Re: Stonethrowing most compelling behaviour to create language

From: Archimedes Plutonium (a_plutonium_at_iw.net)
Date: 01/15/05 

Date: Sat, 15 Jan 2005 14:18:04 -0600

Fri, 14 Jan 2005 05:06:34 GMT Val Lentz wrote:

>
>
> Ah-hah! Progress. *Anything* that requires co-ordination or teamwork
> requires communication, but not necessarily language. Chimps are known to
> hunt monkeys in groups and they don't use throwing to take down their prey.
> It is *not* true that the only teamwork behavior would have been throwing...
>

You still do not get it. Language was borne to improve a behaviour, pre-human
behaviour. Language was not borne to help 5% of behaviour x and help 3% of
behaviour z and 4% of behaviour y. Language was borne because it facilitated
vast improvement of one behaviour. And that behaviour was Throwing of stones or
rocks.

To put it another way. No species on Earth would have a language if no species
ever threw rocks or stones. Whales do not have language, nor do porpoises or
any other species.

>
>
> "Pre-Oreopithecus" was still an ape. Apes have been around for more than 30
> million years... Ape-like creatures? ...those are monkeys... You've got a
> lot more gaps to fill in... trust me on that one.

If apes and monkeys were around for 30 million years then that is about right
for the time scale of preOreopithecus beginning to throw rocks both underarm
and overarm about 10 million years ago.

>
>
> My own situation: a spider monkey threw a glass of water at me. He was
> standing on the kitchen counter at the time, I was about ten feet away and
> the glass hit me square in the chest. Monkeys are famous for their temper
> tantrums. I haven't heard of baboons throwing anything, but that doesn't
> mean that they can't.
>

No-one takes the Stonethrowing theory seriously except myself. If anyone did,
then they would have already made an exhaustive study of all monkeys and all
apes as to their ability to throw or not throw. They would have filmed and
committed to film proof whether any species of monkey or ape could throw. They
would have filmed whether the spider monkey throws underarm or overarm or both.
They would have filmed whether baboons or orangutans or gorillas can throw.

They would have filmed whether the chimpanzee can ever throw overarm, even
though they have been filmed to throw underarm.

They would have filmed whether any ape or monkey can throw rocks and stones.
Rocks and stones are more important than throwing tree branches, feces and
other tree related material. I suppose if a spider monkey can throw a glass, it
can throw a rock or stone but has a spider monkey ever done that?? Has a spider
monkey ever ventured to the ground to pick up rocks or stones? It may have
taken preOreopithecus 1 or 2 million years to gather or collect stones from the
ground and take them up into the trees to ambush some animal on the ground. Do
chimps ever take rocks into the trees?

So, no scientist has ever taken the Stonethrowing theory seriously except
Archimedes Plutonium. And I can attest to that claim because no-one has made a
thorough investigation as to the extent of throwing abilities of every monkey
and ape species now living. If they did, they would have focused on Throwing
and filmed the full capabilities of every ape and monkey species.

Not just anecdotes of someone getting hit with a glass at 10 feet but capturing
it on film. Did you spot, Val, whether that spider monkey threw the glass
underarm or overarm?? And can spider monkeys throw both underarm and overarm?

Do chimps carry rocks up into trees?
Do spider monkeys ever go to the ground to get rocks to throw?

And, once a exhaustive film collection of all apes and all monkeys is made,
then an exhaustive research as to the bone anatomy of all of those apes and
monkeys to tell us why they cannot throw and why certain species can throw only
underarm and not overarm.

So, alot of work by scientists of paleontology and anthropology needs be done
and I dare say that most of the work in paleontology and anthropology
concerning human origins is primitive and obtuse because it lacks the behaviour
that transformed apes into humans---- Throwing of Rocks and stones. I would say
that 90% of the science of Anthropology is the behaviour of Throwing of rocks.

Archimedes Plutonium
www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots
of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Stonethrowing most compelling behaviour to create language
    ... > requires communication, but not necessarily language. ... ever threw rocks or stones. ... If apes and monkeys were around for 30 million years then that is about right ... committed to film proof whether any species of monkey or ape could throw. ...
    (sci.anthropology)
  • Re: Apes and language
    ... the "Monkey see, monkey do" adage remains, to a large extent, valid. ... simulacrum of human language to various apes, ... Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: Fire (pine knots)
    ... monkey breaking off a branch of pine, ... I burned holes in my trousers rubbing those rocks together. ... Other animals are eating salt, ... Try to salt your apple. ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)
  • Re: Apes and language
    ... such observers countered that any linguistic abilities detected ... the "Monkey see, monkey do" adage remains, to a large extent, valid. ... simulacrum of human language to various apes, ...
    (sci.lang)
  • Re: SKEPTIC article on O Jews and science
    ... With linguistic evidence, it'd give us more ability judge their ... A monkey can be trained to do simple sign language. ... If you don't know the difference between an ape and monkey you ...
    (soc.culture.jewish.moderated)
Loading