[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

Re: Sauropodz r kewl WAS: silly conversation on 2012 US presidential race



http://static.divbyzero.nl/facepalm/doublefacepalm.jpg

On Tue, Apr 17, 2012 at 3:37 PM,  <tyazbeck@comcast.net> wrote:
> Speaking of human classification...why aren't there any subspecies used
> for man, the most widespread species of mammal on earth? Wouldn't it depend
> on whether Neanderthals were considered a seperate species? if not, I would
> think that Homo sapiens sapiens would be used for the 'caucasian' race, and
> seperate ones for Negroid, Mongoloid and Australoid. Alternately, (since
> Africa is more genetically diverse than the rest of the world, I think) one
> could have H.s.sapiens for all non-African humans, and several other
> subspecies for the African groups. And no, I am not a white supremacist or a
> racialist. I just don't understand why the  different human races we seem to
> always use are not used taxonomically.