Re: fire &/or coast?
From: Marc Verhaegen (fa204466_at_skynet.be)
Date: 09/27/04
- Next message: Marc Verhaegen: "Re: Bipedalism in different substrates"
- Previous message: Marc Verhaegen: "Re: bipedal bears (Re: What is the Aquatic theory?"
- In reply to: Rich Travsky: "Re: fire &/or coast?"
- Next in thread: Rich Travsky: "Re: fire &/or coast?"
- Reply: Rich Travsky: "Re: fire &/or coast?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 12:48:09 +0200
"Rich Travsky" <traRvEsky@hotMOVEmail.com> wrote in message
news:4157775E.96D3E699@hotMOVEmail.com...
> > > Matt Ridley, in 'Nature via Nurture' quotes Richard Wrangham's theory
that the human pair bond derived from cooking.
> > :-D I've seen lots of silly theories in PA, but this must be one of
the worst.
> > > - Fire - suggestive evidence 1.6Mya (and every archaeologist
desperately looks for it). - Human teeth (erectus) started growing smaller
1.9 MYa.
> > We have inactivation of myosin-16 (masticatory musculature) estimated at
c 2 Ma. A possible explanation is use of fire, but much more likely IMO is
the transition to slippery foods which require less mastication & more
suction (seaside).
> Uh Marc, you ARE aware that mammals suckle? And that include primates and
in particular here, homo? Slippery foods! LOL!
Sigh. As usual, too stupid to follow. Why do you think Homo had inactivation
of myosin-16 IYO?? why this difference with chimps?? Some imbeciles here
think that Homo started to hunt 2 Ma, but in that case they needed larger
teeth than chimps (who also hunt), but the opposite is true. Got it?
- Next message: Marc Verhaegen: "Re: Bipedalism in different substrates"
- Previous message: Marc Verhaegen: "Re: bipedal bears (Re: What is the Aquatic theory?"
- In reply to: Rich Travsky: "Re: fire &/or coast?"
- Next in thread: Rich Travsky: "Re: fire &/or coast?"
- Reply: Rich Travsky: "Re: fire &/or coast?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]