Re: Discovery Channel Comedy


Jim McGinn wrote:
> Paul Crowley wrote:
> > Jim McGinn wrote
>
> <snip>
>
> > PA people claim that the savanna theory
> > has been displaced. It hasn't. It rules all
> > normal understanding. It is, at least, a
> > theory, and you can't replace something
> > with nothing. You could even say that
> > such abysmal crap is better than the
> > 'nothing' which standard PA wants to
> > put in its place.
>
> I agree except that a lot of the most problematic assumptions are not
> specific to the savanna or any habitat. Among these is the
> simpleminded assumption that group size was not much different than
> that of apes and/or modern day hunter gatherers. In reality there
are
> a lot of good reasons to assume that early hominid group size was
> determined by geographic factors (town-sized, city-sized patches of
> forest in monsoon habitat), just as it is presently, and there is no
> evidence to suggest that group size was dictated by some kind of
> idealized hunter gatherer lifestyle.
>
> Another problematic assumption--and a rather ridiculous one at
that--is
> this notion that human intellect (growth in human brain size) could
> possibly be the result of tool-usage. There is absolutely no
evidence
> of such and in fact it is becoming more and more aparent that
> encephalization (growth in head size) is more directly traceable to
> social factors, such as group size.
>
> Jim


Yes Jim, you're probably right, but how can anyone ever prove that
brain size grew with social factors?

How can anyone ever show just how large (or small) early human groups
were?

This kind of discussion or theory-proposing just shows how desperately
short of real facts the whole of the study of paleaoanthropology really
is.

I am currently reading 'Harmsworths Ancient History' published in 1927.
Apart from the over-emphasis it puts on 'Piltdown Man' almost every
other 'fact' it proposes is exactly where the current paradigm still
stands today.

When I can get time, I intend to publish a list of 'archaeological
facts' proposed then, under the title 'Archaeology of
Palaeoanthropology' and ask everyone on this list if they've learned
anything new.

Regards

Richard

.