https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/11/211111154244.htm
Op dinsdag 16 november 2021 om 01:29:04 UTC+1 schreef DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/11/211111154244.htm
Yes, it's well possible that tool use & speech co-evolved (late-Pleistocene?):
both find their origin partly in our Pleistocene shellfish-diving past: -stone tool use for opening shells, cf sea-otters,
-voluntary breathing for shallow-diving,
-large brain thanks to seafood, e.g. DHA,
-lip-tongue-throat movemensts for suction feeding.
IOW, only incredible idiots still believe their ancestors ran after antelopes.
"speech language origins PPT verhaegen".
Australopithecus had language (it probably had), this language was very undeveloped. It is coastal living that develops language to the level
Op dinsdag 16 november 2021 om 18:52:28 UTC+1 schreef Mario Petrinovic:
Australopithecus had language (it probably had), this language was very
undeveloped. It is coastal living that develops language to the level
:-DDD
Mario, Mario, Mario...
Dogs also have "language"...
Australopithecus had language (it probably had), this language was very
undeveloped. It is coastal living that develops language to the level
:-DDD Mario, Mario, Mario...
Dogs also have "language"...
Australopithecuses aren't dogs.
Op dinsdag 16 november 2021 om 23:10:07 UTC+1 schreef Mario Petrinovic:
Australopithecus had language (it probably had), this language was very >>>> undeveloped. It is coastal living that develops language to the level
:-DDD Mario, Mario, Mario...
Dogs also have "language"...
Australopithecuses aren't dogs.
Yes, Mario, yes... I meant, of course, dogs & most mammals make different kinds of sounds,
but that isn't language: apiths did NOT speak.
BTW (this has 0 to do with your nonsense about speaking apiths),
did dog domestication begin with cooperation between wading early H.sapiens, chasing e.g.ducks or waterdeer between reeds, & wolves waiting at the waterside?
Op dinsdag 16 november 2021 om 01:29:04 UTC+1 schreef DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves:-
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/11/211111154244.htm
Yes, it's well possible that tool use & speech co-evolved (late-Pleistocene?):
both find their origin partly in our Pleistocene shellfish-diving past: -stone tool use for opening shells, cf sea-otters,
-voluntary breathing for shallow-diving,
-large brain thanks to seafood, e.g. DHA,
-lip-tongue-throat movemensts for suction feeding.
IOW, only incredible idiots still believe their ancestors ran after antelopes.
"speech language origins PPT verhaegen".
IOW, only incredible idiots still believe their ancestors slept in water.
Op dinsdag 16 november 2021 om 23:10:07 UTC+1 schreef Mario Petrinovic:-
Australopithecus had language (it probably had), this language was very >> undeveloped. It is coastal living that develops language to the level
:-DDD Mario, Mario, Mario...
Dogs also have "language"...
Australopithecuses aren't dogs.Yes, Mario, yes... I meant, of course, dogs & most mammals make different kinds of sounds,
but that isn't language: apiths did NOT speak.
BTW (this has 0 to do with your nonsense about speaking apiths),
did dog domestication begin with cooperation between wading early H.sapiens, chasing e.g.ducks or waterdeer between reeds, & wolves waiting at the waterside?
On 16.11.2021. 13:57, littor...@gmail.com wrote:
Op dinsdag 16 november 2021 om 01:29:04 UTC+1 schreef DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/11/211111154244.htm
Yes, it's well possible that tool use & speech co-evolved (late-Pleistocene?):
both find their origin partly in our Pleistocene shellfish-diving past: -stone tool use for opening shells, cf sea-otters,
-voluntary breathing for shallow-diving,
-large brain thanks to seafood, e.g. DHA,
-lip-tongue-throat movemensts for suction feeding.
IOW, only incredible idiots still believe their ancestors ran after antelopes.
"speech language origins PPT verhaegen".
use should predate that.
They may evolve in unison, but, the above sequence of things should be correct.
Further still, just like I am always saying, the difference between Australopithecus and Kenyanthropus/Homo should be in language use. If Australopithecus had language (it probably had), this language was very undeveloped. It is coastal living that develops language to the level
that is necessary for the development of tool use.
--
https://groups.google.com/g/human-evolution
human-e...@googlegroups.com
On 16.11.2021. 23:30, littor...@gmail.com wrote:-
Op dinsdag 16 november 2021 om 23:10:07 UTC+1 schreef Mario Petrinovic:
Australopithecus had language (it probably had), this language was very >>>> undeveloped. It is coastal living that develops language to the level
:-DDD Mario, Mario, Mario...
Dogs also have "language"...
Australopithecuses aren't dogs.
Yes, Mario, yes... I meant, of course, dogs & most mammals make different kinds of sounds,
but that isn't language: apiths did NOT speak.
BTW (this has 0 to do with your nonsense about speaking apiths),Whenever I am thinking about dog domestication, I always look at
did dog domestication begin with cooperation between wading early H.sapiens, chasing e.g.ducks or waterdeer between reeds, & wolves waiting at the waterside?
Gelada baboons and Ethiopian wolf.
I mean, we are natural partners. We eat meat, but we cannot eat bones.
On the other hand, dogs are excellent alarm devices. The are small
enough so they cannot harm a group of people (when dogs hunt, they
always single out one individual).
So you have a situation where you have a group of people, and a bunch
of bones around them. And dogs come, and eat those bones. They are not offensive, and they are great alarming devices, so why not secure them
around by leaving some meat on those bones?
Similar thing with cats, when humans started to stock cereals, a lot
of mouses moved around it. After mouses cats came. Just the other day a neighbor cat left a dead mouse in front of my door. Maybe she wanted to establish some kind of bond, she catches mouses for me, while I feed
her. It is good for times when there are no cat food around, so that I
can provide her with a food all year around.
So, this "domestication" can happen when we started to eat terrestrial
meat, with ease. I mean, how dingos came to Australia? On a cruise ship?
--
https://groups.google.com/g/human-evolution
human-e...@googlegroups.com
Only imbeciles believe their ancestors could never have slept on water.
On topic:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/11/211111154244.htm
It's well possible that tool use & speech co-evolved (late-Pleistocene?): both find their origin partly in our Pleistocene shellfish-diving past: -stone tool use for opening shells, cf sea-otters,
-voluntary breathing for shallow-diving,
-large brain thanks to seafood, e.g. DHA,
-lip-tongue-throat movemensts for suction feeding.
"speech language origins PPT verhaegen".
Only imbeciles believe their ancestors could never have slept on water.
On topic:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/11/211111154244.htm
It's well possible that tool use & speech co-evolved (late-Pleistocene?): both find their origin partly in our Pleistocene shellfish-diving past: -stone tool use for opening shells, cf sea-otters,
-voluntary breathing for shallow-diving,
-large brain thanks to seafood, e.g. DHA,
-lip-tongue-throat movemensts for suction feeding.
"speech language origins PPT verhaegen".
On 17.11.2021. 8:02, littor...@gmail.com wrote:-
Only imbeciles believe their ancestors could never have slept on water.
On topic:Stone tools have sharp edge. This is like broken shellfish. So, the
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/11/211111154244.htm
It's well possible that tool use & speech co-evolved (late-Pleistocene?): both find their origin partly in our Pleistocene shellfish-diving past: -stone tool use for opening shells, cf sea-otters,
-voluntary breathing for shallow-diving,
-large brain thanks to seafood, e.g. DHA,
-lip-tongue-throat movemensts for suction feeding.
"speech language origins PPT verhaegen".
main thing in stone tools isn't to be used as a hammer. Stone (unmade,
raw) can be used as a hammer, you don't need stone tool for that. Stone
tools are made to be used as a cutting device.
The paradox is that for cutting (sharp edge), you need to have sharp
edge. So, the idea originated in the usage of sharp edges. But, the
Oldowan tools are made out of pebbles, and pebbles are about the
bluntest objects in nature, not the sharpest. So, the development of the usage of sharp edges should happen before Oldowan stone tools.
--
https://groups.google.com/g/human-evolution
human-e...@googlegroups.com
On Wednesday, November 17, 2021 at 1:29:22 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
On 17.11.2021. 8:02, littor...@gmail.com wrote:-
Only imbeciles believe their ancestors could never have slept on water.Stone tools have sharp edge. This is like broken shellfish. So, the
On topic:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/11/211111154244.htm
It's well possible that tool use & speech co-evolved (late-Pleistocene?): >>> both find their origin partly in our Pleistocene shellfish-diving past:
-stone tool use for opening shells, cf sea-otters,
-voluntary breathing for shallow-diving,
-large brain thanks to seafood, e.g. DHA,
-lip-tongue-throat movemensts for suction feeding.
"speech language origins PPT verhaegen".
main thing in stone tools isn't to be used as a hammer. Stone (unmade,
raw) can be used as a hammer, you don't need stone tool for that. Stone
tools are made to be used as a cutting device.
The paradox is that for cutting (sharp edge), you need to have sharp
edge. So, the idea originated in the usage of sharp edges. But, the
Oldowan tools are made out of pebbles, and pebbles are about the
bluntest objects in nature, not the sharpest. So, the development of the
usage of sharp edges should happen before Oldowan stone tools.
Molar hammering crushing cracking
Carnassial. shearing
Incisor gnawing
Canine tearing, piercing
Homo replicated these functions by hand using various materials
On 17.11.2021. 22:08, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Wednesday, November 17, 2021 at 1:29:22 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
On 17.11.2021. 8:02, littor...@gmail.com wrote:
Only imbeciles believe their ancestors could never have slept on water. >>>Stone tools have sharp edge. This is like broken shellfish.
On topic:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/11/211111154244.htm
It's well possible that tool use & speech co-evolved (late-Pleistocene?): >>> both find their origin partly in our Pleistocene shellfish-diving past: >>> -stone tool use for opening shells, cf sea-otters,
-voluntary breathing for shallow-diving,
-large brain thanks to seafood, e.g. DHA,
-lip-tongue-throat movemensts for suction feeding.
"speech language origins PPT verhaegen".
No way. Which materials?main thing in stone tools isn't to be used as a hammer. Stone (unmade,-
raw) can be used as a hammer, you don't need stone tool for that. Stone
tools are made to be used as a cutting device.
The paradox is that for cutting (sharp edge), you need to have sharp
edge. So, the idea originated in the usage of sharp edges. But, the
Oldowan tools are made out of pebbles, and pebbles are about the
bluntest objects in nature, not the sharpest. So, the development of the >> usage of sharp edges should happen before Oldowan stone tools.
Molar hammering crushing cracking
Carnassial. shearing
Incisor gnawing
Canine tearing, piercing
Homo replicated these functions by hand using various materials
Antlers? With antlers you can pierce. But, what's the use of piercing?
If you don't have carnassials you cannot eat what you pierced.
Shearing. Stone? It will break your teeth?
throat. Metal? Now, that's much better, but it only came in Middle Paleolithic, along with Homo sapiens. This is why Homo sapiens has
changes in chopping apparatus. With metal we chopped off meat from
carcass. But, that's about it.
No, before the first tools, we had to have fire. Fire was the tool to
soften up meat. Why would you pierce an animal, if you cannot eat its
meat? For hides? No. Before Oldowan tools we had to have fire,
otherwise, why would we hunt animals in the first place?
And this logical net *proves* how Science is *shallow*. They have all
those stories about our past, without even thinking to resolve the "carnassial" problem. You cannot eat meat without carnassials, or
without fire. Full stop.
--
https://groups.google.com/g/human-evolution
human-e...@googlegroups.com
On Wednesday, November 17, 2021 at 4:59:14 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
On 17.11.2021. 22:08, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Wednesday, November 17, 2021 at 1:29:22 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
On 17.11.2021. 8:02, littor...@gmail.com wrote:
Only imbeciles believe their ancestors could never have slept on water. >>>>>Stone tools have sharp edge. This is like broken shellfish.
On topic:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/11/211111154244.htm
It's well possible that tool use & speech co-evolved (late-Pleistocene?): >>>>> both find their origin partly in our Pleistocene shellfish-diving past: >>>>> -stone tool use for opening shells, cf sea-otters,
-voluntary breathing for shallow-diving,
-large brain thanks to seafood, e.g. DHA,
-lip-tongue-throat movemensts for suction feeding.
"speech language origins PPT verhaegen".
Not so sharp. Conchoidal fracture of flint is much sharper than broken clam.
So, the
No way. Which materials?main thing in stone tools isn't to be used as a hammer. Stone (unmade, >>>> raw) can be used as a hammer, you don't need stone tool for that. Stone >>>> tools are made to be used as a cutting device.-
The paradox is that for cutting (sharp edge), you need to have sharp
edge. So, the idea originated in the usage of sharp edges. But, the
Oldowan tools are made out of pebbles, and pebbles are about the
bluntest objects in nature, not the sharpest. So, the development of the >>>> usage of sharp edges should happen before Oldowan stone tools.
Molar hammering crushing cracking
Carnassial. shearing
Incisor gnawing
Canine tearing, piercing
Homo replicated these functions by hand using various materials
Hammerstone & anvil stone/log replaced big molars, allowed processing extremely tough nuts.
Antlers? With antlers you can pierce. But, what's the use of piercing?
Stabbing to kill prey. Replace fangs with spear allows further distance from prey's defensive weapons.
If you don't have carnassials you cannot eat what you pierced.
A sharp obsidian flake slices thinly through flesh & sinew.
Shearing. Stone? It will break your teeth?
What? Obsidian slicing meat.
Obsidian? It will cut your
throat. Metal? Now, that's much better, but it only came in Middle
Paleolithic, along with Homo sapiens. This is why Homo sapiens has
changes in chopping apparatus. With metal we chopped off meat from
carcass. But, that's about it.
No, before the first tools, we had to have fire. Fire was the tool to
soften up meat. Why would you pierce an animal, if you cannot eat its
meat? For hides? No. Before Oldowan tools we had to have fire,
otherwise, why would we hunt animals in the first place?
Thin-sliced & ground-up meat, chewing gum style.
And this logical net *proves* how Science is *shallow*. They have all
those stories about our past, without even thinking to resolve the
"carnassial" problem. You cannot eat meat without carnassials, or
without fire. Full stop.
Cold-blooded oysters, crab, shrimp were not cooked, because their flesh was never hot.
Warm blooded rabbits, antelope, pigs were cooked to bring the meat back to life-like temperature, cold meat did not taste as good. Those who cooked thin sliced meat reduced food-borne parasites so their progeny were healthier.
Nobody ate big chunks of meat, cooked or uncooked, not edible. Mammoth was thin-sliced.
DD
On 18.11.2021. 10:08, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Wednesday, November 17, 2021 at 4:59:14 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
On 17.11.2021. 22:08, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Wednesday, November 17, 2021 at 1:29:22 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
On 17.11.2021. 8:02, littor...@gmail.com wrote:
Only imbeciles believe their ancestors could never have slept on water. >>>>>Stone tools have sharp edge. This is like broken shellfish.
On topic:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/11/211111154244.htm
It's well possible that tool use & speech co-evolved (late-Pleistocene?):
both find their origin partly in our Pleistocene shellfish-diving past: >>>>> -stone tool use for opening shells, cf sea-otters,
-voluntary breathing for shallow-diving,
-large brain thanks to seafood, e.g. DHA,
-lip-tongue-throat movemensts for suction feeding.
"speech language origins PPT verhaegen".
Not so sharp. Conchoidal fracture of flint is much sharper than broken clam.Just the other way around, every shellfish, broken on any way, is very
sharp.
in nature isn't very sharp. I wouldn't say that you encounter a lot of conchoidally fractured flint in nature. And even if there is one around,
why would you have it in your hand? On the other hand, if you are eating shellfish, you handle sharp broken shellfish all the time, and they are
in your hands.
Your objection is very nice example of how somebody can be biased in
his interpretation of nature.
you extremely emphasized some sideway thing.
So, the
No way. Which materials?main thing in stone tools isn't to be used as a hammer. Stone (unmade, >>>> raw) can be used as a hammer, you don't need stone tool for that. Stone >>>> tools are made to be used as a cutting device.-
The paradox is that for cutting (sharp edge), you need to have sharp >>>> edge. So, the idea originated in the usage of sharp edges. But, the
Oldowan tools are made out of pebbles, and pebbles are about the
bluntest objects in nature, not the sharpest. So, the development of the >>>> usage of sharp edges should happen before Oldowan stone tools.
Molar hammering crushing cracking
Carnassial. shearing
Incisor gnawing
Canine tearing, piercing
Homo replicated these functions by hand using various materials
Hammerstone & anvil stone/log replaced big molars, allowed processing extremely tough nuts.Who cares. We do have Oldowan stone tools for 2.5 my. We used it for
dealing with wood, hides, we weren't vegetarians.
Antlers? With antlers you can pierce. But, what's the use of piercing?
Stabbing to kill prey. Replace fangs with spear allows further distance from prey's defensive weapons.Hm, why would we stab the prey if we cannot eat it, for god's sake?
If you don't have carnassials you cannot eat what you pierced.
A sharp obsidian flake slices thinly through flesh & sinew.No way that I would eat this flesh.
obsidian is made industrially, and I have a guarantee that everything is alright with it, it is grounded smoothly. Obsidian used by our ancestors isn't anything like that.
Shearing. Stone? It will break your teeth?
What? Obsidian slicing meat.
Obsidian? It will cut your
throat.
Paleolithic, along with Homo sapiens. This is why Homo sapiens has
changes in chopping apparatus. With metal we chopped off meat from
carcass. But, that's about it.
No, before the first tools, we had to have fire. Fire was the tool to
soften up meat. Why would you pierce an animal, if you cannot eat its
meat? For hides? No. Before Oldowan tools we had to have fire,
otherwise, why would we hunt animals in the first place?
Thin-sliced & ground-up meat, chewing gum style.
And this logical net *proves* how Science is *shallow*. They have all
those stories about our past, without even thinking to resolve the
"carnassial" problem. You cannot eat meat without carnassials, or
without fire. Full stop.
Cold-blooded oysters, crab, shrimp were not cooked, because their flesh was never hot.
Warm blooded rabbits, antelope, pigs were cooked to bring the meat back to life-like temperature, cold meat did not taste as good. Those who cooked thin sliced meat reduced food-borne parasites so their progeny were healthier.
Nobody ate big chunks of meat, cooked or uncooked, not edible. Mammoth was thin-sliced.We ate shellfish raw. We burned surroundings for safety, not for food.
DD
But, this burning gave us food. So, this is how we acquired eating
burned food.
--
https://groups.google.com/g/human-evolution
human-e...@googlegroups.com
On Thursday, November 18, 2021 at 1:43:07 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
On 18.11.2021. 10:08, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Wednesday, November 17, 2021 at 4:59:14 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:Just the other way around, every shellfish, broken on any way, is very
On 17.11.2021. 22:08, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Wednesday, November 17, 2021 at 1:29:22 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
On 17.11.2021. 8:02, littor...@gmail.com wrote:
Only imbeciles believe their ancestors could never have slept on water. >>>>>>>Stone tools have sharp edge. This is like broken shellfish.
On topic:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/11/211111154244.htm
It's well possible that tool use & speech co-evolved (late-Pleistocene?):
both find their origin partly in our Pleistocene shellfish-diving past: >>>>>>> -stone tool use for opening shells, cf sea-otters,
-voluntary breathing for shallow-diving,
-large brain thanks to seafood, e.g. DHA,
-lip-tongue-throat movemensts for suction feeding.
"speech language origins PPT verhaegen".
Not so sharp. Conchoidal fracture of flint is much sharper than broken clam.
sharp.
You are comparing natural shell to knapped stone?
On the other hand, from my experience, the flint that yo can find
in nature isn't very sharp. I wouldn't say that you encounter a lot of
conchoidally fractured flint in nature. And even if there is one around,
why would you have it in your hand? On the other hand, if you are eating
shellfish, you handle sharp broken shellfish all the time, and they are
in your hands.
Your objection is very nice example of how somebody can be biased in
his interpretation of nature.
Probably not.
You completely ignored the obvious, and
you extremely emphasized some sideway thing.
So, the
No way. Which materials?main thing in stone tools isn't to be used as a hammer. Stone (unmade, >>>>>> raw) can be used as a hammer, you don't need stone tool for that. Stone >>>>>> tools are made to be used as a cutting device.-
The paradox is that for cutting (sharp edge), you need to have sharp >>>>>> edge. So, the idea originated in the usage of sharp edges. But, the >>>>>> Oldowan tools are made out of pebbles, and pebbles are about the
bluntest objects in nature, not the sharpest. So, the development of the >>>>>> usage of sharp edges should happen before Oldowan stone tools.
Molar hammering crushing cracking
Carnassial. shearing
Incisor gnawing
Canine tearing, piercing
Homo replicated these functions by hand using various materials
Sticks and stones mostly.
Hammerstone & anvil stone/log replaced big molars, allowed processing extremely tough nuts.Who cares. We do have Oldowan stone tools for 2.5 my. We used it for
dealing with wood, hides, we weren't vegetarians.
Nut cracking, clam cracking...
Hm, why would we stab the prey if we cannot eat it, for god's sake?Antlers? With antlers you can pierce. But, what's the use of piercing?
Stabbing to kill prey. Replace fangs with spear allows further distance from prey's defensive weapons.
Knapped stone flakes slice thin meat.
If you don't have carnassials you cannot eat what you pierced.
Thin slices.
A sharp obsidian flake slices thinly through flesh & sinew.No way that I would eat this flesh.
Tartare.
Are you crazy? Ok, if this
obsidian is made industrially, and I have a guarantee that everything is
alright with it, it is grounded smoothly. Obsidian used by our ancestors
isn't anything like that.
Shearing. Stone? It will break your teeth?
What? Obsidian slicing meat.
Obsidian? It will cut your
throat.
Don't eat stone, eat meat.
Metal? Now, that's much better, but it only came in Middle
We ate shellfish raw. We burned surroundings for safety, not for food.Paleolithic, along with Homo sapiens. This is why Homo sapiens has
changes in chopping apparatus. With metal we chopped off meat from
carcass. But, that's about it.
No, before the first tools, we had to have fire. Fire was the tool to
soften up meat. Why would you pierce an animal, if you cannot eat its
meat? For hides? No. Before Oldowan tools we had to have fire,
otherwise, why would we hunt animals in the first place?
Thin-sliced & ground-up meat, chewing gum style.
And this logical net *proves* how Science is *shallow*. They have all
those stories about our past, without even thinking to resolve the
"carnassial" problem. You cannot eat meat without carnassials, or
without fire. Full stop.
Cold-blooded oysters, crab, shrimp were not cooked, because their flesh was never hot.
Warm blooded rabbits, antelope, pigs were cooked to bring the meat back to life-like temperature, cold meat did not taste as good. Those who cooked thin sliced meat reduced food-borne parasites so their progeny were healthier.
Nobody ate big chunks of meat, cooked or uncooked, not edible. Mammoth was thin-sliced.
DD
But, this burning gave us food. So, this is how we acquired eating
burned food.
Silly fantasy. You burn your house down and then eat the burnt rats?
On 19.11.2021. 8:07, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Thursday, November 18, 2021 at 1:43:07 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
On 18.11.2021. 10:08, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Wednesday, November 17, 2021 at 4:59:14 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:Just the other way around, every shellfish, broken on any way, is very
On 17.11.2021. 22:08, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote: >>>>> On Wednesday, November 17, 2021 at 1:29:22 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
On 17.11.2021. 8:02, littor...@gmail.com wrote:
Only imbeciles believe their ancestors could never have slept on water.Stone tools have sharp edge. This is like broken shellfish.
On topic:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/11/211111154244.htm >>>>>>> It's well possible that tool use & speech co-evolved (late-Pleistocene?):
both find their origin partly in our Pleistocene shellfish-diving past:
-stone tool use for opening shells, cf sea-otters,
-voluntary breathing for shallow-diving,
-large brain thanks to seafood, e.g. DHA,
-lip-tongue-throat movemensts for suction feeding.
"speech language origins PPT verhaegen".
Not so sharp. Conchoidal fracture of flint is much sharper than broken clam.
sharp.
You are comparing natural shell to knapped stone?But, for god's sake, why would I compare natural shells to metal
knives? Yes, today we are using metal knives and not natural shells,
this isn't a question. The question we are trying to answer in this news group is, how all this *started*. Why we *started* to knap stones in the first place? We just saw stones around, and decided, why wouldn't we
knap them, just for fun?
On the other hand, from my experience, the flint that yo can find
in nature isn't very sharp. I wouldn't say that you encounter a lot of
conchoidally fractured flint in nature. And even if there is one around, >> why would you have it in your hand? On the other hand, if you are eating >> shellfish, you handle sharp broken shellfish all the time, and they are
in your hands.
Your objection is very nice example of how somebody can be biased in
his interpretation of nature.
Probably not.
You completely ignored the obvious, and
you extremely emphasized some sideway thing.
So, the
No way. Which materials?main thing in stone tools isn't to be used as a hammer. Stone (unmade, >>>>>> raw) can be used as a hammer, you don't need stone tool for that. Stone-
tools are made to be used as a cutting device.
The paradox is that for cutting (sharp edge), you need to have sharp >>>>>> edge. So, the idea originated in the usage of sharp edges. But, the >>>>>> Oldowan tools are made out of pebbles, and pebbles are about the >>>>>> bluntest objects in nature, not the sharpest. So, the development of the
usage of sharp edges should happen before Oldowan stone tools.
Molar hammering crushing cracking
Carnassial. shearing
Incisor gnawing
Canine tearing, piercing
Homo replicated these functions by hand using various materials
Sticks and stones mostly.https://youtu.be/iv25o_zzqrE
Hammerstone & anvil stone/log replaced big molars, allowed processing extremely tough nuts.Who cares. We do have Oldowan stone tools for 2.5 my. We used it for
dealing with wood, hides, we weren't vegetarians.
Nut cracking, clam cracking...
Hm, why would we stab the prey if we cannot eat it, for god's sake?Antlers? With antlers you can pierce. But, what's the use of piercing? >>>Stabbing to kill prey. Replace fangs with spear allows further distance from prey's defensive weapons.
Knapped stone flakes slice thin meat.And leave stone particles in that meat.
brittle type of stones, otherwise you wouldn't be able to knap it.
Brittle, it means that it shutters
those tiny particles in it, if I want my teeth to remain whole.
If you don't have carnassials you cannot eat what you pierced.
Thin slices.
A sharp obsidian flake slices thinly through flesh & sinew.No way that I would eat this flesh.
Tartare.
Are you crazy? Ok, if this
obsidian is made industrially, and I have a guarantee that everything is >> alright with it, it is grounded smoothly. Obsidian used by our ancestors >> isn't anything like that.
Shearing. Stone? It will break your teeth?
What? Obsidian slicing meat.
Obsidian? It will cut your
throat.
Don't eat stone, eat meat.Try it yourself.
Metal? Now, that's much better, but it only came in Middle
We ate shellfish raw.Paleolithic, along with Homo sapiens. This is why Homo sapiens has
changes in chopping apparatus. With metal we chopped off meat from
carcass. But, that's about it.
No, before the first tools, we had to have fire. Fire was the tool to >>>> soften up meat. Why would you pierce an animal, if you cannot eat its >>>> meat? For hides? No. Before Oldowan tools we had to have fire,
otherwise, why would we hunt animals in the first place?
Thin-sliced & ground-up meat, chewing gum style.
And this logical net *proves* how Science is *shallow*. They have all >>>> those stories about our past, without even thinking to resolve the
"carnassial" problem. You cannot eat meat without carnassials, or
without fire. Full stop.
Cold-blooded oysters, crab, shrimp were not cooked, because their flesh was never hot.
Warm blooded rabbits, antelope, pigs were cooked to bring the meat back to life-like temperature, cold meat did not taste as good. Those who cooked thin sliced meat reduced food-borne parasites so their progeny were healthier.
Nobody ate big chunks of meat, cooked or uncooked, not edible. Mammoth was thin-sliced.
DD
But, this burning gave us food. So, this is how we acquired eating
burned food.
Silly fantasy. You burn your house down and then eat the burnt rats?What house? We were living on rocky sea cliffs,
if they would burn, we still can jump into sea.
--
https://groups.google.com/g/human-evolution
human-e...@googlegroups.com
On Friday, November 19, 2021 at 2:45:04 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
On 19.11.2021. 8:07, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Thursday, November 18, 2021 at 1:43:07 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote: >>>> On 18.11.2021. 10:08, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:But, for god's sake, why would I compare natural shells to metal
On Wednesday, November 17, 2021 at 4:59:14 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:Just the other way around, every shellfish, broken on any way, is very >>>> sharp.
On 17.11.2021. 22:08, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote: >>>>>>> On Wednesday, November 17, 2021 at 1:29:22 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
On 17.11.2021. 8:02, littor...@gmail.com wrote:
Only imbeciles believe their ancestors could never have slept on water.Stone tools have sharp edge. This is like broken shellfish.
On topic:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/11/211111154244.htm >>>>>>>>> It's well possible that tool use & speech co-evolved (late-Pleistocene?):
both find their origin partly in our Pleistocene shellfish-diving past:
-stone tool use for opening shells, cf sea-otters,
-voluntary breathing for shallow-diving,
-large brain thanks to seafood, e.g. DHA,
-lip-tongue-throat movemensts for suction feeding.
"speech language origins PPT verhaegen".
Not so sharp. Conchoidal fracture of flint is much sharper than broken clam.
You are comparing natural shell to knapped stone?
knives? Yes, today we are using metal knives and not natural shells,
this isn't a question. The question we are trying to answer in this news
group is, how all this *started*. Why we *started* to knap stones in the
first place? We just saw stones around, and decided, why wouldn't we
knap them, just for fun?
Stones as hammers against stone anvils sometimes shatter producing sharp edges. The nut meat is still edible.
If the alternative was cracking nuts with teeth, risking broken jaw or teeth, hammering is more efficient.
On the other hand, from my experience, the flint that yo can findhttps://youtu.be/iv25o_zzqrE
in nature isn't very sharp. I wouldn't say that you encounter a lot of >>>> conchoidally fractured flint in nature. And even if there is one around, >>>> why would you have it in your hand? On the other hand, if you are eating >>>> shellfish, you handle sharp broken shellfish all the time, and they are >>>> in your hands.
Your objection is very nice example of how somebody can be biased in
his interpretation of nature.
Probably not.
You completely ignored the obvious, and
you extremely emphasized some sideway thing.
So, the
No way. Which materials?main thing in stone tools isn't to be used as a hammer. Stone (unmade, >>>>>>>> raw) can be used as a hammer, you don't need stone tool for that. Stone-
tools are made to be used as a cutting device.
The paradox is that for cutting (sharp edge), you need to have sharp >>>>>>>> edge. So, the idea originated in the usage of sharp edges. But, the >>>>>>>> Oldowan tools are made out of pebbles, and pebbles are about the >>>>>>>> bluntest objects in nature, not the sharpest. So, the development of the
usage of sharp edges should happen before Oldowan stone tools.
Molar hammering crushing cracking
Carnassial. shearing
Incisor gnawing
Canine tearing, piercing
Homo replicated these functions by hand using various materials
Sticks and stones mostly.
Hammerstone & anvil stone/log replaced big molars, allowed processing extremely tough nuts.Who cares. We do have Oldowan stone tools for 2.5 my. We used it for
dealing with wood, hides, we weren't vegetarians.
Have you ever eaten nuts?
Nut cracking, clam cracking...
Hm, why would we stab the prey if we cannot eat it, for god's sake?Antlers? With antlers you can pierce. But, what's the use of piercing? >>>>>Stabbing to kill prey. Replace fangs with spear allows further distance from prey's defensive weapons.
Stab, kill, slice, eat.
Knapped stone flakes slice thin meat.And leave stone particles in that meat.
Only if hit against hard bone. If slicing flesh, no chips unless flake is from poor stone.
Knapped flakes are made of
brittle type of stones, otherwise you wouldn't be able to knap it.
Brittle, it means that it shutters
you mean splinters? Only if hit hard against bone or if stone flake is from poor stone source.
easily. I wouldn't eat meat with
those tiny particles in it, if I want my teeth to remain whole.
Then don't eat gritty shellfish, lots of quartzite grit. I ate some from a tin can, so much sandy grit.
Try it yourself.If you don't have carnassials you cannot eat what you pierced.
Thin slices.
A sharp obsidian flake slices thinly through flesh & sinew.No way that I would eat this flesh.
Tartare.
Are you crazy? Ok, if this
obsidian is made industrially, and I have a guarantee that everything is >>>> alright with it, it is grounded smoothly. Obsidian used by our ancestors >>>> isn't anything like that.
Shearing. Stone? It will break your teeth?
What? Obsidian slicing meat.
Obsidian? It will cut your
throat.
Don't eat stone, eat meat.
You don't understand meat processing & eating. Do you worry about metal or plastic fragments & particles when using fork & spoon?
Metal? Now, that's much better, but it only came in Middle
We ate shellfish raw.Paleolithic, along with Homo sapiens. This is why Homo sapiens has >>>>>> changes in chopping apparatus. With metal we chopped off meat from >>>>>> carcass. But, that's about it.
No, before the first tools, we had to have fire. Fire was the tool to >>>>>> soften up meat. Why would you pierce an animal, if you cannot eat its >>>>>> meat? For hides? No. Before Oldowan tools we had to have fire,
otherwise, why would we hunt animals in the first place?
Thin-sliced & ground-up meat, chewing gum style.
And this logical net *proves* how Science is *shallow*. They have all >>>>>> those stories about our past, without even thinking to resolve the >>>>>> "carnassial" problem. You cannot eat meat without carnassials, or
without fire. Full stop.
Cold-blooded oysters, crab, shrimp were not cooked, because their flesh was never hot.
Warm blooded rabbits, antelope, pigs were cooked to bring the meat back to life-like temperature, cold meat did not taste as good. Those who cooked thin sliced meat reduced food-borne parasites so their progeny were healthier.
Nobody ate big chunks of meat, cooked or uncooked, not edible. Mammoth was thin-sliced.
DD
We ate everything raw.
We burned surroundings for safety, not for food.
What house? We were living on rocky sea cliffs,But, this burning gave us food. So, this is how we acquired eating
burned food.
Silly fantasy. You burn your house down and then eat the burnt rats?
Geladas don't burn down the forest.
rocks don't burn, and
if they would burn, we still can jump into sea.
On 20.11.2021. 8:16, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Friday, November 19, 2021 at 2:45:04 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
On 19.11.2021. 8:07, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Thursday, November 18, 2021 at 1:43:07 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:But, for god's sake, why would I compare natural shells to metal
On 18.11.2021. 10:08, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote: >>>>> On Wednesday, November 17, 2021 at 4:59:14 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
Just the other way around, every shellfish, broken on any way, is very >>>> sharp.On 17.11.2021. 22:08, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote: >>>>>>> On Wednesday, November 17, 2021 at 1:29:22 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
On 17.11.2021. 8:02, littor...@gmail.com wrote:
Only imbeciles believe their ancestors could never have slept on water.Stone tools have sharp edge. This is like broken shellfish.
On topic:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/11/211111154244.htm >>>>>>>>> It's well possible that tool use & speech co-evolved (late-Pleistocene?):
both find their origin partly in our Pleistocene shellfish-diving past:
-stone tool use for opening shells, cf sea-otters,
-voluntary breathing for shallow-diving,
-large brain thanks to seafood, e.g. DHA,
-lip-tongue-throat movemensts for suction feeding.
"speech language origins PPT verhaegen".
Not so sharp. Conchoidal fracture of flint is much sharper than broken clam.
You are comparing natural shell to knapped stone?
knives? Yes, today we are using metal knives and not natural shells,
this isn't a question. The question we are trying to answer in this news >> group is, how all this *started*. Why we *started* to knap stones in the >> first place? We just saw stones around, and decided, why wouldn't we
knap them, just for fun?
Stones as hammers against stone anvils sometimes shatter producing sharp edges. The nut meat is still edible.I believe people have problems grasping this. Not every stone is the
If the alternative was cracking nuts with teeth, risking broken jaw or teeth, hammering is more efficient.
same. Some stones easily shutter, some don't. Flint easily shutters. I believe that basalt stones don't. You can crack nuts with those that
don't, but those don't produce sharp edges, those that shutter produce
sharp edges. So, you cannot cut meat with a stone. Those that don't
shutter aren't sharp, those that shutter are sharp, but can leave stone particles in meat.
I am talking about eating meat. Primates don't eat meat, we do. Hence
our diet moved in the direction of meat eating.
On the other hand, from my experience, the flint that yo can findhttps://youtu.be/iv25o_zzqrE
in nature isn't very sharp. I wouldn't say that you encounter a lot of >>>> conchoidally fractured flint in nature. And even if there is one around, >>>> why would you have it in your hand? On the other hand, if you are eating >>>> shellfish, you handle sharp broken shellfish all the time, and they are >>>> in your hands.
Your objection is very nice example of how somebody can be biased in >>>> his interpretation of nature.
Probably not.
You completely ignored the obvious, and
you extremely emphasized some sideway thing.
So, the
main thing in stone tools isn't to be used as a hammer. Stone (unmade,Molar hammering crushing cracking
raw) can be used as a hammer, you don't need stone tool for that. Stone
tools are made to be used as a cutting device.
The paradox is that for cutting (sharp edge), you need to have sharp >>>>>>>> edge. So, the idea originated in the usage of sharp edges. But, the >>>>>>>> Oldowan tools are made out of pebbles, and pebbles are about the >>>>>>>> bluntest objects in nature, not the sharpest. So, the development of the
usage of sharp edges should happen before Oldowan stone tools. >>>>>>> -
Carnassial. shearing
Incisor gnawing
Canine tearing, piercing
Homo replicated these functions by hand using various materials >>>>>> No way. Which materials?
Sticks and stones mostly.
Hammerstone & anvil stone/log replaced big molars, allowed processing extremely tough nuts.Who cares. We do have Oldowan stone tools for 2.5 my. We used it for >>>> dealing with wood, hides, we weren't vegetarians.
Have you ever eaten nuts?
Nut cracking, clam cracking...
Hm, why would we stab the prey if we cannot eat it, for god's sake?Antlers? With antlers you can pierce. But, what's the use of piercing? >>>>>Stabbing to kill prey. Replace fangs with spear allows further distance from prey's defensive weapons.
Stab, kill, slice, eat.
Knapped stone flakes slice thin meat.And leave stone particles in that meat.
Only if hit against hard bone. If slicing flesh, no chips unless flake is from poor stone.What bloody "poor stone"? Every stone that can be sharp is "poor
stone", this goes hand in hand. It is sharp because it is "poor".
Knapped flakes are made of
brittle type of stones, otherwise you wouldn't be able to knap it.
Brittle, it means that it shutters
you mean splinters? Only if hit hard against bone or if stone flake is from poor stone source.
easily. I wouldn't eat meat with
those tiny particles in it, if I want my teeth to remain whole.
Then don't eat gritty shellfish, lots of quartzite grit. I ate some from a tin can, so much sandy grit.This is why I did acquire the trait of thick enamel, precisely for
this reason.
Try it yourself.If you don't have carnassials you cannot eat what you pierced.
Thin slices.
A sharp obsidian flake slices thinly through flesh & sinew.No way that I would eat this flesh.
Tartare.
Are you crazy? Ok, if this
obsidian is made industrially, and I have a guarantee that everything is >>>> alright with it, it is grounded smoothly. Obsidian used by our ancestors >>>> isn't anything like that.
Shearing. Stone? It will break your teeth?
What? Obsidian slicing meat.
Obsidian? It will cut your
throat.
Don't eat stone, eat meat.
You don't understand meat processing & eating. Do you worry about metal or plastic fragments & particles when using fork & spoon?Of course I don't, because (ground) metal doesn't shutter.
who doesn't understand anything. By grinding hematite you get ochre. Red ochre is the evidence that we ground metal. Metal becomes sharp by
grinding, but it doesn't shutter after that. Good morning.
Metal? Now, that's much better, but it only came in Middle
We ate shellfish raw.Paleolithic, along with Homo sapiens. This is why Homo sapiens has >>>>>> changes in chopping apparatus. With metal we chopped off meat from >>>>>> carcass. But, that's about it.
No, before the first tools, we had to have fire. Fire was the tool to >>>>>> soften up meat. Why would you pierce an animal, if you cannot eat its >>>>>> meat? For hides? No. Before Oldowan tools we had to have fire,
otherwise, why would we hunt animals in the first place?
Thin-sliced & ground-up meat, chewing gum style.
And this logical net *proves* how Science is *shallow*. They have all >>>>>> those stories about our past, without even thinking to resolve the >>>>>> "carnassial" problem. You cannot eat meat without carnassials, or >>>>>> without fire. Full stop.
Cold-blooded oysters, crab, shrimp were not cooked, because their flesh was never hot.
Warm blooded rabbits, antelope, pigs were cooked to bring the meat back to life-like temperature, cold meat did not taste as good. Those who cooked thin sliced meat reduced food-borne parasites so their progeny were healthier.
Nobody ate big chunks of meat, cooked or uncooked, not edible. Mammoth was thin-sliced.
DD
We ate everything raw.Of course, you only lack the evidence for this claim.
We burned surroundings for safety, not for food.
What house? We were living on rocky sea cliffs,But, this burning gave us food. So, this is how we acquired eating
burned food.
Silly fantasy. You burn your house down and then eat the burnt rats?
Geladas don't burn down the forest.There is no forest where Geladas live, there is only grass. And
Geladas eat grass.
rocks don't burn, and
if they would burn, we still can jump into sea.
--
https://groups.google.com/g/human-evolution
human-e...@googlegroups.com
On Saturday, November 20, 2021 at 9:35:09 AM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
On 20.11.2021. 8:16, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Friday, November 19, 2021 at 2:45:04 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
On 19.11.2021. 8:07, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Thursday, November 18, 2021 at 1:43:07 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:But, for god's sake, why would I compare natural shells to metal
On 18.11.2021. 10:08, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote: >>>>> On Wednesday, November 17, 2021 at 4:59:14 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
Just the other way around, every shellfish, broken on any way, is very >>>> sharp.On 17.11.2021. 22:08, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote: >>>>>>> On Wednesday, November 17, 2021 at 1:29:22 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
On 17.11.2021. 8:02, littor...@gmail.com wrote:
Only imbeciles believe their ancestors could never have slept on water.Stone tools have sharp edge. This is like broken shellfish.
On topic:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/11/211111154244.htm >>>>>>>>> It's well possible that tool use & speech co-evolved (late-Pleistocene?):
both find their origin partly in our Pleistocene shellfish-diving past:
-stone tool use for opening shells, cf sea-otters,
-voluntary breathing for shallow-diving,
-large brain thanks to seafood, e.g. DHA,
-lip-tongue-throat movemensts for suction feeding.
"speech language origins PPT verhaegen".
Not so sharp. Conchoidal fracture of flint is much sharper than broken clam.
You are comparing natural shell to knapped stone?
knives? Yes, today we are using metal knives and not natural shells,
this isn't a question. The question we are trying to answer in this news >> group is, how all this *started*. Why we *started* to knap stones in the >> first place? We just saw stones around, and decided, why wouldn't we
knap them, just for fun?
Stones as hammers against stone anvils sometimes shatter producing sharp edges. The nut meat is still edible.I believe people have problems grasping this. Not every stone is the
If the alternative was cracking nuts with teeth, risking broken jaw or teeth, hammering is more efficient.
same. Some stones easily shutter, some don't. Flint easily shutters. I believe that basalt stones don't. You can crack nuts with those that
don't, but those don't produce sharp edges, those that shutter produce sharp edges. So, you cannot cut meat with a stone. Those that don't
shutter aren't sharp, those that shutter are sharp, but can leave stone particles in meat.
I am talking about eating meat. Primates don't eat meat, we do. Hence
our diet moved in the direction of meat eating.
On the other hand, from my experience, the flint that yo can findhttps://youtu.be/iv25o_zzqrE
in nature isn't very sharp. I wouldn't say that you encounter a lot of >>>> conchoidally fractured flint in nature. And even if there is one around,
why would you have it in your hand? On the other hand, if you are eating
shellfish, you handle sharp broken shellfish all the time, and they are
in your hands.
Your objection is very nice example of how somebody can be biased in >>>> his interpretation of nature.
Probably not.
You completely ignored the obvious, and
you extremely emphasized some sideway thing.
So, the
main thing in stone tools isn't to be used as a hammer. Stone (unmade,Molar hammering crushing cracking
raw) can be used as a hammer, you don't need stone tool for that. Stone
tools are made to be used as a cutting device.
The paradox is that for cutting (sharp edge), you need to have sharp
edge. So, the idea originated in the usage of sharp edges. But, the
Oldowan tools are made out of pebbles, and pebbles are about the >>>>>>>> bluntest objects in nature, not the sharpest. So, the development of the
usage of sharp edges should happen before Oldowan stone tools. >>>>>>> -
Carnassial. shearing
Incisor gnawing
Canine tearing, piercing
Homo replicated these functions by hand using various materials >>>>>> No way. Which materials?
Sticks and stones mostly.
Hammerstone & anvil stone/log replaced big molars, allowed processing extremely tough nuts.Who cares. We do have Oldowan stone tools for 2.5 my. We used it for >>>> dealing with wood, hides, we weren't vegetarians.
Have you ever eaten nuts?
Nut cracking, clam cracking...
Hm, why would we stab the prey if we cannot eat it, for god's sake?Antlers? With antlers you can pierce. But, what's the use of piercing?
Stabbing to kill prey. Replace fangs with spear allows further distance from prey's defensive weapons.
Stab, kill, slice, eat.
Knapped stone flakes slice thin meat.And leave stone particles in that meat.
Only if hit against hard bone. If slicing flesh, no chips unless flake is from poor stone.What bloody "poor stone"? Every stone that can be sharp is "poor
stone", this goes hand in hand. It is sharp because it is "poor".
Knapped flakes are made of
brittle type of stones, otherwise you wouldn't be able to knap it.
Brittle, it means that it shutters
you mean splinters? Only if hit hard against bone or if stone flake is from poor stone source.
easily. I wouldn't eat meat with
those tiny particles in it, if I want my teeth to remain whole.
Like orangutans, who never eat shellfish?Then don't eat gritty shellfish, lots of quartzite grit. I ate some from a tin can, so much sandy grit.This is why I did acquire the trait of thick enamel, precisely for
this reason.
Try it yourself.If you don't have carnassials you cannot eat what you pierced.
Thin slices.
A sharp obsidian flake slices thinly through flesh & sinew.No way that I would eat this flesh.
Tartare.
Are you crazy? Ok, if this
obsidian is made industrially, and I have a guarantee that everything is
alright with it, it is grounded smoothly. Obsidian used by our ancestors
isn't anything like that.
Shearing. Stone? It will break your teeth?
What? Obsidian slicing meat.
Obsidian? It will cut your
throat.
Don't eat stone, eat meat.
Shatter? Flint knives don't shatter cutting meat.You don't understand meat processing & eating. Do you worry about metal or plastic fragments & particles when using fork & spoon?Of course I don't, because (ground) metal doesn't shutter.
It is you
who doesn't understand anything. By grinding hematite you get ochre. Red ochre is the evidence that we ground metal. Metal becomes sharp by grinding, but it doesn't shutter after that. Good morning.
Metal? Now, that's much better, but it only came in Middle
We ate shellfish raw.Paleolithic, along with Homo sapiens. This is why Homo sapiens has >>>>>> changes in chopping apparatus. With metal we chopped off meat from >>>>>> carcass. But, that's about it.
No, before the first tools, we had to have fire. Fire was the tool to
soften up meat. Why would you pierce an animal, if you cannot eat its
meat? For hides? No. Before Oldowan tools we had to have fire, >>>>>> otherwise, why would we hunt animals in the first place?
Thin-sliced & ground-up meat, chewing gum style.
And this logical net *proves* how Science is *shallow*. They have all
those stories about our past, without even thinking to resolve the >>>>>> "carnassial" problem. You cannot eat meat without carnassials, or >>>>>> without fire. Full stop.
Cold-blooded oysters, crab, shrimp were not cooked, because their flesh was never hot.
Warm blooded rabbits, antelope, pigs were cooked to bring the meat back to life-like temperature, cold meat did not taste as good. Those who cooked thin sliced meat reduced food-borne parasites so their progeny were healthier.
Nobody ate big chunks of meat, cooked or uncooked, not edible. Mammoth was thin-sliced.
DD
Since tetrapods left the sea, raw food was the norm.We ate everything raw.Of course, you only lack the evidence for this claim.
We burned surroundings for safety, not for food.
What house? We were living on rocky sea cliffs,But, this burning gave us food. So, this is how we acquired eating >>>> burned food.
Silly fantasy. You burn your house down and then eat the burnt rats?
Right, they don't burn it to make it taste betterGeladas don't burn down the forest.There is no forest where Geladas live, there is only grass. And
Geladas eat grass.
rocks don't burn, and
if they would burn, we still can jump into sea.
--
https://groups.google.com/g/human-evolution
human-e...@googlegroups.com
On Saturday, November 20, 2021 at 9:35:09 AM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
On 20.11.2021. 8:16, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Friday, November 19, 2021 at 2:45:04 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote: >>>> On 19.11.2021. 8:07, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:I believe people have problems grasping this. Not every stone is the
On Thursday, November 18, 2021 at 1:43:07 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:But, for god's sake, why would I compare natural shells to metal
On 18.11.2021. 10:08, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote: >>>>>>> On Wednesday, November 17, 2021 at 4:59:14 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
Just the other way around, every shellfish, broken on any way, is very >>>>>> sharp.On 17.11.2021. 22:08, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, November 17, 2021 at 1:29:22 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
On 17.11.2021. 8:02, littor...@gmail.com wrote:
Only imbeciles believe their ancestors could never have slept on water.Stone tools have sharp edge. This is like broken shellfish.
On topic:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/11/211111154244.htm >>>>>>>>>>> It's well possible that tool use & speech co-evolved (late-Pleistocene?):
both find their origin partly in our Pleistocene shellfish-diving past:
-stone tool use for opening shells, cf sea-otters,
-voluntary breathing for shallow-diving,
-large brain thanks to seafood, e.g. DHA,
-lip-tongue-throat movemensts for suction feeding.
"speech language origins PPT verhaegen".
Not so sharp. Conchoidal fracture of flint is much sharper than broken clam.
You are comparing natural shell to knapped stone?
knives? Yes, today we are using metal knives and not natural shells,
this isn't a question. The question we are trying to answer in this news >>>> group is, how all this *started*. Why we *started* to knap stones in the >>>> first place? We just saw stones around, and decided, why wouldn't we
knap them, just for fun?
Stones as hammers against stone anvils sometimes shatter producing sharp edges. The nut meat is still edible.
If the alternative was cracking nuts with teeth, risking broken jaw or teeth, hammering is more efficient.
same. Some stones easily shutter, some don't. Flint easily shutters. I
believe that basalt stones don't. You can crack nuts with those that
don't, but those don't produce sharp edges, those that shutter produce
sharp edges. So, you cannot cut meat with a stone. Those that don't
shutter aren't sharp, those that shutter are sharp, but can leave stone
particles in meat.
I am talking about eating meat. Primates don't eat meat, we do. Hence
our diet moved in the direction of meat eating.
What bloody "poor stone"? Every stone that can be sharp is "poorOn the other hand, from my experience, the flint that yo can findhttps://youtu.be/iv25o_zzqrE
in nature isn't very sharp. I wouldn't say that you encounter a lot of >>>>>> conchoidally fractured flint in nature. And even if there is one around, >>>>>> why would you have it in your hand? On the other hand, if you are eating >>>>>> shellfish, you handle sharp broken shellfish all the time, and they are >>>>>> in your hands.
Your objection is very nice example of how somebody can be biased in >>>>>> his interpretation of nature.
Probably not.
You completely ignored the obvious, and
you extremely emphasized some sideway thing.
So, the
main thing in stone tools isn't to be used as a hammer. Stone (unmade,Molar hammering crushing cracking
raw) can be used as a hammer, you don't need stone tool for that. Stone
tools are made to be used as a cutting device.
The paradox is that for cutting (sharp edge), you need to have sharp >>>>>>>>>> edge. So, the idea originated in the usage of sharp edges. But, the >>>>>>>>>> Oldowan tools are made out of pebbles, and pebbles are about the >>>>>>>>>> bluntest objects in nature, not the sharpest. So, the development of the
usage of sharp edges should happen before Oldowan stone tools. >>>>>>>>> -
Carnassial. shearing
Incisor gnawing
Canine tearing, piercing
Homo replicated these functions by hand using various materials >>>>>>>> No way. Which materials?
Sticks and stones mostly.
Hammerstone & anvil stone/log replaced big molars, allowed processing extremely tough nuts.Who cares. We do have Oldowan stone tools for 2.5 my. We used it for >>>>>> dealing with wood, hides, we weren't vegetarians.
Have you ever eaten nuts?
Nut cracking, clam cracking...
Hm, why would we stab the prey if we cannot eat it, for god's sake?Antlers? With antlers you can pierce. But, what's the use of piercing? >>>>>>>Stabbing to kill prey. Replace fangs with spear allows further distance from prey's defensive weapons.
Stab, kill, slice, eat.
Knapped stone flakes slice thin meat.And leave stone particles in that meat.
Only if hit against hard bone. If slicing flesh, no chips unless flake is from poor stone.
stone", this goes hand in hand. It is sharp because it is "poor".
Knapped flakes are made ofThis is why I did acquire the trait of thick enamel, precisely for
brittle type of stones, otherwise you wouldn't be able to knap it.
Brittle, it means that it shutters
you mean splinters? Only if hit hard against bone or if stone flake is from poor stone source.
easily. I wouldn't eat meat with
those tiny particles in it, if I want my teeth to remain whole.
Then don't eat gritty shellfish, lots of quartzite grit. I ate some from a tin can, so much sandy grit.
this reason.
Like orangutans, who never eat shellfish?
Of course I don't, because (ground) metal doesn't shutter.Try it yourself.If you don't have carnassials you cannot eat what you pierced.
Thin slices.
A sharp obsidian flake slices thinly through flesh & sinew.No way that I would eat this flesh.
Tartare.
Are you crazy? Ok, if this
obsidian is made industrially, and I have a guarantee that everything is >>>>>> alright with it, it is grounded smoothly. Obsidian used by our ancestors >>>>>> isn't anything like that.
Shearing. Stone? It will break your teeth?
What? Obsidian slicing meat.
Obsidian? It will cut your
throat.
Don't eat stone, eat meat.
You don't understand meat processing & eating. Do you worry about metal or plastic fragments & particles when using fork & spoon?
Shatter? Flint knives don't shatter cutting meat.
It is you
who doesn't understand anything. By grinding hematite you get ochre. Red
ochre is the evidence that we ground metal. Metal becomes sharp by
grinding, but it doesn't shutter after that. Good morning.
Of course, you only lack the evidence for this claim.Metal? Now, that's much better, but it only came in Middle
We ate shellfish raw.Paleolithic, along with Homo sapiens. This is why Homo sapiens has >>>>>>>> changes in chopping apparatus. With metal we chopped off meat from >>>>>>>> carcass. But, that's about it.
No, before the first tools, we had to have fire. Fire was the tool to >>>>>>>> soften up meat. Why would you pierce an animal, if you cannot eat its >>>>>>>> meat? For hides? No. Before Oldowan tools we had to have fire, >>>>>>>> otherwise, why would we hunt animals in the first place?
Thin-sliced & ground-up meat, chewing gum style.
And this logical net *proves* how Science is *shallow*. They have all >>>>>>>> those stories about our past, without even thinking to resolve the >>>>>>>> "carnassial" problem. You cannot eat meat without carnassials, or >>>>>>>> without fire. Full stop.
Cold-blooded oysters, crab, shrimp were not cooked, because their flesh was never hot.
Warm blooded rabbits, antelope, pigs were cooked to bring the meat back to life-like temperature, cold meat did not taste as good. Those who cooked thin sliced meat reduced food-borne parasites so their progeny were healthier.
Nobody ate big chunks of meat, cooked or uncooked, not edible. Mammoth was thin-sliced.
DD
We ate everything raw.
Since tetrapods left the sea, raw food was the norm.
We burned surroundings for safety, not for food.There is no forest where Geladas live, there is only grass. And
What house? We were living on rocky sea cliffs,But, this burning gave us food. So, this is how we acquired eating >>>>>> burned food.
Silly fantasy. You burn your house down and then eat the burnt rats?
Geladas don't burn down the forest.
Geladas eat grass.
Right, they don't burn it to make it taste better
rocks don't burn, and
if they would burn, we still can jump into sea.
On Saturday, November 20, 2021 at 4:30:52 PM UTC-5, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Saturday, November 20, 2021 at 9:35:09 AM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote: >>> On 20.11.2021. 8:16, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
Like orangutans, who never eat shellfish?On Friday, November 19, 2021 at 2:45:04 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote: >>>>> On 19.11.2021. 8:07, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote: >>>>>> On Thursday, November 18, 2021 at 1:43:07 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:I believe people have problems grasping this. Not every stone is the
But, for god's sake, why would I compare natural shells to metalOn 18.11.2021. 10:08, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote: >>>>>>>> On Wednesday, November 17, 2021 at 4:59:14 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
Just the other way around, every shellfish, broken on any way, is very >>>>>>> sharp.On 17.11.2021. 22:08, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, November 17, 2021 at 1:29:22 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:Not so sharp. Conchoidal fracture of flint is much sharper than broken clam.
On 17.11.2021. 8:02, littor...@gmail.com wrote:
Only imbeciles believe their ancestors could never have slept on water.Stone tools have sharp edge. This is like broken shellfish. >>>>>>>>
On topic:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/11/211111154244.htm >>>>>>>>>>>> It's well possible that tool use & speech co-evolved (late-Pleistocene?):
both find their origin partly in our Pleistocene shellfish-diving past:
-stone tool use for opening shells, cf sea-otters,
-voluntary breathing for shallow-diving,
-large brain thanks to seafood, e.g. DHA,
-lip-tongue-throat movemensts for suction feeding.
"speech language origins PPT verhaegen".
You are comparing natural shell to knapped stone?
knives? Yes, today we are using metal knives and not natural shells, >>>>> this isn't a question. The question we are trying to answer in this news >>>>> group is, how all this *started*. Why we *started* to knap stones in the >>>>> first place? We just saw stones around, and decided, why wouldn't we >>>>> knap them, just for fun?
Stones as hammers against stone anvils sometimes shatter producing sharp edges. The nut meat is still edible.
If the alternative was cracking nuts with teeth, risking broken jaw or teeth, hammering is more efficient.
same. Some stones easily shutter, some don't. Flint easily shutters. I
believe that basalt stones don't. You can crack nuts with those that
don't, but those don't produce sharp edges, those that shutter produce
sharp edges. So, you cannot cut meat with a stone. Those that don't
shutter aren't sharp, those that shutter are sharp, but can leave stone
particles in meat.
I am talking about eating meat. Primates don't eat meat, we do. Hence
our diet moved in the direction of meat eating.
What bloody "poor stone"? Every stone that can be sharp is "poorOn the other hand, from my experience, the flint that yo can find >>>>>>> in nature isn't very sharp. I wouldn't say that you encounter a lot of >>>>>>> conchoidally fractured flint in nature. And even if there is one around,https://youtu.be/iv25o_zzqrE
why would you have it in your hand? On the other hand, if you are eating
shellfish, you handle sharp broken shellfish all the time, and they are >>>>>>> in your hands.
Your objection is very nice example of how somebody can be biased in >>>>>>> his interpretation of nature.
Probably not.
You completely ignored the obvious, and
you extremely emphasized some sideway thing.
So, the
main thing in stone tools isn't to be used as a hammer. Stone (unmade,Molar hammering crushing cracking
raw) can be used as a hammer, you don't need stone tool for that. Stone
tools are made to be used as a cutting device.
The paradox is that for cutting (sharp edge), you need to have sharp
edge. So, the idea originated in the usage of sharp edges. But, the >>>>>>>>>>> Oldowan tools are made out of pebbles, and pebbles are about the >>>>>>>>>>> bluntest objects in nature, not the sharpest. So, the development of the
usage of sharp edges should happen before Oldowan stone tools. >>>>>>>>>> -
Carnassial. shearing
Incisor gnawing
Canine tearing, piercing
Homo replicated these functions by hand using various materials >>>>>>>>> No way. Which materials?
Sticks and stones mostly.
Hammerstone & anvil stone/log replaced big molars, allowed processing extremely tough nuts.Who cares. We do have Oldowan stone tools for 2.5 my. We used it for >>>>>>> dealing with wood, hides, we weren't vegetarians.
Have you ever eaten nuts?
Stab, kill, slice, eat.
Nut cracking, clam cracking...
Hm, why would we stab the prey if we cannot eat it, for god's sake? >>>>Antlers? With antlers you can pierce. But, what's the use of piercing?
Stabbing to kill prey. Replace fangs with spear allows further distance from prey's defensive weapons.
Knapped stone flakes slice thin meat.And leave stone particles in that meat.
Only if hit against hard bone. If slicing flesh, no chips unless flake is from poor stone.
stone", this goes hand in hand. It is sharp because it is "poor".
Knapped flakes are made ofThis is why I did acquire the trait of thick enamel, precisely for
brittle type of stones, otherwise you wouldn't be able to knap it.
Brittle, it means that it shutters
you mean splinters? Only if hit hard against bone or if stone flake is from poor stone source.
easily. I wouldn't eat meat with
those tiny particles in it, if I want my teeth to remain whole.
Then don't eat gritty shellfish, lots of quartzite grit. I ate some from a tin can, so much sandy grit.
this reason.
Shatter? Flint knives don't shatter cutting meat.Of course I don't, because (ground) metal doesn't shutter.Try it yourself.If you don't have carnassials you cannot eat what you pierced.
Thin slices.
A sharp obsidian flake slices thinly through flesh & sinew.No way that I would eat this flesh.
Tartare.
Are you crazy? Ok, if this
obsidian is made industrially, and I have a guarantee that everything is
alright with it, it is grounded smoothly. Obsidian used by our ancestors
isn't anything like that.
Shearing. Stone? It will break your teeth?
What? Obsidian slicing meat.
Obsidian? It will cut your
throat.
Don't eat stone, eat meat.
You don't understand meat processing & eating. Do you worry about metal or plastic fragments & particles when using fork & spoon?
It is you
who doesn't understand anything. By grinding hematite you get ochre. Red >>> ochre is the evidence that we ground metal. Metal becomes sharp bySince tetrapods left the sea, raw food was the norm.
grinding, but it doesn't shutter after that. Good morning.
Of course, you only lack the evidence for this claim.Metal? Now, that's much better, but it only came in Middle
We ate shellfish raw.Paleolithic, along with Homo sapiens. This is why Homo sapiens has >>>>>>>>> changes in chopping apparatus. With metal we chopped off meat from >>>>>>>>> carcass. But, that's about it.
No, before the first tools, we had to have fire. Fire was the tool to >>>>>>>>> soften up meat. Why would you pierce an animal, if you cannot eat its >>>>>>>>> meat? For hides? No. Before Oldowan tools we had to have fire, >>>>>>>>> otherwise, why would we hunt animals in the first place?
Thin-sliced & ground-up meat, chewing gum style.
And this logical net *proves* how Science is *shallow*. They have all >>>>>>>>> those stories about our past, without even thinking to resolve the >>>>>>>>> "carnassial" problem. You cannot eat meat without carnassials, or >>>>>>>>> without fire. Full stop.
Cold-blooded oysters, crab, shrimp were not cooked, because their flesh was never hot.
Warm blooded rabbits, antelope, pigs were cooked to bring the meat back to life-like temperature, cold meat did not taste as good. Those who cooked thin sliced meat reduced food-borne parasites so their progeny were healthier.
Nobody ate big chunks of meat, cooked or uncooked, not edible. Mammoth was thin-sliced.
DD
We ate everything raw.
Right, they don't burn it to make it taste betterWe burned surroundings for safety, not for food.There is no forest where Geladas live, there is only grass. And
But, this burning gave us food. So, this is how we acquired eating >>>>>>> burned food.
Silly fantasy. You burn your house down and then eat the burnt rats? >>>>> What house? We were living on rocky sea cliffs,
Geladas don't burn down the forest.
Geladas eat grass.
rocks don't burn, and
if they would burn, we still can jump into sea.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41562-020-00955-z
300ka Israel cave, stone flint blades heat-treated in temperature controlled fire
On 20.11.2021. 22:30, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Saturday, November 20, 2021 at 9:35:09 AM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
On 20.11.2021. 8:16, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Friday, November 19, 2021 at 2:45:04 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote: >>>> On 19.11.2021. 8:07, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote: >>>>> On Thursday, November 18, 2021 at 1:43:07 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:I believe people have problems grasping this. Not every stone is the
But, for god's sake, why would I compare natural shells to metalOn 18.11.2021. 10:08, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote: >>>>>>> On Wednesday, November 17, 2021 at 4:59:14 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
Just the other way around, every shellfish, broken on any way, is very >>>>>> sharp.On 17.11.2021. 22:08, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, November 17, 2021 at 1:29:22 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:Not so sharp. Conchoidal fracture of flint is much sharper than broken clam.
On 17.11.2021. 8:02, littor...@gmail.com wrote:
Only imbeciles believe their ancestors could never have slept on water.Stone tools have sharp edge. This is like broken shellfish. >>>>>>>
On topic:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/11/211111154244.htm >>>>>>>>>>> It's well possible that tool use & speech co-evolved (late-Pleistocene?):
both find their origin partly in our Pleistocene shellfish-diving past:
-stone tool use for opening shells, cf sea-otters,
-voluntary breathing for shallow-diving,
-large brain thanks to seafood, e.g. DHA,
-lip-tongue-throat movemensts for suction feeding.
"speech language origins PPT verhaegen".
You are comparing natural shell to knapped stone?
knives? Yes, today we are using metal knives and not natural shells, >>>> this isn't a question. The question we are trying to answer in this news >>>> group is, how all this *started*. Why we *started* to knap stones in the >>>> first place? We just saw stones around, and decided, why wouldn't we >>>> knap them, just for fun?
Stones as hammers against stone anvils sometimes shatter producing sharp edges. The nut meat is still edible.
If the alternative was cracking nuts with teeth, risking broken jaw or teeth, hammering is more efficient.
same. Some stones easily shutter, some don't. Flint easily shutters. I
believe that basalt stones don't. You can crack nuts with those that
don't, but those don't produce sharp edges, those that shutter produce
sharp edges. So, you cannot cut meat with a stone. Those that don't
shutter aren't sharp, those that shutter are sharp, but can leave stone
particles in meat.
I am talking about eating meat. Primates don't eat meat, we do. Hence
our diet moved in the direction of meat eating.
What bloody "poor stone"? Every stone that can be sharp is "poorOn the other hand, from my experience, the flint that yo can find >>>>>> in nature isn't very sharp. I wouldn't say that you encounter a lot of >>>>>> conchoidally fractured flint in nature. And even if there is one around,https://youtu.be/iv25o_zzqrE
why would you have it in your hand? On the other hand, if you are eating
shellfish, you handle sharp broken shellfish all the time, and they are
in your hands.
Your objection is very nice example of how somebody can be biased in >>>>>> his interpretation of nature.
Probably not.
You completely ignored the obvious, and
you extremely emphasized some sideway thing.
So, the
main thing in stone tools isn't to be used as a hammer. Stone (unmade,Molar hammering crushing cracking
raw) can be used as a hammer, you don't need stone tool for that. Stone
tools are made to be used as a cutting device.
The paradox is that for cutting (sharp edge), you need to have sharp
edge. So, the idea originated in the usage of sharp edges. But, the
Oldowan tools are made out of pebbles, and pebbles are about the >>>>>>>>>> bluntest objects in nature, not the sharpest. So, the development of the
usage of sharp edges should happen before Oldowan stone tools. >>>>>>>>> -
Carnassial. shearing
Incisor gnawing
Canine tearing, piercing
Homo replicated these functions by hand using various materials >>>>>>>> No way. Which materials?
Sticks and stones mostly.
Hammerstone & anvil stone/log replaced big molars, allowed processing extremely tough nuts.Who cares. We do have Oldowan stone tools for 2.5 my. We used it for >>>>>> dealing with wood, hides, we weren't vegetarians.
Have you ever eaten nuts?
Stab, kill, slice, eat.
Nut cracking, clam cracking...
Hm, why would we stab the prey if we cannot eat it, for god's sake? >>>Antlers? With antlers you can pierce. But, what's the use of piercing?
Stabbing to kill prey. Replace fangs with spear allows further distance from prey's defensive weapons.
Knapped stone flakes slice thin meat.And leave stone particles in that meat.
Only if hit against hard bone. If slicing flesh, no chips unless flake is from poor stone.
stone", this goes hand in hand. It is sharp because it is "poor".
Knapped flakes are made ofThis is why I did acquire the trait of thick enamel, precisely for
brittle type of stones, otherwise you wouldn't be able to knap it.
Brittle, it means that it shutters
you mean splinters? Only if hit hard against bone or if stone flake is from poor stone source.
easily. I wouldn't eat meat with
those tiny particles in it, if I want my teeth to remain whole.
Then don't eat gritty shellfish, lots of quartzite grit. I ate some from a tin can, so much sandy grit.
this reason.
Like orangutans, who never eat shellfish?We are talking about first apes,
like us. They had thick enamel, this is why orangutan *still* has thick enamel. This is a vestigial trait.
Of course I don't, because (ground) metal doesn't shutter.Try it yourself.If you don't have carnassials you cannot eat what you pierced.
Thin slices.
A sharp obsidian flake slices thinly through flesh & sinew.No way that I would eat this flesh.
Tartare.
Are you crazy? Ok, if this
obsidian is made industrially, and I have a guarantee that everything is
alright with it, it is grounded smoothly. Obsidian used by our ancestors
isn't anything like that.
Shearing. Stone? It will break your teeth?
What? Obsidian slicing meat.
Obsidian? It will cut your
throat.
Don't eat stone, eat meat.
You don't understand meat processing & eating. Do you worry about metal or plastic fragments & particles when using fork & spoon?
Shatter? Flint knives don't shatter cutting meat.It will (from time to time), it is brittle. It is enough to shatter
once, to brake my tooth.
It is you
who doesn't understand anything. By grinding hematite you get ochre. Red >> ochre is the evidence that we ground metal. Metal becomes sharp by
grinding, but it doesn't shutter after that. Good morning.
Metal? Now, that's much better, but it only came in Middle
Paleolithic, along with Homo sapiens. This is why Homo sapiens has >>>>>>>> changes in chopping apparatus. With metal we chopped off meat from >>>>>>>> carcass. But, that's about it.
No, before the first tools, we had to have fire. Fire was the tool to
soften up meat. Why would you pierce an animal, if you cannot eat its
meat? For hides? No. Before Oldowan tools we had to have fire, >>>>>>>> otherwise, why would we hunt animals in the first place?
Thin-sliced & ground-up meat, chewing gum style.
And this logical net *proves* how Science is *shallow*. They have all
those stories about our past, without even thinking to resolve the >>>>>>>> "carnassial" problem. You cannot eat meat without carnassials, or >>>>>>>> without fire. Full stop.
Of course, you only lack the evidence for this claim.We ate shellfish raw.
Cold-blooded oysters, crab, shrimp were not cooked, because their flesh was never hot.
Warm blooded rabbits, antelope, pigs were cooked to bring the meat back to life-like temperature, cold meat did not taste as good. Those who cooked thin sliced meat reduced food-borne parasites so their progeny were healthier.
Nobody ate big chunks of meat, cooked or uncooked, not edible. Mammoth was thin-sliced.
DD
We ate everything raw.
Since tetrapods left the sea, raw food was the norm.Not for humans, as we can see.
Cats like my hamburgers well done.We burned surroundings for safety, not for food.There is no forest where Geladas live, there is only grass. And
But, this burning gave us food. So, this is how we acquired eating >>>>>> burned food.
Silly fantasy. You burn your house down and then eat the burnt rats? >>>> What house? We were living on rocky sea cliffs,
Geladas don't burn down the forest.
Geladas eat grass.
Right, they don't burn it to make it taste betterExactly. Because if you are used to raw meat taste, you will not like
burned meat better.
beginning.
rocks don't burn, and
if they would burn, we still can jump into sea.
--
https://groups.google.com/g/human-evolution
human-e...@googlegroups.com
On Sunday, November 21, 2021 at 12:05:07 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
On 20.11.2021. 22:30, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Saturday, November 20, 2021 at 9:35:09 AM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote: >>>> On 20.11.2021. 8:16, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:We are talking about first apes,
On Friday, November 19, 2021 at 2:45:04 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote: >>>>>> On 19.11.2021. 8:07, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote: >>>>>>> On Thursday, November 18, 2021 at 1:43:07 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:I believe people have problems grasping this. Not every stone is the
But, for god's sake, why would I compare natural shells to metalOn 18.11.2021. 10:08, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, November 17, 2021 at 4:59:14 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
Just the other way around, every shellfish, broken on any way, is very >>>>>>>> sharp.On 17.11.2021. 22:08, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, November 17, 2021 at 1:29:22 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:Not so sharp. Conchoidal fracture of flint is much sharper than broken clam.
On 17.11.2021. 8:02, littor...@gmail.com wrote:
Only imbeciles believe their ancestors could never have slept on water.Stone tools have sharp edge. This is like broken shellfish. >>>>>>>>>
On topic:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/11/211111154244.htm >>>>>>>>>>>>> It's well possible that tool use & speech co-evolved (late-Pleistocene?):
both find their origin partly in our Pleistocene shellfish-diving past:
-stone tool use for opening shells, cf sea-otters,
-voluntary breathing for shallow-diving,
-large brain thanks to seafood, e.g. DHA,
-lip-tongue-throat movemensts for suction feeding.
"speech language origins PPT verhaegen".
You are comparing natural shell to knapped stone?
knives? Yes, today we are using metal knives and not natural shells, >>>>>> this isn't a question. The question we are trying to answer in this news >>>>>> group is, how all this *started*. Why we *started* to knap stones in the >>>>>> first place? We just saw stones around, and decided, why wouldn't we >>>>>> knap them, just for fun?
Stones as hammers against stone anvils sometimes shatter producing sharp edges. The nut meat is still edible.
If the alternative was cracking nuts with teeth, risking broken jaw or teeth, hammering is more efficient.
same. Some stones easily shutter, some don't. Flint easily shutters. I >>>> believe that basalt stones don't. You can crack nuts with those that
don't, but those don't produce sharp edges, those that shutter produce >>>> sharp edges. So, you cannot cut meat with a stone. Those that don't
shutter aren't sharp, those that shutter are sharp, but can leave stone >>>> particles in meat.
I am talking about eating meat. Primates don't eat meat, we do. Hence
our diet moved in the direction of meat eating.
What bloody "poor stone"? Every stone that can be sharp is "poorOn the other hand, from my experience, the flint that yo can find >>>>>>>> in nature isn't very sharp. I wouldn't say that you encounter a lot of >>>>>>>> conchoidally fractured flint in nature. And even if there is one around,https://youtu.be/iv25o_zzqrE
why would you have it in your hand? On the other hand, if you are eating
shellfish, you handle sharp broken shellfish all the time, and they are
in your hands.
Your objection is very nice example of how somebody can be biased in >>>>>>>> his interpretation of nature.
Probably not.
You completely ignored the obvious, and
you extremely emphasized some sideway thing.
So, the
main thing in stone tools isn't to be used as a hammer. Stone (unmade,Molar hammering crushing cracking
raw) can be used as a hammer, you don't need stone tool for that. Stone
tools are made to be used as a cutting device.
The paradox is that for cutting (sharp edge), you need to have sharp
edge. So, the idea originated in the usage of sharp edges. But, the
Oldowan tools are made out of pebbles, and pebbles are about the >>>>>>>>>>>> bluntest objects in nature, not the sharpest. So, the development of the
usage of sharp edges should happen before Oldowan stone tools. >>>>>>>>>>> -
Carnassial. shearing
Incisor gnawing
Canine tearing, piercing
Homo replicated these functions by hand using various materials >>>>>>>>>> No way. Which materials?
Sticks and stones mostly.
Hammerstone & anvil stone/log replaced big molars, allowed processing extremely tough nuts.Who cares. We do have Oldowan stone tools for 2.5 my. We used it for >>>>>>>> dealing with wood, hides, we weren't vegetarians.
Have you ever eaten nuts?
Stab, kill, slice, eat.
Nut cracking, clam cracking...
Hm, why would we stab the prey if we cannot eat it, for god's sake? >>>>>Antlers? With antlers you can pierce. But, what's the use of piercing?
Stabbing to kill prey. Replace fangs with spear allows further distance from prey's defensive weapons.
Knapped stone flakes slice thin meat.And leave stone particles in that meat.
Only if hit against hard bone. If slicing flesh, no chips unless flake is from poor stone.
stone", this goes hand in hand. It is sharp because it is "poor".
Knapped flakes are made ofThis is why I did acquire the trait of thick enamel, precisely for
brittle type of stones, otherwise you wouldn't be able to knap it. >>>>>> Brittle, it means that it shutters
you mean splinters? Only if hit hard against bone or if stone flake is from poor stone source.
easily. I wouldn't eat meat with
those tiny particles in it, if I want my teeth to remain whole.
Then don't eat gritty shellfish, lots of quartzite grit. I ate some from a tin can, so much sandy grit.
this reason.
Like orangutans, who never eat shellfish?
I'm talking about human ancestors who had complex language software tool associated with complex stick and stone artifacts hardware tools.
who didn't look like orangutans, but,
like us. They had thick enamel, this is why orangutan *still* has thick
enamel. This is a vestigial trait.
Orangutans eat hard nuts and fruits, gorillas don't, chimps and humans use tools but chewed a lot until milling advanced.
Of course I don't, because (ground) metal doesn't shutter.Try it yourself.Thin slices.If you don't have carnassials you cannot eat what you pierced. >>>>>>>
A sharp obsidian flake slices thinly through flesh & sinew.No way that I would eat this flesh.
Tartare.
Are you crazy? Ok, if this
obsidian is made industrially, and I have a guarantee that everything is
alright with it, it is grounded smoothly. Obsidian used by our ancestors
isn't anything like that.
Shearing. Stone? It will break your teeth?
What? Obsidian slicing meat.
Obsidian? It will cut your
throat.
Don't eat stone, eat meat.
You don't understand meat processing & eating. Do you worry about metal or plastic fragments & particles when using fork & spoon?
Obsidian is brittle laterally (bending to the side), but perfect cutting straight through meat.
Shatter? Flint knives don't shatter cutting meat.It will (from time to time), it is brittle. It is enough to shatter
once, to brake my tooth.
It is you
who doesn't understand anything. By grinding hematite you get ochre. Red >>>> ochre is the evidence that we ground metal. Metal becomes sharp by
grinding, but it doesn't shutter after that. Good morning.
Metal? Now, that's much better, but it only came in Middle
Paleolithic, along with Homo sapiens. This is why Homo sapiens has >>>>>>>>>> changes in chopping apparatus. With metal we chopped off meat from >>>>>>>>>> carcass. But, that's about it.
No, before the first tools, we had to have fire. Fire was the tool to
soften up meat. Why would you pierce an animal, if you cannot eat its
meat? For hides? No. Before Oldowan tools we had to have fire, >>>>>>>>>> otherwise, why would we hunt animals in the first place?
Thin-sliced & ground-up meat, chewing gum style.
And this logical net *proves* how Science is *shallow*. They have all
those stories about our past, without even thinking to resolve the >>>>>>>>>> "carnassial" problem. You cannot eat meat without carnassials, or >>>>>>>>>> without fire. Full stop.
Sharp cutting into slices, then chewing like bubblegum.
Not for humans, as we can see.Of course, you only lack the evidence for this claim.We ate shellfish raw.
Cold-blooded oysters, crab, shrimp were not cooked, because their flesh was never hot.
Warm blooded rabbits, antelope, pigs were cooked to bring the meat back to life-like temperature, cold meat did not taste as good. Those who cooked thin sliced meat reduced food-borne parasites so their progeny were healthier.
Nobody ate big chunks of meat, cooked or uncooked, not edible. Mammoth was thin-sliced.
DD
We ate everything raw.
Since tetrapods left the sea, raw food was the norm.
Because humans quit swinging and started cutting.
Cats like my hamburgers well done.Exactly. Because if you are used to raw meat taste, you will not likeWe burned surroundings for safety, not for food.There is no forest where Geladas live, there is only grass. And
But, this burning gave us food. So, this is how we acquired eating >>>>>>>> burned food.
Silly fantasy. You burn your house down and then eat the burnt rats? >>>>>> What house? We were living on rocky sea cliffs,
Geladas don't burn down the forest.
Geladas eat grass.
Right, they don't burn it to make it taste better
burned meat better.
Only if you are used to burned meat from the very
beginning.
As I said, humans cooked terrestrial meat to return it to living temperature, but didn't cook seafood since it was coldblooded.
rocks don't burn, and
if they would burn, we still can jump into sea.
On 21.11.2021. 18:35, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:Of what?
On Sunday, November 21, 2021 at 12:05:07 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
On 20.11.2021. 22:30, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Saturday, November 20, 2021 at 9:35:09 AM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:We are talking about first apes,
On 20.11.2021. 8:16, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote: >>>>> On Friday, November 19, 2021 at 2:45:04 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
I believe people have problems grasping this. Not every stone is the >>>> same. Some stones easily shutter, some don't. Flint easily shutters. I >>>> believe that basalt stones don't. You can crack nuts with those that >>>> don't, but those don't produce sharp edges, those that shutter produce >>>> sharp edges. So, you cannot cut meat with a stone. Those that don'tOn 19.11.2021. 8:07, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote: >>>>>>> On Thursday, November 18, 2021 at 1:43:07 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
But, for god's sake, why would I compare natural shells to metal >>>>>> knives? Yes, today we are using metal knives and not natural shells, >>>>>> this isn't a question. The question we are trying to answer in this newsOn 18.11.2021. 10:08, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, November 17, 2021 at 4:59:14 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
Just the other way around, every shellfish, broken on any way, is veryOn 17.11.2021. 22:08, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:Not so sharp. Conchoidal fracture of flint is much sharper than broken clam.
On Wednesday, November 17, 2021 at 1:29:22 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
On 17.11.2021. 8:02, littor...@gmail.com wrote:
Only imbeciles believe their ancestors could never have slept on water.Stone tools have sharp edge. This is like broken shellfish. >>>>>>>>>
On topic:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/11/211111154244.htm >>>>>>>>>>>>> It's well possible that tool use & speech co-evolved (late-Pleistocene?):
both find their origin partly in our Pleistocene shellfish-diving past:
-stone tool use for opening shells, cf sea-otters, >>>>>>>>>>>>> -voluntary breathing for shallow-diving,
-large brain thanks to seafood, e.g. DHA,
-lip-tongue-throat movemensts for suction feeding. >>>>>>>>>>>>> Google
"speech language origins PPT verhaegen".
sharp.
You are comparing natural shell to knapped stone?
group is, how all this *started*. Why we *started* to knap stones in the
first place? We just saw stones around, and decided, why wouldn't we >>>>>> knap them, just for fun?
Stones as hammers against stone anvils sometimes shatter producing sharp edges. The nut meat is still edible.
If the alternative was cracking nuts with teeth, risking broken jaw or teeth, hammering is more efficient.
shutter aren't sharp, those that shutter are sharp, but can leave stone >>>> particles in meat.
I am talking about eating meat. Primates don't eat meat, we do. Hence >>>> our diet moved in the direction of meat eating.
What bloody "poor stone"? Every stone that can be sharp is "poorOn the other hand, from my experience, the flint that yo can find >>>>>>>> in nature isn't very sharp. I wouldn't say that you encounter a lot ofhttps://youtu.be/iv25o_zzqrE
conchoidally fractured flint in nature. And even if there is one around,
why would you have it in your hand? On the other hand, if you are eating
shellfish, you handle sharp broken shellfish all the time, and they are
in your hands.
Your objection is very nice example of how somebody can be biased in >>>>>>>> his interpretation of nature.
Probably not.
You completely ignored the obvious, and
you extremely emphasized some sideway thing.
So, the
main thing in stone tools isn't to be used as a hammer. Stone (unmade,Molar hammering crushing cracking
raw) can be used as a hammer, you don't need stone tool for that. Stone
tools are made to be used as a cutting device.
The paradox is that for cutting (sharp edge), you need to have sharp
edge. So, the idea originated in the usage of sharp edges. But, the
Oldowan tools are made out of pebbles, and pebbles are about the >>>>>>>>>>>> bluntest objects in nature, not the sharpest. So, the development of the
usage of sharp edges should happen before Oldowan stone tools. >>>>>>>>>>> -
Carnassial. shearing
Incisor gnawing
Canine tearing, piercing
Homo replicated these functions by hand using various materials >>>>>>>>>> No way. Which materials?
Sticks and stones mostly.
Hammerstone & anvil stone/log replaced big molars, allowed processing extremely tough nuts.Who cares. We do have Oldowan stone tools for 2.5 my. We used it for >>>>>>>> dealing with wood, hides, we weren't vegetarians.
Have you ever eaten nuts?
Stab, kill, slice, eat.
Nut cracking, clam cracking...
Hm, why would we stab the prey if we cannot eat it, for god's sake? >>>>>Antlers? With antlers you can pierce. But, what's the use of piercing?
Stabbing to kill prey. Replace fangs with spear allows further distance from prey's defensive weapons.
Knapped stone flakes slice thin meat.And leave stone particles in that meat.
Only if hit against hard bone. If slicing flesh, no chips unless flake is from poor stone.
stone", this goes hand in hand. It is sharp because it is "poor".
Knapped flakes are made ofThis is why I did acquire the trait of thick enamel, precisely for
brittle type of stones, otherwise you wouldn't be able to knap it. >>>>>> Brittle, it means that it shutters
you mean splinters? Only if hit hard against bone or if stone flake is from poor stone source.
easily. I wouldn't eat meat with
those tiny particles in it, if I want my teeth to remain whole.
Then don't eat gritty shellfish, lots of quartzite grit. I ate some from a tin can, so much sandy grit.
this reason.
Like orangutans, who never eat shellfish?
I'm talking about human ancestors who had complex language software tool associated with complex stick and stone artifacts hardware tools.I would start from the beginning.
Perfect for cutting meat.who didn't look like orangutans, but,
like us. They had thick enamel, this is why orangutan *still* has thick
enamel. This is a vestigial trait.
Orangutans eat hard nuts and fruits, gorillas don't, chimps and humans use tools but chewed a lot until milling advanced.
Of course I don't, because (ground) metal doesn't shutter.Try it yourself.Thin slices.If you don't have carnassials you cannot eat what you pierced. >>>>>>>
A sharp obsidian flake slices thinly through flesh & sinew. >>>>>>>> No way that I would eat this flesh.
Tartare.
Are you crazy? Ok, if this
obsidian is made industrially, and I have a guarantee that everything is
alright with it, it is grounded smoothly. Obsidian used by our ancestors
isn't anything like that.
Shearing. Stone? It will break your teeth?
What? Obsidian slicing meat.
Obsidian? It will cut your
throat.
Don't eat stone, eat meat.
You don't understand meat processing & eating. Do you worry about metal or plastic fragments & particles when using fork & spoon?
Obsidian is brittle laterally (bending to the side), but perfect cutting straight through meat.It is brittle glass. It would cut throat.
Then you pushed the blade laterally or hit the bone and pried or twisted the blade.Shatter? Flint knives don't shatter cutting meat.It will (from time to time), it is brittle. It is enough to shatter
once, to brake my tooth.
It is you
who doesn't understand anything. By grinding hematite you get ochre. Red >>>> ochre is the evidence that we ground metal. Metal becomes sharp by
grinding, but it doesn't shutter after that. Good morning.
Metal? Now, that's much better, but it only came in Middle
Paleolithic, along with Homo sapiens. This is why Homo sapiens has >>>>>>>>>> changes in chopping apparatus. With metal we chopped off meat from >>>>>>>>>> carcass. But, that's about it.
No, before the first tools, we had to have fire. Fire was the tool to
soften up meat. Why would you pierce an animal, if you cannot eat its
meat? For hides? No. Before Oldowan tools we had to have fire, >>>>>>>>>> otherwise, why would we hunt animals in the first place?
Thin-sliced & ground-up meat, chewing gum style.
And this logical net *proves* how Science is *shallow*. They have all
those stories about our past, without even thinking to resolve the >>>>>>>>>> "carnassial" problem. You cannot eat meat without carnassials, or >>>>>>>>>> without fire. Full stop.
Sharp cutting into slices, then chewing like bubblegum.
Not for humans, as we can see.Of course, you only lack the evidence for this claim.We ate shellfish raw.
Cold-blooded oysters, crab, shrimp were not cooked, because their flesh was never hot.
Warm blooded rabbits, antelope, pigs were cooked to bring the meat back to life-like temperature, cold meat did not taste as good. Those who cooked thin sliced meat reduced food-borne parasites so their progeny were healthier.
Nobody ate big chunks of meat, cooked or uncooked, not edible. Mammoth was thin-sliced.
DD
We ate everything raw.
Since tetrapods left the sea, raw food was the norm.
Because humans quit swinging and started cutting.
https://youtu.be/YSd413Xrk_QCats like my hamburgers well done.Exactly. Because if you are used to raw meat taste, you will not likeWe burned surroundings for safety, not for food.There is no forest where Geladas live, there is only grass. And
But, this burning gave us food. So, this is how we acquired eating >>>>>>>> burned food.
Silly fantasy. You burn your house down and then eat the burnt rats? >>>>>> What house? We were living on rocky sea cliffs,
Geladas don't burn down the forest.
Geladas eat grass.
Right, they don't burn it to make it taste better
burned meat better.
Only if you are used to burned meat from the very
beginning.
As I said, humans cooked terrestrial meat to return it to living temperature, but didn't cook seafood since it was coldblooded.You have very good imagination, but this is pure bollocks.
rocks don't burn, and
if they would burn, we still can jump into sea.
--
https://groups.google.com/g/human-evolution
human-e...@googlegroups.com
On Monday, November 22, 2021 at 2:47:55 AM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
On 21.11.2021. 18:35, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:Of what?
On Sunday, November 21, 2021 at 12:05:07 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote: >>>> On 20.11.2021. 22:30, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:I would start from the beginning.
On Saturday, November 20, 2021 at 9:35:09 AM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:We are talking about first apes,
On 20.11.2021. 8:16, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote: >>>>>>> On Friday, November 19, 2021 at 2:45:04 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
I believe people have problems grasping this. Not every stone is the >>>>>> same. Some stones easily shutter, some don't. Flint easily shutters. I >>>>>> believe that basalt stones don't. You can crack nuts with those that >>>>>> don't, but those don't produce sharp edges, those that shutter produce >>>>>> sharp edges. So, you cannot cut meat with a stone. Those that don't >>>>>> shutter aren't sharp, those that shutter are sharp, but can leave stone >>>>>> particles in meat.On 19.11.2021. 8:07, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Thursday, November 18, 2021 at 1:43:07 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
But, for god's sake, why would I compare natural shells to metal >>>>>>>> knives? Yes, today we are using metal knives and not natural shells, >>>>>>>> this isn't a question. The question we are trying to answer in this newsOn 18.11.2021. 10:08, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, November 17, 2021 at 4:59:14 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
Just the other way around, every shellfish, broken on any way, is veryOn 17.11.2021. 22:08, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:Not so sharp. Conchoidal fracture of flint is much sharper than broken clam.
On Wednesday, November 17, 2021 at 1:29:22 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
On 17.11.2021. 8:02, littor...@gmail.com wrote:
Only imbeciles believe their ancestors could never have slept on water.Stone tools have sharp edge. This is like broken shellfish. >>>>>>>>>>>
On topic:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/11/211111154244.htm >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's well possible that tool use & speech co-evolved (late-Pleistocene?):
both find their origin partly in our Pleistocene shellfish-diving past:
-stone tool use for opening shells, cf sea-otters, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -voluntary breathing for shallow-diving,
-large brain thanks to seafood, e.g. DHA,
-lip-tongue-throat movemensts for suction feeding. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Google
"speech language origins PPT verhaegen".
sharp.
You are comparing natural shell to knapped stone?
group is, how all this *started*. Why we *started* to knap stones in the
first place? We just saw stones around, and decided, why wouldn't we >>>>>>>> knap them, just for fun?
Stones as hammers against stone anvils sometimes shatter producing sharp edges. The nut meat is still edible.
If the alternative was cracking nuts with teeth, risking broken jaw or teeth, hammering is more efficient.
I am talking about eating meat. Primates don't eat meat, we do. Hence >>>>>> our diet moved in the direction of meat eating.
What bloody "poor stone"? Every stone that can be sharp is "poorOn the other hand, from my experience, the flint that yo can find >>>>>>>>>> in nature isn't very sharp. I wouldn't say that you encounter a lot ofhttps://youtu.be/iv25o_zzqrE
conchoidally fractured flint in nature. And even if there is one around,
why would you have it in your hand? On the other hand, if you are eating
shellfish, you handle sharp broken shellfish all the time, and they are
in your hands.
Your objection is very nice example of how somebody can be biased in >>>>>>>>>> his interpretation of nature.
Probably not.
You completely ignored the obvious, and
you extremely emphasized some sideway thing.
So, the
main thing in stone tools isn't to be used as a hammer. Stone (unmade,Molar hammering crushing cracking
raw) can be used as a hammer, you don't need stone tool for that. Stone
tools are made to be used as a cutting device.
The paradox is that for cutting (sharp edge), you need to have sharp
edge. So, the idea originated in the usage of sharp edges. But, the
Oldowan tools are made out of pebbles, and pebbles are about the >>>>>>>>>>>>>> bluntest objects in nature, not the sharpest. So, the development of the
usage of sharp edges should happen before Oldowan stone tools. >>>>>>>>>>>>> -
Carnassial. shearing
Incisor gnawing
Canine tearing, piercing
Homo replicated these functions by hand using various materials >>>>>>>>>>>> No way. Which materials?
Sticks and stones mostly.
Hammerstone & anvil stone/log replaced big molars, allowed processing extremely tough nuts.Who cares. We do have Oldowan stone tools for 2.5 my. We used it for >>>>>>>>>> dealing with wood, hides, we weren't vegetarians.
Have you ever eaten nuts?
Stab, kill, slice, eat.
Nut cracking, clam cracking...
Hm, why would we stab the prey if we cannot eat it, for god's sake? >>>>>>>Antlers? With antlers you can pierce. But, what's the use of piercing?
Stabbing to kill prey. Replace fangs with spear allows further distance from prey's defensive weapons.
Knapped stone flakes slice thin meat.And leave stone particles in that meat.
Only if hit against hard bone. If slicing flesh, no chips unless flake is from poor stone.
stone", this goes hand in hand. It is sharp because it is "poor". >>>>>>> Knapped flakes are made of
This is why I did acquire the trait of thick enamel, precisely for >>>>>> this reason.brittle type of stones, otherwise you wouldn't be able to knap it. >>>>>>>> Brittle, it means that it shutters
you mean splinters? Only if hit hard against bone or if stone flake is from poor stone source.
easily. I wouldn't eat meat with
those tiny particles in it, if I want my teeth to remain whole. >>>>>>>Then don't eat gritty shellfish, lots of quartzite grit. I ate some from a tin can, so much sandy grit.
Like orangutans, who never eat shellfish?
I'm talking about human ancestors who had complex language software tool associated with complex stick and stone artifacts hardware tools.
Perfect for cutting meat.who didn't look like orangutans, but,It is brittle glass. It would cut throat.
like us. They had thick enamel, this is why orangutan *still* has thick >>>> enamel. This is a vestigial trait.
Orangutans eat hard nuts and fruits, gorillas don't, chimps and humans use tools but chewed a lot until milling advanced.
Of course I don't, because (ground) metal doesn't shutter.Try it yourself.Thin slices.If you don't have carnassials you cannot eat what you pierced. >>>>>>>>>
A sharp obsidian flake slices thinly through flesh & sinew. >>>>>>>>>> No way that I would eat this flesh.
Tartare.
Are you crazy? Ok, if this
obsidian is made industrially, and I have a guarantee that everything is
alright with it, it is grounded smoothly. Obsidian used by our ancestors
isn't anything like that.
Shearing. Stone? It will break your teeth?
What? Obsidian slicing meat.
Obsidian? It will cut your
throat.
Don't eat stone, eat meat.
You don't understand meat processing & eating. Do you worry about metal or plastic fragments & particles when using fork & spoon?
Obsidian is brittle laterally (bending to the side), but perfect cutting straight through meat.
Then you pushed the blade laterally or hit the bone and pried or twisted the blade.Shatter? Flint knives don't shatter cutting meat.It will (from time to time), it is brittle. It is enough to shatter
once, to brake my tooth.
https://youtu.be/YSd413Xrk_QIt is you
who doesn't understand anything. By grinding hematite you get ochre. Red >>>>>> ochre is the evidence that we ground metal. Metal becomes sharp by >>>>>> grinding, but it doesn't shutter after that. Good morning.
Metal? Now, that's much better, but it only came in Middle >>>>>>>>>>>> Paleolithic, along with Homo sapiens. This is why Homo sapiens has >>>>>>>>>>>> changes in chopping apparatus. With metal we chopped off meat from >>>>>>>>>>>> carcass. But, that's about it.
No, before the first tools, we had to have fire. Fire was the tool toThin-sliced & ground-up meat, chewing gum style.
soften up meat. Why would you pierce an animal, if you cannot eat its
meat? For hides? No. Before Oldowan tools we had to have fire, >>>>>>>>>>>> otherwise, why would we hunt animals in the first place? >>>>>>>>>>>
And this logical net *proves* how Science is *shallow*. They have all
those stories about our past, without even thinking to resolve the >>>>>>>>>>>> "carnassial" problem. You cannot eat meat without carnassials, or >>>>>>>>>>>> without fire. Full stop.
Sharp cutting into slices, then chewing like bubblegum.
Not for humans, as we can see.Of course, you only lack the evidence for this claim.We ate shellfish raw.
Cold-blooded oysters, crab, shrimp were not cooked, because their flesh was never hot.
Warm blooded rabbits, antelope, pigs were cooked to bring the meat back to life-like temperature, cold meat did not taste as good. Those who cooked thin sliced meat reduced food-borne parasites so their progeny were healthier.
Nobody ate big chunks of meat, cooked or uncooked, not edible. Mammoth was thin-sliced.
DD
We ate everything raw.
Since tetrapods left the sea, raw food was the norm.
Because humans quit swinging and started cutting.
Cats like my hamburgers well done.Exactly. Because if you are used to raw meat taste, you will not likeWe burned surroundings for safety, not for food.There is no forest where Geladas live, there is only grass. And
But, this burning gave us food. So, this is how we acquired eating >>>>>>>>>> burned food.
Silly fantasy. You burn your house down and then eat the burnt rats? >>>>>>>> What house? We were living on rocky sea cliffs,
Geladas don't burn down the forest.
Geladas eat grass.
Right, they don't burn it to make it taste better
burned meat better.
Only if you are used to burned meat from the veryYou have very good imagination, but this is pure bollocks.
beginning.
As I said, humans cooked terrestrial meat to return it to living temperature, but didn't cook seafood since it was coldblooded.
Thanks, a good scientist uses imagination as a software tool, like language. Hard: obsidian
Tough: rubber
Hard and tough: steel
rocks don't burn, and
if they would burn, we still can jump into sea.
On 22.11.2021. 15:10, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Monday, November 22, 2021 at 2:47:55 AM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:Of meat eating.
On 21.11.2021. 18:35, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:Of what?
On Sunday, November 21, 2021 at 12:05:07 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:I would start from the beginning.
On 20.11.2021. 22:30, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote: >>>>> On Saturday, November 20, 2021 at 9:35:09 AM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
We are talking about first apes,On 20.11.2021. 8:16, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote: >>>>>>> On Friday, November 19, 2021 at 2:45:04 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
I believe people have problems grasping this. Not every stone is the >>>>>> same. Some stones easily shutter, some don't. Flint easily shutters. I >>>>>> believe that basalt stones don't. You can crack nuts with those that >>>>>> don't, but those don't produce sharp edges, those that shutter produce >>>>>> sharp edges. So, you cannot cut meat with a stone. Those that don't >>>>>> shutter aren't sharp, those that shutter are sharp, but can leave stoneOn 19.11.2021. 8:07, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Thursday, November 18, 2021 at 1:43:07 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
But, for god's sake, why would I compare natural shells to metal >>>>>>>> knives? Yes, today we are using metal knives and not natural shells, >>>>>>>> this isn't a question. The question we are trying to answer in this newsOn 18.11.2021. 10:08, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Wednesday, November 17, 2021 at 4:59:14 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:Just the other way around, every shellfish, broken on any way, is very
On 17.11.2021. 22:08, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:Not so sharp. Conchoidal fracture of flint is much sharper than broken clam.
On Wednesday, November 17, 2021 at 1:29:22 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
On 17.11.2021. 8:02, littor...@gmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Only imbeciles believe their ancestors could never have slept on water.
Stone tools have sharp edge. This is like broken shellfish. >>>>>>>>>>>
On topic:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/11/211111154244.htm
It's well possible that tool use & speech co-evolved (late-Pleistocene?):
both find their origin partly in our Pleistocene shellfish-diving past:
-stone tool use for opening shells, cf sea-otters, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -voluntary breathing for shallow-diving,
-large brain thanks to seafood, e.g. DHA,
-lip-tongue-throat movemensts for suction feeding. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Google
"speech language origins PPT verhaegen".
sharp.
You are comparing natural shell to knapped stone?
group is, how all this *started*. Why we *started* to knap stones in the
first place? We just saw stones around, and decided, why wouldn't we >>>>>>>> knap them, just for fun?
Stones as hammers against stone anvils sometimes shatter producing sharp edges. The nut meat is still edible.
If the alternative was cracking nuts with teeth, risking broken jaw or teeth, hammering is more efficient.
particles in meat.
I am talking about eating meat. Primates don't eat meat, we do. Hence >>>>>> our diet moved in the direction of meat eating.
What bloody "poor stone"? Every stone that can be sharp is "poor >>>>>> stone", this goes hand in hand. It is sharp because it is "poor". >>>>>>> Knapped flakes are made ofOn the other hand, from my experience, the flint that yo can find >>>>>>>>>> in nature isn't very sharp. I wouldn't say that you encounter a lot ofhttps://youtu.be/iv25o_zzqrE
conchoidally fractured flint in nature. And even if there is one around,
why would you have it in your hand? On the other hand, if you are eating
shellfish, you handle sharp broken shellfish all the time, and they are
in your hands.
Your objection is very nice example of how somebody can be biased in
his interpretation of nature.
Probably not.
You completely ignored the obvious, and
you extremely emphasized some sideway thing.
So, the
main thing in stone tools isn't to be used as a hammer. Stone (unmade,Molar hammering crushing cracking
raw) can be used as a hammer, you don't need stone tool for that. Stone
tools are made to be used as a cutting device.
The paradox is that for cutting (sharp edge), you need to have sharp
edge. So, the idea originated in the usage of sharp edges. But, the
Oldowan tools are made out of pebbles, and pebbles are about the
bluntest objects in nature, not the sharpest. So, the development of the
usage of sharp edges should happen before Oldowan stone tools. >>>>>>>>>>>>> -
Carnassial. shearing
Incisor gnawing
Canine tearing, piercing
Homo replicated these functions by hand using various materials >>>>>>>>>>>> No way. Which materials?
Sticks and stones mostly.
Hammerstone & anvil stone/log replaced big molars, allowed processing extremely tough nuts.Who cares. We do have Oldowan stone tools for 2.5 my. We used it for
dealing with wood, hides, we weren't vegetarians.
Have you ever eaten nuts?
Nut cracking, clam cracking...
Hm, why would we stab the prey if we cannot eat it, for god's sake?Antlers? With antlers you can pierce. But, what's the use of piercing?
Stabbing to kill prey. Replace fangs with spear allows further distance from prey's defensive weapons.
Stab, kill, slice, eat.
Knapped stone flakes slice thin meat.And leave stone particles in that meat.
Only if hit against hard bone. If slicing flesh, no chips unless flake is from poor stone.
This is why I did acquire the trait of thick enamel, precisely for >>>>>> this reason.brittle type of stones, otherwise you wouldn't be able to knap it. >>>>>>>> Brittle, it means that it shutters
you mean splinters? Only if hit hard against bone or if stone flake is from poor stone source.
easily. I wouldn't eat meat with
those tiny particles in it, if I want my teeth to remain whole. >>>>>>>Then don't eat gritty shellfish, lots of quartzite grit. I ate some from a tin can, so much sandy grit.
Like orangutans, who never eat shellfish?
I'm talking about human ancestors who had complex language software tool associated with complex stick and stone artifacts hardware tools.
Cutting, yes. Inedible meat.Perfect for cutting meat.who didn't look like orangutans, but,It is brittle glass. It would cut throat.
like us. They had thick enamel, this is why orangutan *still* has thick >>>> enamel. This is a vestigial trait.
Orangutans eat hard nuts and fruits, gorillas don't, chimps and humans use tools but chewed a lot until milling advanced.
Of course I don't, because (ground) metal doesn't shutter.Try it yourself.Thin slices.If you don't have carnassials you cannot eat what you pierced. >>>>>>>>>
A sharp obsidian flake slices thinly through flesh & sinew. >>>>>>>>>> No way that I would eat this flesh.
Tartare.
Are you crazy? Ok, if this
obsidian is made industrially, and I have a guarantee that everything is
alright with it, it is grounded smoothly. Obsidian used by our ancestors
isn't anything like that.
Shearing. Stone? It will break your teeth?
What? Obsidian slicing meat.
Obsidian? It will cut your
throat.
Don't eat stone, eat meat.
You don't understand meat processing & eating. Do you worry about metal or plastic fragments & particles when using fork & spoon?
Obsidian is brittle laterally (bending to the side), but perfect cutting straight through meat.
Or anything.Then you pushed the blade laterally or hit the bone and pried or twisted the blade.Shatter? Flint knives don't shatter cutting meat.It will (from time to time), it is brittle. It is enough to shatter
once, to brake my tooth.
https://youtu.be/YSd413Xrk_QIt is you
who doesn't understand anything. By grinding hematite you get ochre. Red
ochre is the evidence that we ground metal. Metal becomes sharp by >>>>>> grinding, but it doesn't shutter after that. Good morning.
Metal? Now, that's much better, but it only came in Middle >>>>>>>>>>>> Paleolithic, along with Homo sapiens. This is why Homo sapiens has
changes in chopping apparatus. With metal we chopped off meat fromThin-sliced & ground-up meat, chewing gum style.
carcass. But, that's about it.
No, before the first tools, we had to have fire. Fire was the tool to
soften up meat. Why would you pierce an animal, if you cannot eat its
meat? For hides? No. Before Oldowan tools we had to have fire, >>>>>>>>>>>> otherwise, why would we hunt animals in the first place? >>>>>>>>>>>
And this logical net *proves* how Science is *shallow*. They have all
those stories about our past, without even thinking to resolve the
"carnassial" problem. You cannot eat meat without carnassials, or
without fire. Full stop.
Sharp cutting into slices, then chewing like bubblegum.
Not for humans, as we can see.Of course, you only lack the evidence for this claim.We ate shellfish raw.
Cold-blooded oysters, crab, shrimp were not cooked, because their flesh was never hot.
Warm blooded rabbits, antelope, pigs were cooked to bring the meat back to life-like temperature, cold meat did not taste as good. Those who cooked thin sliced meat reduced food-borne parasites so their progeny were healthier.
Nobody ate big chunks of meat, cooked or uncooked, not edible. Mammoth was thin-sliced.
DD
We ate everything raw.
Since tetrapods left the sea, raw food was the norm.
Because humans quit swinging and started cutting.
Cats like my hamburgers well done.Exactly. Because if you are used to raw meat taste, you will not like >>>> burned meat better.We burned surroundings for safety, not for food.There is no forest where Geladas live, there is only grass. And
What house? We were living on rocky sea cliffs,But, this burning gave us food. So, this is how we acquired eating >>>>>>>>>> burned food.
Silly fantasy. You burn your house down and then eat the burnt rats?
Geladas don't burn down the forest.
Geladas eat grass.
Right, they don't burn it to make it taste better
Only if you are used to burned meat from the veryYou have very good imagination, but this is pure bollocks.
beginning.
As I said, humans cooked terrestrial meat to return it to living temperature, but didn't cook seafood since it was coldblooded.
Thanks, a good scientist uses imagination as a software tool, like language.
Hard: obsidian
Tough: rubber
Hard and tough: steel
rocks don't burn, and
if they would burn, we still can jump into sea.
--
https://groups.google.com/g/human-evolution
human-e...@googlegroups.com
On Monday, November 22, 2021 at 11:40:08 AM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
On 22.11.2021. 15:10, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Monday, November 22, 2021 at 2:47:55 AM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote: >>>> On 21.11.2021. 18:35, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:Of meat eating.
Of what?On Sunday, November 21, 2021 at 12:05:07 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:I would start from the beginning.
On 20.11.2021. 22:30, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote: >>>>>>> On Saturday, November 20, 2021 at 9:35:09 AM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
We are talking about first apes,On 20.11.2021. 8:16, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Friday, November 19, 2021 at 2:45:04 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
I believe people have problems grasping this. Not every stone is the >>>>>>>> same. Some stones easily shutter, some don't. Flint easily shutters. I >>>>>>>> believe that basalt stones don't. You can crack nuts with those that >>>>>>>> don't, but those don't produce sharp edges, those that shutter produce >>>>>>>> sharp edges. So, you cannot cut meat with a stone. Those that don't >>>>>>>> shutter aren't sharp, those that shutter are sharp, but can leave stoneOn 19.11.2021. 8:07, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On Thursday, November 18, 2021 at 1:43:07 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
But, for god's sake, why would I compare natural shells to metal >>>>>>>>>> knives? Yes, today we are using metal knives and not natural shells, >>>>>>>>>> this isn't a question. The question we are trying to answer in this newsOn 18.11.2021. 10:08, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Wednesday, November 17, 2021 at 4:59:14 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:Just the other way around, every shellfish, broken on any way, is very
On 17.11.2021. 22:08, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:Not so sharp. Conchoidal fracture of flint is much sharper than broken clam.
On Wednesday, November 17, 2021 at 1:29:22 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
On 17.11.2021. 8:02, littor...@gmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Only imbeciles believe their ancestors could never have slept on water.
Stone tools have sharp edge. This is like broken shellfish. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
On topic:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/11/211111154244.htm
It's well possible that tool use & speech co-evolved (late-Pleistocene?):
both find their origin partly in our Pleistocene shellfish-diving past:
-stone tool use for opening shells, cf sea-otters, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -voluntary breathing for shallow-diving,
-large brain thanks to seafood, e.g. DHA,
-lip-tongue-throat movemensts for suction feeding. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Google
"speech language origins PPT verhaegen".
sharp.
You are comparing natural shell to knapped stone?
group is, how all this *started*. Why we *started* to knap stones in the
first place? We just saw stones around, and decided, why wouldn't we >>>>>>>>>> knap them, just for fun?
Stones as hammers against stone anvils sometimes shatter producing sharp edges. The nut meat is still edible.
If the alternative was cracking nuts with teeth, risking broken jaw or teeth, hammering is more efficient.
particles in meat.
I am talking about eating meat. Primates don't eat meat, we do. Hence >>>>>>>> our diet moved in the direction of meat eating.
What bloody "poor stone"? Every stone that can be sharp is "poor >>>>>>>> stone", this goes hand in hand. It is sharp because it is "poor". >>>>>>>>> Knapped flakes are made ofOn the other hand, from my experience, the flint that yo can find >>>>>>>>>>>> in nature isn't very sharp. I wouldn't say that you encounter a lot ofhttps://youtu.be/iv25o_zzqrE
conchoidally fractured flint in nature. And even if there is one around,
why would you have it in your hand? On the other hand, if you are eating
shellfish, you handle sharp broken shellfish all the time, and they are
in your hands.
Your objection is very nice example of how somebody can be biased in
his interpretation of nature.
Probably not.
You completely ignored the obvious, and
you extremely emphasized some sideway thing.
So, the
main thing in stone tools isn't to be used as a hammer. Stone (unmade,Molar hammering crushing cracking
raw) can be used as a hammer, you don't need stone tool for that. Stone
tools are made to be used as a cutting device. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The paradox is that for cutting (sharp edge), you need to have sharp
edge. So, the idea originated in the usage of sharp edges. But, the
Oldowan tools are made out of pebbles, and pebbles are about the
bluntest objects in nature, not the sharpest. So, the development of the
usage of sharp edges should happen before Oldowan stone tools. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -
Carnassial. shearing
Incisor gnawing
Canine tearing, piercing
Homo replicated these functions by hand using various materials >>>>>>>>>>>>>> No way. Which materials?
Sticks and stones mostly.
Hammerstone & anvil stone/log replaced big molars, allowed processing extremely tough nuts.Who cares. We do have Oldowan stone tools for 2.5 my. We used it for
dealing with wood, hides, we weren't vegetarians.
Have you ever eaten nuts?
Nut cracking, clam cracking...
Hm, why would we stab the prey if we cannot eat it, for god's sake?Antlers? With antlers you can pierce. But, what's the use of piercing?
Stabbing to kill prey. Replace fangs with spear allows further distance from prey's defensive weapons.
Stab, kill, slice, eat.
Knapped stone flakes slice thin meat.And leave stone particles in that meat.
Only if hit against hard bone. If slicing flesh, no chips unless flake is from poor stone.
This is why I did acquire the trait of thick enamel, precisely for >>>>>>>> this reason.brittle type of stones, otherwise you wouldn't be able to knap it. >>>>>>>>>> Brittle, it means that it shutters
you mean splinters? Only if hit hard against bone or if stone flake is from poor stone source.
easily. I wouldn't eat meat with
those tiny particles in it, if I want my teeth to remain whole. >>>>>>>>>Then don't eat gritty shellfish, lots of quartzite grit. I ate some from a tin can, so much sandy grit.
Like orangutans, who never eat shellfish?
I'm talking about human ancestors who had complex language software tool associated with complex stick and stone artifacts hardware tools.
Cutting, yes. Inedible meat.Perfect for cutting meat.who didn't look like orangutans, but,It is brittle glass. It would cut throat.
like us. They had thick enamel, this is why orangutan *still* has thick >>>>>> enamel. This is a vestigial trait.
Orangutans eat hard nuts and fruits, gorillas don't, chimps and humans use tools but chewed a lot until milling advanced.
Of course I don't, because (ground) metal doesn't shutter.Try it yourself.Thin slices.If you don't have carnassials you cannot eat what you pierced. >>>>>>>>>>>
A sharp obsidian flake slices thinly through flesh & sinew. >>>>>>>>>>>> No way that I would eat this flesh.
Tartare.
Are you crazy? Ok, if this
obsidian is made industrially, and I have a guarantee that everything is
alright with it, it is grounded smoothly. Obsidian used by our ancestors
isn't anything like that.
Shearing. Stone? It will break your teeth?
What? Obsidian slicing meat.
Obsidian? It will cut your
throat.
Don't eat stone, eat meat.
You don't understand meat processing & eating. Do you worry about metal or plastic fragments & particles when using fork & spoon?
Obsidian is brittle laterally (bending to the side), but perfect cutting straight through meat.
Or anything.Then you pushed the blade laterally or hit the bone and pried or twisted the blade.Shatter? Flint knives don't shatter cutting meat.It will (from time to time), it is brittle. It is enough to shatter >>>>>> once, to brake my tooth.
Have you ever touched obsidian?
You seem very uninformed about it.
Did you confuse it with something else?
https://youtu.be/YSd413Xrk_QIt is you
who doesn't understand anything. By grinding hematite you get ochre. Red
ochre is the evidence that we ground metal. Metal becomes sharp by >>>>>>>> grinding, but it doesn't shutter after that. Good morning.
Metal? Now, that's much better, but it only came in Middle >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Paleolithic, along with Homo sapiens. This is why Homo sapiens has
changes in chopping apparatus. With metal we chopped off meat fromThin-sliced & ground-up meat, chewing gum style.
carcass. But, that's about it.
No, before the first tools, we had to have fire. Fire was the tool to
soften up meat. Why would you pierce an animal, if you cannot eat its
meat? For hides? No. Before Oldowan tools we had to have fire, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> otherwise, why would we hunt animals in the first place? >>>>>>>>>>>>>
And this logical net *proves* how Science is *shallow*. They have all
those stories about our past, without even thinking to resolve the
"carnassial" problem. You cannot eat meat without carnassials, or
without fire. Full stop.
Sharp cutting into slices, then chewing like bubblegum.
Not for humans, as we can see.Of course, you only lack the evidence for this claim.We ate shellfish raw.
Cold-blooded oysters, crab, shrimp were not cooked, because their flesh was never hot.
Warm blooded rabbits, antelope, pigs were cooked to bring the meat back to life-like temperature, cold meat did not taste as good. Those who cooked thin sliced meat reduced food-borne parasites so their progeny were healthier.
Nobody ate big chunks of meat, cooked or uncooked, not edible. Mammoth was thin-sliced.
DD
We ate everything raw.
Since tetrapods left the sea, raw food was the norm.
Because humans quit swinging and started cutting.
Cats like my hamburgers well done.Exactly. Because if you are used to raw meat taste, you will not like >>>>>> burned meat better.We burned surroundings for safety, not for food.There is no forest where Geladas live, there is only grass. And >>>>>>>> Geladas eat grass.
What house? We were living on rocky sea cliffs,But, this burning gave us food. So, this is how we acquired eating >>>>>>>>>>>> burned food.
Silly fantasy. You burn your house down and then eat the burnt rats?
Geladas don't burn down the forest.
Right, they don't burn it to make it taste better
Only if you are used to burned meat from the veryYou have very good imagination, but this is pure bollocks.
beginning.
As I said, humans cooked terrestrial meat to return it to living temperature, but didn't cook seafood since it was coldblooded.
Thanks, a good scientist uses imagination as a software tool, like language.
Hard: obsidian
Tough: rubber
Hard and tough: steel
rocks don't burn, and
if they would burn, we still can jump into sea.
On 22.11.2021. 22:39, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:Be logical. To make an obsidian blade, one must knap it from the side. You can't knap it with meat, it won't chip off, it will cut through.
On Monday, November 22, 2021 at 11:40:08 AM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
On 22.11.2021. 15:10, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Monday, November 22, 2021 at 2:47:55 AM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote: >>>> On 21.11.2021. 18:35, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote: >>>>> On Sunday, November 21, 2021 at 12:05:07 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:Of meat eating.
Of what?I would start from the beginning.On 20.11.2021. 22:30, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote: >>>>>>> On Saturday, November 20, 2021 at 9:35:09 AM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
We are talking about first apes,On 20.11.2021. 8:16, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Friday, November 19, 2021 at 2:45:04 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
I believe people have problems grasping this. Not every stone is the >>>>>>>> same. Some stones easily shutter, some don't. Flint easily shutters. IOn 19.11.2021. 8:07, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Thursday, November 18, 2021 at 1:43:07 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:But, for god's sake, why would I compare natural shells to metal >>>>>>>>>> knives? Yes, today we are using metal knives and not natural shells,
On 18.11.2021. 10:08, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Wednesday, November 17, 2021 at 4:59:14 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:Just the other way around, every shellfish, broken on any way, is very
On 17.11.2021. 22:08, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:Not so sharp. Conchoidal fracture of flint is much sharper than broken clam.
On Wednesday, November 17, 2021 at 1:29:22 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
On 17.11.2021. 8:02, littor...@gmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Only imbeciles believe their ancestors could never have slept on water.
Stone tools have sharp edge. This is like broken shellfish. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
On topic:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/11/211111154244.htm
It's well possible that tool use & speech co-evolved (late-Pleistocene?):
both find their origin partly in our Pleistocene shellfish-diving past:
-stone tool use for opening shells, cf sea-otters, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -voluntary breathing for shallow-diving,
-large brain thanks to seafood, e.g. DHA,
-lip-tongue-throat movemensts for suction feeding. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Google
"speech language origins PPT verhaegen".
sharp.
You are comparing natural shell to knapped stone?
this isn't a question. The question we are trying to answer in this news
group is, how all this *started*. Why we *started* to knap stones in the
first place? We just saw stones around, and decided, why wouldn't we
knap them, just for fun?
Stones as hammers against stone anvils sometimes shatter producing sharp edges. The nut meat is still edible.
If the alternative was cracking nuts with teeth, risking broken jaw or teeth, hammering is more efficient.
believe that basalt stones don't. You can crack nuts with those that >>>>>>>> don't, but those don't produce sharp edges, those that shutter produce
sharp edges. So, you cannot cut meat with a stone. Those that don't >>>>>>>> shutter aren't sharp, those that shutter are sharp, but can leave stone
particles in meat.
I am talking about eating meat. Primates don't eat meat, we do. Hence
our diet moved in the direction of meat eating.
What bloody "poor stone"? Every stone that can be sharp is "poor >>>>>>>> stone", this goes hand in hand. It is sharp because it is "poor". >>>>>>>>> Knapped flakes are made ofOn the other hand, from my experience, the flint that yo can find >>>>>>>>>>>> in nature isn't very sharp. I wouldn't say that you encounter a lot ofhttps://youtu.be/iv25o_zzqrE
conchoidally fractured flint in nature. And even if there is one around,
why would you have it in your hand? On the other hand, if you are eating
shellfish, you handle sharp broken shellfish all the time, and they are
in your hands.
Your objection is very nice example of how somebody can be biased in
his interpretation of nature.
Probably not.
You completely ignored the obvious, and
you extremely emphasized some sideway thing.
So, the
No way. Which materials?main thing in stone tools isn't to be used as a hammer. Stone (unmade,-
raw) can be used as a hammer, you don't need stone tool for that. Stone
tools are made to be used as a cutting device. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The paradox is that for cutting (sharp edge), you need to have sharp
edge. So, the idea originated in the usage of sharp edges. But, the
Oldowan tools are made out of pebbles, and pebbles are about the
bluntest objects in nature, not the sharpest. So, the development of the
usage of sharp edges should happen before Oldowan stone tools.
Molar hammering crushing cracking
Carnassial. shearing
Incisor gnawing
Canine tearing, piercing
Homo replicated these functions by hand using various materials
Sticks and stones mostly.
Hammerstone & anvil stone/log replaced big molars, allowed processing extremely tough nuts.Who cares. We do have Oldowan stone tools for 2.5 my. We used it for
dealing with wood, hides, we weren't vegetarians.
Have you ever eaten nuts?
Nut cracking, clam cracking...
Hm, why would we stab the prey if we cannot eat it, for god's sake?Antlers? With antlers you can pierce. But, what's the use of piercing?
Stabbing to kill prey. Replace fangs with spear allows further distance from prey's defensive weapons.
Stab, kill, slice, eat.
Knapped stone flakes slice thin meat.And leave stone particles in that meat.
Only if hit against hard bone. If slicing flesh, no chips unless flake is from poor stone.
This is why I did acquire the trait of thick enamel, precisely for >>>>>>>> this reason.brittle type of stones, otherwise you wouldn't be able to knap it. >>>>>>>>>> Brittle, it means that it shutters
you mean splinters? Only if hit hard against bone or if stone flake is from poor stone source.
easily. I wouldn't eat meat with
those tiny particles in it, if I want my teeth to remain whole. >>>>>>>>>Then don't eat gritty shellfish, lots of quartzite grit. I ate some from a tin can, so much sandy grit.
Like orangutans, who never eat shellfish?
I'm talking about human ancestors who had complex language software tool associated with complex stick and stone artifacts hardware tools.
Cutting, yes. Inedible meat.Perfect for cutting meat.who didn't look like orangutans, but,It is brittle glass. It would cut throat.
like us. They had thick enamel, this is why orangutan *still* has thick
enamel. This is a vestigial trait.
Orangutans eat hard nuts and fruits, gorillas don't, chimps and humans use tools but chewed a lot until milling advanced.
Of course I don't, because (ground) metal doesn't shutter.Try it yourself.Thin slices.If you don't have carnassials you cannot eat what you pierced. >>>>>>>>>>>
A sharp obsidian flake slices thinly through flesh & sinew. >>>>>>>>>>>> No way that I would eat this flesh.
Tartare.
Are you crazy? Ok, if this
obsidian is made industrially, and I have a guarantee that everything is
alright with it, it is grounded smoothly. Obsidian used by our ancestors
isn't anything like that.
Shearing. Stone? It will break your teeth?
What? Obsidian slicing meat.
Obsidian? It will cut your
throat.
Don't eat stone, eat meat.
You don't understand meat processing & eating. Do you worry about metal or plastic fragments & particles when using fork & spoon?
Obsidian is brittle laterally (bending to the side), but perfect cutting straight through meat.
Or anything.Then you pushed the blade laterally or hit the bone and pried or twisted the blade.Shatter? Flint knives don't shatter cutting meat.It will (from time to time), it is brittle. It is enough to shatter >>>>>> once, to brake my tooth.
Have you ever touched obsidian?No, I never touched obsidian, I really am uninformed about it. I think
You seem very uninformed about it.
Did you confuse it with something else?
that it is a form of glass. This is why it is so sharp.
I am absolutely convinced that it is gravely dangerous to eat meat cut
by Stone Age obsidian tools.
https://youtu.be/YSd413Xrk_QIt is you
who doesn't understand anything. By grinding hematite you get ochre. Red
ochre is the evidence that we ground metal. Metal becomes sharp by >>>>>>>> grinding, but it doesn't shutter after that. Good morning. >>>>>>>>>>> Metal? Now, that's much better, but it only came in Middle >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Paleolithic, along with Homo sapiens. This is why Homo sapiens has
changes in chopping apparatus. With metal we chopped off meat fromThin-sliced & ground-up meat, chewing gum style.
carcass. But, that's about it.
No, before the first tools, we had to have fire. Fire was the tool to
soften up meat. Why would you pierce an animal, if you cannot eat its
meat? For hides? No. Before Oldowan tools we had to have fire, >>>>>>>>>>>>>> otherwise, why would we hunt animals in the first place? >>>>>>>>>>>>>
And this logical net *proves* how Science is *shallow*. They have all
those stories about our past, without even thinking to resolve the
"carnassial" problem. You cannot eat meat without carnassials, or
without fire. Full stop.
Sharp cutting into slices, then chewing like bubblegum.
Not for humans, as we can see.Of course, you only lack the evidence for this claim.We ate shellfish raw.
Cold-blooded oysters, crab, shrimp were not cooked, because their flesh was never hot.
Warm blooded rabbits, antelope, pigs were cooked to bring the meat back to life-like temperature, cold meat did not taste as good. Those who cooked thin sliced meat reduced food-borne parasites so their progeny were healthier.
Nobody ate big chunks of meat, cooked or uncooked, not edible. Mammoth was thin-sliced.
DD
We ate everything raw.
Since tetrapods left the sea, raw food was the norm.
Because humans quit swinging and started cutting.
Cats like my hamburgers well done.Exactly. Because if you are used to raw meat taste, you will not like >>>>>> burned meat better.We burned surroundings for safety, not for food.There is no forest where Geladas live, there is only grass. And >>>>>>>> Geladas eat grass.
What house? We were living on rocky sea cliffs,But, this burning gave us food. So, this is how we acquired eating
burned food.
Silly fantasy. You burn your house down and then eat the burnt rats?
Geladas don't burn down the forest.
Right, they don't burn it to make it taste better
Only if you are used to burned meat from the veryYou have very good imagination, but this is pure bollocks.
beginning.
As I said, humans cooked terrestrial meat to return it to living temperature, but didn't cook seafood since it was coldblooded.
Thanks, a good scientist uses imagination as a software tool, like language.
Hard: obsidian
Tough: rubber
Hard and tough: steel
rocks don't burn, and
if they would burn, we still can jump into sea.
--
https://groups.google.com/g/human-evolution
human-e...@googlegroups.com
On Monday, November 22, 2021 at 8:09:06 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
On 22.11.2021. 22:39, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:Be logical. To make an obsidian blade, one must knap it from the side. You can't knap it with meat, it won't chip off, it will cut through.
On Monday, November 22, 2021 at 11:40:08 AM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote: >>>> On 22.11.2021. 15:10, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:No, I never touched obsidian, I really am uninformed about it. I think
On Monday, November 22, 2021 at 2:47:55 AM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote: >>>>>> On 21.11.2021. 18:35, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote: >>>>>>> On Sunday, November 21, 2021 at 12:05:07 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:Of meat eating.
Of what?I would start from the beginning.On 20.11.2021. 22:30, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Saturday, November 20, 2021 at 9:35:09 AM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
We are talking about first apes,On 20.11.2021. 8:16, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On Friday, November 19, 2021 at 2:45:04 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
I believe people have problems grasping this. Not every stone is the >>>>>>>>>> same. Some stones easily shutter, some don't. Flint easily shutters. IOn 19.11.2021. 8:07, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Thursday, November 18, 2021 at 1:43:07 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:But, for god's sake, why would I compare natural shells to metal >>>>>>>>>>>> knives? Yes, today we are using metal knives and not natural shells,
On 18.11.2021. 10:08, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Wednesday, November 17, 2021 at 4:59:14 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:Just the other way around, every shellfish, broken on any way, is very
On 17.11.2021. 22:08, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:Not so sharp. Conchoidal fracture of flint is much sharper than broken clam.
On Wednesday, November 17, 2021 at 1:29:22 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
On 17.11.2021. 8:02, littor...@gmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Only imbeciles believe their ancestors could never have slept on water.
Stone tools have sharp edge. This is like broken shellfish. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
On topic:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/11/211111154244.htm
It's well possible that tool use & speech co-evolved (late-Pleistocene?):
both find their origin partly in our Pleistocene shellfish-diving past:
-stone tool use for opening shells, cf sea-otters, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -voluntary breathing for shallow-diving, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -large brain thanks to seafood, e.g. DHA, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -lip-tongue-throat movemensts for suction feeding. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Google
"speech language origins PPT verhaegen".
sharp.
You are comparing natural shell to knapped stone?
this isn't a question. The question we are trying to answer in this news
group is, how all this *started*. Why we *started* to knap stones in the
first place? We just saw stones around, and decided, why wouldn't we
knap them, just for fun?
Stones as hammers against stone anvils sometimes shatter producing sharp edges. The nut meat is still edible.
If the alternative was cracking nuts with teeth, risking broken jaw or teeth, hammering is more efficient.
believe that basalt stones don't. You can crack nuts with those that >>>>>>>>>> don't, but those don't produce sharp edges, those that shutter produce
sharp edges. So, you cannot cut meat with a stone. Those that don't >>>>>>>>>> shutter aren't sharp, those that shutter are sharp, but can leave stone
particles in meat.
I am talking about eating meat. Primates don't eat meat, we do. Hence
our diet moved in the direction of meat eating.
What bloody "poor stone"? Every stone that can be sharp is "poor >>>>>>>>>> stone", this goes hand in hand. It is sharp because it is "poor". >>>>>>>>>>> Knapped flakes are made ofOn the other hand, from my experience, the flint that yo can find >>>>>>>>>>>>>> in nature isn't very sharp. I wouldn't say that you encounter a lot ofhttps://youtu.be/iv25o_zzqrE
conchoidally fractured flint in nature. And even if there is one around,
why would you have it in your hand? On the other hand, if you are eating
shellfish, you handle sharp broken shellfish all the time, and they are
in your hands.
Your objection is very nice example of how somebody can be biased in
his interpretation of nature.
Probably not.
You completely ignored the obvious, and
you extremely emphasized some sideway thing.
So, the
No way. Which materials?main thing in stone tools isn't to be used as a hammer. Stone (unmade,-
raw) can be used as a hammer, you don't need stone tool for that. Stone
tools are made to be used as a cutting device. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The paradox is that for cutting (sharp edge), you need to have sharp
edge. So, the idea originated in the usage of sharp edges. But, the
Oldowan tools are made out of pebbles, and pebbles are about the
bluntest objects in nature, not the sharpest. So, the development of the
usage of sharp edges should happen before Oldowan stone tools.
Molar hammering crushing cracking
Carnassial. shearing
Incisor gnawing
Canine tearing, piercing
Homo replicated these functions by hand using various materials
Sticks and stones mostly.
Hammerstone & anvil stone/log replaced big molars, allowed processing extremely tough nuts.Who cares. We do have Oldowan stone tools for 2.5 my. We used it for
dealing with wood, hides, we weren't vegetarians.
Have you ever eaten nuts?
Nut cracking, clam cracking...
Hm, why would we stab the prey if we cannot eat it, for god's sake?Antlers? With antlers you can pierce. But, what's the use of piercing?
Stabbing to kill prey. Replace fangs with spear allows further distance from prey's defensive weapons.
Stab, kill, slice, eat.
Knapped stone flakes slice thin meat.And leave stone particles in that meat.
Only if hit against hard bone. If slicing flesh, no chips unless flake is from poor stone.
This is why I did acquire the trait of thick enamel, precisely for >>>>>>>>>> this reason.brittle type of stones, otherwise you wouldn't be able to knap it. >>>>>>>>>>>> Brittle, it means that it shutters
you mean splinters? Only if hit hard against bone or if stone flake is from poor stone source.
easily. I wouldn't eat meat with
those tiny particles in it, if I want my teeth to remain whole. >>>>>>>>>>>Then don't eat gritty shellfish, lots of quartzite grit. I ate some from a tin can, so much sandy grit.
Like orangutans, who never eat shellfish?
I'm talking about human ancestors who had complex language software tool associated with complex stick and stone artifacts hardware tools.
Cutting, yes. Inedible meat.Perfect for cutting meat.who didn't look like orangutans, but,It is brittle glass. It would cut throat.
like us. They had thick enamel, this is why orangutan *still* has thick
enamel. This is a vestigial trait.
Orangutans eat hard nuts and fruits, gorillas don't, chimps and humans use tools but chewed a lot until milling advanced.
Of course I don't, because (ground) metal doesn't shutter.Try it yourself.Thin slices.If you don't have carnassials you cannot eat what you pierced. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
A sharp obsidian flake slices thinly through flesh & sinew. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> No way that I would eat this flesh.
Tartare.
Are you crazy? Ok, if this
obsidian is made industrially, and I have a guarantee that everything is
alright with it, it is grounded smoothly. Obsidian used by our ancestors
isn't anything like that.
Shearing. Stone? It will break your teeth?
What? Obsidian slicing meat.
Obsidian? It will cut your
throat.
Don't eat stone, eat meat.
You don't understand meat processing & eating. Do you worry about metal or plastic fragments & particles when using fork & spoon?
Obsidian is brittle laterally (bending to the side), but perfect cutting straight through meat.
Or anything.Then you pushed the blade laterally or hit the bone and pried or twisted the blade.Shatter? Flint knives don't shatter cutting meat.It will (from time to time), it is brittle. It is enough to shatter >>>>>>>> once, to brake my tooth.
Have you ever touched obsidian?
You seem very uninformed about it.
Did you confuse it with something else?
that it is a form of glass. This is why it is so sharp.
I am absolutely convinced that it is gravely dangerous to eat meat cut
by Stone Age obsidian tools.
https://youtu.be/YSd413Xrk_QIt is you
who doesn't understand anything. By grinding hematite you get ochre. Red
ochre is the evidence that we ground metal. Metal becomes sharp by >>>>>>>>>> grinding, but it doesn't shutter after that. Good morning. >>>>>>>>>>>>> Metal? Now, that's much better, but it only came in Middle >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Paleolithic, along with Homo sapiens. This is why Homo sapiens has
changes in chopping apparatus. With metal we chopped off meat fromThin-sliced & ground-up meat, chewing gum style. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
carcass. But, that's about it.
No, before the first tools, we had to have fire. Fire was the tool to
soften up meat. Why would you pierce an animal, if you cannot eat its
meat? For hides? No. Before Oldowan tools we had to have fire, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> otherwise, why would we hunt animals in the first place? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
And this logical net *proves* how Science is *shallow*. They have all
those stories about our past, without even thinking to resolve the
"carnassial" problem. You cannot eat meat without carnassials, or
without fire. Full stop.
Sharp cutting into slices, then chewing like bubblegum.
Not for humans, as we can see.Of course, you only lack the evidence for this claim.We ate shellfish raw.
Cold-blooded oysters, crab, shrimp were not cooked, because their flesh was never hot.
Warm blooded rabbits, antelope, pigs were cooked to bring the meat back to life-like temperature, cold meat did not taste as good. Those who cooked thin sliced meat reduced food-borne parasites so their progeny were healthier.
Nobody ate big chunks of meat, cooked or uncooked, not edible. Mammoth was thin-sliced.
DD
We ate everything raw.
Since tetrapods left the sea, raw food was the norm.
Because humans quit swinging and started cutting.
Cats like my hamburgers well done.Exactly. Because if you are used to raw meat taste, you will not like >>>>>>>> burned meat better.We burned surroundings for safety, not for food.There is no forest where Geladas live, there is only grass. And >>>>>>>>>> Geladas eat grass.
What house? We were living on rocky sea cliffs,But, this burning gave us food. So, this is how we acquired eating
burned food.
Silly fantasy. You burn your house down and then eat the burnt rats?
Geladas don't burn down the forest.
Right, they don't burn it to make it taste better
Only if you are used to burned meat from the veryYou have very good imagination, but this is pure bollocks.
beginning.
As I said, humans cooked terrestrial meat to return it to living temperature, but didn't cook seafood since it was coldblooded.
Thanks, a good scientist uses imagination as a software tool, like language.
Hard: obsidian
Tough: rubber
Hard and tough: steel
rocks don't burn, and
if they would burn, we still can jump into sea.
On 23.11.2021. 2:39, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:A BULLET TO YOUR BRAIN WOULD DO NO DAMAGE.
On Monday, November 22, 2021 at 8:09:06 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:I don't play Russian roulette. You say, well, there is only 1 chance
On 22.11.2021. 22:39, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:Be logical. To make an obsidian blade, one must knap it from the side. You can't knap it with meat, it won't chip off, it will cut through.
On Monday, November 22, 2021 at 11:40:08 AM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:No, I never touched obsidian, I really am uninformed about it. I think
On 22.11.2021. 15:10, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote: >>>>> On Monday, November 22, 2021 at 2:47:55 AM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
Of meat eating.On 21.11.2021. 18:35, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote: >>>>>>> On Sunday, November 21, 2021 at 12:05:07 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:Of what?
I would start from the beginning.On 20.11.2021. 22:30, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Saturday, November 20, 2021 at 9:35:09 AM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
We are talking about first apes,On 20.11.2021. 8:16, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Friday, November 19, 2021 at 2:45:04 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:I believe people have problems grasping this. Not every stone is the
On 19.11.2021. 8:07, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Thursday, November 18, 2021 at 1:43:07 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:But, for god's sake, why would I compare natural shells to metal >>>>>>>>>>>> knives? Yes, today we are using metal knives and not natural shells,
On 18.11.2021. 10:08, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Wednesday, November 17, 2021 at 4:59:14 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:Just the other way around, every shellfish, broken on any way, is very
On 17.11.2021. 22:08, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Wednesday, November 17, 2021 at 1:29:22 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
On 17.11.2021. 8:02, littor...@gmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Only imbeciles believe their ancestors could never have slept on water.
On topic:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/11/211111154244.htm
It's well possible that tool use & speech co-evolved (late-Pleistocene?):
both find their origin partly in our Pleistocene shellfish-diving past:
-stone tool use for opening shells, cf sea-otters, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -voluntary breathing for shallow-diving, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -large brain thanks to seafood, e.g. DHA, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -lip-tongue-throat movemensts for suction feeding. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Google
"speech language origins PPT verhaegen". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Stone tools have sharp edge. This is like broken shellfish.
Not so sharp. Conchoidal fracture of flint is much sharper than broken clam.
sharp.
You are comparing natural shell to knapped stone?
this isn't a question. The question we are trying to answer in this news
group is, how all this *started*. Why we *started* to knap stones in the
first place? We just saw stones around, and decided, why wouldn't we
knap them, just for fun?
Stones as hammers against stone anvils sometimes shatter producing sharp edges. The nut meat is still edible.
If the alternative was cracking nuts with teeth, risking broken jaw or teeth, hammering is more efficient.
same. Some stones easily shutter, some don't. Flint easily shutters. I
believe that basalt stones don't. You can crack nuts with those that
don't, but those don't produce sharp edges, those that shutter produce
sharp edges. So, you cannot cut meat with a stone. Those that don't
shutter aren't sharp, those that shutter are sharp, but can leave stone
particles in meat.
I am talking about eating meat. Primates don't eat meat, we do. Hence
our diet moved in the direction of meat eating.
What bloody "poor stone"? Every stone that can be sharp is "poor >>>>>>>>>> stone", this goes hand in hand. It is sharp because it is "poor". >>>>>>>>>>> Knapped flakes are made ofOn the other hand, from my experience, the flint that yo can findhttps://youtu.be/iv25o_zzqrE
in nature isn't very sharp. I wouldn't say that you encounter a lot of
conchoidally fractured flint in nature. And even if there is one around,
why would you have it in your hand? On the other hand, if you are eating
shellfish, you handle sharp broken shellfish all the time, and they are
in your hands.
Your objection is very nice example of how somebody can be biased in
his interpretation of nature.
Probably not.
You completely ignored the obvious, and
you extremely emphasized some sideway thing.
So, the
No way. Which materials?main thing in stone tools isn't to be used as a hammer. Stone (unmade,-
raw) can be used as a hammer, you don't need stone tool for that. Stone
tools are made to be used as a cutting device. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The paradox is that for cutting (sharp edge), you need to have sharp
edge. So, the idea originated in the usage of sharp edges. But, the
Oldowan tools are made out of pebbles, and pebbles are about the
bluntest objects in nature, not the sharpest. So, the development of the
usage of sharp edges should happen before Oldowan stone tools.
Molar hammering crushing cracking
Carnassial. shearing
Incisor gnawing
Canine tearing, piercing
Homo replicated these functions by hand using various materials
Sticks and stones mostly.
Hammerstone & anvil stone/log replaced big molars, allowed processing extremely tough nuts.Who cares. We do have Oldowan stone tools for 2.5 my. We used it for
dealing with wood, hides, we weren't vegetarians.
Have you ever eaten nuts?
Nut cracking, clam cracking...
Hm, why would we stab the prey if we cannot eat it, for god's sake?Antlers? With antlers you can pierce. But, what's the use of piercing?
Stabbing to kill prey. Replace fangs with spear allows further distance from prey's defensive weapons.
Stab, kill, slice, eat.
Knapped stone flakes slice thin meat.And leave stone particles in that meat.
Only if hit against hard bone. If slicing flesh, no chips unless flake is from poor stone.
This is why I did acquire the trait of thick enamel, precisely for >>>>>>>>>> this reason.brittle type of stones, otherwise you wouldn't be able to knap it.
Brittle, it means that it shutters
you mean splinters? Only if hit hard against bone or if stone flake is from poor stone source.
easily. I wouldn't eat meat with
those tiny particles in it, if I want my teeth to remain whole. >>>>>>>>>>>Then don't eat gritty shellfish, lots of quartzite grit. I ate some from a tin can, so much sandy grit.
Like orangutans, who never eat shellfish?
I'm talking about human ancestors who had complex language software tool associated with complex stick and stone artifacts hardware tools.
Cutting, yes. Inedible meat.Perfect for cutting meat.who didn't look like orangutans, but,It is brittle glass. It would cut throat.
like us. They had thick enamel, this is why orangutan *still* has thick
enamel. This is a vestigial trait.
Orangutans eat hard nuts and fruits, gorillas don't, chimps and humans use tools but chewed a lot until milling advanced.
Of course I don't, because (ground) metal doesn't shutter.Try it yourself.If you don't have carnassials you cannot eat what you pierced.
Thin slices.
A sharp obsidian flake slices thinly through flesh & sinew. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> No way that I would eat this flesh.
Tartare.
Are you crazy? Ok, if this
obsidian is made industrially, and I have a guarantee that everything is
alright with it, it is grounded smoothly. Obsidian used by our ancestors
isn't anything like that.
Shearing. Stone? It will break your teeth?
What? Obsidian slicing meat.
Obsidian? It will cut your
throat.
Don't eat stone, eat meat.
You don't understand meat processing & eating. Do you worry about metal or plastic fragments & particles when using fork & spoon?
Obsidian is brittle laterally (bending to the side), but perfect cutting straight through meat.
Or anything.Then you pushed the blade laterally or hit the bone and pried or twisted the blade.Shatter? Flint knives don't shatter cutting meat.It will (from time to time), it is brittle. It is enough to shatter >>>>>>>> once, to brake my tooth.
Have you ever touched obsidian?
You seem very uninformed about it.
Did you confuse it with something else?
that it is a form of glass. This is why it is so sharp.
I am absolutely convinced that it is gravely dangerous to eat meat cut
by Stone Age obsidian tools.
https://youtu.be/YSd413Xrk_QIt is you
who doesn't understand anything. By grinding hematite you get ochre. Red
ochre is the evidence that we ground metal. Metal becomes sharp by >>>>>>>>>> grinding, but it doesn't shutter after that. Good morning. >>>>>>>>>>>>> Metal? Now, that's much better, but it only came in Middle >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Paleolithic, along with Homo sapiens. This is why Homo sapiens has
changes in chopping apparatus. With metal we chopped off meat fromThin-sliced & ground-up meat, chewing gum style. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
carcass. But, that's about it.
No, before the first tools, we had to have fire. Fire was the tool to
soften up meat. Why would you pierce an animal, if you cannot eat its
meat? For hides? No. Before Oldowan tools we had to have fire,
otherwise, why would we hunt animals in the first place? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
And this logical net *proves* how Science is *shallow*. They have all
those stories about our past, without even thinking to resolve the
"carnassial" problem. You cannot eat meat without carnassials, or
without fire. Full stop.
Sharp cutting into slices, then chewing like bubblegum.
Not for humans, as we can see.Of course, you only lack the evidence for this claim.We ate shellfish raw.
Cold-blooded oysters, crab, shrimp were not cooked, because their flesh was never hot.
Warm blooded rabbits, antelope, pigs were cooked to bring the meat back to life-like temperature, cold meat did not taste as good. Those who cooked thin sliced meat reduced food-borne parasites so their progeny were healthier.
Nobody ate big chunks of meat, cooked or uncooked, not edible. Mammoth was thin-sliced.
DD
We ate everything raw.
Since tetrapods left the sea, raw food was the norm.
Because humans quit swinging and started cutting.
Cats like my hamburgers well done.Exactly. Because if you are used to raw meat taste, you will not likeWe burned surroundings for safety, not for food.There is no forest where Geladas live, there is only grass. And >>>>>>>>>> Geladas eat grass.
What house? We were living on rocky sea cliffs,But, this burning gave us food. So, this is how we acquired eating
burned food.
Silly fantasy. You burn your house down and then eat the burnt rats?
Geladas don't burn down the forest.
Right, they don't burn it to make it taste better
burned meat better.
Only if you are used to burned meat from the veryYou have very good imagination, but this is pure bollocks.
beginning.
As I said, humans cooked terrestrial meat to return it to living temperature, but didn't cook seafood since it was coldblooded.
Thanks, a good scientist uses imagination as a software tool, like language.
Hard: obsidian
Tough: rubber
Hard and tough: steel
rocks don't burn, and
if they would burn, we still can jump into sea.
in 6 that I'll die, so odds are on my side. I'd rather chop off meat
with my teeth, until people invent hematite.
https://youtu.be/OUZeDOaheUE
--
https://groups.google.com/g/human-evolution
human-e...@googlegroups.com
On Monday, November 22, 2021 at 9:01:09 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
On 23.11.2021. 2:39, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:A BULLET TO YOUR BRAIN WOULD DO NO DAMAGE.
On Monday, November 22, 2021 at 8:09:06 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote: >>>> On 22.11.2021. 22:39, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:I don't play Russian roulette. You say, well, there is only 1 chance
Be logical. To make an obsidian blade, one must knap it from the side. You can't knap it with meat, it won't chip off, it will cut through.On Monday, November 22, 2021 at 11:40:08 AM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:No, I never touched obsidian, I really am uninformed about it. I think >>>> that it is a form of glass. This is why it is so sharp.
On 22.11.2021. 15:10, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote: >>>>>>> On Monday, November 22, 2021 at 2:47:55 AM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
Of meat eating.On 21.11.2021. 18:35, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Sunday, November 21, 2021 at 12:05:07 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:Of what?
I would start from the beginning.On 20.11.2021. 22:30, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On Saturday, November 20, 2021 at 9:35:09 AM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
We are talking about first apes,On 20.11.2021. 8:16, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Friday, November 19, 2021 at 2:45:04 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:I believe people have problems grasping this. Not every stone is the
On 19.11.2021. 8:07, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Thursday, November 18, 2021 at 1:43:07 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:this isn't a question. The question we are trying to answer in this news
On 18.11.2021. 10:08, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Wednesday, November 17, 2021 at 4:59:14 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:Just the other way around, every shellfish, broken on any way, is very
On 17.11.2021. 22:08, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Wednesday, November 17, 2021 at 1:29:22 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
On 17.11.2021. 8:02, littor...@gmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Only imbeciles believe their ancestors could never have slept on water.
On topic:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/11/211111154244.htm
It's well possible that tool use & speech co-evolved (late-Pleistocene?):
both find their origin partly in our Pleistocene shellfish-diving past:
-stone tool use for opening shells, cf sea-otters, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -voluntary breathing for shallow-diving, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -large brain thanks to seafood, e.g. DHA, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -lip-tongue-throat movemensts for suction feeding. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Google
"speech language origins PPT verhaegen". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Stone tools have sharp edge. This is like broken shellfish.
Not so sharp. Conchoidal fracture of flint is much sharper than broken clam.
sharp.
You are comparing natural shell to knapped stone? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> But, for god's sake, why would I compare natural shells to metal >>>>>>>>>>>>>> knives? Yes, today we are using metal knives and not natural shells,
group is, how all this *started*. Why we *started* to knap stones in the
first place? We just saw stones around, and decided, why wouldn't we
knap them, just for fun?
Stones as hammers against stone anvils sometimes shatter producing sharp edges. The nut meat is still edible.
If the alternative was cracking nuts with teeth, risking broken jaw or teeth, hammering is more efficient.
same. Some stones easily shutter, some don't. Flint easily shutters. I
believe that basalt stones don't. You can crack nuts with those that
don't, but those don't produce sharp edges, those that shutter produce
sharp edges. So, you cannot cut meat with a stone. Those that don't
shutter aren't sharp, those that shutter are sharp, but can leave stone
particles in meat.
I am talking about eating meat. Primates don't eat meat, we do. Hence
our diet moved in the direction of meat eating.
What bloody "poor stone"? Every stone that can be sharp is "poor >>>>>>>>>>>> stone", this goes hand in hand. It is sharp because it is "poor". >>>>>>>>>>>>> Knapped flakes are made ofHave you ever eaten nuts?On the other hand, from my experience, the flint that yo can findhttps://youtu.be/iv25o_zzqrE
in nature isn't very sharp. I wouldn't say that you encounter a lot of
conchoidally fractured flint in nature. And even if there is one around,
why would you have it in your hand? On the other hand, if you are eating
shellfish, you handle sharp broken shellfish all the time, and they are
in your hands.
Your objection is very nice example of how somebody can be biased in
his interpretation of nature.
Probably not.
You completely ignored the obvious, and
you extremely emphasized some sideway thing.
So, the
No way. Which materials?main thing in stone tools isn't to be used as a hammer. Stone (unmade,-
raw) can be used as a hammer, you don't need stone tool for that. Stone
tools are made to be used as a cutting device. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The paradox is that for cutting (sharp edge), you need to have sharp
edge. So, the idea originated in the usage of sharp edges. But, the
Oldowan tools are made out of pebbles, and pebbles are about the
bluntest objects in nature, not the sharpest. So, the development of the
usage of sharp edges should happen before Oldowan stone tools.
Molar hammering crushing cracking
Carnassial. shearing
Incisor gnawing
Canine tearing, piercing
Homo replicated these functions by hand using various materials
Sticks and stones mostly.
Hammerstone & anvil stone/log replaced big molars, allowed processing extremely tough nuts.Who cares. We do have Oldowan stone tools for 2.5 my. We used it for
dealing with wood, hides, we weren't vegetarians. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
Nut cracking, clam cracking...
Hm, why would we stab the prey if we cannot eat it, for god's sake?Antlers? With antlers you can pierce. But, what's the use of piercing?
Stabbing to kill prey. Replace fangs with spear allows further distance from prey's defensive weapons.
Stab, kill, slice, eat.
Knapped stone flakes slice thin meat.And leave stone particles in that meat.
Only if hit against hard bone. If slicing flesh, no chips unless flake is from poor stone.
This is why I did acquire the trait of thick enamel, precisely for >>>>>>>>>>>> this reason.brittle type of stones, otherwise you wouldn't be able to knap it.
Brittle, it means that it shutters
you mean splinters? Only if hit hard against bone or if stone flake is from poor stone source.
easily. I wouldn't eat meat with
those tiny particles in it, if I want my teeth to remain whole. >>>>>>>>>>>>>Then don't eat gritty shellfish, lots of quartzite grit. I ate some from a tin can, so much sandy grit.
Like orangutans, who never eat shellfish?
I'm talking about human ancestors who had complex language software tool associated with complex stick and stone artifacts hardware tools.
Cutting, yes. Inedible meat.Perfect for cutting meat.who didn't look like orangutans, but,It is brittle glass. It would cut throat.
like us. They had thick enamel, this is why orangutan *still* has thick
enamel. This is a vestigial trait.
Orangutans eat hard nuts and fruits, gorillas don't, chimps and humans use tools but chewed a lot until milling advanced.
Obsidian is brittle laterally (bending to the side), but perfect cutting straight through meat.Of course I don't, because (ground) metal doesn't shutter. >>>>>>>>>Try it yourself.If you don't have carnassials you cannot eat what you pierced.
Thin slices.
A sharp obsidian flake slices thinly through flesh & sinew. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No way that I would eat this flesh.
Tartare.
Are you crazy? Ok, if this
obsidian is made industrially, and I have a guarantee that everything is
alright with it, it is grounded smoothly. Obsidian used by our ancestors
isn't anything like that.
Shearing. Stone? It will break your teeth?
What? Obsidian slicing meat.
Obsidian? It will cut your
throat.
Don't eat stone, eat meat.
You don't understand meat processing & eating. Do you worry about metal or plastic fragments & particles when using fork & spoon?
Or anything.Then you pushed the blade laterally or hit the bone and pried or twisted the blade.Shatter? Flint knives don't shatter cutting meat.It will (from time to time), it is brittle. It is enough to shatter >>>>>>>>>> once, to brake my tooth.
Have you ever touched obsidian?
You seem very uninformed about it.
Did you confuse it with something else?
I am absolutely convinced that it is gravely dangerous to eat meat cut >>>> by Stone Age obsidian tools.
https://youtu.be/YSd413Xrk_QIt is you
who doesn't understand anything. By grinding hematite you get ochre. Red
ochre is the evidence that we ground metal. Metal becomes sharp by >>>>>>>>>>>> grinding, but it doesn't shutter after that. Good morning. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Metal? Now, that's much better, but it only came in Middle >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Paleolithic, along with Homo sapiens. This is why Homo sapiens has
changes in chopping apparatus. With metal we chopped off meat fromThin-sliced & ground-up meat, chewing gum style. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
carcass. But, that's about it.
No, before the first tools, we had to have fire. Fire was the tool to
soften up meat. Why would you pierce an animal, if you cannot eat its
meat? For hides? No. Before Oldowan tools we had to have fire,
otherwise, why would we hunt animals in the first place? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
And this logical net *proves* how Science is *shallow*. They have all
those stories about our past, without even thinking to resolve the
"carnassial" problem. You cannot eat meat without carnassials, or
without fire. Full stop.
Sharp cutting into slices, then chewing like bubblegum.
Not for humans, as we can see.Of course, you only lack the evidence for this claim.We ate shellfish raw.
Cold-blooded oysters, crab, shrimp were not cooked, because their flesh was never hot.
Warm blooded rabbits, antelope, pigs were cooked to bring the meat back to life-like temperature, cold meat did not taste as good. Those who cooked thin sliced meat reduced food-borne parasites so their progeny were healthier.
Nobody ate big chunks of meat, cooked or uncooked, not edible. Mammoth was thin-sliced.
DD
We ate everything raw.
Since tetrapods left the sea, raw food was the norm.
Because humans quit swinging and started cutting.
Cats like my hamburgers well done.Exactly. Because if you are used to raw meat taste, you will not likeWe burned surroundings for safety, not for food.There is no forest where Geladas live, there is only grass. And >>>>>>>>>>>> Geladas eat grass.
What house? We were living on rocky sea cliffs,But, this burning gave us food. So, this is how we acquired eating
burned food.
Silly fantasy. You burn your house down and then eat the burnt rats?
Geladas don't burn down the forest.
Right, they don't burn it to make it taste better
burned meat better.
Only if you are used to burned meat from the veryYou have very good imagination, but this is pure bollocks.
beginning.
As I said, humans cooked terrestrial meat to return it to living temperature, but didn't cook seafood since it was coldblooded.
Thanks, a good scientist uses imagination as a software tool, like language.
Hard: obsidian
Tough: rubber
Hard and tough: steel
rocks don't burn, and
if they would burn, we still can jump into sea.
in 6 that I'll die, so odds are on my side. I'd rather chop off meat
with my teeth, until people invent hematite.
https://youtu.be/OUZeDOaheUE
On 23.11.2021. 13:03, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:I'll get the obsidian scalpel ready.
On Monday, November 22, 2021 at 9:01:09 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:The bullet would be hurt.
On 23.11.2021. 2:39, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:A BULLET TO YOUR BRAIN WOULD DO NO DAMAGE.
On Monday, November 22, 2021 at 8:09:06 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote: >>>> On 22.11.2021. 22:39, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote: >>>>> On Monday, November 22, 2021 at 11:40:08 AM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:I don't play Russian roulette. You say, well, there is only 1 chance
Be logical. To make an obsidian blade, one must knap it from the side. You can't knap it with meat, it won't chip off, it will cut through.No, I never touched obsidian, I really am uninformed about it. I think >>>> that it is a form of glass. This is why it is so sharp.On 22.11.2021. 15:10, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote: >>>>>>> On Monday, November 22, 2021 at 2:47:55 AM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
Of meat eating.On 21.11.2021. 18:35, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Sunday, November 21, 2021 at 12:05:07 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:Of what?
I would start from the beginning.On 20.11.2021. 22:30, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Saturday, November 20, 2021 at 9:35:09 AM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:We are talking about first apes,
On 20.11.2021. 8:16, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Friday, November 19, 2021 at 2:45:04 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:I believe people have problems grasping this. Not every stone is the
On 19.11.2021. 8:07, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Thursday, November 18, 2021 at 1:43:07 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:knives? Yes, today we are using metal knives and not natural shells,
On 18.11.2021. 10:08, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Wednesday, November 17, 2021 at 4:59:14 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:Just the other way around, every shellfish, broken on any way, is very
On 17.11.2021. 22:08, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Wednesday, November 17, 2021 at 1:29:22 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
On 17.11.2021. 8:02, littor...@gmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Only imbeciles believe their ancestors could never have slept on water.
On topic:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/11/211111154244.htm
It's well possible that tool use & speech co-evolved (late-Pleistocene?):
both find their origin partly in our Pleistocene shellfish-diving past:
-stone tool use for opening shells, cf sea-otters, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -voluntary breathing for shallow-diving, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -large brain thanks to seafood, e.g. DHA, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -lip-tongue-throat movemensts for suction feeding. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Google
"speech language origins PPT verhaegen". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Stone tools have sharp edge. This is like broken shellfish.
Not so sharp. Conchoidal fracture of flint is much sharper than broken clam.
sharp.
You are comparing natural shell to knapped stone? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> But, for god's sake, why would I compare natural shells to metal
this isn't a question. The question we are trying to answer in this news
group is, how all this *started*. Why we *started* to knap stones in the
first place? We just saw stones around, and decided, why wouldn't we
knap them, just for fun?
Stones as hammers against stone anvils sometimes shatter producing sharp edges. The nut meat is still edible.
If the alternative was cracking nuts with teeth, risking broken jaw or teeth, hammering is more efficient.
same. Some stones easily shutter, some don't. Flint easily shutters. I
believe that basalt stones don't. You can crack nuts with those that
don't, but those don't produce sharp edges, those that shutter produce
sharp edges. So, you cannot cut meat with a stone. Those that don't
shutter aren't sharp, those that shutter are sharp, but can leave stone
particles in meat.
I am talking about eating meat. Primates don't eat meat, we do. Hence
our diet moved in the direction of meat eating.
What bloody "poor stone"? Every stone that can be sharp is "poor >>>>>>>>>>>> stone", this goes hand in hand. It is sharp because it is "poor".Have you ever eaten nuts?On the other hand, from my experience, the flint that yo can findhttps://youtu.be/iv25o_zzqrE
in nature isn't very sharp. I wouldn't say that you encounter a lot of
conchoidally fractured flint in nature. And even if there is one around,
why would you have it in your hand? On the other hand, if you are eating
shellfish, you handle sharp broken shellfish all the time, and they are
in your hands.
Your objection is very nice example of how somebody can be biased in
his interpretation of nature.
Probably not.
You completely ignored the obvious, and
you extremely emphasized some sideway thing. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, the
No way. Which materials?main thing in stone tools isn't to be used as a hammer. Stone (unmade,-
raw) can be used as a hammer, you don't need stone tool for that. Stone
tools are made to be used as a cutting device. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The paradox is that for cutting (sharp edge), you need to have sharp
edge. So, the idea originated in the usage of sharp edges. But, the
Oldowan tools are made out of pebbles, and pebbles are about the
bluntest objects in nature, not the sharpest. So, the development of the
usage of sharp edges should happen before Oldowan stone tools.
Molar hammering crushing cracking
Carnassial. shearing
Incisor gnawing
Canine tearing, piercing
Homo replicated these functions by hand using various materials
Sticks and stones mostly.
Hammerstone & anvil stone/log replaced big molars, allowed processing extremely tough nuts.Who cares. We do have Oldowan stone tools for 2.5 my. We used it for
dealing with wood, hides, we weren't vegetarians. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
Nut cracking, clam cracking...
Hm, why would we stab the prey if we cannot eat it, for god's sake?Antlers? With antlers you can pierce. But, what's the use of piercing?
Stabbing to kill prey. Replace fangs with spear allows further distance from prey's defensive weapons.
Stab, kill, slice, eat.
Knapped stone flakes slice thin meat.And leave stone particles in that meat.
Only if hit against hard bone. If slicing flesh, no chips unless flake is from poor stone.
Knapped flakes are made ofThis is why I did acquire the trait of thick enamel, precisely for
brittle type of stones, otherwise you wouldn't be able to knap it.
Brittle, it means that it shutters
you mean splinters? Only if hit hard against bone or if stone flake is from poor stone source.
easily. I wouldn't eat meat with
those tiny particles in it, if I want my teeth to remain whole.
Then don't eat gritty shellfish, lots of quartzite grit. I ate some from a tin can, so much sandy grit.
this reason.
Like orangutans, who never eat shellfish?
I'm talking about human ancestors who had complex language software tool associated with complex stick and stone artifacts hardware tools.
Cutting, yes. Inedible meat.Perfect for cutting meat.who didn't look like orangutans, but,It is brittle glass. It would cut throat.
like us. They had thick enamel, this is why orangutan *still* has thick
enamel. This is a vestigial trait.
Orangutans eat hard nuts and fruits, gorillas don't, chimps and humans use tools but chewed a lot until milling advanced.
Obsidian is brittle laterally (bending to the side), but perfect cutting straight through meat.Of course I don't, because (ground) metal doesn't shutter. >>>>>>>>>Try it yourself.If you don't have carnassials you cannot eat what you pierced.
Thin slices.
A sharp obsidian flake slices thinly through flesh & sinew. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No way that I would eat this flesh.
Tartare.
Are you crazy? Ok, if this
obsidian is made industrially, and I have a guarantee that everything is
alright with it, it is grounded smoothly. Obsidian used by our ancestors
isn't anything like that.
Shearing. Stone? It will break your teeth? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>What? Obsidian slicing meat.
Obsidian? It will cut your
throat.
Don't eat stone, eat meat.
You don't understand meat processing & eating. Do you worry about metal or plastic fragments & particles when using fork & spoon?
Or anything.Then you pushed the blade laterally or hit the bone and pried or twisted the blade.Shatter? Flint knives don't shatter cutting meat.It will (from time to time), it is brittle. It is enough to shatter
once, to brake my tooth.
Have you ever touched obsidian?
You seem very uninformed about it.
Did you confuse it with something else?
I am absolutely convinced that it is gravely dangerous to eat meat cut >>>> by Stone Age obsidian tools.
https://youtu.be/YSd413Xrk_QIt is you
who doesn't understand anything. By grinding hematite you get ochre. Red
ochre is the evidence that we ground metal. Metal becomes sharp by
grinding, but it doesn't shutter after that. Good morning. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Metal? Now, that's much better, but it only came in Middle >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Paleolithic, along with Homo sapiens. This is why Homo sapiens has
changes in chopping apparatus. With metal we chopped off meat fromThin-sliced & ground-up meat, chewing gum style. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
carcass. But, that's about it.
No, before the first tools, we had to have fire. Fire was the tool to
soften up meat. Why would you pierce an animal, if you cannot eat its
meat? For hides? No. Before Oldowan tools we had to have fire,
otherwise, why would we hunt animals in the first place? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
And this logical net *proves* how Science is *shallow*. They have all
those stories about our past, without even thinking to resolve the
"carnassial" problem. You cannot eat meat without carnassials, or
without fire. Full stop.
Sharp cutting into slices, then chewing like bubblegum.
Not for humans, as we can see.Since tetrapods left the sea, raw food was the norm.Of course, you only lack the evidence for this claim. >>>>>>>>>>>We ate shellfish raw.
Cold-blooded oysters, crab, shrimp were not cooked, because their flesh was never hot.
Warm blooded rabbits, antelope, pigs were cooked to bring the meat back to life-like temperature, cold meat did not taste as good. Those who cooked thin sliced meat reduced food-borne parasites so their progeny were healthier.
Nobody ate big chunks of meat, cooked or uncooked, not edible. Mammoth was thin-sliced.
DD
We ate everything raw.
Because humans quit swinging and started cutting.
Cats like my hamburgers well done.Exactly. Because if you are used to raw meat taste, you will not likeWe burned surroundings for safety, not for food. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But, this burning gave us food. So, this is how we acquired eatingThere is no forest where Geladas live, there is only grass. And >>>>>>>>>>>> Geladas eat grass.
What house? We were living on rocky sea cliffs,burned food.
Silly fantasy. You burn your house down and then eat the burnt rats?
Geladas don't burn down the forest.
Right, they don't burn it to make it taste better
burned meat better.
Only if you are used to burned meat from the veryYou have very good imagination, but this is pure bollocks.
beginning.
As I said, humans cooked terrestrial meat to return it to living temperature, but didn't cook seafood since it was coldblooded.
Thanks, a good scientist uses imagination as a software tool, like language.
Hard: obsidian
Tough: rubber
Hard and tough: steel
rocks don't burn, and
if they would burn, we still can jump into sea.
in 6 that I'll die, so odds are on my side. I'd rather chop off meat
with my teeth, until people invent hematite.
https://youtu.be/OUZeDOaheUE
--
https://groups.google.com/g/human-evolution
human-e...@googlegroups.com
On Tuesday, November 23, 2021 at 4:25:27 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
On 23.11.2021. 13:03, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:I'll get the obsidian scalpel ready.
On Monday, November 22, 2021 at 9:01:09 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote: >>>> On 23.11.2021. 2:39, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:The bullet would be hurt.
A BULLET TO YOUR BRAIN WOULD DO NO DAMAGE.On Monday, November 22, 2021 at 8:09:06 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote: >>>>>> On 22.11.2021. 22:39, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote: >>>>>>> On Monday, November 22, 2021 at 11:40:08 AM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:I don't play Russian roulette. You say, well, there is only 1 chance
Be logical. To make an obsidian blade, one must knap it from the side. You can't knap it with meat, it won't chip off, it will cut through.No, I never touched obsidian, I really am uninformed about it. I think >>>>>> that it is a form of glass. This is why it is so sharp.On 22.11.2021. 15:10, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Monday, November 22, 2021 at 2:47:55 AM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
Of meat eating.On 21.11.2021. 18:35, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On Sunday, November 21, 2021 at 12:05:07 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:Of what?
I would start from the beginning.On 20.11.2021. 22:30, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Saturday, November 20, 2021 at 9:35:09 AM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:We are talking about first apes,
On 20.11.2021. 8:16, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Friday, November 19, 2021 at 2:45:04 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:I believe people have problems grasping this. Not every stone is the
On 19.11.2021. 8:07, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Thursday, November 18, 2021 at 1:43:07 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:knives? Yes, today we are using metal knives and not natural shells,
On 18.11.2021. 10:08, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Wednesday, November 17, 2021 at 4:59:14 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:Just the other way around, every shellfish, broken on any way, is very
On 17.11.2021. 22:08, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Wednesday, November 17, 2021 at 1:29:22 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
On 17.11.2021. 8:02, littor...@gmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Only imbeciles believe their ancestors could never have slept on water.
On topic:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/11/211111154244.htm
It's well possible that tool use & speech co-evolved (late-Pleistocene?):
both find their origin partly in our Pleistocene shellfish-diving past:
-stone tool use for opening shells, cf sea-otters, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -voluntary breathing for shallow-diving, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -large brain thanks to seafood, e.g. DHA, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -lip-tongue-throat movemensts for suction feeding. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Google
"speech language origins PPT verhaegen". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Stone tools have sharp edge. This is like broken shellfish.
Not so sharp. Conchoidal fracture of flint is much sharper than broken clam.
sharp.
You are comparing natural shell to knapped stone? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But, for god's sake, why would I compare natural shells to metal
this isn't a question. The question we are trying to answer in this news
group is, how all this *started*. Why we *started* to knap stones in the
first place? We just saw stones around, and decided, why wouldn't we
knap them, just for fun?
Stones as hammers against stone anvils sometimes shatter producing sharp edges. The nut meat is still edible.
If the alternative was cracking nuts with teeth, risking broken jaw or teeth, hammering is more efficient.
same. Some stones easily shutter, some don't. Flint easily shutters. I
believe that basalt stones don't. You can crack nuts with those that
don't, but those don't produce sharp edges, those that shutter produce
sharp edges. So, you cannot cut meat with a stone. Those that don't
shutter aren't sharp, those that shutter are sharp, but can leave stone
particles in meat.
I am talking about eating meat. Primates don't eat meat, we do. Hence
our diet moved in the direction of meat eating. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On the other hand, from my experience, the flint that yo can find
What bloody "poor stone"? Every stone that can be sharp is "poor >>>>>>>>>>>>>> stone", this goes hand in hand. It is sharp because it is "poor".Have you ever eaten nuts?https://youtu.be/iv25o_zzqrEin nature isn't very sharp. I wouldn't say that you encounter a lot of
conchoidally fractured flint in nature. And even if there is one around,
why would you have it in your hand? On the other hand, if you are eating
shellfish, you handle sharp broken shellfish all the time, and they are
in your hands.
Your objection is very nice example of how somebody can be biased in
his interpretation of nature.
Probably not.
You completely ignored the obvious, and
you extremely emphasized some sideway thing. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, the
No way. Which materials?main thing in stone tools isn't to be used as a hammer. Stone (unmade,-
raw) can be used as a hammer, you don't need stone tool for that. Stone
tools are made to be used as a cutting device. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The paradox is that for cutting (sharp edge), you need to have sharp
edge. So, the idea originated in the usage of sharp edges. But, the
Oldowan tools are made out of pebbles, and pebbles are about the
bluntest objects in nature, not the sharpest. So, the development of the
usage of sharp edges should happen before Oldowan stone tools.
Molar hammering crushing cracking
Carnassial. shearing
Incisor gnawing
Canine tearing, piercing
Homo replicated these functions by hand using various materials
Sticks and stones mostly.
Hammerstone & anvil stone/log replaced big molars, allowed processing extremely tough nuts.Who cares. We do have Oldowan stone tools for 2.5 my. We used it for
dealing with wood, hides, we weren't vegetarians. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Nut cracking, clam cracking...
Hm, why would we stab the prey if we cannot eat it, for god's sake?Antlers? With antlers you can pierce. But, what's the use of piercing?
Stabbing to kill prey. Replace fangs with spear allows further distance from prey's defensive weapons.
Stab, kill, slice, eat.
Knapped stone flakes slice thin meat.And leave stone particles in that meat.
Only if hit against hard bone. If slicing flesh, no chips unless flake is from poor stone.
Knapped flakes are made ofThis is why I did acquire the trait of thick enamel, precisely for
brittle type of stones, otherwise you wouldn't be able to knap it.
Brittle, it means that it shutters
you mean splinters? Only if hit hard against bone or if stone flake is from poor stone source.
easily. I wouldn't eat meat with
those tiny particles in it, if I want my teeth to remain whole.
Then don't eat gritty shellfish, lots of quartzite grit. I ate some from a tin can, so much sandy grit.
this reason.
Like orangutans, who never eat shellfish?
I'm talking about human ancestors who had complex language software tool associated with complex stick and stone artifacts hardware tools.
Cutting, yes. Inedible meat.Perfect for cutting meat.who didn't look like orangutans, but,It is brittle glass. It would cut throat.
like us. They had thick enamel, this is why orangutan *still* has thick
enamel. This is a vestigial trait.
Orangutans eat hard nuts and fruits, gorillas don't, chimps and humans use tools but chewed a lot until milling advanced.
Obsidian is brittle laterally (bending to the side), but perfect cutting straight through meat.Of course I don't, because (ground) metal doesn't shutter. >>>>>>>>>>>Try it yourself.If you don't have carnassials you cannot eat what you pierced.
Thin slices.
A sharp obsidian flake slices thinly through flesh & sinew. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No way that I would eat this flesh.
Tartare.
Are you crazy? Ok, if this
obsidian is made industrially, and I have a guarantee that everything is
alright with it, it is grounded smoothly. Obsidian used by our ancestors
isn't anything like that.
Shearing. Stone? It will break your teeth? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>What? Obsidian slicing meat.
Obsidian? It will cut your
throat.
Don't eat stone, eat meat.
You don't understand meat processing & eating. Do you worry about metal or plastic fragments & particles when using fork & spoon?
Or anything.Then you pushed the blade laterally or hit the bone and pried or twisted the blade.Shatter? Flint knives don't shatter cutting meat.It will (from time to time), it is brittle. It is enough to shatter
once, to brake my tooth.
Have you ever touched obsidian?
You seem very uninformed about it.
Did you confuse it with something else?
I am absolutely convinced that it is gravely dangerous to eat meat cut >>>>>> by Stone Age obsidian tools.
https://youtu.be/YSd413Xrk_QIt is you
who doesn't understand anything. By grinding hematite you get ochre. Red
ochre is the evidence that we ground metal. Metal becomes sharp by
grinding, but it doesn't shutter after that. Good morning. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Metal? Now, that's much better, but it only came in Middle >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Paleolithic, along with Homo sapiens. This is why Homo sapiens has
changes in chopping apparatus. With metal we chopped off meat fromThin-sliced & ground-up meat, chewing gum style. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
carcass. But, that's about it.
No, before the first tools, we had to have fire. Fire was the tool to
soften up meat. Why would you pierce an animal, if you cannot eat its
meat? For hides? No. Before Oldowan tools we had to have fire,
otherwise, why would we hunt animals in the first place? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
And this logical net *proves* how Science is *shallow*. They have all
those stories about our past, without even thinking to resolve the
"carnassial" problem. You cannot eat meat without carnassials, or
without fire. Full stop.
Sharp cutting into slices, then chewing like bubblegum.
Not for humans, as we can see.Since tetrapods left the sea, raw food was the norm.Of course, you only lack the evidence for this claim. >>>>>>>>>>>>>We ate shellfish raw.
Cold-blooded oysters, crab, shrimp were not cooked, because their flesh was never hot.
Warm blooded rabbits, antelope, pigs were cooked to bring the meat back to life-like temperature, cold meat did not taste as good. Those who cooked thin sliced meat reduced food-borne parasites so their progeny were healthier.
Nobody ate big chunks of meat, cooked or uncooked, not edible. Mammoth was thin-sliced.
DD
We ate everything raw.
Because humans quit swinging and started cutting.
Cats like my hamburgers well done.Exactly. Because if you are used to raw meat taste, you will not likeWe burned surroundings for safety, not for food. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But, this burning gave us food. So, this is how we acquired eatingThere is no forest where Geladas live, there is only grass. And >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Geladas eat grass.
Geladas don't burn down the forest.What house? We were living on rocky sea cliffs, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>burned food.
Silly fantasy. You burn your house down and then eat the burnt rats?
Right, they don't burn it to make it taste better
burned meat better.
Only if you are used to burned meat from the veryYou have very good imagination, but this is pure bollocks.
beginning.
As I said, humans cooked terrestrial meat to return it to living temperature, but didn't cook seafood since it was coldblooded.
Thanks, a good scientist uses imagination as a software tool, like language.
Hard: obsidian
Tough: rubber
Hard and tough: steel
rocks don't burn, and
if they would burn, we still can jump into sea.
in 6 that I'll die, so odds are on my side. I'd rather chop off meat
with my teeth, until people invent hematite.
https://youtu.be/OUZeDOaheUE
On 24.11.2021. 3:08, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Tuesday, November 23, 2021 at 4:25:27 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:Just careful with that obsidian scalpel, Daud.
On 23.11.2021. 13:03, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:I'll get the obsidian scalpel ready.
On Monday, November 22, 2021 at 9:01:09 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote: >>>> On 23.11.2021. 2:39, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote: >>>>> On Monday, November 22, 2021 at 8:09:06 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:The bullet would be hurt.
A BULLET TO YOUR BRAIN WOULD DO NO DAMAGE.I don't play Russian roulette. You say, well, there is only 1 chance >>>> in 6 that I'll die, so odds are on my side. I'd rather chop off meat >>>> with my teeth, until people invent hematite.On 22.11.2021. 22:39, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote: >>>>>>> On Monday, November 22, 2021 at 11:40:08 AM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:Be logical. To make an obsidian blade, one must knap it from the side. You can't knap it with meat, it won't chip off, it will cut through.
No, I never touched obsidian, I really am uninformed about it. I think >>>>>> that it is a form of glass. This is why it is so sharp.On 22.11.2021. 15:10, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Monday, November 22, 2021 at 2:47:55 AM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
Of meat eating.On 21.11.2021. 18:35, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:Of what?
On Sunday, November 21, 2021 at 12:05:07 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:I would start from the beginning.
On 20.11.2021. 22:30, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Saturday, November 20, 2021 at 9:35:09 AM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:We are talking about first apes,
On 20.11.2021. 8:16, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Friday, November 19, 2021 at 2:45:04 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:I believe people have problems grasping this. Not every stone is the
On 19.11.2021. 8:07, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Thursday, November 18, 2021 at 1:43:07 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:knives? Yes, today we are using metal knives and not natural shells,
On 18.11.2021. 10:08, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Wednesday, November 17, 2021 at 4:59:14 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:Just the other way around, every shellfish, broken on any way, is very
On 17.11.2021. 22:08, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Wednesday, November 17, 2021 at 1:29:22 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
On 17.11.2021. 8:02, littor...@gmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Only imbeciles believe their ancestors could never have slept on water.
On topic:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/11/211111154244.htm
It's well possible that tool use & speech co-evolved (late-Pleistocene?):
both find their origin partly in our Pleistocene shellfish-diving past:
-stone tool use for opening shells, cf sea-otters, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -voluntary breathing for shallow-diving, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -large brain thanks to seafood, e.g. DHA, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -lip-tongue-throat movemensts for suction feeding. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Google
"speech language origins PPT verhaegen". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Stone tools have sharp edge. This is like broken shellfish.
Not so sharp. Conchoidal fracture of flint is much sharper than broken clam.
sharp.
You are comparing natural shell to knapped stone? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But, for god's sake, why would I compare natural shells to metal
this isn't a question. The question we are trying to answer in this news
group is, how all this *started*. Why we *started* to knap stones in the
first place? We just saw stones around, and decided, why wouldn't we
knap them, just for fun?
Stones as hammers against stone anvils sometimes shatter producing sharp edges. The nut meat is still edible.
If the alternative was cracking nuts with teeth, risking broken jaw or teeth, hammering is more efficient.
same. Some stones easily shutter, some don't. Flint easily shutters. I
believe that basalt stones don't. You can crack nuts with those that
don't, but those don't produce sharp edges, those that shutter produce
sharp edges. So, you cannot cut meat with a stone. Those that don't
shutter aren't sharp, those that shutter are sharp, but can leave stone
particles in meat.
I am talking about eating meat. Primates don't eat meat, we do. Hence
our diet moved in the direction of meat eating. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On the other hand, from my experience, the flint that yo can find
What bloody "poor stone"? Every stone that can be sharp is "poorHave you ever eaten nuts?https://youtu.be/iv25o_zzqrEin nature isn't very sharp. I wouldn't say that you encounter a lot of
conchoidally fractured flint in nature. And even if there is one around,
why would you have it in your hand? On the other hand, if you are eating
shellfish, you handle sharp broken shellfish all the time, and they are
in your hands.
Your objection is very nice example of how somebody can be biased in
his interpretation of nature.
Probably not.
You completely ignored the obvious, and
you extremely emphasized some sideway thing. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, the
No way. Which materials?main thing in stone tools isn't to be used as a hammer. Stone (unmade,-
raw) can be used as a hammer, you don't need stone tool for that. Stone
tools are made to be used as a cutting device. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The paradox is that for cutting (sharp edge), you need to have sharp
edge. So, the idea originated in the usage of sharp edges. But, the
Oldowan tools are made out of pebbles, and pebbles are about the
bluntest objects in nature, not the sharpest. So, the development of the
usage of sharp edges should happen before Oldowan stone tools.
Molar hammering crushing cracking
Carnassial. shearing
Incisor gnawing
Canine tearing, piercing
Homo replicated these functions by hand using various materials
Sticks and stones mostly.
Hammerstone & anvil stone/log replaced big molars, allowed processing extremely tough nuts.Who cares. We do have Oldowan stone tools for 2.5 my. We used it for
dealing with wood, hides, we weren't vegetarians. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Nut cracking, clam cracking...
Hm, why would we stab the prey if we cannot eat it, for god's sake?Antlers? With antlers you can pierce. But, what's the use of piercing?
Stabbing to kill prey. Replace fangs with spear allows further distance from prey's defensive weapons.
Stab, kill, slice, eat.
Knapped stone flakes slice thin meat.And leave stone particles in that meat.
Only if hit against hard bone. If slicing flesh, no chips unless flake is from poor stone.
stone", this goes hand in hand. It is sharp because it is "poor".
Knapped flakes are made ofThis is why I did acquire the trait of thick enamel, precisely for
brittle type of stones, otherwise you wouldn't be able to knap it.
Brittle, it means that it shutters
you mean splinters? Only if hit hard against bone or if stone flake is from poor stone source.
easily. I wouldn't eat meat with
those tiny particles in it, if I want my teeth to remain whole.
Then don't eat gritty shellfish, lots of quartzite grit. I ate some from a tin can, so much sandy grit.
this reason.
Like orangutans, who never eat shellfish?
I'm talking about human ancestors who had complex language software tool associated with complex stick and stone artifacts hardware tools.
Cutting, yes. Inedible meat.Perfect for cutting meat.who didn't look like orangutans, but,It is brittle glass. It would cut throat.
like us. They had thick enamel, this is why orangutan *still* has thick
enamel. This is a vestigial trait.
Orangutans eat hard nuts and fruits, gorillas don't, chimps and humans use tools but chewed a lot until milling advanced.
Obsidian is brittle laterally (bending to the side), but perfect cutting straight through meat.Of course I don't, because (ground) metal doesn't shutter. >>>>>>>>>>>Try it yourself.If you don't have carnassials you cannot eat what you pierced.
Thin slices.
A sharp obsidian flake slices thinly through flesh & sinew.No way that I would eat this flesh.
Tartare.
Are you crazy? Ok, if this
obsidian is made industrially, and I have a guarantee that everything is
alright with it, it is grounded smoothly. Obsidian used by our ancestors
isn't anything like that.
Shearing. Stone? It will break your teeth? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>What? Obsidian slicing meat.
Obsidian? It will cut your
throat.
Don't eat stone, eat meat.
You don't understand meat processing & eating. Do you worry about metal or plastic fragments & particles when using fork & spoon?
Or anything.Then you pushed the blade laterally or hit the bone and pried or twisted the blade.Shatter? Flint knives don't shatter cutting meat.It will (from time to time), it is brittle. It is enough to shatter
once, to brake my tooth.
Have you ever touched obsidian?
You seem very uninformed about it.
Did you confuse it with something else?
I am absolutely convinced that it is gravely dangerous to eat meat cut >>>>>> by Stone Age obsidian tools.
Thanks, a good scientist uses imagination as a software tool, like language.https://youtu.be/YSd413Xrk_QIt is you
who doesn't understand anything. By grinding hematite you get ochre. Red
ochre is the evidence that we ground metal. Metal becomes sharp by
grinding, but it doesn't shutter after that. Good morning. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Metal? Now, that's much better, but it only came in Middle >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Paleolithic, along with Homo sapiens. This is why Homo sapiens has
changes in chopping apparatus. With metal we chopped off meat fromThin-sliced & ground-up meat, chewing gum style. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
carcass. But, that's about it.
No, before the first tools, we had to have fire. Fire was the tool to
soften up meat. Why would you pierce an animal, if you cannot eat its
meat? For hides? No. Before Oldowan tools we had to have fire,
otherwise, why would we hunt animals in the first place? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
And this logical net *proves* how Science is *shallow*. They have all
those stories about our past, without even thinking to resolve the
"carnassial" problem. You cannot eat meat without carnassials, or
without fire. Full stop.
Sharp cutting into slices, then chewing like bubblegum. >>>>>>>>>>>
Since tetrapods left the sea, raw food was the norm. >>>>>>>>>>>> Not for humans, as we can see.Of course, you only lack the evidence for this claim. >>>>>>>>>>>>>We ate shellfish raw.
Cold-blooded oysters, crab, shrimp were not cooked, because their flesh was never hot.
Warm blooded rabbits, antelope, pigs were cooked to bring the meat back to life-like temperature, cold meat did not taste as good. Those who cooked thin sliced meat reduced food-borne parasites so their progeny were healthier.
Nobody ate big chunks of meat, cooked or uncooked, not edible. Mammoth was thin-sliced.
DD
We ate everything raw.
Because humans quit swinging and started cutting.
Cats like my hamburgers well done.Exactly. Because if you are used to raw meat taste, you will not likeWe burned surroundings for safety, not for food. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But, this burning gave us food. So, this is how we acquired eatingThere is no forest where Geladas live, there is only grass. And
Geladas don't burn down the forest.What house? We were living on rocky sea cliffs, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>burned food.
Silly fantasy. You burn your house down and then eat the burnt rats?
Geladas eat grass.
Right, they don't burn it to make it taste better
burned meat better.
Only if you are used to burned meat from the veryYou have very good imagination, but this is pure bollocks. >>>>>>>>>
beginning.
As I said, humans cooked terrestrial meat to return it to living temperature, but didn't cook seafood since it was coldblooded.
Hard: obsidian
Tough: rubber
Hard and tough: steel
rocks don't burn, and
if they would burn, we still can jump into sea.
https://youtu.be/OUZeDOaheUE
https://youtu.be/YtZqNAI4pBk
--
https://groups.google.com/g/human-evolution
human-e...@googlegroups.com
On Wednesday, November 24, 2021 at 1:33:53 AM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
On 24.11.2021. 3:08, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Tuesday, November 23, 2021 at 4:25:27 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote: >>>> On 23.11.2021. 13:03, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:Just careful with that obsidian scalpel, Daud.
I'll get the obsidian scalpel ready.On Monday, November 22, 2021 at 9:01:09 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote: >>>>>> On 23.11.2021. 2:39, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote: >>>>>>> On Monday, November 22, 2021 at 8:09:06 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:The bullet would be hurt.
A BULLET TO YOUR BRAIN WOULD DO NO DAMAGE.I don't play Russian roulette. You say, well, there is only 1 chance >>>>>> in 6 that I'll die, so odds are on my side. I'd rather chop off meat >>>>>> with my teeth, until people invent hematite.On 22.11.2021. 22:39, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Monday, November 22, 2021 at 11:40:08 AM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:Be logical. To make an obsidian blade, one must knap it from the side. You can't knap it with meat, it won't chip off, it will cut through.
No, I never touched obsidian, I really am uninformed about it. I think >>>>>>>> that it is a form of glass. This is why it is so sharp.On 22.11.2021. 15:10, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On Monday, November 22, 2021 at 2:47:55 AM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
Of meat eating.On 21.11.2021. 18:35, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:Of what?
On Sunday, November 21, 2021 at 12:05:07 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:I would start from the beginning.
On 20.11.2021. 22:30, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Saturday, November 20, 2021 at 9:35:09 AM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:We are talking about first apes,
On 20.11.2021. 8:16, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Friday, November 19, 2021 at 2:45:04 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:I believe people have problems grasping this. Not every stone is the
On 19.11.2021. 8:07, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Thursday, November 18, 2021 at 1:43:07 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:knives? Yes, today we are using metal knives and not natural shells,
On 18.11.2021. 10:08, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Wednesday, November 17, 2021 at 4:59:14 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:Just the other way around, every shellfish, broken on any way, is very
On 17.11.2021. 22:08, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Wednesday, November 17, 2021 at 1:29:22 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
On 17.11.2021. 8:02, littor...@gmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Only imbeciles believe their ancestors could never have slept on water.
On topic:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/11/211111154244.htm
It's well possible that tool use & speech co-evolved (late-Pleistocene?):
both find their origin partly in our Pleistocene shellfish-diving past:
-stone tool use for opening shells, cf sea-otters, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -voluntary breathing for shallow-diving, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -large brain thanks to seafood, e.g. DHA, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -lip-tongue-throat movemensts for suction feeding. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Google
"speech language origins PPT verhaegen". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Stone tools have sharp edge. This is like broken shellfish.
Not so sharp. Conchoidal fracture of flint is much sharper than broken clam.
sharp.
You are comparing natural shell to knapped stone? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But, for god's sake, why would I compare natural shells to metal
this isn't a question. The question we are trying to answer in this news
group is, how all this *started*. Why we *started* to knap stones in the
first place? We just saw stones around, and decided, why wouldn't we
knap them, just for fun?
Stones as hammers against stone anvils sometimes shatter producing sharp edges. The nut meat is still edible.
If the alternative was cracking nuts with teeth, risking broken jaw or teeth, hammering is more efficient.
same. Some stones easily shutter, some don't. Flint easily shutters. I
believe that basalt stones don't. You can crack nuts with those that
don't, but those don't produce sharp edges, those that shutter produce
sharp edges. So, you cannot cut meat with a stone. Those that don't
shutter aren't sharp, those that shutter are sharp, but can leave stone
particles in meat.
I am talking about eating meat. Primates don't eat meat, we do. Hence
our diet moved in the direction of meat eating. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On the other hand, from my experience, the flint that yo can find
What bloody "poor stone"? Every stone that can be sharp is "poorHave you ever eaten nuts?https://youtu.be/iv25o_zzqrEin nature isn't very sharp. I wouldn't say that you encounter a lot of
conchoidally fractured flint in nature. And even if there is one around,
why would you have it in your hand? On the other hand, if you are eating
shellfish, you handle sharp broken shellfish all the time, and they are
in your hands.
Your objection is very nice example of how somebody can be biased in
his interpretation of nature.
Probably not.
You completely ignored the obvious, and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you extremely emphasized some sideway thing. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, the
No way. Which materials?main thing in stone tools isn't to be used as a hammer. Stone (unmade,-
raw) can be used as a hammer, you don't need stone tool for that. Stone
tools are made to be used as a cutting device. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The paradox is that for cutting (sharp edge), you need to have sharp
edge. So, the idea originated in the usage of sharp edges. But, the
Oldowan tools are made out of pebbles, and pebbles are about the
bluntest objects in nature, not the sharpest. So, the development of the
usage of sharp edges should happen before Oldowan stone tools.
Molar hammering crushing cracking >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Carnassial. shearing
Incisor gnawing
Canine tearing, piercing
Homo replicated these functions by hand using various materials
Sticks and stones mostly.
Hammerstone & anvil stone/log replaced big molars, allowed processing extremely tough nuts.Who cares. We do have Oldowan stone tools for 2.5 my. We used it for
dealing with wood, hides, we weren't vegetarians. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Nut cracking, clam cracking...
Hm, why would we stab the prey if we cannot eat it, for god's sake?Antlers? With antlers you can pierce. But, what's the use of piercing?
Stabbing to kill prey. Replace fangs with spear allows further distance from prey's defensive weapons.
Stab, kill, slice, eat.
Knapped stone flakes slice thin meat.And leave stone particles in that meat.
Only if hit against hard bone. If slicing flesh, no chips unless flake is from poor stone.
stone", this goes hand in hand. It is sharp because it is "poor".
Knapped flakes are made ofThis is why I did acquire the trait of thick enamel, precisely for
brittle type of stones, otherwise you wouldn't be able to knap it.
Brittle, it means that it shutters
you mean splinters? Only if hit hard against bone or if stone flake is from poor stone source.
easily. I wouldn't eat meat with
those tiny particles in it, if I want my teeth to remain whole.
Then don't eat gritty shellfish, lots of quartzite grit. I ate some from a tin can, so much sandy grit.
this reason.
Like orangutans, who never eat shellfish?
I'm talking about human ancestors who had complex language software tool associated with complex stick and stone artifacts hardware tools.
Cutting, yes. Inedible meat.Perfect for cutting meat.who didn't look like orangutans, but,It is brittle glass. It would cut throat.
like us. They had thick enamel, this is why orangutan *still* has thick
enamel. This is a vestigial trait.
Orangutans eat hard nuts and fruits, gorillas don't, chimps and humans use tools but chewed a lot until milling advanced.
Obsidian is brittle laterally (bending to the side), but perfect cutting straight through meat.Of course I don't, because (ground) metal doesn't shutter. >>>>>>>>>>>>>Try it yourself.If you don't have carnassials you cannot eat what you pierced.
Thin slices.
A sharp obsidian flake slices thinly through flesh & sinew.No way that I would eat this flesh.
Tartare.
Are you crazy? Ok, if this
obsidian is made industrially, and I have a guarantee that everything is
alright with it, it is grounded smoothly. Obsidian used by our ancestors
isn't anything like that.
Shearing. Stone? It will break your teeth? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>What? Obsidian slicing meat.
Obsidian? It will cut your
throat.
Don't eat stone, eat meat.
You don't understand meat processing & eating. Do you worry about metal or plastic fragments & particles when using fork & spoon?
Or anything.Then you pushed the blade laterally or hit the bone and pried or twisted the blade.Shatter? Flint knives don't shatter cutting meat. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> It will (from time to time), it is brittle. It is enough to shatteronce, to brake my tooth.
Have you ever touched obsidian?
You seem very uninformed about it.
Did you confuse it with something else?
I am absolutely convinced that it is gravely dangerous to eat meat cut >>>>>>>> by Stone Age obsidian tools.
Thanks, a good scientist uses imagination as a software tool, like language.https://youtu.be/YSd413Xrk_QIt is you
who doesn't understand anything. By grinding hematite you get ochre. Red
ochre is the evidence that we ground metal. Metal becomes sharp by
grinding, but it doesn't shutter after that. Good morning. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Metal? Now, that's much better, but it only came in Middle >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Paleolithic, along with Homo sapiens. This is why Homo sapiens has
changes in chopping apparatus. With metal we chopped off meat fromThin-sliced & ground-up meat, chewing gum style. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
carcass. But, that's about it.
No, before the first tools, we had to have fire. Fire was the tool to
soften up meat. Why would you pierce an animal, if you cannot eat its
meat? For hides? No. Before Oldowan tools we had to have fire,
otherwise, why would we hunt animals in the first place? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
And this logical net *proves* how Science is *shallow*. They have all
those stories about our past, without even thinking to resolve the
"carnassial" problem. You cannot eat meat without carnassials, or
without fire. Full stop.
Sharp cutting into slices, then chewing like bubblegum. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
Since tetrapods left the sea, raw food was the norm. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Not for humans, as we can see.Of course, you only lack the evidence for this claim. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>We ate shellfish raw.
Cold-blooded oysters, crab, shrimp were not cooked, because their flesh was never hot.
Warm blooded rabbits, antelope, pigs were cooked to bring the meat back to life-like temperature, cold meat did not taste as good. Those who cooked thin sliced meat reduced food-borne parasites so their progeny were healthier.
Nobody ate big chunks of meat, cooked or uncooked, not edible. Mammoth was thin-sliced.
DD
We ate everything raw.
Because humans quit swinging and started cutting.
Cats like my hamburgers well done.burned meat better.We burned surroundings for safety, not for food. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But, this burning gave us food. So, this is how we acquired eatingThere is no forest where Geladas live, there is only grass. And
Geladas don't burn down the forest.What house? We were living on rocky sea cliffs, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>burned food.
Silly fantasy. You burn your house down and then eat the burnt rats?
Geladas eat grass.
Right, they don't burn it to make it taste better >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Exactly. Because if you are used to raw meat taste, you will not like
Only if you are used to burned meat from the veryYou have very good imagination, but this is pure bollocks. >>>>>>>>>>>
beginning.
As I said, humans cooked terrestrial meat to return it to living temperature, but didn't cook seafood since it was coldblooded.
Hard: obsidian
Tough: rubber
Hard and tough: steel
rocks don't burn, and
if they would burn, we still can jump into sea.
https://youtu.be/OUZeDOaheUE
https://youtu.be/YtZqNAI4pBk
NOTE: MY PHONE IS WRITING ONLY IN CAPITOL LETTERS. I'M NOT SHOUTING.
IT'S HAFTED.
On 25.11.2021. 2:17, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:I DON'T SPEAK CROAtIAn. YET.
On Wednesday, November 24, 2021 at 1:33:53 AM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
On 24.11.2021. 3:08, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Tuesday, November 23, 2021 at 4:25:27 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:Just careful with that obsidian scalpel, Daud.
On 23.11.2021. 13:03, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote: >>>>> On Monday, November 22, 2021 at 9:01:09 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:I'll get the obsidian scalpel ready.
The bullet would be hurt.On 23.11.2021. 2:39, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote: >>>>>>> On Monday, November 22, 2021 at 8:09:06 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:A BULLET TO YOUR BRAIN WOULD DO NO DAMAGE.
I don't play Russian roulette. You say, well, there is only 1 chance >>>>>> in 6 that I'll die, so odds are on my side. I'd rather chop off meat >>>>>> with my teeth, until people invent hematite.On 22.11.2021. 22:39, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Monday, November 22, 2021 at 11:40:08 AM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:Be logical. To make an obsidian blade, one must knap it from the side. You can't knap it with meat, it won't chip off, it will cut through.
No, I never touched obsidian, I really am uninformed about it. I thinkOn 22.11.2021. 15:10, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Monday, November 22, 2021 at 2:47:55 AM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:Of meat eating.
On 21.11.2021. 18:35, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:Of what?
On Sunday, November 21, 2021 at 12:05:07 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:I would start from the beginning.
On 20.11.2021. 22:30, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Saturday, November 20, 2021 at 9:35:09 AM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:We are talking about first apes,
On 20.11.2021. 8:16, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Friday, November 19, 2021 at 2:45:04 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:I believe people have problems grasping this. Not every stone is the
On 19.11.2021. 8:07, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Thursday, November 18, 2021 at 1:43:07 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:knives? Yes, today we are using metal knives and not natural shells,
On 18.11.2021. 10:08, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Wednesday, November 17, 2021 at 4:59:14 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:Just the other way around, every shellfish, broken on any way, is very
On 17.11.2021. 22:08, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Wednesday, November 17, 2021 at 1:29:22 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
On 17.11.2021. 8:02, littor...@gmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Only imbeciles believe their ancestors could never have slept on water.
On topic:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/11/211111154244.htm
It's well possible that tool use & speech co-evolved (late-Pleistocene?):
both find their origin partly in our Pleistocene shellfish-diving past:
-stone tool use for opening shells, cf sea-otters, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -voluntary breathing for shallow-diving, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -large brain thanks to seafood, e.g. DHA, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -lip-tongue-throat movemensts for suction feeding. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Google
"speech language origins PPT verhaegen". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Stone tools have sharp edge. This is like broken shellfish.
Not so sharp. Conchoidal fracture of flint is much sharper than broken clam.
sharp.
You are comparing natural shell to knapped stone? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But, for god's sake, why would I compare natural shells to metal
this isn't a question. The question we are trying to answer in this news
group is, how all this *started*. Why we *started* to knap stones in the
first place? We just saw stones around, and decided, why wouldn't we
knap them, just for fun?
Stones as hammers against stone anvils sometimes shatter producing sharp edges. The nut meat is still edible.
If the alternative was cracking nuts with teeth, risking broken jaw or teeth, hammering is more efficient.
same. Some stones easily shutter, some don't. Flint easily shutters. I
believe that basalt stones don't. You can crack nuts with those that
don't, but those don't produce sharp edges, those that shutter produce
sharp edges. So, you cannot cut meat with a stone. Those that don't
shutter aren't sharp, those that shutter are sharp, but can leave stone
particles in meat.
I am talking about eating meat. Primates don't eat meat, we do. Hence
our diet moved in the direction of meat eating. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On the other hand, from my experience, the flint that yo can find
What bloody "poor stone"? Every stone that can be sharp is "poorHave you ever eaten nuts?https://youtu.be/iv25o_zzqrEin nature isn't very sharp. I wouldn't say that you encounter a lot of
conchoidally fractured flint in nature. And even if there is one around,
why would you have it in your hand? On the other hand, if you are eating
shellfish, you handle sharp broken shellfish all the time, and they are
in your hands.
Your objection is very nice example of how somebody can be biased in
his interpretation of nature.
Probably not.
You completely ignored the obvious, and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you extremely emphasized some sideway thing. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, the
No way. Which materials?main thing in stone tools isn't to be used as a hammer. Stone (unmade,-
raw) can be used as a hammer, you don't need stone tool for that. Stone
tools are made to be used as a cutting device. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The paradox is that for cutting (sharp edge), you need to have sharp
edge. So, the idea originated in the usage of sharp edges. But, the
Oldowan tools are made out of pebbles, and pebbles are about the
bluntest objects in nature, not the sharpest. So, the development of the
usage of sharp edges should happen before Oldowan stone tools.
Molar hammering crushing cracking >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Carnassial. shearing
Incisor gnawing
Canine tearing, piercing
Homo replicated these functions by hand using various materials
Sticks and stones mostly.
Hammerstone & anvil stone/log replaced big molars, allowed processing extremely tough nuts.Who cares. We do have Oldowan stone tools for 2.5 my. We used it for
dealing with wood, hides, we weren't vegetarians. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Nut cracking, clam cracking...
Hm, why would we stab the prey if we cannot eat it, for god's sake?Antlers? With antlers you can pierce. But, what's the use of piercing?
Stabbing to kill prey. Replace fangs with spear allows further distance from prey's defensive weapons.
Stab, kill, slice, eat.
Knapped stone flakes slice thin meat.And leave stone particles in that meat.
Only if hit against hard bone. If slicing flesh, no chips unless flake is from poor stone.
stone", this goes hand in hand. It is sharp because it is "poor".
Knapped flakes are made ofThis is why I did acquire the trait of thick enamel, precisely for
brittle type of stones, otherwise you wouldn't be able to knap it.
Brittle, it means that it shutters
you mean splinters? Only if hit hard against bone or if stone flake is from poor stone source.
easily. I wouldn't eat meat with
those tiny particles in it, if I want my teeth to remain whole.
Then don't eat gritty shellfish, lots of quartzite grit. I ate some from a tin can, so much sandy grit.
this reason.
Like orangutans, who never eat shellfish?
I'm talking about human ancestors who had complex language software tool associated with complex stick and stone artifacts hardware tools.
Cutting, yes. Inedible meat.Perfect for cutting meat.who didn't look like orangutans, but,It is brittle glass. It would cut throat.
like us. They had thick enamel, this is why orangutan *still* has thick
enamel. This is a vestigial trait.
Orangutans eat hard nuts and fruits, gorillas don't, chimps and humans use tools but chewed a lot until milling advanced.
Obsidian is brittle laterally (bending to the side), but perfect cutting straight through meat.Of course I don't, because (ground) metal doesn't shutter. >>>>>>>>>>>>>Try it yourself.If you don't have carnassials you cannot eat what you pierced.
Thin slices.
A sharp obsidian flake slices thinly through flesh & sinew.No way that I would eat this flesh.
Tartare.
Are you crazy? Ok, if this
obsidian is made industrially, and I have a guarantee that everything is
alright with it, it is grounded smoothly. Obsidian used by our ancestors
isn't anything like that.
Shearing. Stone? It will break your teeth? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>What? Obsidian slicing meat.
Obsidian? It will cut your
throat.
Don't eat stone, eat meat.
You don't understand meat processing & eating. Do you worry about metal or plastic fragments & particles when using fork & spoon?
Or anything.Then you pushed the blade laterally or hit the bone and pried or twisted the blade.Shatter? Flint knives don't shatter cutting meat. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> It will (from time to time), it is brittle. It is enough to shatteronce, to brake my tooth.
Have you ever touched obsidian?
You seem very uninformed about it.
Did you confuse it with something else?
that it is a form of glass. This is why it is so sharp.
I am absolutely convinced that it is gravely dangerous to eat meat cut
by Stone Age obsidian tools.
Thanks, a good scientist uses imagination as a software tool, like language.https://youtu.be/YSd413Xrk_QIt is you
who doesn't understand anything. By grinding hematite you get ochre. Red
ochre is the evidence that we ground metal. Metal becomes sharp by
grinding, but it doesn't shutter after that. Good morning. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Metal? Now, that's much better, but it only came in Middle
Paleolithic, along with Homo sapiens. This is why Homo sapiens has
changes in chopping apparatus. With metal we chopped off meat from
carcass. But, that's about it.
No, before the first tools, we had to have fire. Fire was the tool to
soften up meat. Why would you pierce an animal, if you cannot eat its
meat? For hides? No. Before Oldowan tools we had to have fire,
otherwise, why would we hunt animals in the first place?
Thin-sliced & ground-up meat, chewing gum style. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
And this logical net *proves* how Science is *shallow*. They have all
those stories about our past, without even thinking to resolve the
"carnassial" problem. You cannot eat meat without carnassials, or
without fire. Full stop.
Sharp cutting into slices, then chewing like bubblegum. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
Since tetrapods left the sea, raw food was the norm. >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Not for humans, as we can see.Of course, you only lack the evidence for this claim. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>We ate shellfish raw.
Cold-blooded oysters, crab, shrimp were not cooked, because their flesh was never hot.
Warm blooded rabbits, antelope, pigs were cooked to bring the meat back to life-like temperature, cold meat did not taste as good. Those who cooked thin sliced meat reduced food-borne parasites so their progeny were healthier.
Nobody ate big chunks of meat, cooked or uncooked, not edible. Mammoth was thin-sliced.
DD
We ate everything raw.
Because humans quit swinging and started cutting.
Cats like my hamburgers well done.burned meat better.We burned surroundings for safety, not for food. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But, this burning gave us food. So, this is how we acquired eatingThere is no forest where Geladas live, there is only grass. And
Geladas don't burn down the forest.What house? We were living on rocky sea cliffs, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>burned food.
Silly fantasy. You burn your house down and then eat the burnt rats?
Geladas eat grass.
Right, they don't burn it to make it taste better >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Exactly. Because if you are used to raw meat taste, you will not like
Only if you are used to burned meat from the very >>>>>>>>>>>>>> beginning.You have very good imagination, but this is pure bollocks. >>>>>>>>>>>
As I said, humans cooked terrestrial meat to return it to living temperature, but didn't cook seafood since it was coldblooded.
Hard: obsidian
Tough: rubber
Hard and tough: steel
rocks don't burn, and
if they would burn, we still can jump into sea.
https://youtu.be/OUZeDOaheUE
https://youtu.be/YtZqNAI4pBk
NOTE: MY PHONE IS WRITING ONLY IN CAPITOL LETTERS. I'M NOT SHOUTING.I hope that it reads small letters. Otherwise, not strange that you
IT'S HAFTED.
don't understand what I am talking about.
--
https://groups.google.com/g/human-evolution
human-e...@googlegroups.com
On Wednesday, November 24, 2021 at 9:06:01 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
On 25.11.2021. 2:17, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:I DON'T SPEAK CROAtIAn. YET.
On Wednesday, November 24, 2021 at 1:33:53 AM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:I hope that it reads small letters. Otherwise, not strange that you
On 24.11.2021. 3:08, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Tuesday, November 23, 2021 at 4:25:27 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:Just careful with that obsidian scalpel, Daud.
On 23.11.2021. 13:03, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote: >>>>>>> On Monday, November 22, 2021 at 9:01:09 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:I'll get the obsidian scalpel ready.
The bullet would be hurt.On 23.11.2021. 2:39, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Monday, November 22, 2021 at 8:09:06 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:A BULLET TO YOUR BRAIN WOULD DO NO DAMAGE.
I don't play Russian roulette. You say, well, there is only 1 chance >>>>>>>> in 6 that I'll die, so odds are on my side. I'd rather chop off meat >>>>>>>> with my teeth, until people invent hematite.On 22.11.2021. 22:39, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On Monday, November 22, 2021 at 11:40:08 AM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:Be logical. To make an obsidian blade, one must knap it from the side. You can't knap it with meat, it won't chip off, it will cut through.
No, I never touched obsidian, I really am uninformed about it. I thinkOn 22.11.2021. 15:10, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Monday, November 22, 2021 at 2:47:55 AM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:Of meat eating.
On 21.11.2021. 18:35, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:Of what?
On Sunday, November 21, 2021 at 12:05:07 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:I would start from the beginning.
On 20.11.2021. 22:30, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Saturday, November 20, 2021 at 9:35:09 AM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:We are talking about first apes,
On 20.11.2021. 8:16, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Friday, November 19, 2021 at 2:45:04 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:I believe people have problems grasping this. Not every stone is the
On 19.11.2021. 8:07, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Thursday, November 18, 2021 at 1:43:07 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:knives? Yes, today we are using metal knives and not natural shells,
On 18.11.2021. 10:08, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Wednesday, November 17, 2021 at 4:59:14 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:Just the other way around, every shellfish, broken on any way, is very
On 17.11.2021. 22:08, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Wednesday, November 17, 2021 at 1:29:22 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
On 17.11.2021. 8:02, littor...@gmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Only imbeciles believe their ancestors could never have slept on water.
On topic:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/11/211111154244.htm
It's well possible that tool use & speech co-evolved (late-Pleistocene?):
both find their origin partly in our Pleistocene shellfish-diving past:
-stone tool use for opening shells, cf sea-otters, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -voluntary breathing for shallow-diving, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -large brain thanks to seafood, e.g. DHA, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -lip-tongue-throat movemensts for suction feeding. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Google
"speech language origins PPT verhaegen". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Stone tools have sharp edge. This is like broken shellfish.
Not so sharp. Conchoidal fracture of flint is much sharper than broken clam.
sharp.
You are comparing natural shell to knapped stone? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But, for god's sake, why would I compare natural shells to metal
this isn't a question. The question we are trying to answer in this news
group is, how all this *started*. Why we *started* to knap stones in the
first place? We just saw stones around, and decided, why wouldn't we
knap them, just for fun?
Stones as hammers against stone anvils sometimes shatter producing sharp edges. The nut meat is still edible.
If the alternative was cracking nuts with teeth, risking broken jaw or teeth, hammering is more efficient.
same. Some stones easily shutter, some don't. Flint easily shutters. I
believe that basalt stones don't. You can crack nuts with those that
don't, but those don't produce sharp edges, those that shutter produce
sharp edges. So, you cannot cut meat with a stone. Those that don't
shutter aren't sharp, those that shutter are sharp, but can leave stone
particles in meat.
I am talking about eating meat. Primates don't eat meat, we do. Hence
our diet moved in the direction of meat eating. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On the other hand, from my experience, the flint that yo can find
What bloody "poor stone"? Every stone that can be sharp is "poorHave you ever eaten nuts?https://youtu.be/iv25o_zzqrEin nature isn't very sharp. I wouldn't say that you encounter a lot of
conchoidally fractured flint in nature. And even if there is one around,
why would you have it in your hand? On the other hand, if you are eating
shellfish, you handle sharp broken shellfish all the time, and they are
in your hands.
Your objection is very nice example of how somebody can be biased in
his interpretation of nature.
Probably not.
You completely ignored the obvious, and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you extremely emphasized some sideway thing. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, the
No way. Which materials?main thing in stone tools isn't to be used as a hammer. Stone (unmade,-
raw) can be used as a hammer, you don't need stone tool for that. Stone
tools are made to be used as a cutting device. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The paradox is that for cutting (sharp edge), you need to have sharp
edge. So, the idea originated in the usage of sharp edges. But, the
Oldowan tools are made out of pebbles, and pebbles are about the
bluntest objects in nature, not the sharpest. So, the development of the
usage of sharp edges should happen before Oldowan stone tools.
Molar hammering crushing cracking >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Carnassial. shearing
Incisor gnawing
Canine tearing, piercing
Homo replicated these functions by hand using various materials
Sticks and stones mostly.
Hammerstone & anvil stone/log replaced big molars, allowed processing extremely tough nuts.Who cares. We do have Oldowan stone tools for 2.5 my. We used it for
dealing with wood, hides, we weren't vegetarians. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Nut cracking, clam cracking...
Hm, why would we stab the prey if we cannot eat it, for god's sake?Antlers? With antlers you can pierce. But, what's the use of piercing?
Stabbing to kill prey. Replace fangs with spear allows further distance from prey's defensive weapons.
Stab, kill, slice, eat.
Only if hit against hard bone. If slicing flesh, no chips unless flake is from poor stone.Knapped stone flakes slice thin meat. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And leave stone particles in that meat. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
stone", this goes hand in hand. It is sharp because it is "poor".
Knapped flakes are made ofThis is why I did acquire the trait of thick enamel, precisely for
brittle type of stones, otherwise you wouldn't be able to knap it.
Brittle, it means that it shutters
you mean splinters? Only if hit hard against bone or if stone flake is from poor stone source.
easily. I wouldn't eat meat with
those tiny particles in it, if I want my teeth to remain whole.
Then don't eat gritty shellfish, lots of quartzite grit. I ate some from a tin can, so much sandy grit.
this reason.
Like orangutans, who never eat shellfish?
I'm talking about human ancestors who had complex language software tool associated with complex stick and stone artifacts hardware tools.
Cutting, yes. Inedible meat.Perfect for cutting meat.who didn't look like orangutans, but,It is brittle glass. It would cut throat.
like us. They had thick enamel, this is why orangutan *still* has thick
enamel. This is a vestigial trait.
Orangutans eat hard nuts and fruits, gorillas don't, chimps and humans use tools but chewed a lot until milling advanced.
Obsidian is brittle laterally (bending to the side), but perfect cutting straight through meat.Of course I don't, because (ground) metal doesn't shutter. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Try it yourself.If you don't have carnassials you cannot eat what you pierced.
Thin slices.
Tartare.A sharp obsidian flake slices thinly through flesh & sinew.No way that I would eat this flesh. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Are you crazy? Ok, if this
obsidian is made industrially, and I have a guarantee that everything is
alright with it, it is grounded smoothly. Obsidian used by our ancestors
isn't anything like that.
Shearing. Stone? It will break your teeth? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>What? Obsidian slicing meat.
Obsidian? It will cut your
throat.
Don't eat stone, eat meat.
You don't understand meat processing & eating. Do you worry about metal or plastic fragments & particles when using fork & spoon?
Or anything.Then you pushed the blade laterally or hit the bone and pried or twisted the blade.Shatter? Flint knives don't shatter cutting meat. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It will (from time to time), it is brittle. It is enough to shatteronce, to brake my tooth.
Have you ever touched obsidian?
You seem very uninformed about it.
Did you confuse it with something else?
that it is a form of glass. This is why it is so sharp.
I am absolutely convinced that it is gravely dangerous to eat meat cut
by Stone Age obsidian tools.
Thanks, a good scientist uses imagination as a software tool, like language.https://youtu.be/YSd413Xrk_QIt is you
who doesn't understand anything. By grinding hematite you get ochre. Red
ochre is the evidence that we ground metal. Metal becomes sharp by
grinding, but it doesn't shutter after that. Good morning. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Metal? Now, that's much better, but it only came in Middle
Paleolithic, along with Homo sapiens. This is why Homo sapiens has
changes in chopping apparatus. With metal we chopped off meat from
carcass. But, that's about it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No, before the first tools, we had to have fire. Fire was the tool to
soften up meat. Why would you pierce an animal, if you cannot eat its
meat? For hides? No. Before Oldowan tools we had to have fire,
otherwise, why would we hunt animals in the first place?
Thin-sliced & ground-up meat, chewing gum style. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
And this logical net *proves* how Science is *shallow*. They have all
those stories about our past, without even thinking to resolve the
"carnassial" problem. You cannot eat meat without carnassials, or
without fire. Full stop.
Sharp cutting into slices, then chewing like bubblegum. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Since tetrapods left the sea, raw food was the norm. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Not for humans, as we can see.Of course, you only lack the evidence for this claim. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>We ate shellfish raw.
Cold-blooded oysters, crab, shrimp were not cooked, because their flesh was never hot.
Warm blooded rabbits, antelope, pigs were cooked to bring the meat back to life-like temperature, cold meat did not taste as good. Those who cooked thin sliced meat reduced food-borne parasites so their progeny were healthier.
Nobody ate big chunks of meat, cooked or uncooked, not edible. Mammoth was thin-sliced.
DD
We ate everything raw.
Because humans quit swinging and started cutting. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Cats like my hamburgers well done.burned meat better.We burned surroundings for safety, not for food. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But, this burning gave us food. So, this is how we acquired eatingThere is no forest where Geladas live, there is only grass. And
Geladas don't burn down the forest.What house? We were living on rocky sea cliffs, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>burned food.
Silly fantasy. You burn your house down and then eat the burnt rats?
Geladas eat grass.
Right, they don't burn it to make it taste better >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Exactly. Because if you are used to raw meat taste, you will not like
Only if you are used to burned meat from the very >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> beginning.You have very good imagination, but this is pure bollocks. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
As I said, humans cooked terrestrial meat to return it to living temperature, but didn't cook seafood since it was coldblooded.
Hard: obsidian
Tough: rubber
Hard and tough: steel
rocks don't burn, and
if they would burn, we still can jump into sea.
https://youtu.be/OUZeDOaheUE
https://youtu.be/YtZqNAI4pBk
NOTE: MY PHONE IS WRITING ONLY IN CAPITOL LETTERS. I'M NOT SHOUTING.
IT'S HAFTED.
don't understand what I am talking about.
On 25.11.2021. 13:44, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:Only if I had an obsidian pipe.
On Wednesday, November 24, 2021 at 9:06:01 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:Ah, I see.
On 25.11.2021. 2:17, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:I DON'T SPEAK CROAtIAn. YET.
On Wednesday, November 24, 2021 at 1:33:53 AM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:I hope that it reads small letters. Otherwise, not strange that you
On 24.11.2021. 3:08, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote: >>>>> On Tuesday, November 23, 2021 at 4:25:27 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
Just careful with that obsidian scalpel, Daud.On 23.11.2021. 13:03, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote: >>>>>>> On Monday, November 22, 2021 at 9:01:09 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:I'll get the obsidian scalpel ready.
The bullet would be hurt.On 23.11.2021. 2:39, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Monday, November 22, 2021 at 8:09:06 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:A BULLET TO YOUR BRAIN WOULD DO NO DAMAGE.
I don't play Russian roulette. You say, well, there is only 1 chance >>>>>>>> in 6 that I'll die, so odds are on my side. I'd rather chop off meat >>>>>>>> with my teeth, until people invent hematite.On 22.11.2021. 22:39, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:Be logical. To make an obsidian blade, one must knap it from the side. You can't knap it with meat, it won't chip off, it will cut through.
On Monday, November 22, 2021 at 11:40:08 AM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:No, I never touched obsidian, I really am uninformed about it. I think
On 22.11.2021. 15:10, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Monday, November 22, 2021 at 2:47:55 AM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:Of meat eating.
On 21.11.2021. 18:35, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:Of what?
On Sunday, November 21, 2021 at 12:05:07 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:I would start from the beginning.
On 20.11.2021. 22:30, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Saturday, November 20, 2021 at 9:35:09 AM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:We are talking about first apes,
On 20.11.2021. 8:16, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Friday, November 19, 2021 at 2:45:04 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:I believe people have problems grasping this. Not every stone is the
On 19.11.2021. 8:07, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Thursday, November 18, 2021 at 1:43:07 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:knives? Yes, today we are using metal knives and not natural shells,
On 18.11.2021. 10:08, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Wednesday, November 17, 2021 at 4:59:14 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:Just the other way around, every shellfish, broken on any way, is very
On 17.11.2021. 22:08, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
On Wednesday, November 17, 2021 at 1:29:22 PM UTC-5, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
On 17.11.2021. 8:02, littor...@gmail.com wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Only imbeciles believe their ancestors could never have slept on water.
On topic:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/11/211111154244.htm
It's well possible that tool use & speech co-evolved (late-Pleistocene?):
both find their origin partly in our Pleistocene shellfish-diving past:
-stone tool use for opening shells, cf sea-otters,
-voluntary breathing for shallow-diving, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -large brain thanks to seafood, e.g. DHA, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -lip-tongue-throat movemensts for suction feeding.
"speech language origins PPT verhaegen". >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Stone tools have sharp edge. This is like broken shellfish.
Not so sharp. Conchoidal fracture of flint is much sharper than broken clam.
sharp.
You are comparing natural shell to knapped stone? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But, for god's sake, why would I compare natural shells to metal
this isn't a question. The question we are trying to answer in this news
group is, how all this *started*. Why we *started* to knap stones in the
first place? We just saw stones around, and decided, why wouldn't we
knap them, just for fun?
Stones as hammers against stone anvils sometimes shatter producing sharp edges. The nut meat is still edible.
If the alternative was cracking nuts with teeth, risking broken jaw or teeth, hammering is more efficient.
same. Some stones easily shutter, some don't. Flint easily shutters. I
believe that basalt stones don't. You can crack nuts with those that
don't, but those don't produce sharp edges, those that shutter produce
sharp edges. So, you cannot cut meat with a stone. Those that don't
shutter aren't sharp, those that shutter are sharp, but can leave stone
particles in meat.
I am talking about eating meat. Primates don't eat meat, we do. Hence
our diet moved in the direction of meat eating. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On the other hand, from my experience, the flint that yo can find
What bloody "poor stone"? Every stone that can be sharp is "poorHave you ever eaten nuts?https://youtu.be/iv25o_zzqrEin nature isn't very sharp. I wouldn't say that you encounter a lot of
conchoidally fractured flint in nature. And even if there is one around,
why would you have it in your hand? On the other hand, if you are eating
shellfish, you handle sharp broken shellfish all the time, and they are
in your hands.
Your objection is very nice example of how somebody can be biased in
his interpretation of nature.
Probably not.
You completely ignored the obvious, and >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you extremely emphasized some sideway thing. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, the
No way. Which materials?main thing in stone tools isn't to be used as a hammer. Stone (unmade,-
raw) can be used as a hammer, you don't need stone tool for that. Stone
tools are made to be used as a cutting device. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The paradox is that for cutting (sharp edge), you need to have sharp
edge. So, the idea originated in the usage of sharp edges. But, the
Oldowan tools are made out of pebbles, and pebbles are about the
bluntest objects in nature, not the sharpest. So, the development of the
usage of sharp edges should happen before Oldowan stone tools.
Molar hammering crushing cracking >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Carnassial. shearing
Incisor gnawing
Canine tearing, piercing
Homo replicated these functions by hand using various materials
Sticks and stones mostly.
Hammerstone & anvil stone/log replaced big molars, allowed processing extremely tough nuts.Who cares. We do have Oldowan stone tools for 2.5 my. We used it for
dealing with wood, hides, we weren't vegetarians. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Nut cracking, clam cracking...
Hm, why would we stab the prey if we cannot eat it, for god's sake?Antlers? With antlers you can pierce. But, what's the use of piercing?
Stabbing to kill prey. Replace fangs with spear allows further distance from prey's defensive weapons.
Stab, kill, slice, eat.
Only if hit against hard bone. If slicing flesh, no chips unless flake is from poor stone.Knapped stone flakes slice thin meat. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And leave stone particles in that meat. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
stone", this goes hand in hand. It is sharp because it is "poor".
Knapped flakes are made ofThis is why I did acquire the trait of thick enamel, precisely for
brittle type of stones, otherwise you wouldn't be able to knap it.
Brittle, it means that it shutters
you mean splinters? Only if hit hard against bone or if stone flake is from poor stone source.
easily. I wouldn't eat meat with
those tiny particles in it, if I want my teeth to remain whole.
Then don't eat gritty shellfish, lots of quartzite grit. I ate some from a tin can, so much sandy grit.
this reason.
Like orangutans, who never eat shellfish?
I'm talking about human ancestors who had complex language software tool associated with complex stick and stone artifacts hardware tools.
Cutting, yes. Inedible meat.Perfect for cutting meat.who didn't look like orangutans, but,It is brittle glass. It would cut throat.
like us. They had thick enamel, this is why orangutan *still* has thick
enamel. This is a vestigial trait.
Orangutans eat hard nuts and fruits, gorillas don't, chimps and humans use tools but chewed a lot until milling advanced.
Obsidian is brittle laterally (bending to the side), but perfect cutting straight through meat.Of course I don't, because (ground) metal doesn't shutter. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Try it yourself.If you don't have carnassials you cannot eat what you pierced.
Thin slices.
Tartare.A sharp obsidian flake slices thinly through flesh & sinew.No way that I would eat this flesh. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Are you crazy? Ok, if this
obsidian is made industrially, and I have a guarantee that everything is
alright with it, it is grounded smoothly. Obsidian used by our ancestors
isn't anything like that.
Shearing. Stone? It will break your teeth? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>What? Obsidian slicing meat.
Obsidian? It will cut your
throat.
Don't eat stone, eat meat.
You don't understand meat processing & eating. Do you worry about metal or plastic fragments & particles when using fork & spoon?
Or anything.Then you pushed the blade laterally or hit the bone and pried or twisted the blade.Shatter? Flint knives don't shatter cutting meat. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It will (from time to time), it is brittle. It is enough to shatteronce, to brake my tooth.
Have you ever touched obsidian?
You seem very uninformed about it.
Did you confuse it with something else?
that it is a form of glass. This is why it is so sharp.
I am absolutely convinced that it is gravely dangerous to eat meat cut
by Stone Age obsidian tools.
Thanks, a good scientist uses imagination as a software tool, like language.https://youtu.be/YSd413Xrk_QIt is you
who doesn't understand anything. By grinding hematite you get ochre. Red
ochre is the evidence that we ground metal. Metal becomes sharp by
grinding, but it doesn't shutter after that. Good morning. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Metal? Now, that's much better, but it only came in Middle
Paleolithic, along with Homo sapiens. This is why Homo sapiens has
changes in chopping apparatus. With metal we chopped off meat from
carcass. But, that's about it. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No, before the first tools, we had to have fire. Fire was the tool to
soften up meat. Why would you pierce an animal, if you cannot eat its
meat? For hides? No. Before Oldowan tools we had to have fire,
otherwise, why would we hunt animals in the first place?
Thin-sliced & ground-up meat, chewing gum style. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
And this logical net *proves* how Science is *shallow*. They have all
those stories about our past, without even thinking to resolve the
"carnassial" problem. You cannot eat meat without carnassials, or
without fire. Full stop.
Sharp cutting into slices, then chewing like bubblegum. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Since tetrapods left the sea, raw food was the norm. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Not for humans, as we can see.Of course, you only lack the evidence for this claim. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>We ate shellfish raw.
Cold-blooded oysters, crab, shrimp were not cooked, because their flesh was never hot.
Warm blooded rabbits, antelope, pigs were cooked to bring the meat back to life-like temperature, cold meat did not taste as good. Those who cooked thin sliced meat reduced food-borne parasites so their progeny were healthier.
Nobody ate big chunks of meat, cooked or uncooked, not edible. Mammoth was thin-sliced.
DD
We ate everything raw.
Because humans quit swinging and started cutting. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Cats like my hamburgers well done.burned meat better.We burned surroundings for safety, not for food. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But, this burning gave us food. So, this is how we acquired eatingThere is no forest where Geladas live, there is only grass. And
Geladas don't burn down the forest.What house? We were living on rocky sea cliffs, >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>burned food.
Silly fantasy. You burn your house down and then eat the burnt rats?
Geladas eat grass.
Right, they don't burn it to make it taste better >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Exactly. Because if you are used to raw meat taste, you will not like
Only if you are used to burned meat from the very >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> beginning.You have very good imagination, but this is pure bollocks. >>>>>>>>>>>>>
As I said, humans cooked terrestrial meat to return it to living temperature, but didn't cook seafood since it was coldblooded.
Hard: obsidian
Tough: rubber
Hard and tough: steel
rocks don't burn, and
if they would burn, we still can jump into sea. >>>>>>>>>>
https://youtu.be/OUZeDOaheUE
https://youtu.be/YtZqNAI4pBk
NOTE: MY PHONE IS WRITING ONLY IN CAPITOL LETTERS. I'M NOT SHOUTING.
IT'S HAFTED.
don't understand what I am talking about.
But, you do smoke ganga, don't you?
--
https://groups.google.com/g/human-evolution
human-e...@googlegroups.com
Sysop: | Keyop |
---|---|
Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
Users: | 285 |
Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
Uptime: | 75:57:19 |
Calls: | 6,489 |
Calls today: | 2 |
Files: | 12,096 |
Messages: | 5,276,201 |