Re: Final Solution of the Aquatic Question

Algis Kuliukas wrote:
>
> Andrew Nowicki wrote:
> > Marc Verhaegen wrote:
> >
> > > Sensible talk, Andrew, but not the final solution. I agree apiths might have
> > > been parttime waders in swamp forests, wetlands etc. But this has nothing
> > > to do with AAT s.s., which is about our ancestors: about Homo, not about
> > > apes or apiths.
> >
> > You believe that apiths are not our ancestors.
> > I believe that they are our ancestors.
>
> This is an important point, IMO. Even if australopithecines were not
> directly on the Homo lineage and, technically, let's face it - the
> chances are vanishingly small that any of the hard evidence we have
> (i.e. fossil evidence) for australopithecines were, then it still seems

Vanishingly small that australopiths were on the Homo lineage? Most
of what I've come across increasingly suggests africanus. Got any
fossil candidates?

> pretty likely that whatever population (or populations) contained those
> individuals that were ancestral to Homo around 5-2Mya, were a'pith
> like.
>
> If such species were generally bipedal, due largely to wading, then

Wading in water not needed for this. Plenty of land base bipedal
behaviors.

> ...
.