|
michaelc54
May 13, 2011, 4:06 AM
Post #1 of 41
(5718 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 15, 2010
Posts: 3
|
Well, are they?
http://www.climbingaustralia.com.au/profiles/blogs/are-sport-climbs-the
Regards
Michaelc
|
|
|
|
|
dugl33
May 13, 2011, 4:12 AM
Post #2 of 41
(5714 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 6, 2009
Posts: 740
|
|
|
|
|
|
spikeddem
May 13, 2011, 5:13 AM
Post #3 of 41
(5674 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2007
Posts: 6319
|
"Many climbers can remember the move away from waistlines made from thin hemp rope and three strand nylon lead ropes."
Really? Doubt it. POLL!!!!!!
"I feel that sports climbs are not ‘proper’ climbs. The very high level of inherent safety makes them feel something like a frozen dinner compared to the experience, skill andingenuity that is required to protect a purely traditional climb."
There are terrifying sport climbs, there are terrifying trad climbs, there are safe sport climbs, and there are safe trad climbs.
Also, I think you give trad climbing a bit too much credit. It's not exactly rocket science.
|
|
|
|
|
Greggle
May 13, 2011, 5:42 AM
Post #4 of 41
(5653 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 27, 2010
Posts: 228
|
Tedious...
|
|
|
|
|
rtwilli4
May 13, 2011, 7:15 AM
Post #5 of 41
(5629 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 14, 2008
Posts: 1867
|
spikeddem wrote: "I feel that sports climbs are not ‘proper’ climbs. The very high level of inherent safety makes them feel something like a frozen dinner compared to the experience, skill andingenuity that is required to protect a purely traditional climb." There are terrifying sport climbs, there are terrifying trad climbs, there are safe sport climbs, and there are safe trad climbs. Also, I think you give trad climbing a bit too much credit. It's not exactly rocket science.
What terrifying sport climbs have you done lately? I've probably climbed 5000 pitches of sport on three different continents and I can't think of a single one that I would describe as terrifying.
|
|
|
|
|
sungam
May 13, 2011, 7:53 AM
Post #6 of 41
(5619 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 26804
|
rtwilli4 wrote: spikeddem wrote: "I feel that sports climbs are not ‘proper’ climbs. The very high level of inherent safety makes them feel something like a frozen dinner compared to the experience, skill andingenuity that is required to protect a purely traditional climb." There are terrifying sport climbs, there are terrifying trad climbs, there are safe sport climbs, and there are safe trad climbs. Also, I think you give trad climbing a bit too much credit. It's not exactly rocket science. What terrifying sport climbs have you done lately? I've probably climbed 5000 pitches of sport on three different continents and I can't think of a single one that I would describe as terrifying.
As for the chest thumping "Trad is just something MORE!"... *Yawn*.
Whatever. Sport climbing is fun as hell. Bouldering is fun as hell. Trad is fun as hell.
We really don't care that you think you're so awesome because you climb trad.
|
|
|
|
|
rtwilli4
May 13, 2011, 8:08 AM
Post #7 of 41
(5605 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 14, 2008
Posts: 1867
|
sungam wrote: rtwilli4 wrote: spikeddem wrote: "I feel that sports climbs are not ‘proper’ climbs. The very high level of inherent safety makes them feel something like a frozen dinner compared to the experience, skill andingenuity that is required to protect a purely traditional climb." There are terrifying sport climbs, there are terrifying trad climbs, there are safe sport climbs, and there are safe trad climbs. Also, I think you give trad climbing a bit too much credit. It's not exactly rocket science. What terrifying sport climbs have you done lately? I've probably climbed 5000 pitches of sport on three different continents and I can't think of a single one that I would describe as terrifying. I got really scared at Stone, but I dunno if that counts as sport climbing. As for the chest thumping "Trad is just something MORE!"... *Yawn*. Whatever. Sport climbing is fun as hell. Bouldering is fun as hell. Trad is fun as hell. We really don't care that you think you're so awesome because you climb trad.
Umm, yea... Stone Mountain is definitely NOT sport climbing! I climbed 100 feet there once from anchor to anchor and clipped one bolt!
I generally enjoy placing gear more than clipping bolts, but I really do like sport and bouldering as well.
What is it with all of these discussions lately about trad and sport? Is there a vote coming up?
|
|
|
|
|
Greggle
May 13, 2011, 8:09 AM
Post #8 of 41
(5605 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 27, 2010
Posts: 228
|
sungam wrote: rtwilli4 wrote: spikeddem wrote: "I feel that sports climbs are not ‘proper’ climbs. The very high level of inherent safety makes them feel something like a frozen dinner compared to the experience, skill andingenuity that is required to protect a purely traditional climb." There are terrifying sport climbs, there are terrifying trad climbs, there are safe sport climbs, and there are safe trad climbs. Also, I think you give trad climbing a bit too much credit. It's not exactly rocket science. What terrifying sport climbs have you done lately? I've probably climbed 5000 pitches of sport on three different continents and I can't think of a single one that I would describe as terrifying. I got really scared at Stone, but I dunno if that counts as sport climbing. As for the chest thumping "Trad is just something MORE!"... *Yawn*. Whatever. Sport climbing is fun as hell. Bouldering is fun as hell. Trad is fun as hell. We really don't care that you think you're so awesome because you climb trad.
Lov' ya'. Always hov'.
|
|
|
|
|
lena_chita
Moderator
May 13, 2011, 12:08 PM
Post #9 of 41
(5572 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 27, 2006
Posts: 6087
|
rtwilli4 wrote: spikeddem wrote: "I feel that sports climbs are not ‘proper’ climbs. The very high level of inherent safety makes them feel something like a frozen dinner compared to the experience, skill andingenuity that is required to protect a purely traditional climb." There are terrifying sport climbs, there are terrifying trad climbs, there are safe sport climbs, and there are safe trad climbs. Also, I think you give trad climbing a bit too much credit. It's not exactly rocket science. What terrifying sport climbs have you done lately? I've probably climbed 5000 pitches of sport on three different continents and I can't think of a single one that I would describe as terrifying.
Terrifying =/ unsafe.
You didn't ask me, but if I had to list the most terrifying climb I've been on in the past year, that would be at Smith Rock: Headless Horseman (.10d) in gale force wind. I would have cried, but I was too terrified to even cry. Or maybe I did cry, and the wind blew the tears away faster than I could produce them. Fully bolted sport climb. And it isn't even PG13. I guess I am just easily terrified.
And as to the OP-- yeah, yeah, whatever. We've heard that before.
I don't even think the TV dinner analogy is a good one. TV dinner implies inferior quality product done for the sake of convenience, that would be better if prepared by traditional methods. But there are many sport climbs that are stellar quality and would not be possible to climb ground-up on gear.
A better analogy would be something ike this: in the paleo days before people used fire, everyone ate raw foods, raw foods are best for you, and sport climbing is like eating heat-cooked meals. O.K., then, I'll take my delicious heat-cooked meals, because there are things that I don't fancy raw. But I would still enjoy my raw salads very much, along with my cooked foods, thank you!
|
|
|
|
|
shockabuku
May 13, 2011, 12:33 PM
Post #10 of 41
(5557 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 20, 2006
Posts: 4868
|
lena_chita wrote: rtwilli4 wrote: spikeddem wrote: "I feel that sports climbs are not ‘proper’ climbs. The very high level of inherent safety makes them feel something like a frozen dinner compared to the experience, skill andingenuity that is required to protect a purely traditional climb." There are terrifying sport climbs, there are terrifying trad climbs, there are safe sport climbs, and there are safe trad climbs. Also, I think you give trad climbing a bit too much credit. It's not exactly rocket science. What terrifying sport climbs have you done lately? I've probably climbed 5000 pitches of sport on three different continents and I can't think of a single one that I would describe as terrifying. Terrifying =/ unsafe. You didn't ask me, but if I had to list the most terrifying climb I've been on in the past year, that would be at Smith Rock: Headless Horseman (.10d) in gale force wind. I would have cried, but I was too terrified to even cry. Or maybe I did cry, and the wind blew the tears away faster than I could produce them. Fully bolted sport climb. And it isn't even PG13. I guess I am just easily terrified. And as to the OP-- yeah, yeah, whatever. We've heard that before. I don't even think the TV dinner analogy is a good one. TV dinner implies inferior quality product done for the sake of convenience, that would be better if prepared by traditional methods. But there are many sport climbs that are stellar quality and would not be possible to climb ground-up on gear. A better analogy would be something ike this: in the paleo days before people used fire, everyone ate raw foods, raw foods are best for you, and sport climbing is like eating heat-cooked meals. O.K., then, I'll take my delicious heat-cooked meals, because there are things that I don't fancy raw. But I would still enjoy my raw salads very much, along with my cooked foods, thank you!
No, raw food is soloing. Trad climbing is cooked over a campfire.
Sport climbing is
|
|
|
|
|
kachoong
May 13, 2011, 2:38 PM
Post #11 of 41
(5521 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 23, 2004
Posts: 15304
|
shockabuku wrote: lena_chita wrote: rtwilli4 wrote: spikeddem wrote: "I feel that sports climbs are not ‘proper’ climbs. The very high level of inherent safety makes them feel something like a frozen dinner compared to the experience, skill andingenuity that is required to protect a purely traditional climb." There are terrifying sport climbs, there are terrifying trad climbs, there are safe sport climbs, and there are safe trad climbs. Also, I think you give trad climbing a bit too much credit. It's not exactly rocket science. What terrifying sport climbs have you done lately? I've probably climbed 5000 pitches of sport on three different continents and I can't think of a single one that I would describe as terrifying. Terrifying =/ unsafe. You didn't ask me, but if I had to list the most terrifying climb I've been on in the past year, that would be at Smith Rock: Headless Horseman (.10d) in gale force wind. I would have cried, but I was too terrified to even cry. Or maybe I did cry, and the wind blew the tears away faster than I could produce them. Fully bolted sport climb. And it isn't even PG13. I guess I am just easily terrified. And as to the OP-- yeah, yeah, whatever. We've heard that before. I don't even think the TV dinner analogy is a good one. TV dinner implies inferior quality product done for the sake of convenience, that would be better if prepared by traditional methods. But there are many sport climbs that are stellar quality and would not be possible to climb ground-up on gear. A better analogy would be something ike this: in the paleo days before people used fire, everyone ate raw foods, raw foods are best for you, and sport climbing is like eating heat-cooked meals. O.K., then, I'll take my delicious heat-cooked meals, because there are things that I don't fancy raw. But I would still enjoy my raw salads very much, along with my cooked foods, thank you! No, raw food is soloing. Trad climbing is cooked over a campfire. Sport climbing is
Yes... prepared for you. Woo! Free restaurant food.
|
|
|
|
|
shockabuku
May 13, 2011, 2:40 PM
Post #12 of 41
(5518 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 20, 2006
Posts: 4868
|
kachoong wrote: shockabuku wrote: lena_chita wrote: rtwilli4 wrote: spikeddem wrote: "I feel that sports climbs are not ‘proper’ climbs. The very high level of inherent safety makes them feel something like a frozen dinner compared to the experience, skill andingenuity that is required to protect a purely traditional climb." There are terrifying sport climbs, there are terrifying trad climbs, there are safe sport climbs, and there are safe trad climbs. Also, I think you give trad climbing a bit too much credit. It's not exactly rocket science. What terrifying sport climbs have you done lately? I've probably climbed 5000 pitches of sport on three different continents and I can't think of a single one that I would describe as terrifying. Terrifying =/ unsafe. You didn't ask me, but if I had to list the most terrifying climb I've been on in the past year, that would be at Smith Rock: Headless Horseman (.10d) in gale force wind. I would have cried, but I was too terrified to even cry. Or maybe I did cry, and the wind blew the tears away faster than I could produce them. Fully bolted sport climb. And it isn't even PG13. I guess I am just easily terrified. And as to the OP-- yeah, yeah, whatever. We've heard that before. I don't even think the TV dinner analogy is a good one. TV dinner implies inferior quality product done for the sake of convenience, that would be better if prepared by traditional methods. But there are many sport climbs that are stellar quality and would not be possible to climb ground-up on gear. A better analogy would be something ike this: in the paleo days before people used fire, everyone ate raw foods, raw foods are best for you, and sport climbing is like eating heat-cooked meals. O.K., then, I'll take my delicious heat-cooked meals, because there are things that I don't fancy raw. But I would still enjoy my raw salads very much, along with my cooked foods, thank you! No, raw food is soloing. Trad climbing is cooked over a campfire. Sport climbing is [image]http://italianfoodlovers.wordpress.com/files/2008/03/academiabarilla-lamb.gif[/image] Yes... prepared for you. Woo! Free restaurant food.
Oh, I forgot bouldering.
|
|
|
|
|
ceebo
May 13, 2011, 3:08 PM
Post #13 of 41
(5500 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 9, 2009
Posts: 862
|
This is only a case of people needing to believe (for what ever reason) that their chosen style is the most hard core.
If they need to believe that in order to keep climbing...
|
|
|
|
|
jbone
May 13, 2011, 3:19 PM
Post #14 of 41
(5489 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 30, 2002
Posts: 463
|
shockabuku wrote: kachoong wrote: shockabuku wrote: lena_chita wrote: rtwilli4 wrote: spikeddem wrote: "I feel that sports climbs are not ‘proper’ climbs. The very high level of inherent safety makes them feel something like a frozen dinner compared to the experience, skill andingenuity that is required to protect a purely traditional climb." There are terrifying sport climbs, there are terrifying trad climbs, there are safe sport climbs, and there are safe trad climbs. Also, I think you give trad climbing a bit too much credit. It's not exactly rocket science. What terrifying sport climbs have you done lately? I've probably climbed 5000 pitches of sport on three different continents and I can't think of a single one that I would describe as terrifying. Terrifying =/ unsafe. You didn't ask me, but if I had to list the most terrifying climb I've been on in the past year, that would be at Smith Rock: Headless Horseman (.10d) in gale force wind. I would have cried, but I was too terrified to even cry. Or maybe I did cry, and the wind blew the tears away faster than I could produce them. Fully bolted sport climb. And it isn't even PG13. I guess I am just easily terrified. And as to the OP-- yeah, yeah, whatever. We've heard that before. I don't even think the TV dinner analogy is a good one. TV dinner implies inferior quality product done for the sake of convenience, that would be better if prepared by traditional methods. But there are many sport climbs that are stellar quality and would not be possible to climb ground-up on gear. A better analogy would be something ike this: in the paleo days before people used fire, everyone ate raw foods, raw foods are best for you, and sport climbing is like eating heat-cooked meals. O.K., then, I'll take my delicious heat-cooked meals, because there are things that I don't fancy raw. But I would still enjoy my raw salads very much, along with my cooked foods, thank you! No, raw food is soloing. Trad climbing is cooked over a campfire. Sport climbing is [image]http://italianfoodlovers.wordpress.com/files/2008/03/academiabarilla-lamb.gif[/image] Yes... prepared for you. Woo! Free restaurant food. Oh, I forgot bouldering. [image]http://i.treehugger.com/images/2007/10/24/twinkies.jpg[/image]
Maybe if you swap the cream filling for Tabasco Sauce.
|
|
|
|
|
happiegrrrl
May 13, 2011, 4:50 PM
Post #15 of 41
(5430 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 25, 2004
Posts: 4660
|
I don't climb sport much at all, and have only led like 3 sport routes, one of which was just recently - Hippie Dreams at Summersville.
All I can say is.... I had been in Full-on emotional meltdown mode that day and when my partner asked if I wanted to lead it, as the 1st route of our day, I looked at it and said sure, no problem. Were it a gear route, at my home crag, there is no way I would have led a 7 in the state I was in.
In fact, I am now home and yesterday we went out. I fell at the crux following Birdie Party, and trashed my arms trying to traverse at it's variation to the MF anchor. The plan was that I would lead Something Interesting after this route, but I....declined. Then I followed SI(which is a 7) and was quite glad I wasn't leading it. Not that I couldn't have, but I like to be more confident I won't have difficulty.
So - if climbing is food, maybe that sport 7 was a nice little cupcake from a halfway decent bakery. Nothing special, but satisfying for the sugar fix, and pretty enough. And Something Interesting would have been.....having to snare a rabbit(and letting someone else kill/clean it - ew!) and having to build a wood fire and roast it myself.
|
|
|
|
|
dynosore
May 13, 2011, 6:01 PM
Post #16 of 41
(5367 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 29, 2004
Posts: 1768
|
Sport climbing and gyms are awesome. They concentrate 90% of the climbers in 5% of the climbing areas, leaving the rest for meeeeeeeeeeeeeee
|
|
|
|
|
camhead
May 13, 2011, 7:06 PM
Post #17 of 41
(5343 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 10, 2001
Posts: 20939
|
Sport climbing is not a frozen TV dinner.
However, sport climbing at Clear Creek Canyon, Reimer's Ranch, or Rumney are definitely frozen TV dinners.
|
|
|
|
|
enigma
May 14, 2011, 4:34 AM
Post #18 of 41
(5286 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 19, 2002
Posts: 2279
|
lena_chita wrote: rtwilli4 wrote: spikeddem wrote: "I feel that sports climbs are not ‘proper’ climbs. The very high level of inherent safety makes them feel something like a frozen dinner compared to the experience, skill andingenuity that is required to protect a purely traditional climb." There are terrifying sport climbs, there are terrifying trad climbs, there are safe sport climbs, and there are safe trad climbs. Also, I think you give trad climbing a bit too much credit. It's not exactly rocket science. What terrifying sport climbs have you done lately? I've probably climbed 5000 pitches of sport on three different continents and I can't think of a single one that I would describe as terrifying. Terrifying =/ unsafe. You didn't ask me, but if I had to list the most terrifying climb I've been on in the past year, that would be at Smith Rock: Headless Horseman (.10d) in gale force wind. I would have cried, but I was too terrified to even cry. Or maybe I did cry, and the wind blew the tears away faster than I could produce them. Fully bolted sport climb. And it isn't even PG13. I guess I am just easily terrified. And as to the OP-- yeah, yeah, whatever. We've heard that before. I don't even think the TV dinner analogy is a good one. TV dinner implies inferior quality product done for the sake of convenience, that would be better if prepared by traditional methods. But there are many sport climbs that are stellar quality and would not be possible to climb ground-up on gear. A better analogy would be something ike this: in the paleo days before people used fire, everyone ate raw foods, raw foods are best for you, and sport climbing is like eating heat-cooked meals. O.K., then, I'll take my delicious heat-cooked meals, because there are things that I don't fancy raw. But I would still enjoy my raw salads very much, along with my cooked foods, thank you!
Good Analogy, Lena!
|
|
|
|
|
justroberto
May 14, 2011, 5:02 AM
Post #19 of 41
(5279 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 21, 2006
Posts: 1876
|
camhead wrote: Sport climbing is not a frozen TV dinner. However, sport climbing at Clear Creek Canyon, Reimer's Ranch, or Rumney are definitely frozen TV dinners.
Ha! I don't know about Clear Creek, but Rumney and Reimer's are like PF Chang's: ridiculously overpriced and equally disappointing, but their proponents will vehemently argue that they're the greatest goddamned things they've ever experienced.
|
|
|
|
|
Toast_in_the_Machine
May 14, 2011, 5:13 PM
Post #20 of 41
(5150 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 12, 2008
Posts: 5208
|
enigma wrote: lena_chita wrote: A better analogy would be something ike this: in the paleo days before people used fire, everyone ate raw foods, raw foods are best for you, and sport climbing is like eating heat-cooked meals. O.K., then, I'll take my delicious heat-cooked meals, because there are things that I don't fancy raw. But I would still enjoy my raw salads very much, along with my cooked foods, thank you! Good Analogy, Lena!
Well, except for the fact that hominid use of fire predates our species by about a million years. But, hey, why let facts matter, pass the bronto burgers.
|
|
|
|
|
potreroed
May 14, 2011, 6:12 PM
Post #21 of 41
(5132 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 30, 2001
Posts: 1454
|
No, they're not. And I don't mind bolts next to cracks if that's how the first ascent party chose to do it.
|
|
|
|
|
camhead
May 16, 2011, 1:48 PM
Post #22 of 41
(4994 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 10, 2001
Posts: 20939
|
Toast_in_the_Machine wrote: enigma wrote: lena_chita wrote: A better analogy would be something ike this: in the paleo days before people used fire, everyone ate raw foods, raw foods are best for you, and sport climbing is like eating heat-cooked meals. O.K., then, I'll take my delicious heat-cooked meals, because there are things that I don't fancy raw. But I would still enjoy my raw salads very much, along with my cooked foods, thank you! Good Analogy, Lena! Well, except for the fact that hominid use of fire predates our species by about a million years. But, hey, why let facts matter, pass the bronto burgers.
at the risk of derailing the thread, where did you hear this? Almost all estimates I've read put earliest use of fire at much less than 1 million years ago, let alone 1 million years before homo sapiens.
|
|
|
|
|
Toast_in_the_Machine
May 16, 2011, 2:27 PM
Post #23 of 41
(4983 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 12, 2008
Posts: 5208
|
camhead wrote: Toast_in_the_Machine wrote: enigma wrote: lena_chita wrote: A better analogy would be something ike this: in the paleo days before people used fire, everyone ate raw foods, raw foods are best for you, and sport climbing is like eating heat-cooked meals. O.K., then, I'll take my delicious heat-cooked meals, because there are things that I don't fancy raw. But I would still enjoy my raw salads very much, along with my cooked foods, thank you! Good Analogy, Lena! Well, except for the fact that hominid use of fire predates our species by about a million years. But, hey, why let facts matter, pass the bronto burgers. at the risk of derailing the thread, where did you hear this? Almost all estimates I've read put earliest use of fire at much less than 1 million years ago, let alone 1 million years before homo sapiens.
Is derailing this thread a bad thing?
http://findarticles.com/...n24_v134/ai_6924560/
Figuring 2k+ for sapiens and splitting the time of the estimate I got too the about a million years.
|
|
|
|
|
camhead
May 16, 2011, 2:32 PM
Post #24 of 41
(4874 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 10, 2001
Posts: 20939
|
Toast_in_the_Machine wrote: camhead wrote: Toast_in_the_Machine wrote: enigma wrote: lena_chita wrote: A better analogy would be something ike this: in the paleo days before people used fire, everyone ate raw foods, raw foods are best for you, and sport climbing is like eating heat-cooked meals. O.K., then, I'll take my delicious heat-cooked meals, because there are things that I don't fancy raw. But I would still enjoy my raw salads very much, along with my cooked foods, thank you! Good Analogy, Lena! Well, except for the fact that hominid use of fire predates our species by about a million years. But, hey, why let facts matter, pass the bronto burgers. at the risk of derailing the thread, where did you hear this? Almost all estimates I've read put earliest use of fire at much less than 1 million years ago, let alone 1 million years before homo sapiens. Is derailing this thread a bad thing? http://findarticles.com/...n24_v134/ai_6924560/ Figuring 2k+ for sapiens and splitting the time of the estimate I got too the about a million years.
Yeah, I remember that. The earliest use of around 1.5 million years ago, however, is still enough under question that I would hesitate to call it a fact.
|
|
|
|
|
Toast_in_the_Machine
May 16, 2011, 2:49 PM
Post #25 of 41
(4871 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 12, 2008
Posts: 5208
|
camhead wrote: Toast_in_the_Machine wrote: camhead wrote: Toast_in_the_Machine wrote: enigma wrote: lena_chita wrote: A better analogy would be something ike this: in the paleo days before people used fire, everyone ate raw foods, raw foods are best for you, and sport climbing is like eating heat-cooked meals. O.K., then, I'll take my delicious heat-cooked meals, because there are things that I don't fancy raw. But I would still enjoy my raw salads very much, along with my cooked foods, thank you! Good Analogy, Lena! Well, except for the fact that hominid use of fire predates our species by about a million years. But, hey, why let facts matter, pass the bronto burgers. at the risk of derailing the thread, where did you hear this? Almost all estimates I've read put earliest use of fire at much less than 1 million years ago, let alone 1 million years before homo sapiens. Is derailing this thread a bad thing? http://findarticles.com/...n24_v134/ai_6924560/ Figuring 2k+ for sapiens and splitting the time of the estimate I got too the about a million years. Yeah, I remember that. The earliest use of around 1.5 million years ago, however, is still enough under question that I would hesitate to call it a fact.
Sure, a good debate on if erectus was indeed the first user of fire can be made. Considering that heidelbergensis, neanderthalensis and sapiens all used fire, erectus is, to me, the logical source. So, yes, while the time span can not be known accurately, the order of is clear. Fire use by homos predates evolution of sapiens.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
