You have absolutely no proof that the skulls they've found are adequate examples of the general population though. The number of intact skulls is just too small to have a realistic sample set. The only thing clear here is you are an elitist blow-hard that doesn't want to cite any real data. You keep linking pandas thumb crap (a site I've never heard of) and wikipedia.
Originally Posted by KimchiNinja
Either cite some publications in peer reviewed journals that clearly list how many skulls, from what region, what the accepted age (and how they determined said age) are or SHUT UP. You are basing your claim on absolutely NOTHING.
Yeah, maybe we just dug up all the big-brained smart specimens by chance. :roll eyes: I'd also like to point out attempting to poke holes in the best theory going, does not propose a better theory.
Originally Posted by ryanmercer
You should stop embarrassing yourself and linking that site, it's not helping business.