Forum
»
Scientists have recreated the face of 9000 year old greek teenage girl (pic)
02-09-2018, 04:26 AM
-
#61
- MetalliNattyCa
- Registered User
-
- MetalliNattyCa
- Registered User
- Join Date: Feb 2012
- Location: Spain
- Posts: 4,901
- Rep Power: 8487
-
-
Originally Posted By MiscInformed⏩
Came in to post Danzig as well, no wonder homosex was rampant in Ancient GreeceI didn't know Glenn Danzig was 9000 years old. I also didn't know he was a chick.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LOaEzmaPfU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LOaEzmaPfU
Always pick #6 crew
+Positive Crew+
┌∩┐(︺︹︺)┌∩┐Men Going Their Own Way Crew ➥
02-09-2018, 04:28 AM
-
#62
- DesiredUserphag
- 1:12TilTheDayIFukinDie
-
- DesiredUserphag
- 1:12TilTheDayIFukinDie
- Join Date: Sep 2014
- Posts: 40,176
- Rep Power: 397140
-
-
I would've been gay
𝗣𝗨𝗥𝗘𝗕𝗟𝗢𝗢𝗗
ωσяℓ∂ тяανєℓєя ȼяєω ₅₀/₁₉₅
𝕬𝖊𝖘𝖙𝖍𝖊𝖙𝖎𝖈𝖆𝖑𝖑𝖞 𝕮𝖚𝖙 𝕸𝖆𝖘𝖙𝖊𝖗 𝕽𝖆𝖈𝖊 ®
ᗪIᔕᑕᖇIᗰIᑎᗩTIOᑎ E᙭ᑕᒪᑌᔕIOᑎ IᑎᗪOᑕTᖇIᑎᗩTIOᑎ
02-09-2018, 04:33 AM
-
#63
02-09-2018, 01:05 PM
-
#64
02-09-2018, 01:06 PM
-
#65
02-09-2018, 01:09 PM
-
#66
- East1600plus
- Bro-god
-
- East1600plus
- Bro-god
- Join Date: Nov 2006
- Location: Lincoln, Nebraska, United States
- Posts: 11,563
- Rep Power: 19090
-
-
Originally Posted By FreeTheRobots⏩
damnit now that you say that I cant un-see itLooks identical to Arnold as Conan srs..
"it's alright man, you can laugh. I laughed when you walked in" - Jay Cutler
Power stance, BOOM
**Husker Football Nation**
02-09-2018, 01:11 PM
-
#67
02-09-2018, 01:23 PM
-
#68
- residesinAZ
- Registered User
-
- residesinAZ
- Registered User
- Join Date: May 2014
- Posts: 10,579
- Rep Power: 35906
-
-
02-09-2018, 01:24 PM
-
#69
02-09-2018, 01:28 PM
-
#70
02-09-2018, 01:36 PM
-
#71
02-09-2018, 01:43 PM
-
#72
- 21stCenturyKid
- Registered User
-
- 21stCenturyKid
- Registered User
- Join Date: Mar 2016
- Age: 30
- Posts: 1,805
- Rep Power: 168
-
-
We as a species are becoming more gracile and nimble.
This "teenage girl" has more bone mass in her face than any man on this website.
This "teenage girl" has more bone mass in her face than any man on this website.
02-09-2018, 01:49 PM
-
#73
- SoutheastBeast1
- Join Date: Mar 2013
- Age: 39
- Posts: 63,742
- Subscribers: 6
- Rep Power: 258536
-
-
More test in Dawn than all of misc combined
"One day I won't be able to lift any more. Not I won't want to lift. I mean physically unable. That day could be decades from now or it could be tomorrow. All I know is that's the day I'll wish I could lift more than ever. The day I'd give anything for one more workout, one more set, or one more cardio session. So go hard and enjoy every workout, every set, every rep. Because one day you will wake up and you will never get it back."
-SoutheastBeast1
02-09-2018, 02:03 PM
-
#74
- eltwentyone
- keep the engine runnin
-
- eltwentyone
- keep the engine runnin
- Join Date: May 2011
- Location: Antarctica
- Age: 34
- Posts: 2,987
- Rep Power: 4376
-
-
apparently neanderthals and humans are separate entities, mind is blown brahs. This thing is probably not human lull
it's interesting to picture neanderthals actually becoming physically stronger and mentally more capable of controlling their bodies and vision as they evolved, but eventually going extinct without humans' evolved social abilities. That may not have actually caused their extinction--there are multiple theories concerning that, including the possibility that neanderthals and ancient humans interbred--but it's perhaps slightly comforting to know that we we're putting our smaller brains to more efficient use.
http://www.tested.com/science/life/4...marter-humans/
it's interesting to picture neanderthals actually becoming physically stronger and mentally more capable of controlling their bodies and vision as they evolved, but eventually going extinct without humans' evolved social abilities. That may not have actually caused their extinction--there are multiple theories concerning that, including the possibility that neanderthals and ancient humans interbred--but it's perhaps slightly comforting to know that we we're putting our smaller brains to more efficient use.
http://www.tested.com/science/life/4...marter-humans/
Sig line can't be a novel
02-09-2018, 02:17 PM
-
#75
- Zackad
- Keanu Reeves Checking In
-
- Zackad
- Keanu Reeves Checking In
- Join Date: Nov 2010
- Location: California, Uganda
- Posts: 25,380
- Rep Power: 219281
-
-
she looked like that at 15-18?
damn, did glow start fading at 5 or something? christ
damn, did glow start fading at 5 or something? christ
Originally Posted By thorpowers⏩
I wouldn't even say it's "poverty" genetics necessarily, just different genes becoming prioritized as our civilization advanced. In those olden times, athletic ability was the #1 desirable genetic trait, as increased athletic ability meant you could fight/hunt/survive that much better, so naturally weaker individuals would die out. Nowadays, we don't need to fight or hunt near as much to survive, but instead need to work. And typically in today's day and age, intelligence translates to success, not high test/athletic ability (barring those involved in professional sports....a very insignificant percentage)Humans will continue getting softer, weaker, less robust, less masculine, lower IQ, and display less sexual dimorphism with every generation.This is due to poverty genetics being allowed not only to live, but to thrive more than good genetics due to welfare and modern medicine.When this woman was alive, low test weak humans would have died very young before reproductive age due to natural selection. The men of her time would have been more athletic than today's top athletes.
"So t
02-09-2018, 02:24 PM
-
#76
- jmoneyjumpman
- Flossing and drippin
-
- jmoneyjumpman
- Flossing and drippin
- Join Date: Feb 2016
- Posts: 4,254
- Rep Power: 31046
-
-
mirin jaw gains
"A quitter never wins, and a winner never quits." - Napoleon Hill
"Obsessed is a word the lazy use to describe the dedicated" - Zyzz
02-09-2018, 02:24 PM
-
#77
- thorpowers
- Registered User
-
- thorpowers
- Registered User
- Join Date: Aug 2013
- Age: 35
- Posts: 3,431
- Rep Power: 9595
-
-
Originally Posted By propreffered7⏩
I don't refute this, nor did I ever imply Einstein or Newton were not outliers during their time. In fact I explicitly said "Newton was one of the most intelligent men to ever live" by definition being an outlier....lol at you talking about outliers then throwing newton, einstein, descartes, da vinci, etc. out there. just because they were outliers, within every time period really, doesn't mean that the avg. iq for that timespan was greater than it is now. they would be outliers today
You are the one who said that kids today are smarter than people from the 1850's solely because we have televisions and cell phones today, your exact quote....
Originally Posted By propreffered7⏩
What you wrote there is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever read. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response did you even come close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this thread is now dumber for having read it.there is simply no way people in the 1850's without electricity have even an iota of the iq of kids today growing up with cell phones, tv, etc.
IQ is not dictated by access to fuking cell phones and television. 'Dur growing up watching pokemon on tv, and scrolling FB on your smartphone makes kids today have high IQ!'
IQ is innate, it's biological and you are born with it. Brain size is highly correlated to IQ in humans. People had bigger brains 9000 years ago.
02-09-2018, 02:35 PM
-
#78
- thorpowers
- Registered User
-
- thorpowers
- Registered User
- Join Date: Aug 2013
- Age: 35
- Posts: 3,431
- Rep Power: 9595
-
-
Originally Posted By Zackad⏩
Extreme athleticism translates to success today just as much as intelligence, top athletes are millionaires and incredibly successful, they are in the top 1%. In the West, the way our society is designed is to encourage the objectively inferior genetics to reproduce (lower IQ, less athletic, more diseases)she looked like that at 15-18?
damn, did glow start fading at 5 or something? christ
I wouldn't even say it's "poverty" genetics necessarily, just different genes becoming prioritized as our civilization advanced. In those olden times, athletic ability was the #1 desirable genetic trait, as increased athletic ability meant you could fight/hunt/survive that much better, so naturally weaker individuals would die out. Nowadays, we don't need to fight or hunt near as much to survive, but instead need to work. And typically in today's day and age, intelligence translates to success, not high test/athletic ability (barring those involved in professional sports....a very insignificant percentage)
damn, did glow start fading at 5 or something? christ
I wouldn't even say it's "poverty" genetics necessarily, just different genes becoming prioritized as our civilization advanced. In those olden times, athletic ability was the #1 desirable genetic trait, as increased athletic ability meant you could fight/hunt/survive that much better, so naturally weaker individuals would die out. Nowadays, we don't need to fight or hunt near as much to survive, but instead need to work. And typically in today's day and age, intelligence translates to success, not high test/athletic ability (barring those involved in professional sports....a very insignificant percentage)
When we have a welfare state that pays people more for the more kids they have, this incentives the people on welfare to have even more kids. The bottom 20% of society is having a disportionate amount of kids than the top 20%. Not only is this supported by government data/statistics, but it is observable reality. Go into a section 8 ghetto and just look around at how many single moms with kids. Now contrast that with a rich gated community, and see how few children you will see. The welfare state is a net negative on the human race. It would be like trying to breed dogs and only taking the slowest, dumbest, and weakest dogs with the most behavioral issues and breeding those. What do you think would happen to the future of that species? That's what welfare does to humans.
Also you are wrong about athleticism being the #1 trait back then. Natural selection has always favored intelligence as the #1 trait in humans. It's the reason we evolved big brains in the first place. Even 9000 years ago humans were physically far inferior to great apes such as gorillas and chimpanzees. The most adaptable humans were the most intelligent humans. Therefore the dumb humans would have died out first, along with their poverty genetics.
02-09-2018, 02:37 PM
-
#79
Originally Posted By Zackad⏩
Looks pretty good for middle aged.she looked like that at 15-18?
damn, did glow start fading at 5 or something? christ
damn, did glow start fading at 5 or something? christ
Smooth Seas don't make Strong Sailors. Keep your head up.
MrWhiskey24 for jolly cooperation (PS)
02-09-2018, 02:42 PM
-
#80
02-09-2018, 02:50 PM
-
#81
- propreffered7
- Registered User
-
- propreffered7
- Registered User
- Join Date: Mar 2010
- Posts: 36,839
- Rep Power: 86393
-
-
U
B) so you think kids learning to program computers vs. Barreling hay has nothing to do with acumen?
The kids nowadays learning findings from centuries upon centuries of information, that former centuries didnt have access to wouldnt lead to higher intelligence?
Further, everything ive read has stated human heads are growing. Have you seen the national geographic pic about humans 100 years from now? Mixed skin, blue eyes, bigger heads, higher iq
As i said before i dont believe in iq but it does measure something
I know you as a poster. And youve got this desire to blame liberalism..which is what i think your point of view is
I know theres plenty, plenty more like it.i just googled and clicked on the first link about humans in 100 to 1000 years
Heres another:.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/parmyol.../#30df82615a96
Originally Posted By thorpowers⏩
A) prove it. Rather, disprove environment is not a larger contributing factor to iq than genesI don't refute this, nor did I ever imply Einstein or Newton were not outliers during their time. In fact I explicitly said "Newton was one of the most intelligent men to ever live" by definition being an outlier....
You are the one who said that kids today are smarter than people from the 1850's solely because we have televisions and cell phones today, your exact quote....
What you wrote there is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever read. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response did you even come close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this thread is now dumber for having read it.
IQ is not dictated by access to fuking cell phones and television. 'Dur growing up watching pokemon on tv, and scrolling FB on your smartphone makes kids today have high IQ!'
IQ is innate, it's biological and you are born with it. Brain size is highly correlated to IQ in humans. People had bigger brains 9000 years ago.
You are the one who said that kids today are smarter than people from the 1850's solely because we have televisions and cell phones today, your exact quote....
What you wrote there is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever read. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response did you even come close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this thread is now dumber for having read it.
IQ is not dictated by access to fuking cell phones and television. 'Dur growing up watching pokemon on tv, and scrolling FB on your smartphone makes kids today have high IQ!'
IQ is innate, it's biological and you are born with it. Brain size is highly correlated to IQ in humans. People had bigger brains 9000 years ago.
B) so you think kids learning to program computers vs. Barreling hay has nothing to do with acumen?
The kids nowadays learning findings from centuries upon centuries of information, that former centuries didnt have access to wouldnt lead to higher intelligence?
Further, everything ive read has stated human heads are growing. Have you seen the national geographic pic about humans 100 years from now? Mixed skin, blue eyes, bigger heads, higher iq
As i said before i dont believe in iq but it does measure something
I know you as a poster. And youve got this desire to blame liberalism..which is what i think your point of view is
I know theres plenty, plenty more like it.i just googled and clicked on the first link about humans in 100 to 1000 years
We'll have darker skin due to global warming
- Nanobots will be integrated into our bodies
- We'll be taller and thinner as a result of climate change
- Our eyes may turn red from genetic mutations
- We could have superhuman abilities, also from genetic mutations
- We'll generally be smarter, stronger and better looking
https://www.google.com/amp/www.daily...d-survive.html- Nanobots will be integrated into our bodies
- We'll be taller and thinner as a result of climate change
- Our eyes may turn red from genetic mutations
- We could have superhuman abilities, also from genetic mutations
- We'll generally be smarter, stronger and better looking
Heres another:.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/parmyol.../#30df82615a96
02-09-2018, 02:59 PM
-
#82
- AWillis
- Social Media Influencer
-
- AWillis
- Social Media Influencer
- Join Date: Jun 2012
- Location: Trump Towers
- Height: 6'0"
- Weight: 175 lbs
- Posts: 40,348
- Subscribers: 4
- Rep Power: 196950
-
-
"Scientists have recreated the face of 9000 year old greek teenage boy that identifies as a girl (pic)"
Cobra Kai Crew
srs
02-09-2018, 03:02 PM
-
#83
- thorpowers
- Registered User
-
- thorpowers
- Registered User
- Join Date: Aug 2013
- Age: 35
- Posts: 3,431
- Rep Power: 9595
-
-
Originally Posted By propreffered7⏩
Genetics is everything. Education does not improve your genetic potential. Put a chimpanzee with a 480 cc brain in the finest education program ever constructed and it's not going to be smarter than an average human with absolutely no education. Because humans have bigger and more complex brains. Newton didn't become so smart because he read so many books and head great education. He was born that way, it was in his genetics. Knowledge and memorizing facts does not equal intelligence. Intelligence is far more complex and involves pattern recognition, rationale, the ability to solve problems.UThe kids nowadays learning findings from centuries upon centuries of information, that former centuries didnt have access to wouldnt lead to higher intelligence?
Now a bad environment can prevent a genetically gifted person from reaching their potential. Same with height. You can take someone who has the genetic potential to be 6'5" and give them a poverty diet and neglect them, and it can stunt their growth, they may only reach 5'11" because of it. However feeding that same human EXTRA food and giving them extra nutrition, won't make them surpass their genetic potential, they won't be 7 feet tall because of it. Just the same way a human won't become more intelligent than their genetics will allow because of better education or more knowledge available.
No matter how much you want intelligence to be a simple product of environment, it doesn't make it so. It may hurt your feelings, but the evidence suggests genetics is the number one factor in explaining ones IQ. I value truth over feelings. If new evidence ever surfaced that suggested otherwise, then I would change my position, but the evidence is overwhelming.
02-09-2018, 03:11 PM
-
#84
- Reliance012
- Registered User
-
- Reliance012
- Registered User
- Join Date: Jul 2012
- Posts: 7,601
- Rep Power: 51600
-
-
Originally Posted By thorpowers⏩
It never ceases to amaze me how people, like you, can speak with such conviction on a topic you know so little about. It is well substantiated that IQ is plastic - and education, nutrition and generally improved socioeconomic conditions lead to improvements in it. This is one of the reasons why the black-white IQ gap has been continually getting smaller.I don't refute this, nor did I ever imply Einstein or Newton were not outliers during their time. In fact I explicitly said "Newton was one of the most intelligent men to ever live" by definition being an outlier....
You are the one who said that kids today are smarter than people from the 1850's solely because we have televisions and cell phones today, your exact quote....
What you wrote there is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever read. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response did you even come close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this thread is now dumber for having read it.
IQ is not dictated by access to fuking cell phones and television. 'Dur growing up watching pokemon on tv, and scrolling FB on your smartphone makes kids today have high IQ!'
IQ is innate, it's biological and you are born with it. Brain size is highly correlated to IQ in humans. People had bigger brains 9000 years ago.
You are the one who said that kids today are smarter than people from the 1850's solely because we have televisions and cell phones today, your exact quote....
What you wrote there is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever read. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response did you even come close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this thread is now dumber for having read it.
IQ is not dictated by access to fuking cell phones and television. 'Dur growing up watching pokemon on tv, and scrolling FB on your smartphone makes kids today have high IQ!'
IQ is innate, it's biological and you are born with it. Brain size is highly correlated to IQ in humans. People had bigger brains 9000 years ago.
"Seen in the light of evolution, biology is, perhaps, intellectually the most satisfying and inspiring science. Without that light it becomes a pile of sundry facts -- some of them interesting or curious but making no meaningful picture as a whole."
02-09-2018, 03:12 PM
-
#85
- thorpowers
- Registered User
-
- thorpowers
- Registered User
- Join Date: Aug 2013
- Age: 35
- Posts: 3,431
- Rep Power: 9595
-
-
Originally Posted By propreffered7⏩
You are 100% wrong. ALL of the data shows that humans cranial capacity is shrinking. Our brains are literally getting smaller.Further, everything ive read has stated human heads are growing. Have you seen the national geographic pic about humans 100 years from now? Mixed skin, blue eyes, bigger heads, higher iq
https://www.scientificamerican.com/a...ted-to-shrink/
http://discovermagazine.com/2010/sep...rain-shrinking
http://www.ancient-origins.net/news-...n-brain-001446
Looking at the cover of some BS Nat geo magazine cover and seeing mixed skin and blue eyes, the fuk does that have to do with anything?? They are predicting that because of multiculturalism. That won't grow the human brain. Our brains are shrinking, our test is getting lower, our jaws are getting smaller, most people don't even have room in their jaw for wisdom teeth anymore. These are verifiable facts, and observable reality. The human species is getting objectively inferior with every generation, and yes it is being accelerated by liberal policies. You live in a delusional world.
If you can provide evidence that human brains are not shrinking, and are in fact growing. Then I would gladly look at the evidence and scrutinize it, and reassess my position based on the new evidence. Though, I highly doubt any exist, and you just pull all this out of thin air because, feelings.
02-09-2018, 03:13 PM
-
#86
- AlamedaBoy
- Registered User
-
- AlamedaBoy
- Registered User
- Join Date: Aug 2012
- Posts: 7,706
- Rep Power: 3317
-
-
Yah intelligence is being able to interpret things a certain way as they happen, simply knowing stuff doesn't mean someone has high IQ. Me for example, I love reading and am naturally intuitive but I am just not very bright. I only get things when I read them. I can appreciate the point and it may be something I had thought about but was unable to articulate but without someone sparking that thought in me I would have never come up with it myself.
But can someone explain her colouring? Findings seem to suggest early Britons were dark skinned and this was 10,000 years ago. Would expect these Greeks would be slightly darker.
But can someone explain her colouring? Findings seem to suggest early Britons were dark skinned and this was 10,000 years ago. Would expect these Greeks would be slightly darker.
LAY DOWN AND ROT CREW
02-09-2018, 03:15 PM
-
#87
- MakeABanana
- 92b pwneq
-
- MakeABanana
- 92b pwneq
- Join Date: Nov 2009
- Location: New Jersey, United States
- Posts: 26,029
- Rep Power: 137921
-
-
02-09-2018, 03:15 PM
-
#88
- StrawHat94
- Not Indian
-
- StrawHat94
- Not Indian
- Join Date: Nov 2013
- Location: england, United Kingdom (Great Britain)
- Posts: 9,258
- Rep Power: 14141
-
-
Saw this on insta a couple days back and completely lost it
Black Lives Matter
02-09-2018, 03:18 PM
-
#89
- propreffered7
- Registered User
-
- propreffered7
- Registered User
- Join Date: Mar 2010
- Posts: 36,839
- Rep Power: 86393
-
-
Originally Posted By thorpowers⏩
Yes, so your argument is the caveman who were just forming language are on the same level intelligence wise as the people who built upon that language for 2000 years of evolution?Genetics is everything. Education does not improve your genetic potential. Put a chimpanzee with a 480 cc brain in the finest education program ever constructed and it's not going to be smarter than an average human with absolutely no education. Because humans have bigger and more complex brains. Newton didn't become so smart because he read so many books and head great education. He was born that way, it was in his genetics. Knowledge and memorizing facts does not equal intelligence. Intelligence is far more complex and involves pattern recognition, rationale, the ability to solve problems.
Now a bad environment can prevent a genetically gifted person from reaching their potential. Same with height. You can take someone who has the genetic potential to be 6'5" and give them a poverty diet and neglect them, and it can stunt their growth, they may only reach 5'11" because of it. However feeding that same human EXTRA food and giving them extra nutrition, won't make them surpass their genetic potential, they won't be 7 feet tall because of it. Just the same way a human won't become more intelligent than their genetics will allow because of better education or more knowledge available.
No matter how much you want intelligence to be a simple product of environment, it doesn't make it so. It may hurt your feelings, but the evidence suggests genetics is the number one factor in explaining ones IQ. I value truth over feelings. If new evidence ever surfaced that suggested otherwise, then I would change my position, but the evidence is overwhelming.
Now a bad environment can prevent a genetically gifted person from reaching their potential. Same with height. You can take someone who has the genetic potential to be 6'5" and give them a poverty diet and neglect them, and it can stunt their growth, they may only reach 5'11" because of it. However feeding that same human EXTRA food and giving them extra nutrition, won't make them surpass their genetic potential, they won't be 7 feet tall because of it. Just the same way a human won't become more intelligent than their genetics will allow because of better education or more knowledge available.
No matter how much you want intelligence to be a simple product of environment, it doesn't make it so. It may hurt your feelings, but the evidence suggests genetics is the number one factor in explaining ones IQ. I value truth over feelings. If new evidence ever surfaced that suggested otherwise, then I would change my position, but the evidence is overwhelming.
Theres been no improvement in intelligence upon suceeding years of information?
Its not hurting my feelings, i have a high iq. I just know that youre wrong
Bookmarks
-
- Digg
-
- del.icio.us
-
- StumbleUpon
-
-
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts