Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Earliest Human Beds Found In South Africa

samzenpus posted more than 2 years ago | from the earliest-to-bed dept.

Science 102

sciencehabit writes "A team working in South Africa claims to have found the earliest known sleeping mats, made of plant material and dated up to 77,000 years ago—50,000 years earlier than previous evidence for human bedding. These early mattresses apparently were even specially prepared to be resistant to mosquitoes and other insects."

cancel ×

102 comments

77,000 years? Bah! (5, Funny)

Pastor Jake (2510522) | more than 2 years ago | (#38310292)

My friends in the Word,

These atheist-backed scientists have surely fabricated these so-called "sleeping mats," as it is clearly outlined in the Bible that God created Adam and Eve 5,000 years ago. Note that I am not questioning the existence of these mats, as these could have possibly BEEN used by Adam or one of his descendants after being thrown out of Eden, I am questioning the "evidence" of their age from the so-called "carbon-dating" process. I wish these scientists well with their work and pray that they will break free from the yoke of grants from godless individuals and governments.

Your friend,
Jake

Re:77,000 years? Bah! (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38310334)

I have to say Pastor Jake I don't see too many people get so many -1 and +5 posts.

Re:77,000 years? Bah! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38310364)

I must admit, I'm a fan. This continues Slashdot's bright legacy of amusing trolling.

Re:77,000 years? Bah! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38311852)

Yeah, it's no surprise that the beds were discovered in the WHITE part of Africa.

Re:77,000 years? Bah! (1)

flyingfsck (986395) | more than 2 years ago | (#38315284)

You made me snort my Coke! I'm a South African American Canadian Arabian and I totally get the joke, but I doubt anyone not from there will find it funny.

Re:77,000 years? Bah! (5, Funny)

Weaselmancer (533834) | more than 2 years ago | (#38310570)

It's a good thing his belief system doesn't believe in karma.

Re:77,000 years? Bah! (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38310862)

You don't believe in karma. Karma just is.

Re:77,000 years? Bah! (2)

angel'o'sphere (80593) | more than 2 years ago | (#38313256)

Unfortunately (or fortunately) you do not need to believe in Karma to be bound by it :D

Re:77,000 years? Bah! (3, Interesting)

sadness203 (1539377) | more than 2 years ago | (#38311548)

It's probably the same guy that was writing as Dr.Bob,DC with the Chiropractic/Subluxation trolling... He'll probably misclick and post with is real user id someday...

Re:77,000 years? Bah! (1)

turtledawn (149719) | more than 2 years ago | (#38315892)

He already did, though I don't recall the username. It was somebody who's pretty reasonable most of the time. A few months ago.

Re:77,000 years? Bah! (3, Funny)

cosm (1072588) | more than 2 years ago | (#38310388)

My scientific friends in the World,

These religious-backed lunatics have surely fabricated these so-called "biblical stories," as it is clearly outlined in the Body of Science evolution created Adam and Eve 5,000 years ago (kidding lolololol, no really more like ~100K+ yrs). Note that I am not questioning the existence of these biblical stories, as these could have possibly BEEN used by the ruling class or one of their descendants after not convincing people to do shit they wanted them to do, I am questioning the "evidence" of their validity from the so-called if you repeat it enough it must be true process. I wish these religious types well with their work and hypothesize that they will break free from the yoke of ignorance of the scientific method and peer validated results verified by individuals and governments.

Your friend, Science

FTFT

Re:77,000 years? Bah! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38310420)

Don't feed trolls.

Re:77,000 years? Bah! (1, Offtopic)

cosm (1072588) | more than 2 years ago | (#38310456)

Going through his comment history is almost like reading satire, which pulled me in. Then I realized every single post is the same satire. Then I realized he's probably not being satirical.

I've got to stop feeding these things.

Re:77,000 years? Bah! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38310800)

Then I realized he's probably not being satirical.

This statement says more about your real prejudices than it does about his hypothetical ones.

Re:77,000 years? Bah! (0)

TxRv (1662461) | more than 2 years ago | (#38310932)

Poe's Law is a bitch, ain't it?

Re:77,000 years? Bah! (0)

cosm (1072588) | more than 2 years ago | (#38310956)

There are serious and well thought out writings on this dilemma? Mind = Blown.

Re:77,000 years? Bah! (2)

mcgrew (92797) | more than 2 years ago | (#38315516)

Going through his comment history is almost like reading satire, which pulled me in.

It's actually a troll, but it works because he's trolling Christians on a predominantly agnostic/athiest site. There is SO much that gives him away, starting with the "These atheist-backed scientists" as if Christians are anti-science. The fact is, over half of US scientists are, in fact, Christians. From conversations I've had here, many athiests don't think science and religion can coexist, and don't seem to be able to (or perhaps want to) understand that science answers "how" while religion answers "why".

Then there's the "it is clearly outlined in the Bible that God created Adam and Eve 5,000 years ago". Um, no, the bible doesn't say that. Not anywhere. There isn't a real preacher in the entire world that believes the earth is 5k years old. Some dimwit a couple hundred years ago did some faulty math, and somehow people believed the nonsense.

Then there's "I wish these scientists well with their work and pray that they will break free from the yoke of grants from godless individuals and governments." One google search [google.com] dispells this lie.

Pastor Golf is a wolf in sheep's clothing. A very stupid wolf.

Re:77,000 years? Bah! (1)

LanMan04 (790429) | more than 2 years ago | (#38315668)

Some dimwit a couple thousand years ago wrote done a bunch of allegorical crap, and somehow people believed the nonsense.

FTFY

Re:77,000 years? Bah! (1)

mcgrew (92797) | more than 2 years ago | (#38316074)

You are correct, I was in error.

Re:77,000 years? Bah! (1)

LanMan04 (790429) | more than 2 years ago | (#38320232)

Heh, sorry McGrew, didn't realize I replied to you. :)

Re:77,000 years? Bah! (1)

mcgrew (92797) | more than 2 years ago | (#38325086)

Hey, I appreciated the correction.

Re:77,000 years? Bah! (1)

flyingfsck (986395) | more than 2 years ago | (#38315330)

The religious will always be with us. -- Herman the Hermit. Douglas Adams wrote about the Orange Catholic Bible that filled 50 intergalactic trucks. My only concern with that is that he probably underestimated it severely.

Re:77,000 years? Bah! (2)

God Of Atheism (1003892) | more than 2 years ago | (#38316140)

Douglas Adams wrote about the Orange Catholic Bible that filled 50 intergalactic trucks.

That was Frank Herbert, not Douglas Adams. The 50 intergalactic trucks were for the encyclopedia galactica (which Adams did write about).

Re:77,000 years? Bah! (1)

operagost (62405) | more than 2 years ago | (#38315530)

Don't feed the trolls.

Re:77,000 years? Bah! (0, Flamebait)

TxRv (1662461) | more than 2 years ago | (#38310512)

The Christians have been saying the world is 6000 years old for nearly 2000 years.

Re:77,000 years? Bah! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38310718)

Uh, no. The '6000 year' claim is extremely recent.

Re:77,000 years? Bah! (3, Insightful)

TxRv (1662461) | more than 2 years ago | (#38310760)

Look up Sextus Julius Africanus.

Re:77,000 years? Bah! (1)

PPH (736903) | more than 2 years ago | (#38311202)

Yep. Which is weird. Because you'd think that when someone came up with the 6000 y.o. figure about 1800 years ago, they'd at least be smart enough to add that 1800 years to the origin date. But no. Because It Is Written.

I think these early Christians went on to work in technology marketing. The delivery date is always 6 months out. No matter how much time has past.

Re:77,000 years? Bah! (5, Informative)

TxRv (1662461) | more than 2 years ago | (#38311546)

They have revised the date a bit. Sextus Julius put it at 5500 BC, while the current estimates, based on the Masoritic text of the Tanakh, are all around 4000 BC. (This also conveniently pushed the date sextus picked for the apocalypse (6000 years after creation) up by about 1500 years.)

Must've been a confusing time for the Sumerians. http://www.theonion.com/articles/sumerians-look-on-in-confusion-as-god-creates-worl,2879/ [theonion.com]

Re:77,000 years? Bah! (2)

Dunbal (464142) | more than 2 years ago | (#38313182)

It makes sense. Religion is about stasis. Stasis of a written story that never changes. A safe world with a father figure that makes sure that nothing changes and when something bad happens it's part of some "plan". The stasis of a routine that includes weekly (or even daily) mass hysteria events. And of course the stasis of the mind, which ignores or discredits any data that is contradictory or thought provoking as "the work of the devil".

Re:77,000 years? Bah! (1)

mcgrew (92797) | more than 2 years ago | (#38315844)

Religion is about stasis. Stasis of a written story that never changes

No? It began as the Torah, and then came Christ and it was added to by his apostles and became the Christian Bible. Then about 600 years later Muhammed added to the Torah and it then was transformed into the Quran. Then after another 1000 years later the Christian bible was added to and Mormanism was born.

Sorry for your ignorance, fellow.

A safe world with a father figure that makes sure that nothing changes

Except it diid. Before Christ, sin resulted in eternal death. The new testament gave a new covenant, and the sins were paid for, and you're given eternal life.

Then check out Revelations. The "something bad" is predicted.

And of course the stasis of the mind, which ignores or discredits any data that is contradictory or thought provoking as "the work of the devil".

Why do people insist on commenting about matters they know nothing whatever about? Read the damned book before you bash it.

Re:77,000 years? Bah! (2)

PPH (736903) | more than 2 years ago | (#38316474)

No? It began as the Torah,

What do you mean by 'it'?

You have mentioned three religions, all of which have regularly engaged in blood feuds over the ownership of the 'truth'. Feuds that have cost the lives of hundreds of millions of people.

Re:77,000 years? Bah! (1)

Dunbal (464142) | more than 2 years ago | (#38320036)

"religion" is far far older than the Jews. Your bias is showing.

Re:77,000 years? Bah! (1)

mcgrew (92797) | more than 2 years ago | (#38325128)

You just strengthened my argument, which was that the OP was wrong and religion does in fact change. I pointed out one example. Another is Hinduism evolving into Bhuddism. IINM both those religions are older than Judism.

Re:77,000 years? Bah! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38311004)

Um, no it's not.

6k year claim IS NOT RECENT. (0, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38311496)

Years are measured since a law was created, a planet was discovered or celestial body appears and dissappears on schedule, or for however long lasts a remnant article of property or fact.

This planet Earth is much older, but according to Holy Scriptures it has only been inhabitted for the past 6k years by man. That is all. Everyone else is comparing apples to bananas. Something came along 6k years ago and caused planet Earth to expand at the core and this is what separated mankind apart to cause Speciation. Speciation only occured for man when small numbers in population were locked together and lose genetic diversity long enough for mutations to occur only specific to their populations. Only problem is before everyone was called man they were called gods, and there are plenty of temples hundreds of feet below ocean around India to prove that the sea-water was a recent endurance of terraforming a solid core-less planet Earth into a planet more hostile than Mars if it weren't for the insulation of sea-water. India is old and has relics to prove that India and the Mayans were once the same but Mayans didn't have any temples under-water.

A Russian scientist is quoted as saying that the Moon is actually older than planet Earth and that the Moon is a hollowed-out space-station that had a mechanical north-polar entrance that NASA exploded some missiles into around the Year 2011. Yea, I said the Year 2011 because that's how long it's been since Chryst died (not killed, not suicided, but terminated) because a bunch of nasty people were spreading STD's and bad behaviours to their kids and stealing and killing one-another and shit. That's how long it's been since someone was brave enough to do anything about brightening anyone's day of societal addictions: one man, behaved like an atheist in teaching to do what you can while you are alive, said to be the Son of God: did what modern atheists seem too affraid to do in paying your neighbor's debts and removing burdens. Yea... it's been 2011 Years...since anyone was that brave.

Re:77,000 years? Bah! (2)

sonamchauhan (587356) | more than 2 years ago | (#38311584)

And they got the idea from the Jews. :-)

Who have been saying the same thing ~1500 years longer

Go to http://www.jpost.com/ [jpost.com]

The dates there are:
"Fri, Dec 9, 2011
13 Kislev, 5772"

Re:77,000 years? Bah! (1)

gstoddart (321705) | more than 2 years ago | (#38314802)

And they got the idea from the Jews. :-)

Who have been saying the same thing ~1500 years longer

And they of course got it from the Mesopotamians [wikipedia.org] ... along with half a dozen other things in the bible.

Everyone just keeps recycling the same stories, keeps pretending it's something new to them.

Re:77,000 years? Bah! (0)

geekoid (135745) | more than 2 years ago | (#38310746)

Maybe you should understand the dating process ?

NO, no, then you would just have to find some other way to delude yourself.

Genesis is an alagory.

Re:77,000 years? Bah! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38311948)

We're taking advice on the Bible from someone who can't spell "allegory"???

I think the book is a fraud too, but at least use the goddamned spellcheck.

Re:77,000 years? Bah! (1)

Anne Thwacks (531696) | more than 2 years ago | (#38312990)

That was the Muslim spelling.

Re:77,000 years? Bah! (1)

flyingfsck (986395) | more than 2 years ago | (#38315616)

ROFL... I live in Arabia and the spelling here is really special.

Re:77,000 years? Bah! (1)

datavirtue (1104259) | more than 2 years ago | (#38314014)

No, we are taking advice from someone who uses a browser that doesn't have spell checking. Equally alarming.

Re:77,000 years? Bah! (1)

mcgrew (92797) | more than 2 years ago | (#38316204)

we are taking advice from someone who uses a browser that doesn't have spell checking. Equally alarming.

Anyone here without a spell checking browser is at work on an XP computer running IE 6 or IE 7. Who her eis stupid enough to risk his job installing a browser when policy forbids it just to spell correctly in slashdot comments, especially since most here don't seem to know lose from loose, there from their from they're, and have no clue how to use an apostrophe, and more importantly when not to use one?

Re:77,000 years? Bah! (1)

mcgrew (92797) | more than 2 years ago | (#38316970)

Dude, he's trolling. He doesn't believe a word of what he says. Please, guys, stop feeding the trolls! I come her to read interesting comments, not anti-religion trolls in a thread that religion has no place in that some dim witted moderators think is funny. "Pastor" Jake Golf's comment should be sitting at -1 troll/flamebait rather than +4 funny. It's about as funny as that movie Dumb And Dumber -- not at all. It's just stupid. Bury the fucker.

Re:77,000 years? Bah! (0)

amoeba1911 (978485) | more than 2 years ago | (#38311990)

Adam & Eve did that nasty on it while the snaked watched.

Re:77,000 years? Bah! (1)

Frnknstn (663642) | more than 2 years ago | (#38312798)

You were funnier when you where doing Dr Bob the chiropractor.

Re:77,000 years? Bah! (1)

tibit (1762298) | more than 2 years ago | (#38312934)

Mods fail at sarcasm. News at 11.

Re:77,000 years? Bah! (1)

Dunbal (464142) | more than 2 years ago | (#38313164)

Almost as good as Dr. Bob... 3/10

Re:77,000 years? Bah! (1)

angel'o'sphere (80593) | more than 2 years ago | (#38313250)

Dear Jake,

you lack common sense.

I am questioning the "evidence" of their age from the so-called "carbon-dating" process.

God created the world and the universe and also the laws to which this universe works. So obviously he has created the carbon isotopes and the way how they decay.
Also keep in mind for one who can craft whole universes it must be easy to deposite some sleeping mats that "look as if" they are 77,000 years old.

So, the scientists are correct. Their methods are correct. The only question is: why is god doing all those confusing things to us?

(BTW: I assume you mean "That God" who is mentioned in the bible and the thora, as you spoke about Adam and Eve? As far as I can tell he is just an upstart(er) ... wasn't he an irrelevant lower fire god before he came to power? I really doubt he was involved in any world forgings let alone universe crafting or man breeding)

Re:77,000 years? Bah! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38313804)

God put those beds there to test us.

Re:77,000 years? Bah! (1)

flyingfsck (986395) | more than 2 years ago | (#38315644)

Maybe god slept in them! We should build a church on the site and sell little bed copies to the pilgrims.

Re:77,000 years? Bah! (1)

LittleLui (1792210) | more than 2 years ago | (#38341470)

God put those beds there to test us.

So those are testbeds then?

Re:77,000 years? Bah! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38314996)

So does it work? I am curious if you actually do feel better about yourself after making a post like this in order to try to make yourself feel more important.

Re:77,000 years? Bah! (1)

mcgrew (92797) | more than 2 years ago | (#38315000)

Excuse me, sir, but are you the famous Reverend Golf I've heard so much about?

You're gonna be really upset... (1)

Kamiza Ikioi (893310) | more than 2 years ago | (#38317566)

They found the world's oldest porn hidden under those world's oldest beds.

Re:77,000 years? Bah! (1)

howzit (1667699) | more than 2 years ago | (#38329960)

It seems that you don't know your bible. Could you please inform us as to where it says that the Earth is 5'000 years old?

Slow (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38310330)

SLOW day at Slashdot.

Slow day.

Re:Slow (4, Funny)

froggymana (1896008) | more than 2 years ago | (#38311606)

SLOW day at Slashdot.

Slow day.

You could just go lay down on a bed and talk a nap instead of reading slashdot then.

Malm? (4, Funny)

RackinFrackin (152232) | more than 2 years ago | (#38310414)

Did it come from IKEA?

Re:Malm? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38310536)

No, but I came in Ikea, helped by your mom in the mattress section.

Re:Malm? (1)

Dunbal (464142) | more than 2 years ago | (#38313184)

I hope you brought her back to the cemetery and buried her again afterwards.

Re:Malm? (1)

PolygamousRanchKid (1290638) | more than 2 years ago | (#38312666)

No, because it was assembled and recognizable as a bed. If it came from IKEA, it would have been just a pile of parts next to a mammoth bone hex key wrench and a in-decipherable pictogram instruction set, written on mammoth skin. There would either be too many or too few mammoth bone screws. The pictogram would bear no resemblance to the pictogram in the mammoth skin IKEA catalog.

FTFA:

"The rock shelter would have been abandoned when food supplies became low, or when the site became unpleasant to live in because it smelled bad, had lots of decaying organic material, or was overrun with pests such as insects or rodents."

Those conditions never stopped me from moving out of my bachelor pad. Obviously, early human chicks possessed the capability to force early human men to change their filthy bachelor ways.

Now that, is an interesting cultural evolutionary find.

This only proves that they were smoking in bed (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38310562)

It's a nasty habit that I've been trying to quit for 77,000 years.

Whaaaaa?? (4, Funny)

EdIII (1114411) | more than 2 years ago | (#38310596)

For people wondering how a mattress could possibly be mosquito resistant it was because it was made out of a specific plant that was a natural insecticide.

Which begs the question, was that lost technology? I don't see Africans using it for the past couple thousand years or anyone else.

My favorite from the article:

"There were no rules for separate eating, working, or sleeping places," she says. "Breakfast in bed may have been an almost daily occurrence."

Perhaps not. I am sure there was the, "Don't touch Thag's shit rule" though.

Re:Whaaaaa?? (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38310762)

Which raises the question, was that lost technology?

FTFY

Re:Whaaaaa?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38310996)

"There were no rules for separate eating, working, or sleeping places,"

Archaeologists are funny.

Re:Whaaaaa?? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38311460)

Which begs the question, was that lost technology? I don't see Africans using it for the past couple thousand years or anyone else.

See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ocotea_bullata

The mosquito repelling tree in question is 1) also called Stinkwood 2) an overforested species.

Re:Whaaaaa?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38311872)

Among the aborigines of Southeast Asia insect repelling plants and plant sap are commonly used.

Re:Whaaaaa?? (2, Informative)

VortexCortex (1117377) | more than 2 years ago | (#38312570)

Which begs the question

You keep using those words.
I do not think they mean what you think they mean.

Ah, but what do you care if your contribution to the dilution helps to lose us an important tool to combat logical fallacies? [wikipedia.org]
You speak of their lost technology, while actively ignoring and destroying your own.

Re:Whaaaaa?? (4, Funny)

EdIII (1114411) | more than 2 years ago | (#38312760)

Wow.

Thank You. My informal use of an oft misquoted phrase was inexcusable. I have been shamed sir, and I hereby undertake not to make any such utterances in the future, as it offends all civilized people, bruises fruit, and scares children. I humbly ask your pardon and your continued tolerance of my rampant ignorance.

Your generous attention to my logical and grammatical failures all the more impressive and deeply moving, since it meant taking you away from the wild parties, Grammar Nazi groupie orgies, and generally, a life of fame, fortune, and excitement to come call me out on the Internets in the middle of the night.

I shall name my two first born sons (twins god willing) Vortex and Cortex in your honor sir.

Forever grateful, My I please have another,

Ed III

Re:Whaaaaa?? (1)

angel'o'sphere (80593) | more than 2 years ago | (#38313218)

I can not agree more!

However to increase your self punishment I allow myself to suggest to order the names of your sons alphabetically: Cortex and Vortex. In case (god forbid!) you get two girls I would suggest Cortexia and Vortyxia as names.

If you get a girl and a boy, please make sure you only pick one name starting with a V and one name starting with a C ... mind the gender.

Re:Whaaaaa?? (2)

angel'o'sphere (80593) | more than 2 years ago | (#38313192)

You can savely assume that "begging the question" and the idiom "This begs the question" are two different things.

The second term/idiom means: "it (the question) comes to mind". Other languages have similar idioms, e.g. in german: "Dies wirft die Frage auf, ob ..."

Re:Whaaaaa?? (1)

b4dc0d3r (1268512) | more than 2 years ago | (#38314380)

Language evolves, I have come to accept. And that is a stupid name for a logical fallacy anyway, especially if you know what the common usage of "begging" is. People say what they have heard, irregardless of how correct it is.

Informing people is one thing, correcting someone is futile. Here's why. Someone uses a phrase because that's the way they heard or read it. For every person, you have a source and probably several peer audience members who heard/read the same thing. You would have to build a time machine to get even marginally close to correcting enough people to get this fixed.

Change the name of the fallacy, and in 1 generation of schooling you'll have enough new people using it correctly that it won't matter any more.

Re:Whaaaaa?? (1)

flyingfsck (986395) | more than 2 years ago | (#38315710)

Yes, well, no fine, but what the hell does 'irregardless' mean?

Re:Whaaaaa?? (1)

EdIII (1114411) | more than 2 years ago | (#38321618)

It means he "mined" his post with grammaticl and spelling traps to get you to post in response.

In other words.. he created a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Either that or he is just stoopid.

Re:Whaaaaa?? (1)

mcgrew (92797) | more than 2 years ago | (#38317446)

Informing people is one thing, correcting someone is futile.

Depends on who the someone is. If I misuse a phrase and someone corrects me, I'm grateful for the lesson; I like to learn.

Of course, it depends on their tone of "voice".

Re:Whaaaaa?? (1)

gstoddart (321705) | more than 2 years ago | (#38315296)

You keep using those words.
I do not think they mean what you think they mean.

So do you.

Look, the reality is when Oxford [oxforddictionaries.com] says "However , over the last 100 years or so another, more general use has arisen: "invite an obvious question" ... This is by far the commonest use today and is the usual one in modern standard English." ... your definition from formal logic is nice and all, but no longer definitive.

English is a hodge-podge of a bunch of different languages, filled with idioms, and changes over time. Just because they have some of the same words, doesn't mean they're not two completely different expressions.

Unless, of course, you consider yourself more authoritative than Oxford. At which point, you're most likely wrong.

Seriously, get over it.

Re:Whaaaaa?? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38320014)

Obligatory Begs the Question fix: from http://begthequestion.info/
What is "Begging the Question?"
"Begging the question" is a form of logical fallacy in which a statement or claim is assumed to be true without evidence other than the statement or claim itself. When one begs the question, the initial assumption of a statement is treated as already proven without any logic to show why the statement is true in the first place.

A simple example would be "I think he is unattractive because he is ugly." The adjective "ugly" does not explain why the subject is "unattractive" -- they virtually amount to the same subjective meaning, and the proof is merely a restatement of the premise. The sentence has begged the question.

What is it Not?
To beg the question does not mean "to raise the question." (e.g. "It begs the question, why is he so dumb?") This is a common error of usage made by those who mistake the word "question" in the phrase to refer to a literal question. Sadly, the error has grown more and more common with time, such that even journalists, advertisers, and major mass media entities have fallen prey to "BTQ Abuse."

While descriptivists and other such laissez-faire linguists are content to allow the misconception to fall into the vernacular, it cannot be denied that logic and philosophy stand to lose an important conceptual label should the meaning of BTQ become diluted to the point that we must constantly distinguish between the traditional usage and the erroneous "modern" usage. This is why we fight.

Evidence for something we already knew... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38310694)

Niggers were lazy, and they haven't changed a bit.

Re:Evidence for something we already knew... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38312292)

You evolved from "niggers," just like the rest of us. I guess we know where all the ignorance and stupidity went, anyway. That's right, bitch. IT WENT IN TO YOU.

Re:Evidence for something we already knew... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38313206)

You evolved from "niggers," just like the rest of us.

So would you say that he is perhaps brighter than a nigger to the same degree that a nigger is brighter than an ape? The drive seems to be towards intelligence, not stupidity - so your reply only proves you incorrect.

What they didn't tell you (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38310734)

was that the one in the back was heart shaped and had the first mirrors on the ceiling.

No doubt ... (4, Funny)

PPH (736903) | more than 2 years ago | (#38311226)

... they found the TV remote underneath one.

I almost feel surprised; (3, Funny)

RandomStr (2116782) | more than 2 years ago | (#38311252)

So the bed wasn't made from, 3 wool and 3 wood planks?

Re:I almost feel surprised; (1)

sadness203 (1539377) | more than 2 years ago | (#38311570)

Please.... it was more like 15 woods and 5 silks.

Re:I almost feel surprised; (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 2 years ago | (#38312278)

Is that all? My villagers always required 2 meat to make a bed.

Re:I almost feel surprised; (1)

Mitchell314 (1576581) | more than 2 years ago | (#38313620)

Civilization was born when we didn't all have to keep respawning at the same, crater infested place.

Herman Cain denies involvement (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#38311284)

Yeah I know, a few days late since he's out of the race; but I couldn't resist the setup.

I don't think he's that old (1)

youn (1516637) | more than 2 years ago | (#38311848)

he definitely has been around for a while though :p

I bet Zog invented it... (1)

Brad1138 (590148) | more than 2 years ago | (#38311482)

Zog [cavemanchemistry.com]

Astounding: Protruding Leaf on Each Mattress (5, Funny)

iggymanz (596061) | more than 2 years ago | (#38311890)

Dr. Wadley today announced an incredible discovery relating to the prehistoric mattresses, each had a protruding leaf with sub-millimeter perforations. These perforations outlined words on the leaves: "Do Not Remove Under Penalty of Law. Tongati River Mattress Works. Composition 35% Sedges, 40% Rushes, 25% Grasses. Machine Wash Cold. Do Not Bleach. Machine Drying May Degrade Flame Retardant, Please Hang Dry".

Ancient cave art also found (2)

GodfatherofSoul (174979) | more than 2 years ago | (#38312188)

Believed to depict a woman placing her cold-ass feet on the back of a male sleeping on the same cot.

These dates keep ketting pushed back (2)

jd (1658) | more than 2 years ago | (#38312746)

That's fine and all part of science - learning naturally alters what you know. From that perspective, it's hardly a surprise. Earliest dates for cooking, advanced stone tool making, etc, have been pushed back by far more significant amounts this year. Domestication of horses may also have been much earlier, but for some curious reason the scholars there have... ...declined to release the data. Anyways, I don't regard that part as being particularly news.

The newsworthy elements to this story:

* Further evidence of abstract and indirect thinking in early humans, pretty much putting beyond question that these skills existed back then
* Further evidence of society evolving gradually rather than in big leaps
* Further evidence that archaeology is massively underfunded given its contributions to understanding of the human condition
* Further evidence that academics in the field are completely incapable of communicating with each other, as there would otherwise be no surprise

This could lead to something big! (1)

sempir (1916194) | more than 2 years ago | (#38313214)

So it's a mattress ...right? People sleep and do stuff on them....right? So they test all the shit they find and do some DNA tests ....right? Then they grow one of them ...like in the movie ...right? And bingo....we know what, and where we came from.....right? I mean there has to be some spilt sperm left over.....Right?

chimps make tree-nests every night (1)

peter303 (12292) | more than 2 years ago | (#38315528)

Perhaps some hominoids go back that far.

Lean on details (1)

sharkey (16670) | more than 2 years ago | (#38315604)

The article doesn't even say what sleep number the beds were set to.

Respawn Location? (1)

matthiasvegh (1800634) | more than 2 years ago | (#38316388)

So do 77000 year old africans still respawn there?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...