Difference between revisions of "Talk:Homo sapiens"
m (Talk:Homo sapiens moved to Talk:Homo Sapiens: CP Style Manual. Articles are Capitalized.) |
|||
| Line 29: | Line 29: | ||
* Other bits I've deleted because they duplicated material already there, or I've explained in edit comments. | * Other bits I've deleted because they duplicated material already there, or I've explained in edit comments. | ||
[[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 10:09, 3 July 2007 (EDT) | [[User:Philip J. Rayment|Philip J. Rayment]] 10:09, 3 July 2007 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | == CP's Manual of Style overrides correct scientific classification? == | ||
| + | |||
| + | That's... eyebrow raising, to say the least. [[User:Kazumaru|Kazumaru]] 00:48, 17 August 2007 (EDT) | ||
Revision as of 04:48, August 17, 2007
Contents
Creationist View?
Can we add the creationist view on "Homo Sapiens?"
- Yes, but keep it neutral.--Elamdri 19:48, 13 March 2007 (EDT)
Antarctica
There are permanent bases on Antarctica. Wouldn't that mean we inhabit all seven continents? --Dave3172 10:53, 14 March 2007 (EDT)
Not really according to most geographers I have talked to. Usually inhabiting means having people living there all thi time in the form of family units, towns, cities and the like. -Gasmonkey
- Well according to this site [1] at least one baby was conceived and born there. Sulgran 04:22, 23 March 2007 (EDT)
Two Homo sapiens articles
There are two separate articles on this subject, Homo Sapiens and Homo sapiens. The lower case sapiens is the correct form, so we should merge the other one here.--Conservateur 01:45, 21 March 2007 (EDT)
Not a mammal?
"(I personally dispute this classification - revert me if you must)"
Are humans not vertebrates that produce milk for their young with hair, specialized teeth, three bones in the ear, warm blooded, and have a placenta when developing? This is what defines a mammal. If any of those are wrong, then we are not mammals. Being a mammal is a scientific definition and classification - not an idealogical one. --Mtur 22:54, 29 March 2007 (EDT)
Britinme's edits
I've changed Britinme's edits, and I'm here explaining why.
- I've removed the bit about the human brain being larger than the chimpanzee's, because it has what relevance? His text seemed to imply that's why it has extra capabilities, but elephant and whale brains are bigger, so it the point is lost. The text already said that humans had the capability of language, so even that bit wasn't needed.
- I've change the bit about the larynx, as it assumed evolution to be true. I've used the word "design", but even evolutionists such as Dawkins have used that word, so it doesn't necessarily imply a designer.
- Other bits I've deleted because they duplicated material already there, or I've explained in edit comments.
Philip J. Rayment 10:09, 3 July 2007 (EDT)
CP's Manual of Style overrides correct scientific classification?
That's... eyebrow raising, to say the least. Kazumaru 00:48, 17 August 2007 (EDT)
