Please stop posting. You are clouding a good, emotional debate with facts. Mind you, this is/. and we have no interest in facts, just emotional responses to TFA.
Hmm. Two species you write. Does this mean that chimpanzees, gorillas and orangutans are considered one species (of course I am leaving out the south american primates) and all species of Homo the second.
Haven't seen this hypothesis in too many scientific publications. Perhaps you would be willing to offer references to this classification?
Oh please, because you assume that europeans and their descendants wouldn't consider neanderthals just one rung below Africans or Native Americans? Just one more race in need of "civilization." Organized religion has no problems with hierarchy.
Good try, but I made no reference (nor did the article) to "A suddenly appearing, fully developed oganism." What we are discussing here is a (slightly) modified hominid, with a shorter stature (among other attributes).
I did not use the word "argument" either.
or does anyone else find it striking that Foxnews.com has an "Evolution and Paleontology Center" (http://www.foxnews.com/science/evolution/).
Certainly, W doesn't approve of this.
"As an aside, I'm also quite interested to see what the bible-thumpers eventually come to make of all of this."
Bible thumpers will make of it what they make of every instance of evolution: God's hand at work. A 3 foot (or whatever it is) tall homonid isn't going to change their minds, given that there are many examples of evolution right in front of their eyes that they refuse to accept.
I think you are missing the point. The argument is not that redneck only applies to whites, indeed from the OED:
redneck: A member of the white rural labouring class of the southern States
so, yes, the use of the term redneck historically refers to whites. But it is a subset of whites who do not necessarily share a common descent, as necessary to be a race. Again from the OED:
race: A group of persons, animals, or plants, connected by common descent or origin.
Compare this with nigger (again OED):
nigger: A dark-skinned person of sub-Saharan African origin or descent
Notice the use of "origin or descent", thus constituting a race, and the entire race, not just a geographic subset of the race. I am from the south and, yes, my family includes individuals that would be labeled "rednecks." Their descent includes French, English, German and others; "southern US" is not a race, any more than "yankee" is. As was mentioned previously, I subscribe to the point-of-view that redneck is a term of economic oppression resulting from the high poverty rates in the South, which this President has no interest in addressing (sorry to editorialize).
Slashdot Mirror
Please stop posting. You are clouding a good, emotional debate with facts. Mind you, this is /. and we have no interest in facts, just emotional responses to TFA.
Hmm. Two species you write. Does this mean that chimpanzees, gorillas and orangutans are considered one species (of course I am leaving out the south american primates) and all species of Homo the second.
Haven't seen this hypothesis in too many scientific publications. Perhaps you would be willing to offer references to this classification?
Oh please, because you assume that europeans and their descendants wouldn't consider neanderthals just one rung below Africans or Native Americans? Just one more race in need of "civilization." Organized religion has no problems with hierarchy.
My question is why the hell is their an Einstein icon. He was a physicist for *@!$'s sake.
Can't we get an icon of Dawkins? Or are we to assume that physics and biology are one in the same?
Good try, but I made no reference (nor did the article) to "A suddenly appearing, fully developed oganism." What we are discussing here is a (slightly) modified hominid, with a shorter stature (among other attributes). I did not use the word "argument" either.
or does anyone else find it striking that Foxnews.com has an "Evolution and Paleontology Center" (http://www.foxnews.com/science/evolution/). Certainly, W doesn't approve of this.
"As an aside, I'm also quite interested to see what the bible-thumpers eventually come to make of all of this." Bible thumpers will make of it what they make of every instance of evolution: God's hand at work. A 3 foot (or whatever it is) tall homonid isn't going to change their minds, given that there are many examples of evolution right in front of their eyes that they refuse to accept.
I think you are missing the point. The argument is not that redneck only applies to whites, indeed from the OED:
redneck: A member of the white rural labouring class of the southern States
so, yes, the use of the term redneck historically refers to whites. But it is a subset of whites who do not necessarily share a common descent, as necessary to be a race. Again from the OED:
race: A group of persons, animals, or plants, connected by common descent or origin.
Compare this with nigger (again OED):
nigger: A dark-skinned person of sub-Saharan African origin or descent
Notice the use of "origin or descent", thus constituting a race, and the entire race, not just a geographic subset of the race. I am from the south and, yes, my family includes individuals that would be labeled "rednecks." Their descent includes French, English, German and others; "southern US" is not a race, any more than "yankee" is. As was mentioned previously, I subscribe to the point-of-view that redneck is a term of economic oppression resulting from the high poverty rates in the South, which this President has no interest in addressing (sorry to editorialize).
No. It was sarcasm with a bit of hyperbole, but definately not irony.