Re: Neanderthal noses as an 'aquatic' adapatation?

From: Algis Kuliukas (algis_at_RiverApes.com)
Date: 12/24/04 

Date: 23 Dec 2004 18:41:11 -0800

Marc Verhaegen wrote:
> "Algis Kuliukas" <algis@RiverApes.com> wrote in message
> news:1103777377.989848.138430@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>
> ...
>
> > You're also wrong to say Marc had no provocation.
>
> Of course, he's wrong, the fool. Well, the very first time when I got
into
> SAP (IOW, before ever posting anything here!), 5 or more years ago,
that
> very day, I saw my name mentioned by some dry aper who believed that
the
> famous passage was wrong: "In a Neandertal swimming on his back, the
large
> nose with distal nostrils and the protruding midface surrounded by
large air
> sinuses functioned as a snorkel." (from one of my Med.Hyp.papers, can
be
> found in the files of http://www.onelist.com/community/AAT ). I knew
this
> passage would elicit reactions, but since I like some controversion &
try to
> write as concise as possible, I didn't change it. The dry apers are
> incredibly stupid here: a child can see that if a neandertal with a
> protruding nose (Zollikofer hadn't yet published on neandertal noses
then)
> floated on his back, his nose worked as a snorkel. Only idiots (as we
find
> many of them here) deny this. Whether or not neandertals really did
this
> frequently, I don't know, but for some obscure reason (read: lack of
> intelligence) dry apers think they have to laugh at it,

They have to laugh at it, Marc, because the idea that a Neanderthal
might have ever swam is just not on their radar. The image of
neanderthals we've all been taught is ugly, ice-age cave men wrapped in
animal skins stomping around the tundra looking for deer to hunt and so
the very concept of swimming just does not compute. It's similar to
Homo erectus and the image of a savannah dweller. That image, instilled
from an early age, cannot be contradicted by reason in minds that are
too inflexible. It's as if they're saying to themselves 'but I know
neanderthals never swam, I've seen images of them.'

And yet if anyone goes to the trouble to do this little experiment one
can see that Marc's idea is not so stupid and, in fact, once again is
probably right.

Go to a part of a swimming pool that is too deep to touch the bottom.
Take a really deep breath of air and tilt your head forwards and just
hang there floating without moving. You'll find that the orientation of
your floating body is such that your back is at the surface and your
mouth and nose are submerged. Now, merely tilt your head backwards
slightly. You'll find that rather quickly you'll reach a point where
your body will suddenly re-orientate itself in the water so that your
mouth and nose become the parts of the body that are above the water,
enabling you to breathe without any effort whatsoever, as well as open
your eyes and look around.

Now, if you are a person with an median amount of adipocity for a
western society, clearly if you exhaled quite deeply your breathing
holes would submerge again but the degree this happens it very much
dependant on how fat you are. With a bit of practice one can soon
perfect the technique of taking long, deep inhalations followed by very
short, shallow exhalations to stay at the surface. It's definitely a
very close thing between being able to breathe whilst floating with no
effort at all and not being able to do so.

I would suggest that any slight change in the orientation of the skull
and increased adipocity would be more than enough to tilt the balance
in favour of effortless breathing whilst floating. This is the sort of
thing aquasceptics have often cited as an argument against the AAH.
(Hippos have breathing holes at the top of their heads, we don't -
there you go, proof it's crap!)

I'm suggesting that comparing humans to neanderthals (and probably H.
erectus too) we do see such differences. If neanderthals spent a
significant amount of time swimming then, considering the water would
have been rather cold, it is quite logical that they'd have had far
greater adipocity than humans - obviously for improved thermoregulation
as well as increased buoyancy. This, plus increased buoyancy that
results from colder water and the greater mass of the occipital parts
of the neanderthal cranium would, in all likelihood allow a neanderthal
to float and breath effortlessly without even having to consciously
tilt the head back. Increased nose size would only aid this effect.
Marc's use of the word 'snorkel' might have led to some
misunderstanding and ridicule but his basic point is clearly valid if -
outrageous for some people here to even consider, we know -
neanderthals swam regularly.

So once again a big objection to the AAH and one that has resulted only
in pure sneering appears to have validity if you look at it more
closely.

> although they're
> still unable, after so many years, to give 1 argument against the
> hypothesis. I can't describe their behaviour in other words than
> unscientific biasedness. The same with all my other hypotheses. I
don't care
> whether my hypotheses are wrong, but if somebody believes they're
wrong, he
> should at least be able to give some arguments...

They (the aquasceptic majority on sap) don't want to give arguments.
They just want us to accept that it's wrong because they think they
know best. All they have is the ex cathedra argument now. Jason even
disputed that Langdon's refutation had won primacy against a majority
of papers in the literature by clearly neutral authors. Get that! The
one paper published in JHE that has attempted to refute the AAH and
*he's* questioning whether it has won primacy! If not Langdon, then
what? - Lowenstein and Zihlman is even worse and Roede et al was a
knife edge decision to reject the idea that there was actually an
aquatic ape but gave support to the idea that water acted as an agency
of selection in our evolution. I can only conclude that coffee room
gossip must be Jason's preferred means of rejecting such hypotheses.

I think we can declare that this debate is really over, Marc. The tide
has turned. When the best they can come up with is calls to killfile
and calling names, I think it's pretty clear which side has won the
argument.

Merry Christmas and a very Happy New Year to you and your family, Marc
(but not your dog!) :-D

All the best

Algis Kuliukas

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Neanderthal noses as an aquatic adapatation?
    ... protruding nose ... saying to themselves 'but I know neanderthals never swam, ... suddenly re-orientate itself in the water so that your mouth and nose become ... of effortless breathing whilst floating. ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)
  • Re: Neanderthal noses as an aquatic adapatation?
    ... >> protruding nose (Zollikofer hadn't yet published on neandertal noses ... > They have to laugh at it, Marc, because the idea that a Neanderthal ... > neanderthals never swam, ... > Take a really deep breath of air and tilt your head forwards and just ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)
  • Re: Neanderthal noses as an aquatic adapatation?
    ... Ask Marc about the snorkel noses... ... >> neanderthals never swam, ... >> mouth and nose are submerged. ... >> to float and breath effortlessly without even having to consciously ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)
  • Re: Airsacs (Re: Ealine Morgan
    ... to that of modern humans without any hyperflexion or extension beyond ... The conclusion must be that diving Neanderthals would have emerged ... And the larger nose, emerging at the same point as in humans, ... the answer would probably be the molars of the sea ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)
  • Re: Airsacs (Re: Ealine Morgan
    ... "Neanderthals Revisited: New Approaches and Perspectives" ... The issue was about *posture*, Marc. ... IOW, our little boy has not answer... ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)
Loading