Miscellaneous Discussion Thread II

Quote: JimRockford

A man vs. horse marathon has been held every year since 1980 in Wales. While a horse generally wins, humans are very competitive. A human has won three out of the last four.
link to original post

that's a runner vs a man on horseback, long distance, and the human runner usually wins I understand

come on! [actually I'm assuming you wanted to see if anyone would catch this]

Four Americans were killed in Mexico yesterday, returning from a raid on a drug factory. The Mexican government is denying knowing they were in the country, and the US has now admitted at least two of the dead are CIA contractors.
Soon afterward, six Americans and a Canadian were shot while visiting the pyramids. I'm sure it's just a coincidence, and our government hasn't started a shooting war with the Mexican cartels.

Quote: odiousgambit

Quote: JimRockford

A man vs. horse marathon has been held every year since 1980 in Wales. While a horse generally wins, humans are very competitive. A human has won three out of the last four.
link to original post

that's a runner vs a man on horseback, long distance, and the human runner usually wins I understand

No, humans are 5 and 38, but they're on a heater in the last five years.

Quote:

come on! [actually I'm assuming you wanted to see if anyone would catch this]
link to original post

Slight handicap. What's your point?

Quote: JimRockford

Slight handicap. What's your point?
link to original post

Now I'm wondering about you. It's not clear to me this is humor.

Actually I do think it is possible a human could outrun a horse in something like a 26 mile marathon. But how would you ever find out?

Quote: googlebot

Humans are arguably the best endurance runners on Earth, capable of outlasting most mammals over long distances, particularly in hot conditions. While outmatched in speed by many, human adaptations—such as efficient sweating, hairless skin for heat dissipation, and specialized tendons—allow us to maintain a steady, high-energy pace that leads to superior endurance.

Quote: odiousgambit

Quote: JimRockford

Slight handicap. What's your point?
link to original post

Now I'm wondering about you. It's not clear to me this is humor.

Actually I do think it is possible a human could outrun a horse in something like a 26 mile marathon. But how would you ever find out?

Quote: googlebot

Humans are arguably the best endurance runners on Earth, capable of outlasting most mammals over long distances, particularly in hot conditions. While outmatched in speed by many, human adaptations—such as efficient sweating, hairless skin for heat dissipation, and specialized tendons—allow us to maintain a steady, high-energy pace that leads to superior endurance.

link to original post

True, all kind of moot because how a domesticated horse runs without a rider or driver is not the same as when they are running for human reasons.

Quote: odiousgambit

Quote: JimRockford

Slight handicap. What's your point?
link to original post

Now I'm wondering about you. It's not clear to me this is humor.

My humor’s not for everyone.

Quote:

Actually I do think it is possible a human could outrun a horse in something like a 26 mile marathon. But how would you ever find out?

Quote: googlebot

Humans are arguably the best endurance runners on Earth, capable of outlasting most mammals over long distances, particularly in hot conditions. While outmatched in speed by many, human adaptations—such as efficient sweating, hairless skin for heat dissipation, and specialized tendons—allow us to maintain a steady, high-energy pace that leads to superior endurance.

link to original post

That is absolutely true but it’s probably a little unfair. It would take a carefully selected and trained human to outperform a horse. Even if you restrict it to men under 35, the typical human wouldn’t stand a chance against an average untrained horse. A typical human couldn’t finish a marathon if trained.

Quote: JimRockford

That is absolutely true but it’s probably a little unfair. It would take a carefully selected and trained human to outperform a horse. Even if you restrict it to men under 35, the typical human wouldn’t stand a chance against an average untrained horse. A typical human couldn’t finish a marathon if trained.
link to original post

yes, typical guys can forget it.

I think the theory is that humans built for long distance running are a throwback to our origins as hunters. I've heard this from people who read books about running.... haven't read them myself

Quote: odiousgambit

Quote: JimRockford

That is absolutely true but it’s probably a little unfair. It would take a carefully selected and trained human to outperform a horse. Even if you restrict it to men under 35, the typical human wouldn’t stand a chance against an average untrained horse. A typical human couldn’t finish a marathon if trained.
link to original post

yes, typical guys can forget it.

I think the theory is that humans built for long distance running are a throwback to our origins as hunters. I've heard this from people who read books about running.... haven't read them myself
link to original post

Not just running either, it's the whole body. As strong as a gorilla is, it could never do a man's workday. It would run out of steam too quickly. A pack of canines can also chase a herd of large herbivores all day, just like human hunters could, which is why the dog became our companion for such hunts. Probably no other animal both likes meat and can keep up with us.

Before the mid-1850s, it is estimated that upwards of 90% of people never traveled more than 50 miles from their birthplace. I'm not sure why they'd need to develop special ligaments for that.

Quote: billryan

Before the mid-1850s, it is estimated that upwards of 90% of people never traveled more than 50 miles from their birthplace. I'm not sure why they'd need to develop special ligaments for that.
link to original post

Developing agriculture and permanent dwellings will do that to you! Gave us war and slavery too.

Quote: billryan

Before the mid-1850s, it is estimated that upwards of 90% of people never traveled more than 50 miles from their birthplace. I'm not sure why they'd need to develop special ligaments for that.
link to original post

1850? the early humans and pre-humans of this theory are of something like a million years ago to begin with, I'm thinking

Quote: odiousgambit

[1850? the early humans and pre-humans of this theory are of something like a million years ago to begin with, I'm thinking
link to original post

.
our earliest ancestors go back about 2.8 million years

"AI Overview

Different Definitions of "Human":

Homo sapiens (Modern Humans): ~300,000 years ago.
Neanderthals: Emerged roughly 400,000 years ago.
Homo erectus: Early humans who used fire, ~1.8 million years ago.
Homo genus: Earliest ancestors, ~2.8 million years ago."



.

Quote: odiousgambit

Quote: billryan

Before the mid-1850s, it is estimated that upwards of 90% of people never traveled more than 50 miles from their birthplace. I'm not sure why they'd need to develop special ligaments for that.
link to original post

1850? the early humans and pre-humans of this theory are of something like a million years ago to begin with, I'm thinking
link to original post

Neither humans nor pre-humans traveled. Why would they?

Quote: billryan

Quote: odiousgambit

Quote: billryan

Before the mid-1850s, it is estimated that upwards of 90% of people never traveled more than 50 miles from their birthplace. I'm not sure why they'd need to develop special ligaments for that.
link to original post

1850? the early humans and pre-humans of this theory are of something like a million years ago to begin with, I'm thinking
link to original post

Neither humans nor pre-humans traveled. Why would they?
link to original post

What, other than pursuing wild herds of food animals, being pressed into military service and marched off to battle, conducting trade with distant peoples for exotic goods like metals, tea and spices, or education?

Quote: billryan

Neither humans nor pre-humans traveled. Why would they?

really - ? - gee whiz

I wonder how humans got from Africa (where they originated) to all over the world without traveling - ?

.

Quote: lilredrooster

Quote: billryan

Neither humans nor pre-humans traveled. Why would they?

really - ? - gee whiz

I wonder how humans got from Africa (where they originated) to all over the world without traveling - ?

.
link to original post

One step at a time, over tens of thousands of years. How did fruit trees, which obviously don't move more than a few miles from where they were born, spread worldwide?? How many thousands of years did it take man to migrate from Africa to Ireland or to Japan? Early men were hunters and gatherers, not explorers.
Humans seem to have begun spreading out of Africa between 40,000 and 60,000 years ago, but the first human activity in Ireland is less than 10,000 years old, so it took at least 30,000 years for mankind to travel that distance. There is little to no evidence of mankind using boats until 10,000 years ago, and no ocean-going boats until much later.

Quote: Dieter

Quote: billryan

Quote: odiousgambit

Quote: billryan

Before the mid-1850s, it is estimated that upwards of 90% of people never traveled more than 50 miles from their birthplace. I'm not sure why they'd need to develop special ligaments for that.
link to original post

1850? the early humans and pre-humans of this theory are of something like a million years ago to begin with, I'm thinking
link to original post

Neither humans nor pre-humans traveled. Why would they?
link to original post

What, other than pursuing wild herds of food animals, being pressed into military service and marched off to battle, conducting trade with distant peoples for exotic goods like metals, tea and spices, or education?
link to original post

Prehumans traveled to distant lands to trade with other prehumans? Or formed armies?

If nothing else, humans got to other places due to curiosity of what is over the next hill. But it's probably related to fulfilling survival needs.

And you can't hang with mom and dad all your life. (some of you anyway)

Today is Earth Day, where we honor Mother Earth.

I remember the first E.D. from April 22 1970. My older sister and her friends were excused from school to attend the first parade in Central Park. She honored the earth by drinking a bottle of wine and ending up in the hospital getting her stomach pumped because they thought she might have mixed pills with it.
Tom Seaver and the Mets celebrated Earth Day with one of the greatest pitching performances ever. He struck out 19, including the last ten batters he faced in a 2-1 win.

Quote: billryan

Humans seem to have begun spreading out of Africa between 40,000 and 60,000 years ago,

Early men were not explorers.

There is little to no evidence of mankind using boats until 10,000 years ago,

that is not correct

they didn't need boats

"AI Overview

Early humans reached China on foot by migrating out of Africa, traversing the Middle East and South Asia over thousands of years. They likely followed northern routes through Siberia, and southern, coastal routes using land bridges exposed by lower sea levels during glacial periods. Evidence suggests hominins, such as Homo erectus, reached China as early as 2.1 million years ago.

Humans left Africa in multiple waves, with the earliest ancestors (Homo erectus) departing roughly 2 million years ago. Modern humans (Homo sapiens) began dispersing in smaller waves around 100,000–120,000 years ago, with the major, successful dispersal that populated the rest of the world occurring about 50,000–60,000 years ago.

Key Migration Waves:

~2 Million Years Ago: Homo erectus left Africa, reaching Eurasia and Southeast Asia, evidenced by findings in Georgia and China.

~100,000–120,000 Years Ago: Early Homo sapiens began moving into the Levant (modern-day Israel/Palestine) and Western Asia

~50,000–60,000 Years Ago: A major wave of Homo sapiens moved out of Africa, leading to the lasting population of the rest of the world."

.

From Kenya to Japan is roughly 7,000 miles, and the best evidence today indicates it was well over 20,000 years from the time humans left Africa to their arrival in Japan. That is a movement of about a third of a mile a year. I'd say humans moved only when they had to, and only as far as was needed. If they had a food supply and access to water, they had no reason to move. When the population in an area exceeded the available food supply, some would leave and move to the closest area where they could survive.
Once people started harvesting food, it further limited their movements.
The outside world was a very scary place, and I doubt many pre-humans had the luxury of wondering what was beyond the next mountain.

Quote: billryan

Quote: lilredrooster

Quote: billryan

Neither humans nor pre-humans traveled. Why would they?

really - ? - gee whiz

I wonder how humans got from Africa (where they originated) to all over the world without traveling - ?

.
link to original post

One step at a time, over tens of thousands of years. How did fruit trees, which obviously don't move more than a few miles from where they were born, spread worldwide?? How many thousands of years did it take man to migrate from Africa to Ireland or to Japan? Early men were hunters and gatherers, not explorers.
Humans seem to have begun spreading out of Africa between 40,000 and 60,000 years ago, but the first human activity in Ireland is less than 10,000 years old, so it took at least 30,000 years for mankind to travel that distance. There is little to no evidence of mankind using boats until 10,000 years ago, and no ocean-going boats until much later.
link to original post

is this a "the Bible was correct" argument you are promoting?

Quote: billryan

Quote: lilredrooster

Quote: billryan

Neither humans nor pre-humans traveled. Why would they?

really - ? - gee whiz

I wonder how humans got from Africa (where they originated) to all over the world without traveling - ?

.
link to original post

One step at a time, over tens of thousands of years. How did fruit trees, which obviously don't move more than a few miles from where they were born, spread worldwide?? How many thousands of years did it take man to migrate from Africa to Ireland or to Japan? Early men were hunters and gatherers, not explorers.
Humans seem to have begun spreading out of Africa between 40,000 and 60,000 years ago, but the first human activity in Ireland is less than 10,000 years old, so it took at least 30,000 years for mankind to travel that distance. There is little to no evidence of mankind using boats until 10,000 years ago, and no ocean-going boats until much later.
link to original post

Oh no those timelines are a bit off. Hominids began appearing out of Africa over a million years ago, maybe two. The Australian Aborigines have been there for 40-50K.

But the monkeys did it first! The species of monkeys that are now native to South America branched off from the rest over 2 million years ago and like all primates, came from Africa. How did they get there? The monkey and human needs for fresh water are the same. The continents couldn't have been connected for the event or there would have been a lot of other African mammals there, not just monkeys.

The most likely explanation is that they were floating on something which broke off from Africa and with a combination of good luck, favorable winds, and a little rain to sustain them they survived the trip. Being agile and intelligent they did not panic and jump off nor allow themselves to be washed off their flotsam. And thus, there were New World monkeys! Columbus a mere imitator.

Quote: billryan

Today is Earth Day, where we honor Mother Earth.

Friday is Arbor Day, when all the ships sail into the Arbor.....

.
some more info on how early humans migrated to China:

"AI Overview

Humans arrived in China through multiple waves of migration from Africa, starting with Homo erectus roughly 2 million years ago and followed by modern humans (Homo sapiens) at least 45,000–120,000 years ago. Early migrants likely navigated coastal routes or moved through the Middle East, adapting to changing climates across thousands of years.

Key Details on Early Human Arrival in China:

Early Hominins (Homo erectus): Archaeological evidence from sites in the Nihewan and Yuanmou regions suggests Homo erectus spread from Africa into East Asia roughly 2 million to 1.7 million years ago. These early ancestors, similar to the famous "Peking Man," populated East Asia for over a million years.

Early Homo sapiens Arrival:

Modern humans took a southern route into Asia, arriving in southern China (e.g., Fuyan Cave) at least 80,000 to 120,000 years ago, notes [!Nav]Science News. Recent findings at the Shiyu site suggest modern humans were in northern China around 45,000 years ago.

Migration Routes: Early settlers moved in stages, likely taking advantage of warmer, wetter climatic periods that opened up habitable routes across Eurasia.

Evidence: Key evidence includes 47 modern human teeth found in Daoxian, Southern China, dated to at least 80,000 years ago, which indicates that modern humans lived in East Asia much earlier than in Europe.

Denisovans, an archaic human species, were also present in Asia, and some studies suggest early humans might have interbred with them."

this is a pic compiled from the first ever confirmed skull of a Denisovan:





"Overview

Peking Man - World ArchaeologyPeking Man is a group of fossil specimens of an extinct hominin subspecies, Homo erectus pekinensis, that lived in Northern China during the Middle Pleistocene epoch, roughly 230,000 to 770,000 years ago. Discovered in the 1920s at Zhoukoudian near Beijing, these ancestors were known to use fire, make stone tools, and hunt, providing critical evidence for human evolution in Asia


below is a model of Peking Man from the Science photo library






below is some info on Australian Aborigines mentioned by AutomaticMonkey and a pic


"AI Overview

Australian Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples are very much present, with a population of nearly one million people (about 3.8% of the total population) as of the 2021 census. They are the custodians of the oldest continuous civilization, spanning over 65,000 years, and maintain distinct cultures, languages, and connection to their land.

Population: The 2021 census recorded 983,700 Indigenous Australians, with roughly 92% identifying as Aboriginal.

Location and Lifestyle: While many live in urban areas, others live in remote communities. Few live completely untouched by modern technology, but many maintain strong cultural, legal, and traditional ties to their country (land).

Cultural Significance: Aboriginal Australians are represented by over 250 distinct language groups.
Modern Challenges: They continue to face significant social disparities compared to non-Indigenous Australians, stemming from colonisation, and are active in fighting for land rights, sovereignty, and recognition.

While Indigenous Australians are thriving in all sectors of modern Australian society, they also continue to struggle with systemic inequalities in health, housing, and justice"

.


.

Quote: odiousgambit

Quote: billryan

Quote: lilredrooster

Quote: billryan

Neither humans nor pre-humans traveled. Why would they?

really - ? - gee whiz

I wonder how humans got from Africa (where they originated) to all over the world without traveling - ?

.
link to original post

One step at a time, over tens of thousands of years. How did fruit trees, which obviously don't move more than a few miles from where they were born, spread worldwide?? How many thousands of years did it take man to migrate from Africa to Ireland or to Japan? Early men were hunters and gatherers, not explorers.
Humans seem to have begun spreading out of Africa between 40,000 and 60,000 years ago, but the first human activity in Ireland is less than 10,000 years old, so it took at least 30,000 years for mankind to travel that distance. There is little to no evidence of mankind using boats until 10,000 years ago, and no ocean-going boats until much later.
link to original post

is this a "the Bible was correct" argument you are promoting?
link to original post

Not at all. Mankind spread out gradually, as it needed room to survive. It's not like a tribe in Russia decided they were going to march across the frozen seas because they were seeking adventure. They were almost certainly fleeing a different tribe that had invaded and seized their food supply.

Quote: billryan

Quote: odiousgambit

Quote: billryan

Quote: lilredrooster

Quote: billryan

Neither humans nor pre-humans traveled. Why would they?

really - ? - gee whiz

I wonder how humans got from Africa (where they originated) to all over the world without traveling - ?

.
link to original post

One step at a time, over tens of thousands of years. How did fruit trees, which obviously don't move more than a few miles from where they were born, spread worldwide?? How many thousands of years did it take man to migrate from Africa to Ireland or to Japan? Early men were hunters and gatherers, not explorers.
Humans seem to have begun spreading out of Africa between 40,000 and 60,000 years ago, but the first human activity in Ireland is less than 10,000 years old, so it took at least 30,000 years for mankind to travel that distance. There is little to no evidence of mankind using boats until 10,000 years ago, and no ocean-going boats until much later.
link to original post

is this a "the Bible was correct" argument you are promoting?
link to original post

Not at all. Mankind spread out gradually, as it needed room to survive. It's not like a tribe in Russia decided they were going to march across the frozen seas because they were seeking adventure. They were almost certainly fleeing a different tribe that had invaded and seized their food supply.
link to original post

They probably weren't fleeing, but following. Many hunter tribes live by following herds of large ruminants, as the Indians did with the bison. The Bering crossing may have been acceptable for caribou or whatever and the Siberians followed, probably not even knowing they were going to a new continent.

Quote: AutomaticMonkey

Quote: billryan

Quote: lilredrooster

Quote: billryan

Neither humans nor pre-humans traveled. Why would they?

really - ? - gee whiz

I wonder how humans got from Africa (where they originated) to all over the world without traveling - ?

.
link to original post

One step at a time, over tens of thousands of years. How did fruit trees, which obviously don't move more than a few miles from where they were born, spread worldwide?? How many thousands of years did it take man to migrate from Africa to Ireland or to Japan? Early men were hunters and gatherers, not explorers.
Humans seem to have begun spreading out of Africa between 40,000 and 60,000 years ago, but the first human activity in Ireland is less than 10,000 years old, so it took at least 30,000 years for mankind to travel that distance. There is little to no evidence of mankind using boats until 10,000 years ago, and no ocean-going boats until much later.
link to original post

In my anthropology classes some 45 years ago, it was speculated that monkeys came to South America by boat. At the time, there was speculation that Egyptians regularly sailed the Atlantic, and it was thought that Polynesian could have visited SA as well. These theories could be long disproven, as I haven't read much on the subject since then.

Oh no those timelines are a bit off. Hominids began appearing out of Africa over a million years ago, maybe two. The Australian Aborigines have been there for 40-50K.

But the monkeys did it first! The species of monkeys that are now native to South America branched off from the rest over 2 million years ago and like all primates, came from Africa. How did they get there? The monkey and human needs for fresh water are the same. The continents couldn't have been connected for the event or there would have been a lot of other African mammals there, not just monkeys.

The most likely explanation is that they were floating on something which broke off from Africa and with a combination of good luck, favorable winds, and a little rain to sustain them they survived the trip. Being agile and intelligent they did not panic and jump off nor allow themselves to be washed off their flotsam. And thus, there were New World monkeys! Columbus a mere imitator.
link to original post

.
the kind of apes closest to humans in evolution:

"AI Overview

Chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) and bonobos (Pan paniscus) are the closest living evolutionary relatives to humans. Both species are equally related to humans, having diverged from our common ancestor about 6 to 7 million years ago
-
Key Details on Closest Relatives

Chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes): Often highlighted due to research on tool use and social behavior, they share about 98.7%
of their DNA with humans.

Bonobos (Pan paniscus): Known as "pygmy chimpanzees," they are equally close to humans genetically and are sometimes considered a better model for the last common ancestor due to their social structures and behaviors.

Shared Ancestry: Both species are more closely related to humans than they are to gorillas or other apes.

While both are equally related to humans, studies often find different aspects of our biology or behavior that are closer to one or the other, making both bonobos and chimps crucial to understanding human evolution."


chimpanzees and bonobos use tools like stone age humans:









"AI Overview

The Stone Age was a prehistoric period lasting from approximately 3.3 million years ago to between 4000 BC and 2000 BC, characterized by the use of stone tools. It began with the earliest known stone tools in Kenya and ended with the rise of metalworking (the Bronze Age).

Main Periods of the Stone Age

Paleolithic (Old Stone Age): Began 3.3 million years ago. Humans were nomadic hunter-gatherers."

this is what it is believed Stone Age humans to have looked like:






.

pretty sure you couldn't get an Anthropologist to like what AI just presented

for one thing once you go back to 3.3 million years the name 'human' is dropped and 'hominid' is used.

I dont believe 'paleolithic' is a term used for that date since it is used, I believe, for just a few thousand years ago *only* and to expand it back is just not done ............................... I truly do not believe

Quote: odiousgambit

pretty sure you couldn't get an Anthropologist to like what AI just presented

for one thing once you go back to 3.3 million years the name 'human' is dropped and 'hominid' is used.

I dont believe 'paleolithic' is a term used for that date since it is used, I believe, for just a few thousand years ago *only* and to expand it back is just not done ............................... I truly do not believe
link to original post

well, that's what Wikipedia says and it's where I believe the AI came from

from Wiki referring to the Stone Age:

"Because of its enormous timescale, it encompasses 99% of "human" history."

and re "paleolithic" - from Wiki:

"The Stone Age is also commonly divided into three distinct periods: the earliest and most primitive being the "Paleolithic" era"

and - "The period lasted for roughly 3.4 million years[1] and ended between 4000 BC and 2000 BC"

of course Wiki could be wrong - it's quite possible

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stone_Age


again from Wiki re "paleolithic" :

"The Paleolithic or Old Stone Age, is a period in human prehistory distinguished by the original development of stone tools. It represents almost the entire period of human prehistoric technology, extending from the earliest known use of stone tools by "hominins" , c. 3.3 million years ago,

however in this instance they do use the word "hominins" which you indicated is the correct term


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paleolithic

.

Perhaps today they teach that the stone age was a 3+ million year period. It was not so in my day

Quote: odiousgambit

Perhaps today they teach that the stone age was a 3+ million year period. It was not so in my day
link to original post

Alexa claims the Stone Age was over three million years. It sounds like the powers that be have decided that anything before the Bronze Age is called the Stone Age.

The Stone Age lasted three millilon years
The Bronze Age was about 2500 years long
The Iron Age was about 1100 years.

Disagree at your peril.

Quote: billryan

Quote: odiousgambit

Perhaps today they teach that the stone age was a 3+ million year period. It was not so in my day
link to original post

Alexa claims the Stone Age was over three million years. It sounds like the powers that be have decided that anything before the Bronze Age is called the Stone Age.

The Stone Age lasted three millilon years
The Bronze Age was about 2500 years long
The Iron Age was about 1100 years.

Disagree at your peril.
link to original post

They're actually calling Australopithicus africanus a hominid now and including it in the Stone Age?

No way. We were not hominids until we went Homo. Going Homo was the significant point in primate evolution where hominids became their own thing and not just another kind of ape. Anthropological eras and the terms for them should be Homo only.

Quote: AutomaticMonkey

Quote: billryan

Quote: odiousgambit

Perhaps today they teach that the stone age was a 3+ million year period. It was not so in my day
link to original post

Alexa claims the Stone Age was over three million years. It sounds like the powers that be have decided that anything before the Bronze Age is called the Stone Age.

The Stone Age lasted three millilon years
The Bronze Age was about 2500 years long
The Iron Age was about 1100 years.

Disagree at your peril.
link to original post

They're actually calling Australopithicus africanus a hominid now and including it in the Stone Age?

No way. We were not hominids until we went Homo. Going Homo was the significant point in primate evolution where hominids became their own thing and not just another kind of ape. Anthropological eras and the terms for them should be Homo only.
link to original post

I agree about applying 'the stone age' only to modern humans. Although I'm sure they have evidence many early hominids used tools, and none of it was bronze LOL, before this current batch of scholars no one would have applied 'the stone age' to anyone but Homo Something and I'm thinking only Sapiens for most

I don't follow why you object to using 'hominid' for early pre-humans

.
we also need to discuss Neanderthals

"AI Overview

Taxonomy: Often referred to as "archaic humans," they are in the same Homo genus as us. Some researchers debate whether they are a separate species (H. neanderthalensis) or a subspecies of modern humans (Homo sapiens neanderthalensis).

Behavioral Traits: Neanderthals were not primitive brutes; they created art, used fire, constructed shelters, and fashioned complex tools.

Interbreeding: Genetic evidence shows that early Homo sapiens and Neanderthals interbred after moving out of Africa, meaning they are closely related to us.

Physical Differences: While they were anatomically distinct—generally shorter, stronger, and with larger noses and brow ridges—these differences are seen as adaptations to colder environments.

The Natural History Museum clarifies that they are our closest ancient human relatives, appearing around 400,000 years ago and going extinct roughly 40,000 years ago

Neanderthals died out approximately 40,000 years ago due to a combination of factors, primarily competition with modern humans (Homo sapiens), climate change, and low population density. Modern humans likely outcompeted them for resources, while rapid climate fluctuations reduced their habitat, leading to their assimilation or demise."






.
..

Quote: AutomaticMonkey

No way. We were not hominids until we went Homo. Going Homo was the significant point in primate evolution where hominids became their own thing and not just another kind of ape. Anthropological eras and the terms for them should be Homo only.
link to original post

When I was a kid, they called it "going homo." But they call it something else, now..

Today is New Kids on The Block Day in Massachusetts. An accidental holiday since 1990.

In 1989, the Gov. of Massachusetts signed an official proclamation declaring April 24th, 1989, as NKOTB day. Due to a paperwork error, the year was left off, and what was meant to be a one-day affair became an annual festival as fans quickly noted it wasn't limited to that year. Thirty-six years later, the holiday has taken on a life of its own, as "fans" outdo themselves in finding ways to honor Boston's favorite sons.

It’s also,

Quote:

National Hairball Awareness Day is observed annually on the last Friday of April. In 2026, it falls on April 24th. Founded in 2006 by Dr. Blake Hawley and Hill's Pet Nutrition, the day aims to educate cat owners on managing and preventing hairballs (trichobezoars) through proper grooming and nutrition.
National Day Calendar

Quote: rxwine

It’s also,

Quote:

National Hairball Awareness Day is observed annually on the last Friday of April. In 2026, it falls on April 24th. Founded in 2006 by Dr. Blake Hawley and Hill's Pet Nutrition, the day aims to educate cat owners on managing and preventing hairballs (trichobezoars) through proper grooming and nutrition.
National Day Calendar

link to original post

I can't believe I forgot to decorate and invite people to join me for the traditional meal.

Quote: billryan

Today is New Kids on The Block Day in Massachusetts. An accidental holiday since 1990.

In 1989, the Gov. of Massachusetts signed an official proclamation declaring April 24th, 1989, as NKOTB day. Due to a paperwork error, the year was left off, and what was meant to be a one-day affair became an annual festival as fans quickly noted it wasn't limited to that year. Thirty-six years later, the holiday has taken on a life of its own, as "fans" outdo themselves in finding ways to honor Boston's favorite sons.
link to original post

Somebody forgot to tell this M@$$hole, or he missed the memo...for 36 years.

Back when the technofunk wars were flattering and not diss tracks. (1988)
Sounds more like Security at the Wicked Witch of the West's castle though.
New Kids On The Block- The Right Stuff (Live)

Quote: AZDuffman

Quote: billryan

Today is Earth Day, where we honor Mother Earth.

Friday is Arbor Day, when all the ships sail into the Arbor.....
link to original post

A song came on called “Don’t Forget the Shovel” and I thought of a murder-related theme. It’s from “It’s Arbor Day, Charlie Brown.”

Quote: stixworth

Quote: smoothgrh

Quote: AZDuffman

Quote: billryan

Today is Earth Day, where we honor Mother Earth.

Friday is Arbor Day, when all the ships sail into the Arbor.....
link to original post

A song came on called “Don’t Forget the Shovel” and I thought of a murder-related theme. It’s from “It’s Arbor Day, Charlie Brown.”
link to original post

You know no one is actually reading anything here apart from 4 old retards?
link to original post

I have it on good information that many posts reach as many as eight or nine old retreads.

The World Beer Cup competition ended this weekend. Thousands of brewies worldwide entered, and 273 awards were given.
A local startup, Barrio Brewery Brothers, took home a gold medal as the world's best Brown Porter.
A second Arizona brewer won Gold for the best Day Drinking beer.

Quote: billryan

The World Beer Cup competition ended this weekend. Thousands of brewies worldwide entered, and 273 awards were given.
A local startup, Barrio Brewery Brothers, took home a gold medal as the world's best Brown Porter.
A second Arizona brewer won Gold for the best Day Drinking beer.
link to original post

I believe I just heard that Pabst announced that they were permanently discontinuing Schlitz.


Dumb, but cute.

Quote: billryan

The World Beer Cup competition ended this weekend. Thousands of brewies worldwide entered, and 273 awards were given.
A local startup, Barrio Brewery Brothers, took home a gold medal as the world's best Brown Porter.
A second Arizona brewer won Gold for the best Day Drinking beer.
link to original post

Correction.
Although Barrio Brewery recently opened a new taproom, they have been in business for thirty years and is now a second-generation business.

The lucky President Trump has been UNASSINATABLE.

This map highlights how close these threats have come:

Incident Date Location Key Details
April 25, 2026 Washington Hilton Suspect Cole Tomas Allen charged a security checkpoint with a shotgun, handgun, and knives.


Sept 15, 2024 West Palm Beach, FL

A gunman was spotted in the bushes of Trump’s golf course with a rifle while he was playing


July 13, 2024 Butler, PA Trump survived an assassination attempt at a rally where a bullet grazed his ear

Quote: Armagedden

The lucky President Trump has been UNASSINATABLE.

This map highlights how close these threats have come:

Incident Date Location Key Details
April 25, 2026 Washington Hilton Suspect Cole Tomas Allen charged a security checkpoint with a shotgun, handgun, and knives.


Sept 15, 2024 West Palm Beach, FL

A gunman was spotted in the bushes of Trump’s golf course with a rifle while he was playing


July 13, 2024 Butler, PA Trump survived an assassination attempt at a rally where a bullet grazed his ear
link to original post

There had been more. I remember in the first term he was charged by an illegal alien from the UK with a knife.

He comes to Vegas a lot but the only incident I'm aware of here was a couple of New Year's Eves ago when somebody blew up a Tesla in the porte-cochere of the Trump Tower.

It's caused by a pollution of the mind where these people believe they will be lauded as heroes for their acts. There is a faction which relies on demagoguery and the illusion of popularity to support their positions, and the weak-minded can become ensorcelled by that and believe that they will be popular for putting themselves in the service of this illusory demand.

Apparently, the goal of the gunman was to burst through the doors and run down the main aisle, shooting as many people as he can. A little research would have shown him that those doors are locked during the event.