Some outdated, self-declared, ego+afro+anthropocentric paleo-anthropologists declare that the waterside theory of human evolution is only followed by non-scientists...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b07w4y98
Some outdated, self-declared, ego+afro+anthropocentric paleo-anthropologists
declare that the waterside theory of human evolution is only followed by non-scientists...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b07w4y98
The "Biblical Archaeologists" also consider themselves scientists.
In no uncertain terms, paleo anthropology is not and never has been
a science. It doesn't meet the basic rules of science, like in data collecting: Can you say "Selection Bias?"
It's circular. It BEGINS with an answer: "Humans arose in Africa then
went searching for a Burger King, carrying a savanna on their backs
to eat from."
Look at the idiocy we've encountered here. Like how our ancestors
didn't need DHA, even though we all know that they did, because
Elephants.
?!?!?!?!?
It's rationalizing. People have been trained to respond on command.
Africa: The right answer.
Anything else: The wrong answer. Don't worry about why it's wrong,
just make up anything.
Op dinsdag 16 mei 2023 om 07:55:38 UTC+2 schreef JTEM:
Some outdated, self-declared, ego+afro+anthropocentric paleo-anthropologists
declare that the waterside theory of human evolution is only followed by non-scientists...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b07w4y98
The "Biblical Archaeologists" also consider themselves scientists.
In no uncertain terms, paleo anthropology is not and never has been
a science. It doesn't meet the basic rules of science, like in data collecting: Can you say "Selection Bias?"
It's circular. It BEGINS with an answer: "Humans arose in Africa then
went searching for a Burger King, carrying a savanna on their backs
to eat from."
Look at the idiocy we've encountered here. Like how our ancestors
didn't need DHA, even though we all know that they did, because
Elephants.
?!?!?!?!?
It's rationalizing. People have been trained to respond on command.
Africa: The right answer.
Anything else: The wrong answer. Don't worry about why it's wrong,
just make up anything.
Yes, incredible, but:cheektooth enamel, knuckle-walking, hand-like feet etc.: we probably descended from something like that?! I had read Desmond Morris "Naked ape" (Dutch transl.) but had forgotten that he briefly mentioned the possibility of our (semi)aq.past. Then I read
When I first read about paleo-anthropology (in the 1960s & 70s) I accepted everything they said: it seemed very logical: our nearest relativs are Pan & Gorilla, both resemble each other, they live in C-Africa, are furred, have long canines, thin
Soon it became clear (my medical studies: sweating etc.) that the various elements of savanna idea were incredibly wrong. Since evolution is gradual, there had to be a phase that combined trees + water: I described this aquarboreal phase some 5 yrsbefore the sedge-wading Ndoki gorilla were described (in 1995?).
Hardy's idea of our aq.phase >10 Ma, and Elaine's >5 Ma, were apparently too long ago (Elaine thought our aquaticness *caused* the H/P split 5 Ma).ancestors. My idea that knuckle-walking evolved in Pan//Gorilla is now accepted by most PAs.
Reading the whole PA literature forced me to accept that E.Afr.apiths->Gorilla, and S.Afr.apiths->PanAnd that Pan had more humanlike ancestors (e.g. their fetus has more humanlike feet), and that apiths (incl. most or all "habilis" etc.?) were NO human
Gradually I came to the scenario that I'm promoting since 1 or 2 yrs (geology): India approaching S-Eurasia + forming islands/peninsulas with coastal forests explains the cercopith/ape split, the Mesopotamian Seaway closure c 15 Ma explains the pongid/hominid split, and the N- & later S-Rift fms explain the remarkably parallel evolutions of Pan//Gorilla, and that "OoAfrica" is an afrocentric prejudice .
I'm now beginning the think that early-Pliocene Pan along the E.Afr.coasts might have been more humanlike than we generally think: with a diet incl. some seafood: slight brain enlargement, stone tools, flat feet... (even some diving??)
(One of my remaining problems: why is Gorilla so much larger than Homo & Pan? herbivory??)
But yes, I too once accepted the ridiculous idea of savanna-dwelling ancestors... :-D
Sweating is an effective way to cool a body that's running after prey that can't, though. I don't see how it helps in an aquatic environment.
Oh, and hello to all. But please note that I'm not interested in any religious 'explanations'.
Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
Sweating is an effective way to cool a body that's running after prey that can't, though. I don't see how it helps in an aquatic environment.
Lol! Running after prey? That's insane.
But sweating is a great way to rid the body of salt. Living waterside, swallowing dozens & dozens of shellfish, their liquor maybe not as
salty as sea water but still pretty salty...
Oh, and hello to all. But please note that I'm not interested in any religious 'explanations'.
You just gave us one.
You require the behavior -- running after antelope -- before they can
evolve the means to do so. Else there is no selective pressure to
evolve the means for the behavior.
Aquatic Ape does not have this problem. They're simply picking up
stuff & eating -- i.e. shellfish. This alone will ensure the absolute
largest brain their genetics will allow. And, if bigger/smarter brain
genes pop up, a useful mutations, they can take full advantage of
it... learning how to make new tools... to better exploit resources.
But they didn't have to. They could take a million years to figure
out stuff, or two million. It didn't matter. They could take advantage
of it on day-1 is the circumstances were right, or the new genetic
adaptation could be floating around as an outlier for a million years
before it made the difference between life or death.
Not true with your savanna idiocy.
On Tue, 16 May 2023 16:01:29 -0700 (PDT)...
marc verhaegen <littor...@gmail.com> wrote:
cheektooth enamel, knuckle-walking, hand-like feet etc.: we probably descended from something like that?! I had read Desmond Morris "Naked ape" (Dutch transl.) but had forgotten that he briefly mentioned the possibility of our (semi)aq.past. Then I readWhen I first read about paleo-anthropology (in the 1960s & 70s) I accepted everything they said: it seemed very logical: our nearest relativs are Pan & Gorilla, both resemble each other, they live in C-Africa, are furred, have long canines, thin
before the sedge-wading Ndoki gorillas were described (in 1995?).Soon it became clear (my medical studies: sweating etc.) that the various elements of savanna idea were incredibly wrong. Since evolution is gradual, there had to be a phase that combined trees + water: I described this aquarboreal phase some 5 yrs
human ancestors. My idea that knuckle-walking evolved in Pan//Gorilla is now accepted by most PAs.Hardy's idea of our aq.phase >10 Ma, and Elaine's >5 Ma, were apparently too long ago (Elaine thought our aquaticness *caused* the H/P split 5 Ma).
Reading the whole PA literature forced me to accept that E.Afr.apiths->Gorilla, and S.Afr.apiths->Pan, and that Pan had more humanlike ancestors (e.g. their fetus has more humanlike feet), and that apiths (incl. most or all "habilis" etc.?) were NO
pongid/hominid split, and the N- & later S-Rift fms explain the remarkably parallel evolutions of Pan//Gorilla, and that "OoAfrica" is an afrocentric prejudice.Gradually I came to the scenario that I'm promoting since 1 or 2 yrs (geology): India approaching S-Eurasia + forming islands/peninsulas with coastal forests explains the cercopith/ape split, the Mesopotamian Seaway closure c 15 Ma explains the
I'm now beginning the think that early-Pliocene Pan along the E.Afr.coasts might have been more humanlike than we generally think: with a diet incl. some seafood: slight brain enlargement, stone tools, flat feet... (even some diving??)
(One of my remaining problems: why is Gorilla so much larger than Homo & Pan? herbivory??)
But yes, I too once accepted the ridiculous idea of savanna-dwelling ancestors... :-D
Thanks for slowing down enough to explain your thinking (apart from 'PA'
- Paleo-Anthropologist?); but what's needed is /Evidence/.
Sweating is an effective way to cool a body that's running after prey that can't, though. I don't see how it helps in an aquatic environment.
Op woensdag 17 mei 2023 om 23:21:36 UTC+2 schreef JTEM:
Sweating is an effective way to cool a body that's running after prey that
can't, though. I don't see how it helps in an aquatic environment.
Lol! Running after prey? That's insane.
But sweating is a great way to rid the body of salt. Living waterside, swallowing dozens & dozens of shellfish, their liquor maybe not as
salty as sea water but still pretty salty...
Oh, and hello to all. But please note that I'm not interested in any religious 'explanations'.
You just gave us one.
You require the behavior -- running after antelope -- before they can evolve the means to do so. Else there is no selective pressure to
evolve the means for the behavior.
Aquatic Ape does not have this problem. They're simply picking up
stuff & eating -- i.e. shellfish. This alone will ensure the absolute largest brain their genetics will allow. And, if bigger/smarter brain
genes pop up, a useful mutations, they can take full advantage of
it... learning how to make new tools... to better exploit resources.
But they didn't have to. They could take a million years to figure
out stuff, or two million. It didn't matter. They could take advantage
of it on day-1 is the circumstances were right, or the new genetic adaptation could be floating around as an outlier for a million years before it made the difference between life or death.
Not true with your savanna idiocy.
I fully agree, of course, but said the same in different words... :-D
On Tue, 16 May 2023 16:01:29 -0700 (PDT)
marc verhaegen <littor...@gmail.com> wrote:
Op dinsdag 16 mei 2023 om 07:55:38 UTC+2 schreef JTEM:
Some outdated, self-declared, ego+afro+anthropocentric paleo-anthropologists
declare that the waterside theory of human evolution is only followed by non-scientists...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b07w4y98
The "Biblical Archaeologists" also consider themselves scientists.
In no uncertain terms, paleo anthropology is not and never has been
a science. It doesn't meet the basic rules of science, like in data collecting: Can you say "Selection Bias?"
It's circular. It BEGINS with an answer: "Humans arose in Africa then went searching for a Burger King, carrying a savanna on their backs
to eat from."
Look at the idiocy we've encountered here. Like how our ancestors
didn't need DHA, even though we all know that they did, because Elephants.
?!?!?!?!?
It's rationalizing. People have been trained to respond on command. Africa: The right answer.
Anything else: The wrong answer. Don't worry about why it's wrong,
just make up anything.
cheektooth enamel, knuckle-walking, hand-like feet etc.: we probably descended from something like that?! I had read Desmond Morris "Naked ape" (Dutch transl.) but had forgotten that he briefly mentioned the possibility of our (semi)aq.past. Then I readYes, incredible, but:
When I first read about paleo-anthropology (in the 1960s & 70s) I accepted everything they said: it seemed very logical: our nearest relativs are Pan & Gorilla, both resemble each other, they live in C-Africa, are furred, have long canines, thin
before the sedge-wading Ndoki gorilla were described (in 1995?).Soon it became clear (my medical studies: sweating etc.) that the various elements of savanna idea were incredibly wrong. Since evolution is gradual, there had to be a phase that combined trees + water: I described this aquarboreal phase some 5 yrs
human ancestors. My idea that knuckle-walking evolved in Pan//Gorilla is now accepted by most PAs.Hardy's idea of our aq.phase >10 Ma, and Elaine's >5 Ma, were apparently too long ago (Elaine thought our aquaticness *caused* the H/P split 5 Ma).
Reading the whole PA literature forced me to accept that E.Afr.apiths->Gorilla, and S.Afr.apiths->PanAnd that Pan had more humanlike ancestors (e.g. their fetus has more humanlike feet), and that apiths (incl. most or all "habilis" etc.?) were NO
pongid/hominid split, and the N- & later S-Rift fms explain the remarkably parallel evolutions of Pan//Gorilla, and that "OoAfrica" is an afrocentric prejudice .Gradually I came to the scenario that I'm promoting since 1 or 2 yrs (geology): India approaching S-Eurasia + forming islands/peninsulas with coastal forests explains the cercopith/ape split, the Mesopotamian Seaway closure c 15 Ma explains the
I'm now beginning the think that early-Pliocene Pan along the E.Afr.coasts might have been more humanlike than we generally think: with a diet incl. some seafood: slight brain enlargement, stone tools, flat feet... (even some diving??)
(One of my remaining problems: why is Gorilla so much larger than Homo & Pan? herbivory??)
But yes, I too once accepted the ridiculous idea of savanna-dwelling ancestors... :-DThanks for slowing down enough to explain your thinking (apart from 'PA'
- Paleo-Anthropologist?); but what's needed is /Evidence/.
Sweating is an effective way to cool a body that's running after prey that can't, though. I don't see how it helps in an aquatic environment.
Oh, and hello to all. But please note that I'm not interested in any religious 'explanations'.
--
Bah, and indeed Humbug.
Is this the first time you are posting to sci.bio.paleontology John?
If so, a hearty welcome to you! We need more participants. This group
is now in the "Endangered" zone, almost as bad as the "Critically Endangered zone"
in which I found it in December 2010 after having gone on a decade-long posting (and even lurking) break.
In any event, I hope this post won't be your last here, and I apologize for having
been absent from it for almost a month.
On Tue, 13 Jun 2023 11:57:17 -0700 (PDT)
Peter Nyikos <peter2nyikos@gmail.com> wrote:
Is this the first time you are posting to sci.bio.paleontology John?
If so, a hearty welcome to you! We need more participants. This group
is now in the "Endangered" zone, almost as bad as the "Critically Endangered zone"
in which I found it in December 2010 after having gone on a decade-long
posting (and even lurking) break.
In any event, I hope this post won't be your last here, and I apologize for having
been absent from it for almost a month.
Thank you.
I'm a long-time usenet user, but a bit of a fraud here; I have no paelontology background, I was just looking for any active group that might have any recent information about early humans, dinosaur-bird split and
the Ediacaran explosion.
On Tue, 13 Jun 2023 11:57:17 -0700 (PDT)
Peter Nyikos <peter2...@gmail.com> wrote:
Is this the first time you are posting to sci.bio.paleontology John?
If so, a hearty welcome to you! We need more participants. This group
is now in the "Endangered" zone, almost as bad as the "Critically Endangered zone"
in which I found it in December 2010 after having gone on a decade-long posting (and even lurking) break.
In any event, I hope this post won't be your last here, and I apologize for having
been absent from it for almost a month.
Thank you.
I'm a long-time usenet user, but a bit of a fraud here; I have no paelontology background, I was just looking for any active group that might have any recent information about early humans, dinosaur-bird split and
the Ediacaran explosion.
Bah, and indeed Humbug.
JTEM is ignoring the obvious -- the elephant in the room, you might say. Where did elephants get such large [much larger than human] brains
On Tue, 13 Jun 2023 11:57:17 -0700 (PDT)
Peter Nyikos <peter2...@gmail.com> wrote:
Is this the first time you are posting to sci.bio.paleontology John?
If so, a hearty welcome to you! We need more participants. This group
is now in the "Endangered" zone, almost as bad as the "Critically Endangered zone"
in which I found it in December 2010 after having gone on a decade-long posting (and even lurking) break.
In any event, I hope this post won't be your last here, and I apologize for havingThank you.
been absent from it for almost a month.
I'm a long-time usenet user, but a bit of a fraud here; I have no paelontology background, I was just looking for any active group that might have any recent information about early humans, dinosaur-bird split and
the Ediacaran explosion.
--
Bah, and indeed Humbug.
On Tuesday, June 13, 2023 at 2:46:40 PM UTC-7, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
On Tue, 13 Jun 2023 11:57:17 -0700 (PDT)
Peter Nyikos <peter2...@gmail.com> wrote:
Is this the first time you are posting to sci.bio.paleontology John?Thank you.
If so, a hearty welcome to you! We need more participants. This group
is now in the "Endangered" zone, almost as bad as the "Critically Endangered zone"
in which I found it in December 2010 after having gone on a decade-long
posting (and even lurking) break.
In any event, I hope this post won't be your last here, and I apologize for having
been absent from it for almost a month.
I'm a long-time usenet user, but a bit of a fraud here; I have no
paelontology background, I was just looking for any active group that might >> have any recent information about early humans, dinosaur-bird split and
the Ediacaran explosion.
--
Bah, and indeed Humbug.
Hi John K-M. You MAY have come to the right place. John Harshman is a ornithologic systematist
who is very familiar with the dinosaur-bird connections. Peter has a long amateur interest in vertebrate
paleontology, with reservations about many current views. I'm also an amateur, with particular interest
in very early metazoan evolution (neo-Proterzoic on).
The Ediacaran-Cambrian "explosion" is a big subject. There's an excellent, non-trivial book "The Cambrian
Explosion" by Erwin and Valentine, unfortunately out of print (and now slightly out of date). You can find in
in libraries, or maybe used book places. IF you find it at ~< $100, buy it. Otherwise, Wikipedia is generally
a good place to start with these subjects in the most popular branching order: Ctenophora, Spongia, Placozoa,
Cnidaria, Bilateria, Prototomia (bugs), Deuterosomia (us). All of the above have their origins in the Ediacaran from earliest
(~620 Mya) to latest (542 Mya). If any references you may want to see are behind paywalls, I have an extensive
collection of references I could provide.
On Wednesday, June 14, 2023 at 9:15:03 AM UTC-7, John Harshman wrote:
On 6/14/23 8:21 AM, erik simpson wrote:I can't find it either, and I haven't got it. A lot of good stuff has been found since 2000.
On Tuesday, June 13, 2023 at 2:46:40 PM UTC-7, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote: >>>> On Tue, 13 Jun 2023 11:57:17 -0700 (PDT)While we're on the subject of references, my very favorite: Budd G.E.,
Peter Nyikos <peter2...@gmail.com> wrote:
Is this the first time you are posting to sci.bio.paleontology John? >>>>>Thank you.
If so, a hearty welcome to you! We need more participants. This group >>>>> is now in the "Endangered" zone, almost as bad as the "Critically Endangered zone"
in which I found it in December 2010 after having gone on a decade-long >>>>> posting (and even lurking) break.
In any event, I hope this post won't be your last here, and I apologize for having
been absent from it for almost a month.
I'm a long-time usenet user, but a bit of a fraud here; I have no
paelontology background, I was just looking for any active group that might
have any recent information about early humans, dinosaur-bird split and >>>> the Ediacaran explosion.
--
Bah, and indeed Humbug.
Hi John K-M. You MAY have come to the right place. John Harshman is a ornithologic systematist
who is very familiar with the dinosaur-bird connections. Peter has a long amateur interest in vertebrate
paleontology, with reservations about many current views. I'm also an amateur, with particular interest
in very early metazoan evolution (neo-Proterzoic on).
The Ediacaran-Cambrian "explosion" is a big subject. There's an excellent, non-trivial book "The Cambrian
Explosion" by Erwin and Valentine, unfortunately out of print (and now slightly out of date). You can find in
in libraries, or maybe used book places. IF you find it at ~< $100, buy it. Otherwise, Wikipedia is generally
a good place to start with these subjects in the most popular branching order: Ctenophora, Spongia, Placozoa,
Cnidaria, Bilateria, Prototomia (bugs), Deuterosomia (us). All of the above have their origins in the Ediacaran from earliest
(~620 Mya) to latest (542 Mya). If any references you may want to see are behind paywalls, I have an extensive
collection of references I could provide.
Jensen S. A critical reappraisal of the fossil record of the bilaterian
phyla. Biological Reviews 2000; 75:253-295.
Unfortunately, I can't at the moment locate a free web copy.
Budd is a good name to look for, as is Droser, Erwin (duh) and Shuhei Xiou.
On 6/14/23 8:21 AM, erik simpson wrote:I can't find it either, and I haven't got it. A lot of good stuff has been found since 2000.
On Tuesday, June 13, 2023 at 2:46:40 PM UTC-7, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
On Tue, 13 Jun 2023 11:57:17 -0700 (PDT)
Peter Nyikos <peter2...@gmail.com> wrote:
Is this the first time you are posting to sci.bio.paleontology John?Thank you.
If so, a hearty welcome to you! We need more participants. This group >>> is now in the "Endangered" zone, almost as bad as the "Critically Endangered zone"
in which I found it in December 2010 after having gone on a decade-long >>> posting (and even lurking) break.
In any event, I hope this post won't be your last here, and I apologize for having
been absent from it for almost a month.
I'm a long-time usenet user, but a bit of a fraud here; I have no
paelontology background, I was just looking for any active group that might
have any recent information about early humans, dinosaur-bird split and >> the Ediacaran explosion.
--
Bah, and indeed Humbug.
Hi John K-M. You MAY have come to the right place. John Harshman is a ornithologic systematist
who is very familiar with the dinosaur-bird connections. Peter has a long amateur interest in vertebrate
paleontology, with reservations about many current views. I'm also an amateur, with particular interest
in very early metazoan evolution (neo-Proterzoic on).
The Ediacaran-Cambrian "explosion" is a big subject. There's an excellent, non-trivial book "The Cambrian
Explosion" by Erwin and Valentine, unfortunately out of print (and now slightly out of date). You can find in
in libraries, or maybe used book places. IF you find it at ~< $100, buy it. Otherwise, Wikipedia is generally
a good place to start with these subjects in the most popular branching order: Ctenophora, Spongia, Placozoa,
Cnidaria, Bilateria, Prototomia (bugs), Deuterosomia (us). All of the above have their origins in the Ediacaran from earliest
(~620 Mya) to latest (542 Mya). If any references you may want to see are behind paywalls, I have an extensive
collection of references I could provide.
While we're on the subject of references, my very favorite: Budd G.E., Jensen S. A critical reappraisal of the fossil record of the bilaterian phyla. Biological Reviews 2000; 75:253-295.
Unfortunately, I can't at the moment locate a free web copy.
On 6/14/23 8:21 AM, erik simpson wrote:
On Tuesday, June 13, 2023 at 2:46:40?PM UTC-7, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:While we're on the subject of references, my very favorite: Budd G.E.,
On Tue, 13 Jun 2023 11:57:17 -0700 (PDT)
Peter Nyikos <peter2...@gmail.com> wrote:
Is this the first time you are posting to sci.bio.paleontology John?Thank you.
If so, a hearty welcome to you! We need more participants. This group
is now in the "Endangered" zone, almost as bad as the "Critically Endangered zone"
in which I found it in December 2010 after having gone on a decade-long >>>> posting (and even lurking) break.
In any event, I hope this post won't be your last here, and I apologize for having
been absent from it for almost a month.
I'm a long-time usenet user, but a bit of a fraud here; I have no
paelontology background, I was just looking for any active group that might >>> have any recent information about early humans, dinosaur-bird split and
the Ediacaran explosion.
--
Bah, and indeed Humbug.
Hi John K-M. You MAY have come to the right place. John Harshman is a ornithologic systematist
who is very familiar with the dinosaur-bird connections. Peter has a long amateur interest in vertebrate
paleontology, with reservations about many current views. I'm also an amateur, with particular interest
in very early metazoan evolution (neo-Proterzoic on).
The Ediacaran-Cambrian "explosion" is a big subject. There's an excellent, non-trivial book "The Cambrian
Explosion" by Erwin and Valentine, unfortunately out of print (and now slightly out of date). You can find in
in libraries, or maybe used book places. IF you find it at ~< $100, buy it. Otherwise, Wikipedia is generally
a good place to start with these subjects in the most popular branching order: Ctenophora, Spongia, Placozoa,
Cnidaria, Bilateria, Prototomia (bugs), Deuterosomia (us). All of the above have their origins in the Ediacaran from earliest
(~620 Mya) to latest (542 Mya). If any references you may want to see are behind paywalls, I have an extensive
collection of references I could provide.
Jensen S. A critical reappraisal of the fossil record of the bilaterian >phyla. Biological Reviews 2000; 75:253-295.
Unfortunately, I can't at the moment locate a free web copy.
On Wed, 14 Jun 2023 09:14:49 -0700, John Harshman
<john.harshman@gmail.com> wrote:
On 6/14/23 8:21 AM, erik simpson wrote:
On Tuesday, June 13, 2023 at 2:46:40?PM UTC-7, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:While we're on the subject of references, my very favorite: Budd G.E.,
On Tue, 13 Jun 2023 11:57:17 -0700 (PDT)
Peter Nyikos <peter2...@gmail.com> wrote:
Is this the first time you are posting to sci.bio.paleontology John? >>>>>Thank you.
If so, a hearty welcome to you! We need more participants. This group >>>>> is now in the "Endangered" zone, almost as bad as the "Critically Endangered zone"
in which I found it in December 2010 after having gone on a decade-long >>>>> posting (and even lurking) break.
In any event, I hope this post won't be your last here, and I apologize for having
been absent from it for almost a month.
I'm a long-time usenet user, but a bit of a fraud here; I have no
paelontology background, I was just looking for any active group that might
have any recent information about early humans, dinosaur-bird split and >>>> the Ediacaran explosion.
--
Bah, and indeed Humbug.
Hi John K-M. You MAY have come to the right place. John Harshman is a ornithologic systematist
who is very familiar with the dinosaur-bird connections. Peter has a long amateur interest in vertebrate
paleontology, with reservations about many current views. I'm also an amateur, with particular interest
in very early metazoan evolution (neo-Proterzoic on).
The Ediacaran-Cambrian "explosion" is a big subject. There's an excellent, non-trivial book "The Cambrian
Explosion" by Erwin and Valentine, unfortunately out of print (and now slightly out of date). You can find in
in libraries, or maybe used book places. IF you find it at ~< $100, buy it. Otherwise, Wikipedia is generally
a good place to start with these subjects in the most popular branching order: Ctenophora, Spongia, Placozoa,
Cnidaria, Bilateria, Prototomia (bugs), Deuterosomia (us). All of the above have their origins in the Ediacaran from earliest
(~620 Mya) to latest (542 Mya). If any references you may want to see are behind paywalls, I have an extensive
collection of references I could provide.
Jensen S. A critical reappraisal of the fossil record of the bilaterian
phyla. Biological Reviews 2000; 75:253-295.
Unfortunately, I can't at the moment locate a free web copy.
Did you try this? https://www.academia.edu/1279529/A_critical_reappraisal_of_the_fossil_record_of_the_bilaterian_phyla
On Wednesday, June 14, 2023 at 11:03:28 AM UTC-7, John Harshman wrote:
On 6/14/23 10:18 AM, Pandora wrote:
On Wed, 14 Jun 2023 09:14:49 -0700, John HarshmanNo. I tend to avoid those people because they frequently want money. But
<john.h...@gmail.com> wrote:
On 6/14/23 8:21 AM, erik simpson wrote:
On Tuesday, June 13, 2023 at 2:46:40?PM UTC-7, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote: >>>>>> On Tue, 13 Jun 2023 11:57:17 -0700 (PDT)While we're on the subject of references, my very favorite: Budd G.E., >>>> Jensen S. A critical reappraisal of the fossil record of the bilaterian >>>> phyla. Biological Reviews 2000; 75:253-295.
Peter Nyikos <peter2...@gmail.com> wrote:
Is this the first time you are posting to sci.bio.paleontology John? >>>>>>>Thank you.
If so, a hearty welcome to you! We need more participants. This group >>>>>>> is now in the "Endangered" zone, almost as bad as the "Critically Endangered zone"
in which I found it in December 2010 after having gone on a decade-long >>>>>>> posting (and even lurking) break.
In any event, I hope this post won't be your last here, and I apologize for having
been absent from it for almost a month.
I'm a long-time usenet user, but a bit of a fraud here; I have no
paelontology background, I was just looking for any active group that might
have any recent information about early humans, dinosaur-bird split and >>>>>> the Ediacaran explosion.
--
Bah, and indeed Humbug.
Hi John K-M. You MAY have come to the right place. John Harshman is a ornithologic systematist
who is very familiar with the dinosaur-bird connections. Peter has a long amateur interest in vertebrate
paleontology, with reservations about many current views. I'm also an amateur, with particular interest
in very early metazoan evolution (neo-Proterzoic on).
The Ediacaran-Cambrian "explosion" is a big subject. There's an excellent, non-trivial book "The Cambrian
Explosion" by Erwin and Valentine, unfortunately out of print (and now slightly out of date). You can find in
in libraries, or maybe used book places. IF you find it at ~< $100, buy it. Otherwise, Wikipedia is generally
a good place to start with these subjects in the most popular branching order: Ctenophora, Spongia, Placozoa,
Cnidaria, Bilateria, Prototomia (bugs), Deuterosomia (us). All of the above have their origins in the Ediacaran from earliest
(~620 Mya) to latest (542 Mya). If any references you may want to see are behind paywalls, I have an extensive
collection of references I could provide.
Unfortunately, I can't at the moment locate a free web copy.
Did you try this?
https://www.academia.edu/1279529/A_critical_reappraisal_of_the_fossil_record_of_the_bilaterian_phyla
that looks free.
Got it. Thank you both.
On 6/14/23 10:18 AM, Pandora wrote:
On Wed, 14 Jun 2023 09:14:49 -0700, John Harshman
<john.h...@gmail.com> wrote:
On 6/14/23 8:21 AM, erik simpson wrote:
On Tuesday, June 13, 2023 at 2:46:40?PM UTC-7, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote: >>>> On Tue, 13 Jun 2023 11:57:17 -0700 (PDT)While we're on the subject of references, my very favorite: Budd G.E.,
Peter Nyikos <peter2...@gmail.com> wrote:
Is this the first time you are posting to sci.bio.paleontology John? >>>>>Thank you.
If so, a hearty welcome to you! We need more participants. This group >>>>> is now in the "Endangered" zone, almost as bad as the "Critically Endangered zone"
in which I found it in December 2010 after having gone on a decade-long
posting (and even lurking) break.
In any event, I hope this post won't be your last here, and I apologize for having
been absent from it for almost a month.
I'm a long-time usenet user, but a bit of a fraud here; I have no
paelontology background, I was just looking for any active group that might
have any recent information about early humans, dinosaur-bird split and >>>> the Ediacaran explosion.
--
Bah, and indeed Humbug.
Hi John K-M. You MAY have come to the right place. John Harshman is a ornithologic systematist
who is very familiar with the dinosaur-bird connections. Peter has a long amateur interest in vertebrate
paleontology, with reservations about many current views. I'm also an amateur, with particular interest
in very early metazoan evolution (neo-Proterzoic on).
The Ediacaran-Cambrian "explosion" is a big subject. There's an excellent, non-trivial book "The Cambrian
Explosion" by Erwin and Valentine, unfortunately out of print (and now slightly out of date). You can find in
in libraries, or maybe used book places. IF you find it at ~< $100, buy it. Otherwise, Wikipedia is generally
a good place to start with these subjects in the most popular branching order: Ctenophora, Spongia, Placozoa,
Cnidaria, Bilateria, Prototomia (bugs), Deuterosomia (us). All of the above have their origins in the Ediacaran from earliest
(~620 Mya) to latest (542 Mya). If any references you may want to see are behind paywalls, I have an extensive
collection of references I could provide.
Jensen S. A critical reappraisal of the fossil record of the bilaterian >> phyla. Biological Reviews 2000; 75:253-295.
Unfortunately, I can't at the moment locate a free web copy.
Did you try this? https://www.academia.edu/1279529/A_critical_reappraisal_of_the_fossil_record_of_the_bilaterian_phylaNo. I tend to avoid those people because they frequently want money. But that looks free.
While we're on the subject of references, my very favorite: Budd G.E.,
Jensen S. A critical reappraisal of the fossil record of the bilaterian phyla. Biological Reviews 2000; 75:253-295.
John Harshman wrote:
While we're on the subject of references, my very favorite: Budd G.E.,
Jensen S. A critical reappraisal of the fossil record of the bilaterian
phyla. Biological Reviews 2000; 75:253-295.
You can't follow threads, not even your own "Contribution." You often
ask questions already answered. You post cites you never read or
if you did you failed to comprehend. And yet here you are, "name
dropping," so to speak, thinking you're fooling anyone but one of your
own alters.
You are a fraud.
I have no idea
John Harshman wrote:
I have no idea
No.
John Harshman wrote:
[...]
You're a disordered troll inflicting its OCPD on
everyone, amongst your other disorders.
Sorry, just seeing how long you will keep up the abuse
John Harshman wrote:
Sorry, just seeing how long you will keep up the abuse
After what nature did to you? Abuse? Impossible. We can't sink
the Titanic, not after it's already sunk.
Thanks for
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 302 |
| Nodes: | 16 (0 / 16) |
| Uptime: | 96:50:04 |
| Calls: | 6,764 |
| Calls today: | 2 |
| Files: | 12,295 |
| Messages: | 5,376,370 |
| Posted today: | 1 |