Huntard writes:
quote:
4) Of the following statements, which one is true or false?
A woman was on earth before any human baby.
A human baby was on earth before any woman.
This is the "Which came first: The chicken or the egg" question. This cannot be defined without a clear definition of what a "woman" is and what a "baby" is. No, this is not a trivial thing. If we get into a circular definition, then the question becomes unanswerable.
The underlying question that avoids the entire issue is what does it mean to be a "human." Given the way evolution works, offspring are not the same thing as the parents. Thus, the first "human" was born from parents who were not "human."
And as onifre pointed out, humans are apes. If we're going to make the distinction between humans and apes, and I agree that a case could be made, then the questions regarding humans and apes need to be vigorously pointed out that the use of the phrase "ape or some other non-human" is specifically designed to play to the emotions. We're back to the Nineteenth Century when people were claiming, "I didn't descend from apes!"
Humans did not descend from apes. Apes did not descend from humans. Both apes and humans descended from a common ancestor that was neither human nor ape. Yes, yes, the phrase also said, "non-human," but that was an afterthought on the part of the questioner. They're trying to play to emotions so that when we say that we are descended from those that aren't human, the people listening to the debate will immediately think "ape" and dismiss the evolutionary explanation.
Rrhain
Thank you for your submission to
Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.
™ Version 4.2
