https://gregladen.com/blog/2007/12/24/redefining-human/ Mon, 24 Dec 2007 23:49:25 +0000 hourly 1 https://wordpress.org/?v=6.4.8 https://gregladen.com/blog/2007/12/24/redefining-human/#comment-2216 Mon, 24 Dec 2007 23:49:25 +0000 http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2007/12/24/redefining-human/#comment-2216 Jim: That was fine until some orangutans started making fire at a research station in Borneo. Then they (the ones in charge of these things) quickly raised the bar…

]]> https://gregladen.com/blog/2007/12/24/redefining-human/#comment-2215 Mon, 24 Dec 2007 20:23:18 +0000 http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2007/12/24/redefining-human/#comment-2215 Whatever happened to the “build a fire” test? If a creature builds a fire, then it is human. If it does not, then it is not human.

]]> https://gregladen.com/blog/2007/12/24/redefining-human/#comment-2214 Mon, 24 Dec 2007 16:15:01 +0000 http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2007/12/24/redefining-human/#comment-2214 I don’t have a strong opinion about Filler’s hypothesis, but I do object to designating a lineage as “human” merely due to bipedalism or proto-bipedalism. Morotopithecus is an ape. So are australopithecines, really. Which makes “apes” paraphyletic (of course, nobody objects to the term “monkey” to describe OWM and NWM, even though this is also paraphyletic). Even “H. habilis” is a bit iffy, in my opinion. Ergaster to us: definitely human, on the grounds of brains, behavior, and postcranial anatomy.

]]>