Farinata, my dear friend,But I'll repeat again, it still horrified Darwin to the point of renunciation of the said theory for the very reasons which led to the Ubermensch school of thought.
Interestingly enough, it was the Oxford delineation of Darwin to humans which propelled the notion of Eugenics. Famous outcomes to eugenicism were the Aryan movement and the Sanger "more from the fit, less from the unfit" Planned Parenthood movement. Clearly these are fed from an evolutionary mind-set.
: : Well if "speciation takes hundreds of thousands of generations" to occur, let's do some quick computations for the human "ancestors":
: : 1 generation = 20 years (conservatively)
: : 200,000 generations is the minimal required for hundered(s) of thousands
: : 20 years/generation x 200,000 generations = 4,000,000 years
: : Are we saying that Homo-Neanderthalis is minimally 4,000,000 years old? I've always heard that he was on the order of 130,000 years.
: : Or perhaps, H-D does not qualify as a different species, by your definition?
: Homo Sapiens Neanderthalis was indeed a different species to Homo Sapiens Sapiens; that's why they have different Latin names.
: However, Homo Sapiens Neanderthalis is not an "ancestor" of humanity; Neanderthals were a branching of the evolutionary tree that died out; as such, they can be a different species; that arose from Homo Erectus
: 'nother one bites the dust.
O.K., Who then IS the closest "related" species to Homo-Sapien-Sapien and is he in fact 4,000,000 years old? The same logic will apply.
Perhaps we should dust-off the main point here, not offer an end-around explanation.
God Bless.
Robert
