Re: Bipedalism in different substrates
From: NA Sides (nas_at_sonic.net)
Date: 07/09/04
- Next message: NA Sides: "Re: Bipedalism in different substrates"
- Previous message: NA Sides: "Re: Bipedalism in different substrates"
- In reply to: NA Sides: "Re: Bipedalism in different substrates"
- Next in thread: Jason Eshleman: "Re: Bipedalism in different substrates"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Fri, 09 Jul 2004 16:08:25 GMT
On Fri, 09 Jul 2004 15:25:00 GMT, NA Sides <nas@sonic.net> wrote:
<snip>
[Algis]
>>> >>>> >I dispute that they'd have to wade for hours if hominid ancestors
>>> >>>> >lived in water-side habitats for 7 million years. Even very slight
>>> >>>> >selection multiplied by that number of generations is very
>>> >>>> >significant. The point about the depth gradient, which you keep
>>> >>>> >missing, is that for every bout of waist deep wading there are going
>>> >>>> >to be at least two phases of even shallower wading where a watered
>>> >>>> >down bipedalism will be practiced.
[Jason]
>>> >Slight selection in any given generation can accumulate (though,
>>> >importantly, it can also be swamped by drift). But there must be a
>>> >selective differential in each generation. This hasn't been demonstrated
>>> >beyond conjecture and assertion. Why does the facultative biped have
>>> >fewer babies?
>>
>>It wades less efficiently, it is not able to wade in as deep water, it
>>is more at risk from losing it's footing and drowning when the water
>>gets deeper. (Of course.)
>
>You make three claims - all unsupported assertions. Then you add that
>"of course" those claims are true. You seem to think that your own
>private conviction lends credibility to your unsupported opinions.
I forgot to mention here that, even if your responses weren't merely
assertions, you still haven't answered Jason's question because you
have previously failed to support your major premise that
proto-hominins occupied a viable ecological niche that involved
specialized aquatic foraging. You attempt to support your primary
assertion with secondary assertions and have presented no evidence to
support any of them.
<snip>
NAS
>>Algis Kuliukas
- Next message: NA Sides: "Re: Bipedalism in different substrates"
- Previous message: NA Sides: "Re: Bipedalism in different substrates"
- In reply to: NA Sides: "Re: Bipedalism in different substrates"
- Next in thread: Jason Eshleman: "Re: Bipedalism in different substrates"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|