"A tiger is still a cat. A wooly mammoth is still a type of elephant. I don't know what a hyena might be related to, but it doesn't matter anyway unless it decides at some point to turn into something other than a hyena. Maybe it's ALWAYS been a hyena or hyena like creature."
Wait a minute. I thought your point was that "types" are recognizable as, well, types.
Is a hyena a whole type unto itself? Or is it a dog? Or maybe a cat?
good point.
I'm told earlier in this thread that "by definition" there is no breeding across species, how dumb can we be.
Later in the thread I see a scientists yukking it up because someone is so dumb, they don't know lions and tigers are different species.
Then I see on yahoo a 10 foot LIGER of all things. I can't imagine how that happened.
Somebody needs to get their stories straight.
I think my statement was pretty clear. A hyena may simply be a hyena. As you say...a type unto itself. Maybe it was ALWAYS a hyena or hyena like creature...I think we can only know for certain when a hyena starts evolving into something that is recognizably different from what a hyena currently looks like.