Guinness noitulovE

Enjoy the commercial, enjoy Guinness and stop talking BS!

This is not a scientific video.

I thought it was more like the whole push behind evolution was to create and enjoy guinness. Like this water is nasty, let's evolve and get something better.

"Ahhhh, now that's better!"

Sorry it took me two years to respond to you comment. When I first saw this advert, I didn't have opposing thumbs.

My thumbs used to be opposed, but years of intense therapy have allowed my thumbs to come to recognize each other as people, ya know?

Really get into each other's minds and just respect them for who they are.
I'm not going to lie, and say all the tension's gone, but honestly? I'd say they where "Respectfully disagreed" thumbs now a days! *hearty chuckle*

Yup this makes it look like humans are the more advanced species, when in fact we are on the same evolutionary level as chimps and gorillas.

Well, if evolutionary 'levels' are determined by success, we are vastly higher then either.

But if its determined merely by chronology, yes we are on the say level. Although Swine flu would be far higher then either of us, so I don't really get the value of the comparison ?

It isn't really a comparison at all. In fact, the way it works by is by generation. No species is considered more "advanced" than any other extant species, and all extant species are considered to be in the current generation. Humans are "successful" in our environment because we are well-adapted, but if you rank by any other factors, such as population size, we are incredibly out-ranked by the success of beetles alone. Humans are no more advanced or evolved than amoebae. They do just fine.

And the award for non-sequitor goes to...YOU!


The idea of evolutionary levels is fucking retarded, and you're displaying humorous levels of ignorance to mention them with anything but derision.

I'd have preferred to have just pointed this out with the rather probing question above, but if you don't like reading subtly, fine, there it is clear as day.

What you said was dumb as fuck. If "levels" is defined as generations, it's not less stupid.

Okay, I should not have used the word "levels." It was a quick comment on someone else's response, but I further explained myself in my response to your comment, and clarified that I meant generations. I did not make up the terms generations or extant species, these are common terms in evolutionary biology. There is no rank order in evolution, and neither success nor chronology have any role, and there is no relative comparison.

[cont'd] Let me try to explain some basics of evolutionary biology to you: all species currently alive today are consider extant to one another. Not one is more advanced or more "evolved" than any other, they are simply coexistent. The generation concept is similar to a family tree: you and your siblings and cousins are the current generation. Your relatedness varies depending on your last common ancestor--your parents in the case of your siblings, and your grandparents for your cousins.

Going back to my original comment, every species from humans to gorillas to bacteria alive today is the current generation. A phylogenetic tree would show the human lineage as a listing of extant species together in one generation, with relatedness varying depending on the LCA. We are closely related to chimps because our LCA was recent. Images depicting evolution as a progression from chimps to humans are a misconception. Humans do NOT descend from chimps, gorillas or any other living species.