The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
Reminder: "Scientists" literally believe monkeys rafted to SA
Poast new message in this thread
Date: February 23rd, 2026 12:14 PM Author: robot daddy on "vegetation mats". and there are textbooks with little diagrams of geologic and phylogenetic timelines and cartoon drawings of monkeys on rafts with arrows going trans atlantic (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5837536&forum_id=2!#49688947) |
 |
Date: February 23rd, 2026 12:36 PM Author: lib quotemo=literally WLMAS=dumb nigger 🚨 this is a WLMAS account 🚨
🚨 this is a WLMAS account 🚨
🚨 this is a WLMAS account 🚨
🚨 this is a WLMAS account 🚨
🚨 this is a WLMAS account 🚨
🚨 this is a WLMAS account 🚨
🚨 this is a WLMAS account 🚨
🚨 this is a WLMAS account 🚨
🚨 this is a WLMAS account 🚨
🚨 this is a WLMAS account 🚨
🚨 this is a WLMAS account 🚨
🚨 this is a WLMAS account 🚨
🚨 this is a WLMAS account 🚨
🚨 this is a WLMAS account 🚨
🚨 this is a WLMAS account 🚨
🚨 this is a WLMAS account 🚨
🚨 this is a WLMAS account 🚨
🚨 this is a WLMAS account 🚨
🚨 this is a WLMAS account 🚨 |
Date: February 23rd, 2026 12:16 PM Author: '"''"'''" when you see stuff like this it makes sense
https://youtu.be/9Rp2ZfYnifQ?si=tY8btkmXH8Gx7hdh
run that same experiment thousands of times over millions of years with different size rafts during different seasons and weather conditions. monkeys aren’t going to suicide by jumping into the ocean |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2026 12:20 PM Author: robot daddy yeah it didn't happen though. not across the Atlantic thats a Joke. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5837536&forum_id=2!#49688958) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2026 12:22 PM Author: '"''"'''" it easily could have. rafts that broke off the African coast have showed up intact on the coast of South America during modern times. It’s easy for scientists to test the soil and vegetation to confirm. they’ve even found African insects living in the dirt of such rafts (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5837536&forum_id=2!#49688962) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2026 12:30 PM Author: lib quotemo = literally WLMAS = dumb nigger 🚨 this is a WLMAS account 🚨
|
|
Date: February 23rd, 2026 12:42 PM Author: robot daddy Why did they just happen to land at the one point or piece of land that has the same type of jungle environment they originated in and why just this one time, only with monkeys? It is way to convenient for explaining away an anomaly that breaks the other models. It is more likely that the land masses separated with the monkeys already in them, and then the two jungles continued to develop in similar but divergent ways. Continents separating, then monkeys sailing on rafts to reach the other jungle is a bit too convenient and implausible (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5837536&forum_id=2!#49689082) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2026 12:43 PM Author: '"''"'''" It probably happened dozens of times and most of the times they never made it or ended up in an inhospitable place. but when you consider prevailing ocean currents South America is a likely destination. it still happens to this day, and they’ve found non terrestrial insects on those rafts (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5837536&forum_id=2!#49689087) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2026 12:50 PM Author: robot daddy lol link to another example of a mammal successfully making a transatlantic journey on a "vegetation raft", let alone then reproducing and resulting in the amount of diversity you see in new world monkeys. you can't. and its not just that, the biggest issue is that this hypothesis is not even well-motivated, it is specifically being used to explain an anomaly in a way that avoids questioning other models thats the biggest issue its way too convenient. even if 20 monkeys made it over the idea that they just transplant over to the other jungle and generate that level of diversity is an absolute joke. its much more plausible that the jungles separated with the monkeys still in them. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5837536&forum_id=2!#49689125) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2026 12:51 PM Author: '"''"'''" off the top of my head, the Hawaiian hoary bat (trans-pacific). It’s the only mammal native to Hawaii. And no, they cannot “fly” that far. Bats are good over short distances. They don’t soar like birds do. for this to happen with an earth raft, it’s usually going to be a species that lives in trees (like bats and monkeys) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5837536&forum_id=2!#49689137) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2026 1:09 PM Author: robot daddy Hoary bats and dozens of other hawaiian flora and fauna are another huge example of FRAUDLIES, they represent dozens of independent "impossible" colonization events all stacked on top of each other, each explained away individually rather than confronted as a collective anomaly. It's a collection of individual just-so stories that have never been satisfactorily unified into a single coherent account (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5837536&forum_id=2!#49689212) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2026 1:16 PM Author: '"''"'''" why even ask the question then if you’re just going to land on “god did it” as your answer? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5837536&forum_id=2!#49689235) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2026 1:55 PM Author: robot daddy Are you retarded? My entire point is all about more rigorous explanations, and intellectual honesty about incomplete models, and you think that means I think "God did it?". This is seriously why I hate midwit redditors like you, because you cannot even imagine the idea that people would challenge ideas due to genuine structural tension in models. You assume retarded shit is correct because its in a book, and then when someone challenges it its because they believe in "God". And the reason for it is simple too-- you don't have thoughts of your own outside what groups of humans or institutions think. If an institution claims something its "correct" until its not, and if anyone challenges it its because they are siding with an alternative institution (some religion). (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5837536&forum_id=2!#49689406) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2026 12:23 PM Author: cowgod (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5837536&forum_id=2!#49688965) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2026 12:23 PM Author: Westside L.A. Guy Idk what you're talking about redpill me on this (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5837536&forum_id=2!#49688964) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2026 12:26 PM Author: '"''"'''" primates originated in Africa long after South America and Africa were separate continents but somehow they existed on both continents when humans started doing transatlantic voyages (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5837536&forum_id=2!#49688978) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2026 12:29 PM Author: lib quotemo = literally WLMAS = dumb nigger 🚨 this is a WLMAS account 🚨
|
|
Date: February 23rd, 2026 12:35 PM Author: robot daddy New World monkeys (monkeys found in South and Central America) are closely related to African monkeys based on genetic and fossil evidence. The problem is that South America and Africa were already separated by the Atlantic Ocean by the time these monkeys appear in the fossil record, around 35-40 million years ago.
The leading hypothesis for how they got there is that a small group of African primates accidentally floated across the Atlantic on a "vegetation mat"-- essentially a tangled mass of trees, roots, and debris that gets swept into the ocean during storms and floods. The idea is that some monkeys got stranded on one of these mats, drifted on ocean currents, and somehow survived the journey to reach South America. That founding population then evolved into all the New World monkey species we see today.
My issue with this is its ridiculous and that there is no way this happened. I don't know how it happened but it wasn't that. I think the most likely explanation has to be that the timelines for when Africa and SA separated and when primates emerged have to be wrong. People argue there are hard limits on the primate emergence timeline and on continental drift, but I see them as more guesswork than they are willing to admit. |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2026 12:40 PM Author: '"''"'''" what exactly is your objection to this theory? a giant earth raft like the one in the video above wouldn’t sink. It would float just like a log until it reaches another coast. if there were monkeys on board where would they go? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5837536&forum_id=2!#49689074) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2026 12:45 PM Author: robot daddy There is zero evidence for it and its essentially unfalsifiable. Its basically a just-so story to explain an anomaly in a way that preserves other models that are already thought to be true (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5837536&forum_id=2!#49689095) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2026 12:46 PM Author: '"''"'''" your theory that the timelines are wrong is easily falsifiable since we have the fossile evidence to back it up (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5837536&forum_id=2!#49689097) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2026 12:52 PM Author: robot daddy lol no not true at all. it isn't just about fossil evidence its about when the continents may have separated. the dating of continental separation isn't read directly from the rock--it's modeled. You're reconstructing past positions from current magnetic striping on the ocean floor, from hotspot tracks, from sedimentary sequences, all of which have error bars that tend to get quietly compressed in the final narrative.
The primate fossil record is even softer. Absence of fossils from a period doesn't mean there couldn't have been primates. It just means absence of preserved and discovered fossils, which is a completely different thing. The Amazon basin is one of the worst places on earth for fossil preservation. We are almost certainly missing enormous chunks of the story. |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2026 1:25 PM Author: '"''"'''" Im not talking about the absence of fossils. Im referring to the ones that exist. We can measure the similarities in the primate fossils that existed on both continents 40 million years ago and then see how they diverged from there (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5837536&forum_id=2!#49689264) |
|
Date: February 24th, 2026 9:41 AM Author: Like Clavicular but maxing annoying screeds (gunneratttt) everything about evolution and pre-history is unfalsifiable until we invent a time machine and can go observe what happened.
but if we know that they're genetically related and that they didn't cross some land bridge, what is the alternative explanation?
we've observed animals rafting on landmasses after the hurricanes and such. over the course of millions of years the chance of this happening doesn't seem super far-fetched. less far-fetched than all the insane morphology and evolutionary traits that happened spontaneously in animals that we know happened. |
|
Date: February 24th, 2026 9:55 AM Author: robot daddy The grand narrative parts of Evolutionary theory and adaptationism are unfalsifiable, yes. But there are fields that fall under "evolutionary theory" that are real science. Phylogenetics is real and makes specific predictions that can be falsified. Lumping that together with "a small group of animals floated across an ocean 35 million years ago" to say "well it's all equally unfalsifiable" is intellectually dishonest, even if unintentionally so.
The "we've observed animals rafting after hurricanes" point I think is weak, because it scales a local observation to an extraordinary claim without accounting for the compounding probabilities. Seeing iguanas on debris after a Caribbean hurricane is not evidence for a transoceanic founding event. The gap between those two things is enormous and gesturing across it isn't an argument.
I think the honest alternative is to say "we don't know". The burden isn't on the skeptic to produce a better story, it should be on the hypothesis to meet evidentiary standards. If you want to know what I honestly think, its that the timelines for continental separation and fossil records are off, and the two landmasses separated at a time where primates had already emerged on Africa. You have two uncertain timelines being cross-referenced to produce a confident conclusion, and when they don't match, instead of questioning either timeline, the field invents a mechanism to bridge the gap. |
|
Date: February 24th, 2026 10:21 AM Author: Like Clavicular but maxing annoying screeds (gunneratttt) i didn't say it was all "equally unfalsifiable" (although unfalsifiable is binary, so it is, but i get what you mean that some unfalsifiable things have more evidence than others).
maybe it's weak evidence but it's still evidence. creatures can travel on debris and make it to a non-native landmass, survive, and procreate that's evidence. sure, crossing the atlantic is significantly less likely, but if we're talking about millions of years, low probability events can become probable.
i think inherent in the landmass theory is that it's the best guess considering the evidence available. i doubt proponents would claim they "know" it happened. i assume people do question the timeline, but that the evidence in favor of it is very strong, so they think it's more likely *something* happened to get them here, and without evidence that they migrated some other way this is their best guess. i think you're jumping the gun here by assuming no one questions the timeline. with every theory there are experts who are skeptical of it. there are climate scientists who don't believe in anthropogenic climate change, but most do and that's why it's the predominant theory. but you can't say no one questions it. |
|
Date: February 24th, 2026 10:38 AM Author: robot daddy I think you are right that I probably am slightly underweighting that serious researchers do contest the timelines. Fields aren't as monolithic as textbook versions suggest. But I stand by my statement that the hypothesis is treated with more confidence than the evidence warrants. I think you are right that "best available guess given current models" is a defensible position if held with appropriate humility. The fight is really about whether that humility actually exists institutionally, and I don't really think it does to the extent that it should. Thats the thing, I don't think it does, because this is just one anomaly among a huge number of them that come up when it comes to reconstructing geologic timelines, evolutionary timelines, plate tectonics, human and animal migrations etc. and a lot of the reason for that is the entire thing relies on modeling choices across disciplines and noone wants to break anything so stuff gets duct taped together and people basically just pray nothing pops out that can't be explained or patched over.
This is something you always see with complex interdisciplinary modeling, when enough of the models become mutually load-bearing, each individual field will sit there and say "our models are correct", while the duct taped composite of geology, phylogenetics, paleontology, plate tectonics, paleooceanography is far more fragile than any individual component admits. The anomalies get absorbed at the joints, which is exactly where nobody has clear disciplinary ownership. The rafting hypothesis lives at one of those joints. So does the Cambrian explosion. So does the Out of Africa timeline which keeps getting pushed back every few years as new fossil finds break it. So does Polynesian settlement chronology. So does the timing of domestication for various species. Every one of these is a joint where models from different disciplines had to be reconciled and the reconciliation required some patch that nobody wants to fully scrutinize. And the incentive structure actively selects against scrutiny. Careers are built on specific modeling frameworks. Grant funding assumes the surrounding models are stable. So yeah, its Bad for Scholarship. |
|
Date: February 24th, 2026 10:55 AM Author: Like Clavicular but maxing annoying screeds (gunneratttt) i agree with all that 100%. i've seen this happen very frequently in the fields of SCHOLARSHIP that i'm an expert in. few things are as cut and dry as they are made out to be. only the experts really know or care about the myriad of patchwork and duct tape that is holding together grand interdisciplinary dogma.
however, i think this is more of a problem with how science is interpreted by/told to the masses than a problem with scholarship itself. few people even know about this, so when it's disseminated to the masses there's only enough bandwidth for "this is what the predominant theory is" without "but here's all the evidence that cuts against it and alternative theories." this is true for every discipline, which is why when someone reads a newspaper reporting something they're an expert in they get the Gell-Mann amnesia effect of scoffing at all the ways the reporting oversimplified or just being wrong about the science.
but you're right that even within SCHOLARSHIP there tends to be dogmatic adherence to the predominant interdisciplinary model, with the model being so broad that no one could possibly be an independent expert in everything, so anomalies get absorbed in the joints. it was jarring to me when i saw firsthand how emotionally invested academics can get in the correctness of predominant theories. as much as we want people to be unbiased truthseekers, that's not human nature. |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2026 12:43 PM Author: Westside L.A. Guy Lol wow I'm reading about this right now. I've never heard about this before. Yeah this seems like some ridiculous fraudlies. I'm not sure how else it could have happened though. There was no bering land bridge at that point in history right? Very strange (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5837536&forum_id=2!#49689088) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2026 12:56 PM Author: robot daddy It's one of the biggest fraudlies in the entire jungle of "science" (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5837536&forum_id=2!#49689163) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2026 12:24 PM Author: cowgod Scientists who don’t do Engineering are a Joke. I always assume every archaeologist or anyone who studies animals has a Trust Fund or something. Engineering, champ. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5837536&forum_id=2!#49688970) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2026 12:37 PM Author: lib quotemo=literally WLMAS=dumb nigger 🚨 this is a WLMAS account 🚨
🚨 this is a WLMAS account 🚨
🚨 this is a WLMAS account 🚨
🚨 this is a WLMAS account 🚨
🚨 this is a WLMAS account 🚨
🚨 this is a WLMAS account 🚨
🚨 this is a WLMAS account 🚨
🚨 this is a WLMAS account 🚨
🚨 this is a WLMAS account 🚨
🚨 this is a WLMAS account 🚨
🚨 this is a WLMAS account 🚨
🚨 this is a WLMAS account 🚨
🚨 this is a WLMAS account 🚨
🚨 this is a WLMAS account 🚨
🚨 this is a WLMAS account 🚨
🚨 this is a WLMAS account 🚨
🚨 this is a WLMAS account 🚨
🚨 this is a WLMAS account 🚨
🚨 this is a WLMAS account 🚨 |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2026 12:47 PM Author: Shlomo Dreidlowitz A thousand monkeys with a thousand rafts would discover and settle the new world, given enough time. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5837536&forum_id=2!#49689108) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2026 12:49 PM Author: '"''"'''" alternatively, a single breeding pair or a pregnant female (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5837536&forum_id=2!#49689118) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2026 12:49 PM Author: incel adams They probably took a Carnival Cruise (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5837536&forum_id=2!#49689122) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2026 1:18 PM Author: SkaddenArse the sole goal of modern science is conceive of reasons to hide the truth that africans are not homo sapiens. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5837536&forum_id=2!#49689243) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2026 1:31 PM Author: Westside L.A. Guy Slam dunk poast (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5837536&forum_id=2!#49689295) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2026 1:59 PM Author: '"''"'''" if you can make babies with them what does that make you? Also theyre reproducing at the highest rate of all races which means they’re the most genetically fit for the modern environment (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5837536&forum_id=2!#49689420) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2026 2:02 PM Author: robot daddy (mid-wit who believes in adaptationist just-so stories)
So you accept Gould's argument about "diff species" but ignored the Spandrels paper? |
|
Date: February 24th, 2026 10:21 AM Author: barnabyjones different species is more appropriate classification. whites are like the best bread of dog, nigs are shitpits. but they can still breed together. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5837536&forum_id=2!#49691400) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2026 2:01 PM Author: robot daddy Do you think anyone actually believes it though? Even if the genetics are close enough, that doesn't explain away differences, because chimps are genetically close to humans and the effective difference can be massive, even if closer to other creatures. The morphological, cultural, linguistic, cognitive, tool-using differences between different "sub-types" of humans is massive. For other animals we declare a new species for tiny divergences. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5837536&forum_id=2!#49689424) |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2026 1:20 PM Author: '"''"'''" Here’s another relevant video that will make op upset
https://x.com/sciencegirl/status/1752933191344615440?s=46 |
|
Date: February 23rd, 2026 1:30 PM Author: MAHA Movement 180 I'm convinced. WLMAS pwned for the billionth time, positioning his ass in front of giant vegetation mat (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5837536&forum_id=2!#49689285) |