MESSAGE
| DATE | 2023-05-14 |
| FROM | Ruben Safir
|
| SUBJECT | Subject: [Hangout - NYLXS] (fwd) Re: Human & ape evolution
|
-- forwarded message --
X-Received: by 2002:ae9:c10c:0:b0:74e:2de8:c802 with SMTP id z12-20020ae9c10c000000b0074e2de8c802mr4391766qki.9.1682509997497;
Wed, 26 Apr 2023 04:53:17 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:a9d:5ccc:0:b0:6a5:d944:f1d6 with SMTP id
r12-20020a9d5ccc000000b006a5d944f1d6mr6712682oti.3.1682509997148; Wed, 26 Apr
2023 04:53:17 -0700 (PDT)
Path: reader2.panix.com!panix!1.us.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!diablo1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!news-out.google.com!nntp.google.com!postnews.google.com!google-groups.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.bio.paleontology
Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2023 04:53:16 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To:
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=2a02:a03f:8dee:f400:fd35:9b5d:d485:d101;
posting-account=od9E6wkAAADQ0Qm7G0889JKn_DjHJ-bA
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2a02:a03f:8dee:f400:fd35:9b5d:d485:d101
References:
<3945b9af-47a1-449f-8d8f-cfe629f1e309n-at-googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <1d190df8-2e61-48f5-b40d-c0e85091d48dn-at-googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Human & ape evolution
From: marc verhaegen
Injection-Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2023 11:53:17 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Received-Bytes: 9315
Xref: panix sci.bio.paleontology:77226
Op woensdag 26 april 2023 om 10:47:00 UTC+2 schreef oot...-at-hot.ee:
Please, "oot", stop misrepresenting me:=20
IMO
1) early-Miocene Hominoidea were already BP (hylobatids & Hs still are): aq=
uaRboreal (aqua=3Dwater, arbor=3Dtree) vertical waders-climbers in swamp fo=
rests (+- cf.Nasalis-Rhinopithecus): wading bipedally + climbing arms overh=
ead in the branches above the water,
2) we do not descend from australopiths: my Hum.Evol.papers showed: E.Afr.a=
piths afarensis->boisei are fossil Gorilla relatives // S.Afr.apiths africa=
nus->robustus are fossil Pan,
3) we do not come from Africa ("out of Afria" nonsense): Miocene Hominoidea=
dispersed along Tethys-ocean coasts, Pliocene Homo along Ind.Ocean coasts,=
Hs I don't kow (S or even SE.Asia?),
4) we never lived in savanna, but have always been waterside, it's really =
not difficult:
https://www.gondwanatalks.com/l/the-waterside-hypothesis-wading-led-to-upri=
ght-walking-in-early-humans/
_____
> On Wednesday, 26 April 2023 at 09:24:27 UTC+3, JTEM wrote:=20
> > oot...-at-hot.ee wrote:=20
> >=20
> > > marc verhaegen wrote:=20
> > > > 4 frequent paleo-anthropological prejudices, with 0 evidence:=20
> > > > Many PAs still *assume* that human ancestors=20
> > > > 1) became bipedal when we left the trees for the gound??=20
> > > > 2) came Out-of-Africa (OoA)??=20
> > > > 3) were savanna-dwellers???=20
> >=20
> > > That is not that popular hypothesis.=20
> >=20
> > Of course it is. GENERATIONS were spoon fed it. You might mean=20
> > that academia has since decided to pile on an even WORSE crank=20
> > "theory" -- that bipedalism was spawned in trees which is why no=20
> > other so called "Ape" is bipedal...=20
> >
> Show me what textbooks teach that our ancestors went into=20
> savanna to chase antelopes? Or what you mean by spoon-feeding=20
> generations? Demonstrate evidence of that. It is hypothesis ... not=20
> very popular, used as straw-man. We have evidence that other=20
> bipedal apes went extinct, were perhaps killed by h.sapiens, no=20
> evidence that those were deep ones however. Rest of extant apes=20
> use tools or carry big stuff only occasionally.
> > > You typically use it as straw man.=20
> >=20
> > It's not a straw man. "Da bipedalism came in trees" is pretty new=20
> > and idiotic.=20
> >
> It is Marcs favorite straw man. Idiotic ape that did run around=20
> imagining being cheetah? Who advocates that idea that Marc keeps=20
> bringing up? Lot of apes are idiots, but majority are smarter than that.
> > > Found remains show indications that our ancestors were still well=20
> > > adapted to climbing trees, even after they had begun to walk upright.=
=20
> >=20
> > Is there any reason to believe this should not be the case?=20
> >=20
> > You clearly believe in Intelligent Design. Clearly. If you didn't, the=
=20
> > fact that traits can be vestigial or even adapted virtually as is to=20
> > a new role is hardly new or even noteworthy.=20
> >=20
> > The good Doctor sees this as evidence for "Aquaboreal," I see it as=20
> > evidence for an animal existing in number of environments... the=20
> > forest where such traits are very useful, outside the forests where=20
> > bipedalism was most useful.=20
> >=20
> > There's very strong evidence for this, btw. If you want to talk=20
> > "Popular," the idea that australopithecus occupied a wide range,=20
> > a number of environments is "Popular."=20
> >
> Yes, trees were common, lot of land was forests. So why these=20
> features were supposedly vestigial (not in use)? What is the=20
> reason to avoid trees not to climb a tree for to get some nuts,=20
> fruits, baby birds or eggs? Is it because deep ones do not climb, these=
=20
> have to dive? But the whole idea of deep ones is not supported=20
> by evidence.
> > > > These are only anthropo- & afro-centric just-so pre-assumptions:=20
> > > > - Darwin thought "Out of Africa" (Pan & Gorilla were African),=20
> > > > - Africa (apart from sahara) is mostly jungle or savanna,=20
> > > > - apiths lived in Africa, were BP, and had some humanlike anatomica=
l traits.=20
> >=20
> > > Typical lie that all the science is what some bearded guys thought=20
> > > more than hundred years ago.=20
> > Are you insane? That is NOT what you just quoted and are reacting to.=
=20
> >=20
> > Is it a straw man or are you insane?=20
> >
> What? I do read scientific articles these are not based on some kind=20
> of fantasies about deep ones and mermaids like Marks garbage is.
> > > > Therefore, many (most?) PAs still assume, without evidence, that=20
> > > > 1) we became BP after we split from Pan, and left the forest,=20
> >=20
> > > Where you concluded that we left forests? Why? Forest is full=20
> > > of edible nuts, eggs, fruit, mushrooms and animals are easier to=20
> > > trap or ambush.=20
> > Lol!=20
> >=20
> > "No! We live in the forest! We're an arboreal species! You just=20
> > think we're not cus you live in a country without forests!"=20
> >
> Yep. I live in city but my brother lives near city in edge of forest. Has=
to=20
> drive to workplace bit longer but is happy about it. What is so bad=20
> about forest (if it exists)? Forest is IMHO good place. When your country=
's=20
> imperialist philosophy needed charcoal for making lot of iron and steel=
=20
> weaponry then you were taken it away. That was only recently, why you do=
=20
> not read books?
> > > > 1) early-Miocene Hominoidea were already BP=3Dvertical waders-climb=
ers in swamp forests (humans & gibbons still are BP), google AQUARBOREAL,=
=20
> >=20
> > > Here is a word our sole deep one worshiper pushes. Note that=20
> > > its sole evidence is few carved seashells found on Java.=20
> > Actually, there's also the fact that Java isn't in Africa. Just saying.=
=20
> >=20
> > I'm not a fan of the good Doctor's Aquaboreal. I'm not complaining=20
> > about his observations -- those are real enough, unlike the crap you=20
> > keep imagining. I just think there are better explanations.=20
> >=20
> > > Yeah forests were more moist indeed before; stupid=20
> > Speaking of stupid: The forest is not an environment where the=20
> > evolution of our brain could happen. We're dependent upon DHA=20
> > and you can't get it there. But Homo is found everywhere from=20
> > southeast Asia to South Africa, so clearly they were moving around.=20
> > And everyone agrees on HOW they moved around:=20
> >
> So eggs, birds, meat, seeds and nuts contain no DHA? Forest takes=20
> indeed bit a brain to navigate in. Most forest animals are noticeably=20
> smarter than most of those of plains or water. Unsure why you think=20
> that forest inhibits brain development.=20
> >=20
> > Coastal dispersal.=20
> >=20
> Also nearby coast is useful, tidal forces can bring or help to trap lot=
=20
> of useful things. But living on coast is hard, forest near coast is=20
> lot better and safer. However all the evidence of deep ones and=20
> swamp mermaids that Marc pushes is simply missing.
> > And if you're a believer in the church of Molecular Dating then our=20
> > present ability to synthesize DHA, as not very good as it is, only=20
> > dates back some 80k years... WAY too recent to account for DHA=20
> > using terrestrial ALA.=20
> >=20
> > So we have humans across continents, we have this stretching back=20
> > MILLIONS of years, they dd this following the coast, not swinging=20
> > from tree branches... if they were on the coast they were eating on=20
> > the coast... all that protein, all that DHA...=20
> >=20
> > It fits.=20
> >
> It is present elsewhere. One who does not eat seafood and fish does=20
> not get brain damage or development issues because of that. Also=20
> fish is possible to catch, trap or spear without need to swim nor dive.
-- end of forwarded message --
_______________________________________________
Hangout mailing list
Hangout-at-nylxs.com
http://lists.mrbrklyn.com/mailman/listinfo/hangout
|
|
