Re: DISCOVER/Neanderthal/Homo Sap.
H. M. Hubey (hubey@pegasus.montclair.edu)
7 Sep 1995 13:46:39 -0400
ghanenbu@inter.nl.net (Gerrit Hanenburg) writes:
>So,when it comes to justifying the claim that Neanderthals and modern humans
>were interbreeding,morphology is important but when an appeal to morphology
>is made to justify separate species status it is degraded to "some bumps" on
>the skull.Why this different attitude?
When I'm given a set of data points thru which I seem to be able
to pass a smooth curve, I can extrapolate or interpolate.
But if I'm given a set of points thru which I seem to be able
to pass a smooth curve, and then I am told that they are really
two separate curves and that we can tell where one stops and the
other starts, it creates bigger problems than the above.
They are different problems.
>And what exactly is a transitional type?
suppose you are given a set of data of the form (x,y) [for simplicity].
You do a scatter plot and it looks like the points cluster around
in two places very clearly. That indicates that there are two distinct
groups.
Suppose the data don't just cluster in two groups but you see
data points in between these two sets. These points are the
transitional types.
--
Regards, Mark
http://www.smns.montclair.edu/~hubey
|