Re: Sex, Genes, Skin Color, Sex, and Europe Only?


"rmacfarl" <rmacfarl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:43ae5a7e_3@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> "deowll" <deowll@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:oa5rf.31215$aS5.15821@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>
>> "rmacfarl" <rmacfarl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>> news:1135317006.593515.294400@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>
>>> deowll wrote:
>>>> <johnwl4@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
>>>> news:1135270506.245876.93400@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>> > "So there would have been selection not
>>>> > just for lighter skin, but for body shapes that were better adapted
>>>> > to
>>>> > the last glacial maximum that arrived about 18 to 20 KYA in Europe...
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>> I suspect that tightly stitched cloths may have greatly reduced the
>>>> need for
>>>> extreme anatomic cold adaptation and the Hsn type build is generally
>>>> considered poor for running or a host of athletic activities.
>>>
>>> Fair call but Eskimos / Inuit have evolved this squat body shape, even
>>> with clothing, so I would expect that early European moderns in similar
>>> climates would also evolve the same way.
>>
>> Not to anything like the same degree.
>
> Why not? Why would they be under any different selection pressures?
>
>>>
>>> As to HSN athletic ability, they were apparently able to survive for
>>> 200KY on a 90%+ meat diet with hunting techniques akin to rodeo
>>> bull-riders, so
>>
>> They survived but my point is this is a bad trade off if you don't have
>> to make it. No other known population has ever had wacked off limbs like
>> this and there is a reason. The high artic is most likely as harsh as the
>> ice age but these people haven't gone to the same extreme.
>>
>
> I don't follow. What's the bad trade-off here? Neanderthals & Inuit had no
> trouble hunting.
>
> Point is that the evidence points to selective pressure on cold-climate
> humans toward relatively shorter, more stocky body shapes that conserve
> heat better. There are sound reasons why this would be evolutionarily
> favoured (which isn't to say thart there aren't other sound reasons why
> this body shape would be selected against, but you need to put up a
> hypothesis as to what those countervailing pressures might be.)
> Cro-Magnons, unlike their near-contemporaries in Europe, the Neanderthals,
> didn't exhibit this body shape, which could be because they were recent
> migrants from a warmer climatic zone...
>
> Ross Macfarlane
>


The bad trade off is mileage and I think I have already made this point.
They would have used more calories to get around. They would have been very
strong but their short limbs meant their arms were less efficient at
transmitting energy to missiles and I have no doubt that they did throw
missiles.

Hsn advantages:

Great strength and cold tolerance with less than the best in sewing skills.

Disadvantages for Hsn:

Poor mileage. They use more calories to get around on foot to cover the same
number of miles. Most likely could not run as fast or if the could they
would have consumed much more energy doing it.

Despite their power they most likely could not throw as hard using missile
weapons due to short limbs. Early European Homo sapiens weren't exactly
wimps either.

I may have already noted that an Hsn might have fared as well in a skin boat
as a modern using a paddle but then I don't know that they used skin boats.

Please note that Inuit don't rely on walking or running for long distance
travel. They use boats and dogs though they ran a lot to take weight of the
sleds or the men did. They also aren't anywhere near as extreme despite
maybe 40,000 years in the icebox. Because they have better cloths I doubt if
another 100,000 years would have produced an Hsn type build. The trade offs
were to costly.

If this doesn't sound to you like a huge disadvantage per person for Hsn I
don't claim it always was. If AMH had had a huge advantage over Hsn the
replacement would have occurred quickly. It didn't.

What I'm saying is both self evident and scattered through the lit. on
humans. Short limbs have certain known disadvantages and advantages. That
nobody seems to have actually applied what is known to Hsn and published
some papers on it leaves me wondering. Way to much attention is being paid
to imaginary or at least unproven AMH mental advantages and very little to
possible problems caused by being a little to well adapted to cold climates
in poor clothing after better clothing showed up.

I don't claim this is the total story but I know it is part of the story.
Heck the only reason any AMH population was able to outcompete any archaic
population had to be because they had better tech and maybe social
traditions that allowed them get by with a less robust body build though
many of the old timers were bleeping robust.



.