A question poised to mainly evolutionists, but not as a challenge to their "faith".
Why is there only one kind of human? We have many types of everything else.
It would be nice to have wars with a different species instead of our own with just different mindsets. Would make for a good rl rpg. The super fast, 4 armed humans vs the slightly more intelligent, 2 armed humans. The 4 armed ones can grenade spam while the 2 armed ones has to rely on tactics.
None.
Relatively ancient and inactive
Err.. since when is there only one kind of human?
As for why they're all so similar, because they keep killing each other off. Or just die off. Seriously, I don't think that anyone with four arms gets to reproduce in a two-armed society.
None.
Based on what I have read, much of the emerging humanoid animals may have been nearly wiped out during a massive supervolcano eruption about 70,000 years ago (See
Toba Catastrophe Theory). Of the survivors, the other "intelligent ape" species, such as the neanderthals, simply couldn't keep up with human advancement were eventually starved out. Just think, if some of them had somehow survived to the present, there would be all kinds of movements for their preservation.
None.
There have been humans born with apparent mutations and odd characteristics, take a look at the dozens of cases in India per year. They are often sterile relative to the rest of our population or aren't allowed to reproduce, however.
None.
Quote from name:isolatedpurity
A question poised to mainly evolutionists, but not as a challenge to their "faith".
Why is there only one kind of human? We have many types of everything else.
It would be nice to have wars with a different species instead of our own with just different mindsets. Would make for a good rl rpg. The super fast, 4 armed humans vs the slightly more intelligent, 2 armed humans. The 4 armed ones can grenade spam while the 2 armed ones has to rely on tactics.
There are plenty of extant genuses with only one surviving member...
For example, the Koala is the only extant member of Phascolarctos, the platypus is the only extant member of Ornithorhynchus. Both, like Homo, had other members, but, they all died out.
In fact, homo had many species. The probable reason that we are the soul representative, is that we learned to differentiate roles in society first. Intelligence is the only real evolutionary advantage that nature conferred upon most Homos, Homo Neanderthallus was probably just as smart as Sapiens, but they split work evenly between members, rather than having dedicated hunters, gatherers, mothers, etc. Since our body types were.... Not very advantagous to surviving, it's lucky we were smart enough to.
None.
So you're suggesting Neanderthals were Communists?
None.
Neanderthals take Communism to a whole new level.
None.
Probably because evolution made us lucky. That turned us into us!
None.
Quote from name:isolatedpurity
A question poised to mainly evolutionists, but not as a challenge to their "faith".
Why is there only one kind of human? We have many types of everything else.
It would be nice to have wars with a different species instead of our own with just different mindsets. Would make for a good rl rpg. The super fast, 4 armed humans vs the slightly more intelligent, 2 armed humans. The 4 armed ones can grenade spam while the 2 armed ones has to rely on tactics.
There are plenty of extant genuses with only one surviving member...
For example, the Koala is the only extant member of Phascolarctos, the platypus is the only extant member of Ornithorhynchus. Both, like Homo, had other members, but, they all died out.
In fact, homo had many species. The probable reason that we are the soul representative, is that we learned to differentiate roles in society first. Intelligence is the only real evolutionary advantage that nature conferred upon most Homos, Homo Neanderthallus was probably just as smart as Sapiens, but they split work evenly between members, rather than having dedicated hunters, gatherers, mothers, etc. Since our body types were.... Not very advantagous to surviving, it's lucky we were smart enough to.
The last 'human' species besides us was actually a pigmy form of the homo genus that is claimed to have lived in the Indonesian islands.
Homo Floresiensis
None.
I never said anything about homo neanderthals being the last other extant species. I was just using them as an example, as they're the most well known non-human homo.
None.
Neanderthals take Communism to a whole new level.
QFT.
But basically, we killed the others off or they kind of merged into our species.
None.
I never said anything about homo neanderthals being the last other extant species. I was just using them as an example, as they're the most well known non-human homo.
Uh... To claim they're non-human is not exactly correct:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NeanderthalThey are either classified as Homo sapiens neanderthalensis or as Homo neanderthalensis.. If they're classified within the first genus, they're human..
None.
I never said anything about homo neanderthals being the last other extant species. I was just using them as an example, as they're the most well known non-human homo.
Uh... To claim they're non-human is not exactly correct:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NeanderthalThey are either classified as Homo sapiens neanderthalensis or as Homo neanderthalensis.. If they're classified within the first genus, they're human..
From the link you gave me to wikipedia (which is seemingly a problem for you, but I don't care.) "Neanderthals are either classified as a subspecies of humans (Homo sapiens neanderthalensis) or as a separate species (Homo neanderthalensis)"
I follow the second route, and consider them a separate species, so I call them not human.
None.
Didn't read any other things other than ur first sentence
There are evidence that there were two lineages of human like animals.. like the Neaderthals and the Cro-magnon (or smth) ... Basically, one of them won out...
And in perspective, there are different humans, like the different races of the world.. in biology and taxonomy, we tend to give really closely related animals (which can basically mate together if forced to) different "species" name..
So, there really are different human, and we are fighting... wars and stuff.
In an evolutionary sense, species can either co-exist, or win over another. and it's simply the latter case. There're very nice population mathematical models to explain speciation, co-existant, and species winning over another, but I am not going into that (cause it was the worse course i ever took
)
None.
Other races are not different species because they are all able to mate with each other; however, in the past there have been several species under the genus 'Homo', We just happen to be the only ones still going.
None.
We killed them off? That doesn't make much sense. There's a whole world, no need for competition. Ice people even. Why couldn't another human species involve and have the intelligence to build cities and such. With some much variety in the world, why can't there be another species that left ancient writings and such. Why are we the only species to write? With billions upon billions of years, how did we get to this stage where millions of other species got no where close?
So, there really are different human, and we are fighting... wars and stuff.
Different races and features and etc are still the same species.
None.
Quote from name:isolatedpurity
We killed them off? That doesn't make much sense. There's a whole world, no need for competition. Ice people even. Why couldn't another human species involve and have the intelligence to build cities and such. With some much variety in the world, why can't there be another species that left ancient writings and such. Why are we the only species to write? With billions upon billions of years, how did we get to this stage where millions of other species got no where close?
So, there really are different human, and we are fighting... wars and stuff.
Different races and features and etc are still the same species.
Homo neanderthalus and possibly homo floresiensis were pretty close to society... They both had discovered fire. I know that at least neandertals used stone and wood tools, and they most definitely had a spoken language. They got close, but no cigar. If they had existed in the more favorable regions like we did, they'd have probably won. Seriously, they only thing we had on neandertals, physically, was height. And not much. They had larger brains, and were stronger.
None.
STF mod creator, Modcrafters.com admin, CampaignCreations.org staff
If they had existed in the more favorable regions like we did, they'd have probably won. Seriously, they only thing we had on neandertals, physically, was height. And not much. They had larger brains, and were stronger. If they had existed in the more favorable regions like we did, they'd have probably won. Seriously, they only thing we had on neandertals, physically, was height. And not much. They had larger brains, and were stronger.
Larger brains are not necessarily advantagous (which I infer by your statement that they would have won given better circumstances), as it does not indicate they were more intelligent by any means. Sperm Whales, for instance, have the largest brain at ~15 pounds. The structure, neuron count, and so much more make up intelligence.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cetacean_intelligenceBrain size
Brain size is a rudimentary indicator of the intelligence of a brain, though many other factors affect such intelligence. Higher ratios of brain to body mass may increase the amount of brain mass available for more complex cognitive tasks.[1] Allometric analysis indicates that mammalian brain sizes scale as approximately the 2/3 or 3/4 power of the body mass;[1] comparison of a particular animal's brain size with the expected brain size based on such allometric analysis provides an "encephalization quotient" (EQ) that can be used as another indication of the animal's intelligence.
- Sperm Whales (Physeter macrocephalus) have the largest brain mass of any extant animal, averaging 7.8kg in mature males.[2]
Bottlenose Dolphins (Tursiops truncatus) have an absolute brain mass of 1500-1700 grams. This is slightly greater than that of humans (1300-1400 grams) and about four times that of chimpanzees (400 grams).[3]
- The brain to body mass ratio in dolphins is less than half that of humans: 0.9% versus 2.1%. This comparison appears more favourable if we leave aside the large amount of blubber (15-20% of mass) dolphins require for insulation. Humans have the highest brain-to-body ratio but there is debate whether dolphins or the treeshrew[4] have the highest non-human animal brain-to-body ratio.
- The encephalization quotient varies widely between species. The Orca/Killer whale has an EQ of 2.57[5] whereas the Bottlenose dolphin has the highest EQ of 5.31. This is below the human EQ of 7.44, but above chimpanzees at 2.49, dogs at 1.17, cats at 1.00, and mice at 0.50.[6]
- At birth, Bottlenose dolphins have a brain mass 42.5% that of an adult dolphin, in comparison with 25% for human newborns. By eighteen months, the brain mass of a Bottlenose Dolphin is roughly 80% of that of an adult. Human beings generally do not achieve this figure until the age of three or four (ibid).
Quote from IsolatedPurity
There's a whole world, no need for competition.
There is always competition. Space is only one need.
