When will the kudu runners realize:
- all Pliocene hominid fossils in Africa are Gorilla or Pan, never Homo,

Kudu runner:

Then what Pliocene fossil taxa belong to the Homo clade?
Was Homo created by God, or fall out of the sky after the Pliocene?

Never heard of *logica*, my little boy??
Again:
"all Pliocene hominid fossils in Africa are Gorilla or Pan, never Homo." Okidoki?

- Pliocene Homo was in S-Asia, NOT in Africa (fossil & RV data).

Show me a single Pliocene Homo specimen from S-Asia.

My little little boy: early-Pleist.fossils on Java.
Confirmed by RV data.
And by absence of *real* Pliocene Homo fossils in Africa.
Grow up.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Fri, 13 Jan 2023 08:40:16 -0800 (PST), "littor...@gmail.com" <littoral.homo@gmail.com> wrote:

When will the kudu runners realize:
- all Pliocene hominid fossils in Africa are Gorilla or Pan, never Homo,

Then what Pliocene fossil taxa belong to the Homo clade?
Was Homo created by God, or fall out of the sky after the Pliocene?

- Pliocene Homo was in S-Asia, NOT in Africa (fossil & RV data).

Show me a single Pliocene Homo specimen from S-Asia.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Fri, 13 Jan 2023 10:00:02 -0800 (PST), "littor...@gmail.com" <littoral.homo@gmail.com> wrote:

When will the kudu runners realize:
- all Pliocene hominid fossils in Africa are Gorilla or Pan, never Homo,

Kudu runner:

Then what Pliocene fossil taxa belong to the Homo clade?
Was Homo created by God, or fall out of the sky after the Pliocene?

Never heard of *logica*, my little boy??
Again:
"all Pliocene hominid fossils in Africa are Gorilla or Pan, never Homo." >Okidoki?

That doesn't sound logic at all.
What are the Pliocene ancestors of Homo if not the australopithecines?
You simply create a new Pliocene ghost lineage for Homo by transfering
all Pliocene hominid taxa to Pan and Gorilla.

- Pliocene Homo was in S-Asia, NOT in Africa (fossil & RV data).

Show me a single Pliocene Homo specimen from S-Asia.

My little little boy: early-Pleist.fossils on Java.

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aau8556

"the hominin dispersal into Java is resolved to
be <1.5 Ma."

Homo aff. H. habilis much earlier in Africa, at least 2.33 Ma. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/216209873

<https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/(SICI)1096-8644(199706)103:2%3C235::AID-AJPA8%3E3.0.CO;2-S>

I'm sure you wil ignore this and without any empirical basis consider
A.L. 666-1 as Pan or Gorilla.
That's the idiocy.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Pandora wrote:

Then what

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/706396332513951744

Show the good Doctor this. He hates this stuff.




-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/706396332513951744

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

When will the kudu runners realize:
- all Pliocene hominid fossils in Africa are Gorilla or Pan, never Homo,

Kudu runner:

Then what Pliocene fossil taxa belong to the Homo clade?
Was Homo created by God, or fall out of the sky after the Pliocene?

Never heard of *logica*, my little boy??
Again:
"all Pliocene hominid fossils in Africa are Gorilla or Pan, never Homo." >Okidoki?

Kudu runner again:

That doesn't sound logic at all.

Yes, to you. Thanks for the argument... :-D

What are the Pliocene ancestors of Homo if not the australopithecines?
You simply create a new Pliocene ghost lineage for Homo by transfering
all Pliocene hominid taxa to Pan and Gorilla.

I transfer nothing, I only use the evidence...
Can't you even *read*, my little boy??
Again: my 2022 book p.299-300:
HPG LCA in Red Sea coastal forests,
-8-7 Ma HP/G split: G followed incipient northern Rift -> Afar, e.g. afarensis->boisei
-6-5 Ma (5.33 Ma exactly? Zanclean flood hypothesis of Francesca Mansfield) Red Sea opened into Gulf:
--- Pan went right -> E.Afr.coastal forests, entered S.Afr. via incipient southern Rift -> africanus->robustus (// afar.->boisei),
--- Homo went left -> S.Asian coast, IOW, no Pliocene fossils -> Java early-Pleist. pachy-osteo-sclerosis + brain 800-900 cc = aquatic foods, diving.

- Pliocene Homo was in S-Asia, NOT in Africa (fossil & RV data).

Show me a single Pliocene Homo specimen from S-Asia.

(the kudu runner should inform a bit on coastal fossilization... sigh)

My little little boy: early-Pleist.fossils on Java.

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aau8556
"the hominin dispersal into Java is resolved to be <1.5 Ma."

Yes, that specific fossil, thanks for the ref.: not impossible, but
- retroviral data: Plio.Homo was not in Africa,
- Homo fossils in China >2 Ma, it's said (doubtful?),
- Java is *far* from Africa,
- 0 undoubtedly-Homo fossils in Plio.Africa ("habilis"=apith),
- Homo brain>800 cc in Asia, not Africa,
-etc.

What discerns us from apes is N

On Sat, 14 Jan 2023 04:08:47 -0800 (PST), "littor...@gmail.com" <littoral.homo@gmail.com> wrote:

What are the Pliocene ancestors of Homo if not the australopithecines?
You simply create a new Pliocene ghost lineage for Homo by transfering
all Pliocene hominid taxa to Pan and Gorilla.

I transfer nothing, I only use the evidence...

You misinterpret the evidence to create a ghostlineage for Homo of
some 4-5 million years, between the H/P split and the earliest members
of our genus, by assigning all non-Homo hominid fossil taxa to Pan and
Gorilla clades.
The earliest member of the human clade in your "possible evolutionary
tree of fossil hominids" (fig.1 in the 1994 paper) would be the
Chemeron temporal (KNM-BC 1) at 2.4 Ma.
https://doi.org/10.1006/jhev.2000.0409

Where are the fossil members of the human branch between about 7 and
2.4 Ma?

- Pliocene Homo was in S-Asia, NOT in Africa (fossil & RV data).

Show me a single Pliocene Homo specimen from S-Asia.

(the kudu runner should inform a bit on coastal fossilization... sigh)

Like Mojokerto?

My little little boy: early-Pleist.fossils on Java.

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aau8556
"the hominin dispersal into Java is resolved to be <1.5 Ma."

Yes, that specific fossil, thanks for the ref.: not impossible, but

"Another hominin specimen that has been contended to be the earliest
Javanese H. erectus is the Mojokerto skull from the Perning site in
East Java. This skull is now concluded to be less than ~1.49 Ma on the
basis of fission-track age determinations"

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

kudu runner:

Where are the fossil members of the human branch between about 7 and
2.4 Ma?

Again: for the Xth time:
my little little boy, why don't you inform a little little bit on coastal fossilization??

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Sat, 14 Jan 2023 07:36:12 -0800 (PST), "littor...@gmail.com" <littoral.homo@gmail.com> wrote:

kudu runner:

Where are the fossil members of the human branch between about 7 and
2.4 Ma?

Again: for the Xth time:
my little little boy, why don't you inform a little little bit on coastal fossilization??

So, you really don't have a shred of fossil evidence of Pliocene Homo
from S-Asia?
Such a pity.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Pandora wrote:

You misinterpret the evidence to create a ghostlineage for Homo of
some 4-5 million years

You mistaken a selection bias -- looking as the easiest fossils there
are to find then pretending they all have to be human ancestors --
and interpret it all within the filter of your pre conceived notions.

You know where Sundaland was supposed to have been. The ocean'
floor has been mapped out. Nearly all of these science is complete,
you can reconstruct coast lines to some accuracy... LOOK!

It ain't hard. YEARS ago I proposed dredging.

Yes, it's a HORRIBLE solution, but only if you know for a fact that your savanna idiocy is a crock of bull poop.

Dredging is actually extremely efficient and cheap, compared to
exploration on dry land. It's a bit too easy, too cheap....

It's danger, of course, is that it erases all context. But what I proposed
is we identify the most likely points of habitation, dredge the equivalent
to a test pit -- albeit larger -- and sift through the material looking for
any fossils, tools, charcoal... *Anything* that might be construed as
evidence for habitation or make it a promising spot to look. THEN we
can engage in some meticulous (expensive, slow, dangerous) undersea archaeology.

Again, it's a TERRIBLE solution, as dredging erasing context, but that
only matters if you know Aquatic Ape is true -- which you do -- and it
can be kept to a minimum.

But why do science, real science anyway, when you can engage in a
transparent selection bias and pretend that it's science?





-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/706432973876215808

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Op vrijdag 13 januari 2023 om 17:40:17 UTC+1 schreef littor...@gmail.com:

- all Pliocene hominid fossils in Africa are Gorilla or Pan, never Homo,
- Pliocene Homo was in S-Asia, NOT in Africa (fossil & RV data).

Correction: not all African Pliocene hominids were necessarily G or P, of course: not unlikely, not only late-Miocene Gorilla in the northern-EARS, but different Miocene hominids (close relatives of HPG, the later ones perhaps belonging to Gorilla?)
probably left the Red Sea, and colonized swamp forests (then abundant) in N-Africa: Chorora-, Nakali-, Samburupithecus, Sahelanthropus, Orrorin, Ardipithecus...?
In any case, I do think Pan-Australopith.s.s. probably entered S.Africa (c 4 Ma?) via the southern-EARS (//Gorilla via the northern-EARS): africanus, naledi, boisei...: IMO that scenario best explains the parallels between today's Gorilla & Pan.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Pandora wrote:

On Sat, 14 Jan 2023 07:36:12 -0800 (PST), "littor...@gmail.com" <littoral.homo@gmail.com> wrote:

kudu runner:

Where are the fossil members of the human branch between about 7 and
2.4 Ma?

Again: for the Xth time:
my little little boy, why don't you inform a little little bit on coastal fossilization??

So, you really don't have a shred of fossil evidence of Pliocene Homo
from S-Asia?
Such a pity.

A repost for mv's benefit since he has zero data of his own on the matter

https://doi.org/10.1006/jhev.2000.0409
The taxonomic status of the Chemeron temporal (KNM-BC 1)

Abstract
Temporal bone morphology, as part of the basicranium,
is commonly used in systematic evaluation of early
hominid fossils. When an isolated right temporal bone,
KNM-BC 1 (the Chemeron temporal) was discovered in the
Baringo Basin, Kenya, Tobias (1967 a, Nature215,
476–480), citing ambiguity of characters, hesitated to
place the specimen generically, attributing the fossil
only to Hominidae gen. et sp. indet. Since that discovery,
the early hominid sample has grown considerably and
comparisons with this expanded dataset led Hill et al.
(1992 a,Nature355, 719–722) to revise the placement of
KNM-BC 1 including it within the genus Homo. This
revision was possible due to the increased number of
hominid fossil specimens from the late Pliocene/early
Pleistocene, most notably members of the genus Homo. A
thorough investigation into the utility of the temporal
bone in hominid systematics shows that many features, as
currently used in the literature, demonstrate high levels
of variation thus questioning their phyletic valence. It
is shown, however, that the temporal bone still contains
useful systematic information. A detailed anatomical
description of KNM-BC 1 is provided and, when discussed
in the context of temporal bone features provided, affirms
the conclusion of Hill et al. (1992 a) and places the
fossil within the genus Homo.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Primum Sapienti wrote:

A repost for mv's benefit

I'd say this is flimsy but then I would have to apologize to all the
purveyors of flimsy evidence that I would be insulting.




-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/707620975420850176

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

JTEM is so reasonable wrote:

Primum Sapienti wrote:

A repost for mv's benefit

I'd say this is flimsy but then I would have to apologize to all the purveyors of flimsy evidence that I would be insulting.

I'm sure mv accepts your apology.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Op zondag 29 januari 2023 om 06:09:04 UTC+1 schreef JTEM is so reasonable:

kudu runner:

A repost for mv's benefit

Thanks, my boy. It says:
"I call it Homo because it resembles IMO another fossil that I call Homo". :-DDD

I'd say this is flimsy but then I would have to apologize to all the purveyors of flimsy evidence that I would be insulting.

Yes, it's so flimsy that it confirms our view: it's ape?gorilla-sized.
My good friend prof.Tobias (1967 Nature 215:476-480) is right here:
"Tobias, citing ambiguity of characters, hesitated to place it generically, attributing the fossil only to Hominidae gen.sp.indet."
Hominid, yes, of course, more likely a fossil relative of Gorilla than of Pan. If it was indeed 2.4 Ma (well possible), the absence of African retroviral DNA in H.sapiens shows that we probably weren't even in Africa then.
In any case, it came from a shell-rich lake or lagoon.
Google "Phillip Tobias Marc Verhaegen". :-)

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)