Dave wrote:
"If I understand Ross and his group correctly, there are
NO creatures anatomically identical to /H. sapiens/. "
I am not sure if that is what they are saying. I have
reviewed my notes from the first months message, and this
was a quote from Fuz Rana:
After being asked how they characterize modern humans (in
other words those descended from Adam and Eve, (Hugh calls
them homo sapiens sapiens Dick, ;) ) ) from hominids, that
is a bipedal primate with large brain capacity, Fuz Rana
responded that what they consider modern humans is
"essentially the same as what an evolutionary biologist
would consider a modern human." And the distinctions are
made based on anatomical differences and on behavioral
differences and the behavioral differences are more
important.
So, if they place Adam and Eve 50 or 60 k years ago, are
they going to claim that somehow the fossil record of homo
sapiens prior to that is anatomically distinct from modern
humans? I certainly think the scientific evidence is
clearly against that, so maybe they are going to push the
date of Adam and Eve further back.
I will review my notes from the second message to see if
there is any clarity on this, but I suspect the details
are forthcoming in further messages, (or in a book to be
published in November.)
Received on Wed Mar 2 15:35:02 2005
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Mar 02 2005 - 15:35:02 EST