Re: Common ancestor between man and ape

On Fri, 18 May 2007 20:38:02 -0400, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by "J.J. O'Shea"
<try.not.to@xxxxxxxxxxx>:

On Fri, 18 May 2007 19:50:23 -0400, Bob Casanova wrote
(in article <upes435jqtfrhmhboqlrmbiffqdmi54fcl@xxxxxxx>):

On Fri, 18 May 2007 17:57:59 -0400, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by "J.J. O'Shea"
<try.not.to@xxxxxxxxxxx>:

On Fri, 18 May 2007 17:14:25 -0400, UC wrote
(in article
<uranium-1179522865.592379.238820@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>):

<snip>

Homo sapiens sapiens

This subspecies does not exist. There's been a wee revision.

Really? I thought there were two recognized subspecies -
Homo sapiens sapiens and Homo sapiens neanderthalensis. This
was changed *again*?


Last I heard everything went back to H. sap. and H. neander. See further
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_hominina_fossils>. I wish they'd make
up their minds. There is, apparently, a now-extinct subspecies of H. sap.
idaltu which are _not_ Neanderthals. UC would probably not call 'em humans.

OK. Aaggghhhh! That the way I initially learned them, then
it was 2 subspecies of H. sapiens, now it's back to separate
species. I agree, although I suspect there's more involved
in such decisions than "my name can whip your name", which
is how it looks from the outside.

As for UC, it's been pretty well established that he thinks
lack of cities is sufficient reason to declare a species
non-human (one of his discriminators in the "human/ape"
semantic wars), so you seem to be correct.
--

Bob C.

"Evidence confirming an observation is
evidence that the observation is wrong."
- McNameless

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: A quick question on human evolutionary history...
    ... the taxonomic name _Homo sapiens sapiens_ is not used much ... I thought Homo Sapiens Neanderthalensis was supposed to be that subspecies, ... as recognition for the fact that Neaderthals had a pretty similar brain ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: A quick question on human evolutionary history...
    ... the taxonomic name _Homo sapiens sapiens_ is not used much ... I thought Homo Sapiens Neanderthalensis was supposed to be that subspecies, ... as recognition for the fact that Neaderthals had a pretty similar brain ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: A quick question on human evolutionary history...
    ... the taxonomic name _Homo sapiens sapiens_ is not used much ... I thought Homo Sapiens Neanderthalensis was supposed to be that subspecies, ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Species concept on Ockhams Razor - How come Wilkins didnt get
    ... We, for the most part, are Homo sapiens sapiens. ... Neanderthals are either classified as a subspecies of humans (Homo ... the Congoid of West Africa. ... Australoids in Australia after A.D. 1788). ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: "Races" found in genes again
    ... typical for subspecies in other animals. ... If Homo sapiens was treated ... and australoid negritos and possibly amerinds that may have their own ... Skull - Caucasoid, ...
    (uk.politics.misc)