one would expect Neandertal sequences to match sequences from non-Africans and Africans to the same extent.
The Kanapoi elbow, dated at 4.5 million, is «fully human», so all these australopithecines and whatnot can not be ancestral to
us because a modern human was already in existence; his thorough - or, let us say, thoroughly selective - combing of the literature has overlooked a paper by Marc R. Feldesman (1982, American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 59:73 - 95) which finds that Kanapoi is very far from being modern human.
Not exact matches
Modern humans have
been around for 200,000 years, Christianity for about 2,000... I feel bad for all of those billions of
humans who
are rotting in hell right now
because they never had a chance to know of Christ.
Furthermore, we live in a world where slavery
was condoned for a while and now in
modern America it
is taboo
because owning another
human being is a reprehensible act.
It
's more important
because, as Hart rightly diagnoses, the
modern mind
is trapped in various false dichotomies — like thinking one has to
be a personal theist or an anti-theist, or that the
human person
is either a ghost in a machine or a machine - generating ghost — and these false dichotomies themselves make it impossible for us to think rationally about topics such as natural law.
Just
because it
's in an ancient book,
is no reason a
modern human should pay any attention to it, TP.
For example, in addition to having higher levels of genetic diversity, populations in Africa tend to have lower amounts of linkage disequilibrium than do populations outside Africa, partly
because of the larger size of
human populations in Africa over the course of
human history and partly
because the number of
modern humans who left Africa to colonize the rest of the world appears to have
been relatively low (Gabriel et al. 2002).
First, its premisses concerning society and
modern man
are pseudoscientific: for example, the affirmation that man has become adult, that he no longer needs a Father, that the Father - God
was invented when the
human race
was in its infancy, etc.; the affirmation that man has become rational and thinks scientifically, and that therefore he must get rid of the religious and mythological notions that
were appropriate when his thought processes
were primitive; the affirmation that the
modern world has
been secularized, laicized, and can no longer countenance religious people, but if they still want to preach the kerygma they must do it in laicized terms; the affirmation that the Bible
is of value only as a cultural document, not as the channel of Revelation, etc. (I say «affirmation»
because these
are indeed simply affirmations, unrelated either to fact or to any scientific knowledge about
modern man or present - day society.)
Modern moral and political thought has often focused on the question of
human rights: What rights, if any, belong to all
human individuals solely
because they
are human?
It
is this one - sidedness we have to correct
because we do not want to give up the
human achievements of the
modern period.
Darwin's theory of evolution, as understood by most of the
modern scientific community, has nothing to say about the «gap» between
humans and «lower» animals,
because no such gap
is recognized.
The Holy See might also have taken a leaf from John Paul's 1991 social encyclical Centesimus Annus and boldly urged the view that
human beings are the basic resource for development,
because the source of wealth in the
modern world
is human creativity.
The biblical answer to the problem of evil in
human history
is a radical answer, precisely
because human evil
is recognized as a much more stubborn fact than
is realized in some
modern versions of the Christian faith.
Moderns have found Augustine's transcendent basis for temporal meaning incredible, and have believed instead that time
is meaningful
because the
human powers of science, reason and morals will progressively lead toward a perfection that can not
be lost.
The transition
is tragic
because the
moderns failed to understand, just as the originators of classical cultures had, how the liberative potential of reason as the
human ability to raise ever further relevant questions
is alienated and frustrated in authoritarian societies deeply marked by classism, sexism, racism, technocentrism, and militarism.
His aim
is so to bring the Christian perspective into the concrete political and social experience of
modern life that the possibility of achieving justice and brotherhood in
human affairs will
be increased
because men
are in some measure freed from the sentimental and romantic notions which can only lead to bitter disillusionment.
Or, to put it in other terms, the boundary between the ancient world and the
modern is to
be traced, not in the Aegean or the middle Mediterranean, but in the pages of the Old Testament, where we find revealed attainments in the realms of thought, facility in literary expression, profound religious insights, and standards of individual and social ethics, all of which
are intimately of the
modern world
because, indeed, they have
been of the vital motivating forces which made our world of the
human spirit.
It
is well known that some of the most significant atheism in the
modern intellectual world has
been aroused
because of the apparent impossibility of reconciling the idea of God with the fact of
human freedom and creativity.
He argued doggedly against «democratism,» the idea that majorities
are always right,
because he believed that democracy
was the characteristically
modern form of political idolatry, based on a flattery of fallen
human nature.
And then there
were bishops like Karol Wojtyła of Kraków, who grasped that the dignity of the
human person
was the battleground on which «the Church in the
modern world»
was contesting with various dangerous forces for the
human future; who thought that coercion of consciences violated that
human dignity; and who believed that the act of faith must
be free if it
is to
be true,
because the God of the Bible wants to
be adored by people who freely choose to do so.
The answer may well
be that
modern humans have inherited a genetic bias towards in ammation
because this response, with its associated depressive symptoms, enhanced survival and reproduction in the highly pathogenic environments present in our
human evolution.
The dynamics of
modern «secular culture» have their roots in a concept of humanism derived from the Christian gospel but that
because of the failure of the churches to respond positively to the values that emerged in Christian culture as implication of Christian humanism, they
were sought to
be realized in
human history under the dynamic of «secularist ideologies of humanism» in opposition to the Christian faith.
The form of argument in this presentation has emphasized several specific points: first, that the Asian values argument, as a challenge to the implementation of constitutional democracy,
is exaggerated and fails to account for the richness of values discourse in the East Asian region - local values do not provide a justification for harsh authoritarian practices; second, that the cultural prerequisites arguments fail
because they ignore the discursive processes for value development and they
are tautological, excessively deterministic and ignore the importance of
human agency it, therefore, makes little sense to take an entry test for constitutional democracy; third, the difficulties of importing Western communitarian ideas into an East Asian authoritarian environment without adequate liberal constitutional safeguards; fourth, the positive role of constitutionalism in constructing empowering conversations in
modern democratic development and as a venue for values discourse; fifth, the importance, especially in a cross-cultural context, of indigenization of constitutionalism through local institutional embodiment; and sixth, the value of extending research focused on the positive engendering or enabling function of constitutionalism to the developmental context in general and East Asia in particular.
Now I
am well aware that one of our
modern humanists might interrupt at this stage and say, «Now your religion, your belief in God and immortality
are put up by your mind, simply
because it will not face the true facts — the utter loneliness and futility of
human living.»
The missional approach
is different than
modern evangelicalism, particularly in this region,
because «the work of salvation, in its full sense,
is 1) about whole
human beings, not merely souls; 2) about the present, not simply the future; and 3) about what God does through us, not merely what God does in and for us.»
This objection has only
been able to gain force
because people have begun associating
modern ideas of the
human person with the «person» of the Trinity.
Obviously this
is a pretty broad question, and I don't care if these
are primary sources, to collaborative works by
modern historians, to historical fictions (as I
'm sure much of this detail will
be left to the imagination as not much evidence will remain), but I
'm looking for how
humans ran societies, and the issue they dealt with, on a day to day basis,
because people live on a day to day basis, and don't, like historians, summarize a decade in a couple of pages of writing.
And leading the world in cracking down on
modern slavery —
because if you
are buying and selling another
human being, you
are undermining all that
is right.
At more than 300,000 years old, Olorgesailie
is significant
because this kind of interaction
is a hallmark of
modern humans that researchers previously thought developed around 100,000 years ago.
Modern - day cannibalism
is fascinating
because it
is widely seen as an extreme anomaly of
human behaviour — either a last - ditch bid to survive or a sick crime perpetrated by a madman.
The Neandertal species did not go extinct,
because it
was never a separate species; instead population pockets of Neandertals died out around 30,000 years ago, whereas other Neandertal populations survived through interbreeding with their
modern human brothers and sisters, who live on to this day.
The South African archaeological record
is so important
because it shows some of the oldest evidence for
modern behavior in early
humans.
Because if some genius Neandertal invents a new kind of hand axe — and they used the same kind for so long, for tens and tens [of] thousands of years — but if somebody in the cave invents a new one, it
's not going to spread beyond that cave probably, it might not even spread that much within the cave; it
's [likely] to die with him; whereas the
modern humans have this thing of watching each other and teaching other and spreading things among themselves among one another, so that 10,000 or so --[it] might have
been a few more, I know that the people
are not too clear about that might — there might only have
been 10,000 Neandertals all over Europe.
The authors suggest that
human activity may even
be driving a similar Lilliput - like pattern in the
modern world, as more and more large animals go extinct
because of hunting, habitat destruction, and climate change.
So, but it does project into the future, and it
's funny that you bring it up,
because one of the things that one of the scientists I talked to, a couple of the scientists that I talked to, mentioned
was that people have this ability,
modern humans have this ability to project themselves into the future and think about a future self so that the theory of mind that allows me to figure out where you
are in your head now also enables me to think where I will
be in my head tomorrow or ten years from now.
Neanderthal genetic material
is found in only small amounts in the genomes of
modern humans because, after interbreeding, natural selection removed large numbers of weakly deleterious Neanderthal gene variants, according to a study by Ivan Juric and colleagues at the University of California, Davis, published November 8th, 2016 in PLOS Genetics.
Although Châtelperronian artifacts closely resemble those made by
modern humans, many researchers have attributed them to Neandertals
because they have sometimes
been found with Neandertal fossils.
Additionally, she peers beyond the traditional boundaries of science and explains that
because of the advancements in our understanding of the universe through
modern physics, religious faith
is best relegated to the social and psychological dimensions of the
human mind.
Researchers had assumed they died out
because they weren't as smart or as good at manipulating tools as
modern humans.
Because scientists know Neandertals and
modern humans mated with each other, «
is it possible that the «
modern» DNA these late Neandertal groups picked up included genes for enhanced cognitive abilities?»
Triple - negative cancers
are so called
because they do not express receptors for the hormones estrogen and progesterone, nor for HER2 (
human epidermal growth factor 2), and hence patients with these cancers
are not candidates for treatment with
modern hormonal therapies or the highly effective HER2 - targeted drug Herceptin (trastuzumab).
Then again,
modern humans may have formed more widespread alliances merely
because their population density
was higher.
This idea of inevitability runs deep in our societal assumptions, probably
because it
's comforting — a picture of a single, forward trajectory, ending in
modern humans as the crown of creation.
Because if you look at afarensis, Lucy
's species, that
's got a heel that
's like a
modern human's.»
But for now, the genetics, and even when the genome
is published, we still won't know,
because so much of the
human genome, we don't know what it means functionally; that holds true for
modern humans, so of course, it
's not going to instantly tell us everything that we want to know about Neandertals.
This publishing spotlight on the first prehistoric
human form to
be discovered (back in 1856)
is appropriate,
because it touches on the hottest topic in palaeoanthropology: the origin of
modern humans.
The possibility that H. erectus and
modern humans interbred
is all the more surprising, he adds,
because most researchers think there
is no evidence for our having swapped genes with the more closely related Neandertals.
Furthermore, «
because some hunter - gatherer societies obtained most of their dietary energy from wild animal fat and protein does not imply that this
is the ideal diet for
modern humans, nor does it imply that
modern humans have genetic adaptations to such diets.»
Louise Humphrey, an anthropologist and tooth expert at the Natural History Museum in London, agrees, although she says that the early weaning of the Scladina child
is «intriguing»
because it
is more than a year earlier than the nearly 30 months typical of
modern human nonindustrial societies.
Genetic analysis of
modern humans is difficult, in part
because the island populations
were decimated by European diseases at the end of the 19th century.