Re: Isn't Water Like Zero Gravity?
- From: "Algis Kuliukas" <algis@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 14 Jun 2005 04:00:25 -0700
Rich Travsky wrote:
> You keep chanting "predictable" as if it were meaningful or important. It
> isn't. Primates are predisposed to bipedal behavior. They'll do it for
> in any number of contexts.
>
> You want predictable?
>
> http://magma.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0401/images/hm_smarts_pic2.jpg
>
> From the not so long ago NatGeo bit on tool using capuchins.
>
> http://magma.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0401/resources_geo2.html
> ...
> The monkeys, brown capuchins (Cebus apella), tool around in a remote dry
> forest in northeastern Brazil. After laying tough-shelled palm nuts on
> sandstone slabs, the monkeys stand upsometimes using their tails for
> supportraise rocks perhaps half their own weight head high, then slam
> the nuts. Not content with any old hammer, the monkeys will haul a
> favorite rock to the "anvil" site, says photographer Pete Oxford. They
> also place nuts in small pits from previous hammering and sniff them
> between strikes to see if the kernel is exposed yet. Older capuchins are
> the best nut crackers, but young ones also try their hand.
>
> "These monkeys are acting in ways we once thought only apes did," says
> primatologist Dorothy Fragaszy of the University of Georgia, who plans to
> study the monkeys' tool use in detail.
>
> And since capuchins are only distantly related to apes, she says, their
> ability must have evolved independently.
>
> "Their Schwarzenegger dead lift is amazing to see," says Charles Munn, a
> zoologist with Tropical Nature (a nonprofit ecotourism group) who first
> learned of the hammer wielders from locals. "But it's no surprise the
> monkeys have to work hard to get food in such a marginal, scrubby habitat."
>
> There. 100% predictable. If they want to smash those nuts, they HAVE
> to go bipedal. Using your (koff koff) logic, therefore are ancestors
> became bipedal by hauling huge rocks.
>
> Did I mention that's ONE HUNDRED PERCENT PREDICTABLE????
So, let me get the experimental protocol right... you take a group of
capuchins. You put them in an enclosure, what, with a series of small
rocks, a handy 'anvil site' sandstone slab and a bunch of palm nuts and
then watch. Is that right?
And this produces 100% predictable *bipedalism*? *100%*? For as long as
the experimental protocol lasts? You sure? Do you know what 100% means?
Nice try but, honestly, I think a group of chimps in a smooth-sideded
tank filled to a 1m depth would qualify just a teensy-weensy bit
better. Come on, admit it, Rich - you've been outdone by wet apedome
yet again!
Algis Kuliukas
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Isn't Water Like Zero Gravity?
- From: Rich Travsky
- Re: Isn't Water Like Zero Gravity?
- References:
- Isn't Water Like Zero Gravity?
- From: firstjois
- Re: Isn't Water Like Zero Gravity?
- From: Rich Travsky
- Re: Isn't Water Like Zero Gravity?
- From: Algis Kuliukas
- Re: Isn't Water Like Zero Gravity?
- From: Rich Travsky
- Isn't Water Like Zero Gravity?
- Prev by Date: Re: Hairlessness and sweating - tentative hypothesis
- Next by Date: Re: A critique of the BBC aquatic ape programme and the transcript.
- Previous by thread: Re: Isn't Water Like Zero Gravity?
- Next by thread: Re: Isn't Water Like Zero Gravity?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|