Well, there is one scientific method by which we can determine that.
When were Trachilos footprints? ...
Op zaterdag 11 december 2021 om 01:56:03 UTC+1 schreef Mario Petrinovic:
Well, there is one scientific method by which we can determine that.
When were Trachilos footprints? ...
All early hominids were "bipedal", google "aquarboreal":
they waded & climbed vertically in swamp/mangrove/flooded...forests.
Trachilos were simply waterside footprints of a dryopith or hominid - nothing unexpected:
google "ape human evolution made easy PPT".
But hominid bipedality has 0 to do with human speech:
google "language speech origins 2017 PPT".
Well, there is one scientific method by which we can determine that.
When were Trachilos footprints? ...
All early hominids were "bipedal", google "aquarboreal":
they waded & climbed vertically in swamp/mangrove/flooded...forests. Trachilos were simply waterside footprints of a dryopith or hominid - nothing unexpected:
google "ape human evolution made easy PPT".
Everybody agrees that those footprints were left by Graecopithecus. It
has thick enamel, smaller canines. Evolution isn't a bubble gum, to
stretch it the way you like it.
I can agree that we can break things down to a range. Like, would any of us really argue -- apart from trolling -- AGAINST the notion of erectus having speech?
Well, there is one scientific method by which we can determine that.
When were Trachillos footprints? Lets see scientific method by which
they found the date. Sedimentary rocks are 5.6 my old. Foraminifera that
was present was 8.5 and 3.5 my old. So, taking sedimentary rocks and foraminifora, it was 8.5 - 5.6 my.
... would any of us
really argue -- apart from trolling -- AGAINST the notion of erectus having speech?
Mario Petrinovic wrote:
Well, there is one scientific method by which we can determine that.
When were Trachillos footprints? Lets see scientific method by which
they found the date. Sedimentary rocks are 5.6 my old. Foraminifera that
was present was 8.5 and 3.5 my old. So, taking sedimentary rocks and
foraminifora, it was 8.5 - 5.6 my.
: The researchers of the tracks suggest that it may imply the possibility of hominin
: evolution outside of Africa, contrary to the current theory.[2]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trachilos_footprints
If pale anthropology were a science and not a social program it would't obsess
over WHERE, realizing that modern humans evolved from a process and not a location.
I can agree that we can break things down to a range. Like, would any of us really argue -- apart from trolling -- AGAINST the notion of erectus having speech?
I think not.
And maybe habilis for an upward limit?
I personally doubt that early habilis had our idea of language...
Stone tools equals language.
This means, Kenyanthropus equals language. Since Kenyanthropus was
"platyops" (flat face), he came from the north.
Sysop: | Keyop |
---|---|
Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
Users: | 295 |
Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
Uptime: | 04:40:46 |
Calls: | 6,642 |
Calls today: | 2 |
Files: | 12,190 |
Messages: | 5,325,746 |