User talk:DaVincisAncestor(TheCode)

Welcome!
Hey Wiki!

Hope you see this message along with my changes.

The timeline you create by your blogs is though very missleading and confusing, since the english and danish articles differs alot from eachother.

The things i wondered the most about, is that Homo Erectus came after Ergaster, but though according to your timeline, H. Erectus was the first one. That is a bit missleading, considering ergaster was the link between prober tool, use of fire etc. except just the simple use of modified material. Which should've made the homo species top of foodchain, and setin the need of habitat expansion, which probably promted the erect evulotion to "H. Erectus".

Because what I knew was that erectus was the species that evolved due to the need of expanding their habitat, and the abundant foodscources, and the ability to make a living anywhere throughout the intellect superiority. So this must come after the prober learning of use of tools, which made the homo species capable of placing themselfs highest in the foodchain, which then gave the need for expansion of territory, and thus the erect species, and that was ergaster, so how ever it happend, Ergaster must've been before H. erectus.

And the homo species should have originated from Africa and the Australopithecus species, where we got H. rudolfensis, and he and H.Habilis surely migrated for new habitat, but it still doesn't exclude their still being some around the Australopithecus species, which could also evolve to habilis, ergaster and/or erectus. Therefor there can be different times of when, the species we know as erectus evolved, and if it evolved in another habitat, it would also differ from the other habilis, ergaster and/or erectus species.

And H.Georgicus, had been a missfire in the step of evolution from habilis, where ergaster was way more capable of handling tools and fire, and thus thrived, compared to H. georgicus, who'm probably became exstinct almost imidiately, since the Ergaster thrived way better, and do to the Ergaster doing so well, it also enabled a fast evolution to H. erectus. And since the evolution can be very different depending of surrounding which forces evolution, then H. Georgicus, was probably promted to evolution by something that wasn't as beneficial, and therefor it didn't thrive, and became exstict, unlike Ergaster.

So in general about these articles, it just seems like the logical big picture that helps with the rationalization of why this evolution occured as it did, gets lost, besides from the fact that the timeline created by foundings is incoherent with the steps of evulotions from "H. rudolfensis to H. Erectus".

Your edits
You cant deny what i write because you get offended i call it a blog, If anyone then i must have highest respect for what wikipedia has to offer, but this is just wrong? So what about your academic sources?xD REALLY:.

Too messed up if you changed it back to something that doesn't make any sense, then check your academic sources, and provide them logic sense, then tell then to rewrite with their academic sources, and ask them perhaps they missunderstood.

The order goes "H. rudolfensis -> H. Habilis -> H. Gerogicus + H. Ergaster --> H. Erectus.

Then it makes no sense your "intel", says erectus was found, and predetermined to have lived BEFORE ergaster?xD they evolved FROM egaster, so how can remains have been found before ergaster? :D they were predetermined to be living AFTER ergaster, thats why we base erectus to have been after ergaster, due to the enhanced handling of tools and fire, not even mentioning the more erect spine which, where ergasters spine is clearly less erect, and thus there would be missing a link to H. Floresiensis erect spine.