dry apers claim wildebeest can dive 50 m (Re: Look humans really are aquatic!

From: Marc Verhaegen (fa204466_at_skynet.be)
Date: 12/31/04 

Date: Fri, 31 Dec 2004 08:36:04 +0100

waste you own time
_______

"Rick Wagler" <taxidea3@shaw.ca> wrote in message
news:yg%Ad.622560$%k.151998@pd7tw2no...
>
> "Marc Verhaegen" <fa204466@skynet.be> wrote in message
> news:41d47254$0$308$ba620e4c@news.skynet.be...
> > "Rick Wagler" <taxidea3@shaw.ca> concedes he has no arguments against
AAT
> > in
> > message news:4IZAd.607508$Pl.529227@pd7tw1no...
> >
> >> >> >> I'll grant you that a beachcomber niche so heavily exploited by
> > birds seems to be devoid of any specialist mammals.
> >
> >> >> > Humans have voluntary control of breathing. No doubt for diving.
> > Diving niche exploited by birds??
> >
> >> >> Fish-eaters are great divers.
> >
> >> > Ricky, I'll try in very simple words. Humans are *slower* than birds.
> > Human divers dive for 1 minute or so (Ama). H.erectus had very thick
> > bones,
> > only seen today in walruses & sirenians, ie, in slow bottom-divers.
Birds
> > OTOH have very *lightly*built bones. Enough? Or do I have to elaborate?
> >
> >> "Diving niche exploited by birds?" you ask. Yes. Yes Yes a hundred
times
> > over. Think gannets, pelicans and penguins. If you want to start in on
> > your
> > standard issue thick bone babble go right ahead. But these light-boned
> > birds
> > don't give a flying fuddle. They'll just keep on diving thank you very
> > much.
> > And yes, Marc, they hold their breaths.
> >
> > Do you believe I don't know this?? Why are you telling this?? Want to
say
> > something??
> >
> Your initial rhetorical question indicated that you, indeed,
> did not know this. Just trying to be helpful.
>
> > I'm saying, my boy, that human ancestors' lifestyle was not that of
diving
> > birds. Okidoki? Birds don't dive tens of metres. Humans can dive without
> > equipment for morethan 50 metres. Clearly a savanna adaptation in the
eyes
> > of many people here... :-D
> >
> Sure. Why not. Check out what seals can do and more importantly
> how they do it. Humans who do dive to 50 meters do so at
> significant risk to thier health both in the immediate and long term.
> Until you can figure out how to get a lion or wildebeest to dive to
> 50 meters you are in no position to say that modern humans
> possess a physiological capacity to do this that wildebeest and
> lions do not. The real comparison is to genuine aquatics and
> here it becomes quite clear that the human body is not at all
> adapted to do things like this but that we are seeing particular
> individuals doing in some particualar way what all kinds of
> humans do all the time. Test the limits. Its a matter of intellect'
> not physiological adaptation
>
> >> >> >> If the living was easy for a pre-tool using hominid
> >
> >> >> > pre-tool-using?? When was that?? 15 Ma?? Orangs use tools, humans
> >> >> > use
> > tools, chimps use tools, not impossibly their LCA c 15 Ma used tools.
> >
> >> >> Not impossible but no tools show up in record.
> >
> >> > And?
> >
> >> And what? Did hominoids of any description use tools to exploit aquatic
> > resources prior to Homo sapiens?
> >
> > ?? Don't you know anything?? Never heard of Terra Amata? Dungo V?
Eritrea?
> > etc.etc.
> >
> Of course I have. Never heard of Choukoutien, Bilzingsleben, Torralba,
> the Dordogne, etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc
>
> >> And, please, I don't care what goes on in your mind's eye. What
evidence
> > do you have.....and at this point you may infer Sagan's dictum properly
> > quoted
> >
> > Sigh. Try to be relevant, Ricky. "If the living was easy for a pre-tool
> > hominid" is nonsense: our ancestors' littoral phase (at least part of
it)
> > was Pleistocene, a few million years *after* tools are known. Okidoki?
> >
> First its 15mmya now its Pleistocene. Gibberish does not
> make a sound argument
>
> >> >> >>one would think lots of fossils would show up.
> >
> >> >> > Yes: Mojokerto, Eritrea, Terra Amata, Gibraltar etc.etc.
> >
> >> >> This is a paltry list
> >
> >> > It's an incredibly rich list.
> >
> >> No, Marc, it is a paltry list compared to the whole of the
archaeological
> > record. You know, the one you wish didn't exist.
> >
> > 1) What do *you* know, my boy, about what I wish to exist??
>
> Read your articles. They are nothing but a list of what
> you wish to exist. That, my dear Dr Blunderbuss, is how
> I know.
>
> > 2) For once, think a bit. Pleistocene coasts were mostly 100 metres
below
> > the present sea level. Okidoki?
>
> Don't know *** about geology either.
>
>
> > 3) Even if it were not incredibly rich, how do you think they got to
> > Mojokerto etc.? over the savanna?? :-D
> >
> Probably. The southern Arabian route opened up when conditions
> ameliorated and savannah supplanted deserts in the region. Hominds
> in Africa were by this time all over the savannah so when these new
> areas opened up they moved into them along with the rest of the
> savannah fauna and flora.
>
> >> >> and none are habitual divers
> >
> >> > Ah? Any reason why littoral human ancestors would not have dived for
> > shells etc.??
> >
> >> Not impossible.
> >
> > :-)
> >
> > The savanna running nonsense OTOH (not for Bushmen perhaps (irrelevant),
> > but
> > for sapiens ancestors - at least *try* to make the difference, Ricky) is
> > completely impossible.
> >
> Bushmen are not Homo sapiens? And what bushmen do does
> not provide an example of what the human organism is capable
> of? They provide sound evidence that what you regard as
> completely impossible is anything but. And they are far from
> the only example of humans engaging in "bouts of strenuous
> activity" in savannah> desert environments.
>
> > Insults snipped.
> >
> Party pooper!
>
> Rick wagler
>
>

Quantcast