What is the right scientific naming for man and what is the difference in their use and meaning?
"Homo refers to the genus, Sapiens the species. Both concepts come from the biological system. Homo Sapiens Sapiens and, for example, Homo Sapiens NeanderTalensis are sub-types of kind of Sapiens and the genus Homo."
Homo Sapiens Sapiens, Designation for today's people (comprehensive man, Jetztime man).
The development of man began about 5 million years ago. It was especially recognizable at the upright walk, at the increase in the performance of the brain, the development of language and dealing with fire.
about 2 million years agoWrapped the Homo Habilis (skillful man), about 70,000 years ago of Homo Erectus (upright man) and about 10,000 years ago of Homo Sapiens (consideration Person). A sub-branch of the Homo Erectus was the Neanderthal . https://learnattack.de/schuelerlexikon/geschichte/homo-Sapiens-sapiens
None of this. It has everything with a dispute among academics to do if man and Neanderthaler should be considered as separate species or only as separate sub-types of the same kind or not.
Everything is caused by the species problem. Simply expressed, there is no solid definition of what makes a kind of, and different scientists sometimes rely on underCudible definitions. There are at least 26 generally use, and they are generally used (but not uniform), depending on what kind of animal they work. Definitions that apply to asexual rendering bacteria are generally not useful if you work with birds or mammals, for example.
Most definitions used on sexually reproductive animals (eg mammals) are based on the biological species concept of Mayr, the species as "groups actually or potentially crossing natural populations, the reproductive of other such Groups are defined "defined. In other words, a kind is a group that opposed into propagation and viable offspringcan struggle; If two groups can not cross, these are different types.
In what are this applicable to Homo Sapiens Sapiens? Well, we know certainly that early hominide species have crossed.
Non-Sapiens DNA accounts for a significant proportion of the European and East Asian genome - about 2% Neanderthaler in both populations (up to 4% at some Europeans) and about 4% Denisovan in East Asian populations (up to 6% in some Individuals). This is a not insignificant degree of inbreeding.
So we know that they have crossed. What obviously means that they can produce couples and viable descendants, what to Mayr's concept means that it is the same kindt.
Denisovans are a new discovery - we know you only since 2010, and you do not even have an agreed taxonomic name. Some people call Homo Denisova, some Homo Altaiensis. However, we have known about Neanderthaler since the mid-19th century, and the intersection with people was first proposed in 1907.
Before 1907, they were always treated as separate species - Homo Sapiens and Homo Neanderthalensis. Some advocates of intersection theory (which has meanwhile proven to be true, but obviously was already controversial) claimed that if they crossed, sub-sorts and non-separate species are and that their names are therefore correct Homo Sapiens Sapiens and Homo Sapiens Neanderthalensis Should be.
Here is your answer - there is no difference. There are only academics that do not agree a bit. And everything is Mayr's fault.