Re: Jim Moore: Flores man could not have survived predators
From: J Moore (anthrosciguy_at_yahoo.com)
Date: 11/02/04
- Next message: J Moore: "Re: fur loss (Re: Scientists Find Prehistoric Dwarf Skeleton"
- Previous message: Jim McGinn: "Re: savanna nonsense (Re: Scientists Find Prehistoric Dwarf Skeleton"
- In reply to: richard01: "Jim Moore: Flores man could not have survived predators"
- Next in thread: firstjois: "Re: Jim Moore: Flores man could not have survived predators"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Tue, 02 Nov 2004 18:59:50 GMT
richard01 <richardparker01@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:6e30eb22.0411020113.1a12262b@posting.google.com...
> If you look at Jim Moore's notorious anti-aquatic ape theory site:
>
> http://www.aquaticape.org/predators.html
>
> you will find a quite persuasive, but half-baked theory that humans
> could not live in the sea because of the problems of shark and
> crocodile attack.
>
> In the Philippines, the Badjao sea gypsies live in or on the sea all
> their lives. In fact, the real risk of shark or crocodile attack is
> far less than equally life-threatening things like lightning or a
> coconut falling on your head.
>
> If you believe Mr Moore's armchair reasoning, you will also realise
> that the tiny Homo floresiesis could not possibly have survived in an
> environment with sabre-toothed elephants, Komodo Dragons (and even
> larger varanid lizards) let alone other predators on Flores.
>
> But they did.
>
> Richard
> My weblog Seashore Foraging & Fishing is at
> http://coconutstudio.blogspot.com
That's an interesting notion, but it certainly doesn't follow from my site
or, so far as I can remember, anything I've ever said or written. In fact,
I'd have to say it's the opposite (and your remarks about the risk to humans
today from sharks and crocodiles are things I talk about on my site, as well
as many times in newsgroups and, in your case, in several e-mails where I
explained the errors in your reasoning). Here's one salient point from my
site regarding predators:
"The bottom line on dealing with predators is that a species doesn't have to
be able to avoid them completely, but in order for the species to survive,
they have to avoid predators well enough to be able to replace their
numbers. Some animals do this simply by having enormous numbers of young;
even some mammals have large numbers of young. But humans and apes don't do
this; in fact primates in general have relatively few young. To see if such
an animal -- medium-sized and having relatively few young -- can survive
predation in a given environment, we can look to see if any such animal
actually has managed to do so. For a postulated land-based transition, we
do see such an animal -- chimps. For a postulated aquatic-based transition,
we see no such animal of any species anywhere in the world."
-- JMoore __ For a scientific critique of the aquatic ape theory, go to www.aquaticape.org
- Next message: J Moore: "Re: fur loss (Re: Scientists Find Prehistoric Dwarf Skeleton"
- Previous message: Jim McGinn: "Re: savanna nonsense (Re: Scientists Find Prehistoric Dwarf Skeleton"
- In reply to: richard01: "Jim Moore: Flores man could not have survived predators"
- Next in thread: firstjois: "Re: Jim Moore: Flores man could not have survived predators"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
