3 ms·
“+” is doing a lot of work there… https://www.nature.com/articles/nature22335 https://www.nature.com/articles/nature22335
by fhsm 3y ago
“+” is doing a lot of work there… https://www.nature.com/articles/nature22335 https://www.nature.com/articles/nature22335
- wernercd 3y agodepends on what you define as humanity. Primordial ooze? Bipetal animals? The current cut of ape? civilization? Of course the + is doing a lot of work because it's a fuzzy concept and doesn't change the fact that "quick" is just as relative.
- bigfryo 3y agoYeah you can certainly make the case for Humanity being at least 100,000 years old, and even make a case for it being 500,000 years old or even a million years old. Homo was controlling fire probably half a million years ago and crafting stone tools 2 million years ago or more