MESSAGE
| DATE | 2023-05-14 |
| FROM | Ruben Safir
|
| SUBJECT | Subject: [Hangout - NYLXS] (fwd) Re: Human & ape evolution
|
-- forwarded message --
X-Received: by 2002:a05:622a:1808:b0:3ef:415f:189 with SMTP id t8-20020a05622a180800b003ef415f0189mr8378965qtc.6.1682514847836;
Wed, 26 Apr 2023 06:14:07 -0700 (PDT)
X-Received: by 2002:aca:3205:0:b0:38e:d4fe:7d7 with SMTP id
y5-20020aca3205000000b0038ed4fe07d7mr2987153oiy.5.1682514847505; Wed, 26 Apr
2023 06:14:07 -0700 (PDT)
Path: reader2.panix.com!panix!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!proxad.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!209.85.160.216.MISMATCH!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 06:14:07 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <1d190df8-2e61-48f5-b40d-c0e85091d48dn-at-googlegroups.com>
Injection-Info: google-groups.googlegroups.com; posting-host=84.50.190.130; posting-account=pysjKgkAAACLegAdYDFznkqjgx_7vlUK
NNTP-Posting-Host: 84.50.190.130
References:
<3945b9af-47a1-449f-8d8f-cfe629f1e309n-at-googlegroups.com>
<1d190df8-2e61-48f5-b40d-c0e85091d48dn-at-googlegroups.com>
User-Agent: G2/1.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <13705fe5-5300-4640-8bfe-e498937d1377n-at-googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Human & ape evolution
From: "oot...-at-hot.ee"
Injection-Date: Wed, 26 Apr 2023 13:14:07 +0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Xref: panix sci.bio.paleontology:77227
On Wednesday, 26 April 2023 at 14:53:18 UTC+3, marc verhaegen wrote:
> Op woensdag 26 april 2023 om 10:47:00 UTC+2 schreef oot...-at-hot.ee:=20
>=20
> Please, "oot", stop misrepresenting me:=20
> IMO=20
>=20
Hard to do it you outright spam your nonsense. And what you write are
just "IMO"... barely even worth to call hypothesis.
> 1) early-Miocene Hominoidea were already BP (hylobatids & Hs still are): =
aquaRboreal (aqua=3Dwater, arbor=3Dtree) vertical waders-climbers in swamp =
forests (+- cf.Nasalis-Rhinopithecus): wading bipedally + climbing arms ove=
rhead in the branches above the water,
Where are fossils of those early Miocene (like -22M) hominids?
Name the findings, genes what have you. Note that it takes quite a stretch =
to
conclude "bipedal" from few teeth or skull fragments.
> 2) we do not descend from australopiths: my Hum.Evol.papers showed: E.Afr=
.apiths afarensis->boisei are fossil Gorilla relatives // S.Afr.apiths afri=
canus->robustus are fossil Pan,=20
That "showed" should read "expressed opinion". And most of your
opinion is based on none of evidence just on your discarding=20
contradicting evidence of others without much ground.
> 3) we do not come from Africa ("out of Afria" nonsense): Miocene Hominoid=
ea dispersed along Tethys-ocean coasts, Pliocene Homo along Ind.Ocean coast=
s, Hs I don't kow (S or even SE.Asia?),
Again Miocene? Where are the fossils, tools whatever of Miocene?
Sahelanthropus and Orrorin (late Miocene) were in Africa.
=20
> 4) we never lived in savanna, but have always been waterside, it's really=
not difficult:=20
> https://www.gondwanatalks.com/l/the-waterside-hypothesis-wading-led-to-up=
right-walking-in-early-humans/=20
>=20
What means "never"? Tens of millions of people of Africa live in savanna
right now. It is just your favorite straw-man that ape in savanna should
imagine being cheetah and to chase antelopes and gazelles around there.=20
I did no misrepresentations whatsoever.
> _____
> > 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
> > >=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.=20
> > > > 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
> > >=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=
.=20
> > > > Found remains show indications that our ancestors were still well=
=20
> > > > adapted to climbing trees, even after they had begun to walk uprigh=
t.=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, th=
e=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
> > >=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.=20
> > > > > 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 anatomi=
cal 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
> > >=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.=20
> > > > > 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
> > >=20
> > Yep. I live in city but my brother lives near city in edge of forest. H=
as 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 count=
ry'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 d=
o=20
> > not read books?=20
> > > > > 1) early-Miocene Hominoidea were already BP=3Dvertical waders-cli=
mbers 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 sayin=
g.=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
> > >=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.=20
> > > 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
> > >=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
|
|
