Quote:
Originally Posted by BadNick
... found the earliest evidence yet for the existence of modern man.
...
|
A gainsaying and a misnomer'd cliche.
You can't speculate whether it is "evidence" of human remains: it either is, or isn't - Evident. Furthermore, the trite additional that this could be a momentous key in the further proof of 'modern man'? The proof is right here... in modern times. If proven fact, and I'm merely speculating the scenario here: he was probably an old man, in an age where there was no such thing as 'modern times', (probably because the only sort of 'times' back then was the one sort: 'harsh times') but he was just that. If there's anything I can say for certain, there was no Modern Man 400,000 years ago. That's even older than ancient history. Reaching farther back [in time] than even the Medieval Ages, and to some of us, that's about as old as it gets. Modern Man lives in Modern Times, and it just so happens the Modern Times are forever now, never then (even the Eighties, which might have been Modern at one point or another, is now just 'old news').
Use better journalistic-societal slang next time, please, eh news[moguls]? That's all I ask. Use what is both common AND correct, not one or the other.