Re: CREATIONISTS ON THE
NICHOLLS PHILIP A (pn8886@thor.albany.edu)
24 Jun 1994 03:11:41 GMT
In article <2udd1h$2jn@access1.digex.net> huston@access1.digex.net (Herb Huston) writes:
>In article <940622000524691@ectech.com>,
>Brian Henderson <brian.henderson@ectech.com> wrote:
>}Actually, Java man is more of a first cousin. Most scientists don't
>}think he is a direct link (that goes to ramapithicus).
>
>_Ramapithecus_ is no longer considered a hominid and hasn't been for about
>ten years. "Java Man" is _Homo erectus_. Whether you think the Asian
>specimens having living descendants depends on whether you're a
>multiregionalist or not, I suppose.
>
>-- Herb Huston
>-- huston@access.digex.net
Ramapithecus isn't even Ramapithecus any more. The genus Sivapithecus has
priority.
Homo erectus has begun to interest me of late. According to speciation
theory, in order for speciation to occur you have to have reproductive
isolation at some point. If the multi-regionalists are correct (and I
am not saying that they are correct) then there has been no reproductive
isolation during the transition from Homo erectus to Homo sapiens. If
this is true, then we need to ask if vectored change alone over time is
enough to justify changing species. In other words, an argument can
be made that Homo erectus should be renamed Homo sapiens.
I am sure that will give our creationists brethern some support, but
it really shouldn't. I'm just thinking out loud.
--
Philip Nicholls "To ask a question,
Department of Anthropology you must first know
SUNY Albany most of the answer."
pn8886@thor.albany.edu
|