Thus modern man is 200,000 years old, not 1M. Thank you.[/quote]
Modern man? Who said modern man? The species of humankind, genus Homo, is well over 1 million years old. Canine is evern older still. Modern dog though, is probably not as old as that. :lol:
Oooops.[/quote]
Do you understand the difference between a Genus and a Species?[/quote]
Homo is the genus that includes modern humans and their close relatives.
The following, which I stated, is correct:
Ooops again!?!? Sheesh.
Thus modern man is 200,000 years old, not 1M. Thank you.[/quote]
Modern man? Who said modern man? The species of humankind, genus Homo, is well over 1 million years old. Canine is evern older still. Modern dog though, is probably not as old as that. :lol:
Oooops.[/quote]
Do you understand the difference between a Genus and a Species?[/quote]
Homo is the genus that includes modern humans and their close relatives.
The following, which I stated, is correct:
Ooops again!?!? Sheesh.[/quote]
SPECIES and GENUS are not the same thing! (read my edit above) And highlighting one does not change what you wrote!
The “Creation in 4004BC” always cracks me up, there must be no end or archeological sites that are older than that, you might be able to fiddle with contexts and stratifications of finds but when they Carbon date human remains to 10000+ years old it would seem fairly conclusive.
Explained away as “put there by god to test faith”. Douglas Adams touches on this in the Hitch hiker’s Guide, with Slartybartfast talking about burying fake dinosaur skeletons on Earth.
EXACTLY! :shock:
That sentence is meaningless. The species of humankind cannot be its genus. A species is a subset of a genus. For a more general explanation, see here.
EXACTLY! :shock:[/quote]
Ooohhh, you must be using “species” in the plural. Then why didn’t you say so???
If you are indeed using “species” in the plural, this raises another interesting point - you appear to consider the other, extinct species from the genus “homus” to also form part of “humankind”. Are they thus (in your opinion) equally as human as modern man?
I have to agree with the above, there is no way humanity is 4,000 years old, however I am also a christian. This leaves one in a state of paradox, however I believe I have a solution to the problem which vexes modern christians the world over.
It’s a simple as this; science and all things related are the mechanics, the nuts and bolts if you will, of God’s work. When the old testament was written the people did not have the know-how to describe what happened during creation they therefore described it as best they could in a metaphorical story.
However, some people take the fact that God created the world in seven days as quite literally Gospel (apologies for the pun). That’s fine. that’s their point of view and they shouldn’t be chastised for that, however I feel my own view, although deemed heretical by some of my christian brethren, is a bit more pragmatic.
EXACTLY! :shock:[/quote]
Ooohhh, you must be using “species” in the plural. Then why didn’t you say so???
If you are indeed using “species” in the plural, this raises another interesting point - you appear to consider the other, extinct species from the genus “homus” to also form part of “humankind”. Are they thus (in your opinion) equally as human as modern man?[/quote]
While I agree with all your posts on this subject, my answer to your last sentence is we cant know for sure. Neanderthalls had a bigger Brain than modern humans, they buried their dead and almost certainly had a language. I suppose its possible that they could have been just as human as we were if you define humanity as an adjective and not in an anthropological term.
The trouble is, I dont think we will ever really know as there are none around today to speak to.
I wonder when evolution produced hominids that we may consider to show human traits as we would recognise them today.
Still its a fact that our particular branch of the species hasnt been around for more than 250000 years as no evidence has so far been found further back.
Have a look at this interesting site on human development:
That sentence is meaningless. The species of humankind cannot be its genus. A species is a subset of a genus. For a more general explanation, see here.[/quote]
Perhaps your did not comprehend the sentance? Read the sentance again.
EDITED TO CORRECT A TYPO
Maybe this will help you graps the language of a simple sentance better.
“The machine classification of automobile, category sportscar, have been around for 80 years or more.”
“The species of humankind, genus Homo, is more than 1 million years old.”
I love the English language! No language compares to it! There is so much beauty in it.
No mate.
Genus Homo has been around for about 4 million years, the species of Homo Sapiens Sapiens 200,000 at best.
Hence Homo Habilis etc etc.
Species is the sub division of the genus.
EXACTLY! :shock:
Your analogy is the opposite way around to your original statement.
Your analogy is the opposite way around to your original statement.[/quote]
Ahh! So right you are. It should have been,
“The category sportscar, classification of automobile, have been around for 80 years or more.”
Fixed!
He is doing it on purpose, AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAArrrghhhhhhh!
I quit. This argument has got silly. It’s impossible to progress when one person point blank refuses to use words in their commonly understood meaning. He’s either trolling or unbelievably stupid.
Me too, Im just too flabergasted for words!
It’s a simple sentance Crab. But if you want to believe that it uses the term “Homo” incorrectly, which it does not, that’s your deal. But you should not insinuate that the word is used incorrectly when it is not. Let me provide one more attempt to make it more easily understood:
“The species of humankind…”
read: sapiens
“genus Homo,”
read: genus Homo
“is over 1 million years old.”
read: is over 1 million years old.
Did that help you understand the sentance? I thought my previous attempt at helping out was pretty good, even though I got the words backwards in the analogy the 1st time. I don’t think I can make it simpler
than that.
EDITED FOR TYPOS - content not altered.
Crab, be sure to lock this thread with your final comment because you don’t like a Thug Gang Member having his idiotic argument shot down.
Bye bye now.