Re: are "we," modern humans, about 195,000 years old or only 40,000 years old?
- From: ed wolf <eduartwolf@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 2 Oct 2008 08:15:00 -0700 (PDT)
On 1 Okt., 15:43, Charles wrote:
Thanks for the interesting defense of HN. You are still fighting the
old image of him as "a big bloke with a human femur as a club,
dragging some females by the hair"? Oh, come on, that goes back a
half century ago! No intelligent person really has that image. It is
only a funny paper cultural icon!
charles
but just before that Charles wrote:
"HN is now reliably classified as a separate species. His small
group
numbers and gender dimorphism suggests he was polygynous, like the
gorilla. He was both carnivorous and cannibal. He was so smart
that
his way of hunting big game was to run into them with a spear."
and I thought it is a modern way to describe exactly the above
comic-strip caveman, including the derogatory undertone.
Where exactly is the difference?
regards, ed
.
- Follow-Ups:
- References:
- Prev by Date: Re: Born To Run: What Humans Really Evolved To Do
- Next by Date: Re: I found Lucy Everybody!
- Previous by thread: Re: are "we," modern humans, about 195,000 years old or only 40,000 years old?
- Next by thread: Re: are "we," modern humans, about 195,000 years old or only 40,000 years old?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
