1. Forum
  2. Usenet
  3. SCI.ANTHROPOLOGY.PALEO

  • Sigh. Only incredible imbeciles still believe they descend from antelop

    From littoral.homo@gmail.com@21:1/5 to All on Mon Apr 3 04:01:56 2023
    The usual just-so, unscientific, outdated afro+anthropocentric savanna fantasies ("gorilla+chimp=forest=QP <--> human=savanna=bipedal") are contradicted by e.g.
    - shell engravings, made by H.erectus, google "Joordens Munro": no seashells in any savanna,
    - stone tools, used by archaic Homo,
    - Pleistocene island colonisations (Flores >18 km oversea),
    - Homo's large brain (DHA etc.) >> ape+apith brain, cf. sea-otter brain > river-otter > weasel,
    - Homo's Pleistocene intercontinental dispersal: Java, Europe, Africa,
    - pachy-osteo-sclerosis in archaic Homo is *exclusively* seen in slow+shallow-diving tetrapods (very disadvantageous when running after kudus :-D),
    - etc.etc.:
    human physiology & anatomy leave 0 doubt that our ancestors regularly dived, most likely often for shellfish, probably maximally early-Pleistocene,
    google e.g. "coastal dispersal Pleistocene Homo"
    or "GondwanaTalks Verhaegen English".

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From JTEM is so reasonable@21:1/5 to littor...@gmail.com on Mon Apr 3 20:00:26 2023
    littor...@gmail.com wrote:

    - etc.etc.:
    human physiology & anatomy leave 0 doubt that our ancestors regularly dived, most likely often for shellfish, probably maximally early-Pleistocene,
    google e.g. "coastal dispersal Pleistocene Homo"
    or "GondwanaTalks Verhaegen English".

    Oh, of course. Don't waste your time on that...

    What I believe -- and I'm right, of course -- is that the originally theorized "Aquatic Phase" followed by a return to inland survival, before moving
    BACK to Aquatic Ape and finishing inland is wrong.

    That's linear.. "Well they were THIS and then they were THAT."

    I hate linear models. They seem to occur extremely rarely in nature, and
    we are speaking of a period of MILLIONS of years spanning a number of
    species and even more than one genus. There seems little chance that
    a linear model can work, and when I say "Little" I mean "None at all."

    Savanna idiocy is one huge linear model: They fell out of a tree, landed on
    a savanna and ran after antelope, only stopping when they reached
    Australia.





    -- --

    https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/713613768636137472

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From littoral.homo@gmail.com@21:1/5 to All on Tue Apr 4 12:06:28 2023
    Op dinsdag 4 april 2023 om 05:00:27 UTC+2 schreef JTEM is so reasonable:
    littor...@gmail.com wrote:

    - etc.etc.:
    human physiology & anatomy leave 0 doubt that our ancestors regularly dived, most likely often for shellfish, probably maximally early-Pleistocene,
    google e.g. "coastal dispersal Pleistocene Homo" or "GondwanaTalks Verhaegen English".

    Oh, of course. Don't waste your time on that...
    What I believe -- and I'm right, of course -- is that the originally theorized
    "Aquatic Phase" followed by a return to inland survival, before moving
    BACK to Aquatic Ape and finishing inland is wrong.

    Yes, evolution is no straight line: it depends on the environment (sometimes abrupt changes, e.g. the opening of the Red Sea into the Gulf).
    But our reconstructions have to be based on facts: the more details we know, the finer our reconstructions. And often: the longer ago, the less we know.
    So far, we can say a lot more than what Hardy or Elaine knew, but there are still a lot of unknowns.
    I wouldn't go much farther today than:
    - Miocene aquarboreal adaptations,
    - early-Pleistocene diving adaptations,
    - mid-late-Pleist. -> wading -> walking.

    That's linear.. "Well they were THIS and then they were THAT."
    I hate linear models. They seem to occur extremely rarely in nature, and
    we are speaking of a period of MILLIONS of years spanning a number of
    species and even more than one genus. There seems little chance that
    a linear model can work, and when I say "Little" I mean "None at all." Savanna idiocy is one huge linear model: They fell out of a tree, landed on
    a savanna and ran after antelope, only stopping when they reached
    Australia.

    Yes, every sensible human agrees: the savanna nonsense is just nonsense. :-DDD

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