Re: savanna nonsense (Re: Scientists Find Prehistoric Dwarf Skeleton

From: Jim McGinn (jimmcginn_at_yahoo.com)
Date: 11/02/04 

Date: 2 Nov 2004 10:45:29 -0800

nmm1@cus.cam.ac.uk (Nick Maclaren)

> |> Do you think they might have survived in monsoon forest
> |> habitat? I think this is an especially pertainent
> |> question in the light of the fact that all of the
> |> paleoecological and paleoclimatic evidence indicates
> |> that the earliest hominids lived in monsoon forest
> |> habitat, not treeless savanna habitat. (When all else
> |> fails look at the evidence.)
>
> The African savanna is not treeless, not even where it merges into
> semi-desert. The trees get smaller and scrubbier, but they exist.

It hardly matters since African savanna is not where
hominids emerged. Old news.

> In most areas, the gradation from rain forest to monsoon forest
> to savanna to semi-desert is primarily controlled by the severity
> of the dry-season.

The extant dry season in east Africa is relatively
longer and harsher than that of the late miocene, when
hominids emerged in east Africa 7 to 9 mya.

> No more, no less. It is almost certain
> that hominid ancestors will have followed that gradation

Too simple. You'd have to sell me on this. And I'm
not 100% sure I fully comprehend what "gradation" you
speak of and in what way hominids, "will have
followed," it.

> as they
> adapted or developed technologies that enabled living in the drier
> ecologies. The primary issue of survival is where to get water
> and food in the dry season, and the former is more important.

We're not talking about the evolution of tortoises
here. We have to be careful about jumping to
conclusions about what is "the" primary issue of
survival. You seem inclined to portray the earliest
years of hominid evolution as some kind of scavenger
hunt in the desert. Let us not forget that we are
talking about the evolution of the most social adept
creature that has ever existed. If you don't have a
theory as to how we evolved the traits and behaviors
that are most plainly prominent in our species then
you don't have a theory worth discussing. Remember,
we're suppose to be discussing HUMAN evolution.

> [ Note that gallery forest is approximately a ribbon of a wetter
> ecology winding through a drier one. ]
>
> As I understand it, chimpanzees' habitat extends from rain to
> monsoon forest, but not really out into the savanna. I don't see
> any problem with out ancestors moving out into that, ONCE we had
> developed the ability to travel fairly long distances and/or
> carry things.

It seems to me you have some kind of traveling ape
hypothesis. This is not even a remote possibility,
IMO. The fossil evidence that Apith were still adapted
to tree dwelling pretty much eliminates the possibility
that they were doing much traveling at all. (When all
else fails look at the evidence.)

> But you really, really HAVE to be able to do one
> or the other to survive on the savanna,

Which is a mute point in light of the fact that hominids
didn't emerge in/from savanna habitat. Hominids emerged
in/from monsoon forest habitat. Old news.

> so it had to happen FIRST.
>
> [ I am assuming that we didn't adopt a burrowing lifestyle, and
> become naked in the same way as mole rats have. ]

I'm assuming that they resided—on a relatively
permanent basis—at locations in the vicinity of water.
So drought was mostly a non issue. The real survival
issues have to do with the fact that they were so
isolated at whatever patch of forest they happened to
reside at and food resources tend to fluctuate do to
competition from migrating species. Unlike a lot of
the other large mammals to whom with which they competed
for seasonally scarce resources they could not easily
travel from one location to the next. So their fate
was largely or completely tied to the availability of
resource through the dry season. They had all their
eggs in one basket. Thus they had little choice but
to guard that basket.

The strategy that evolved is mob-oriented
attack-defensive behavior to guard communally owned
territory in opposition to food-competitor species.
It's what we more commonly think of as war.

Jim

Relevant Pages

  • Re: A More Reasonable Interpretation of the Evidence
    ... "There's not the slightest evidence that our ancestors ever ran over ... treeless savanna habitat is not viable in that they were largely if not ... localities where early hominids resided were more expansive than these ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)
  • Re: A More Reasonable Interpretation of the Evidence
    ... treeless savanna habitat is not viable in that they were largely if not ... localities where early hominids resided were more expansive than these ... What, then, were the stone weapons for? ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)
  • Hominids are Monsoon Forest adapted, not savanna adapted
    ... Human populations don't -- and before ... Savanna flora and fauna are quite ... never have) hominids of any kind. ... because their habitat was reduced. ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)
  • Re: Bipedalism in different substrates
    ... |> hominids, then it could have been better ... |> regions of "open forest of areas ... So their habitat has clearly ... |> habitat' used to be the open savanna, ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)
  • Re: What were the habitats of early hominids?
    ... Comments on a Recent Guest Lecture ... what famous serious PAs today have to say on the savanna fantasies: ... in hominids, but I do consider it plausible. ... AAT is not a 'credible alternative theory'; ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)