Re: Terra firma hominids


Mario Petrinovich wrote:
Will in New Haven:
Mario Petrinovich:
deowll:
nickname:
I've never heard of or seen evidence that sharks or gators/crocs
or
cats or bears attack and eat sirenia, seems likely something would
but so far unknown to me. DD

As for sharks, if its meat and they can get to it, they'll eat it
though I don't know anything suggesting that attacks are common.

I don't know how you don't understand? Shark doesn't know what
meat
is. Shark has never been on land. NEVER. Meat isn't a food for shark.
Sharks don't attack humans. If they do, there will be no alive human
swimming (every shark expert can tell you this). Shark eat meat that has
oddor on fish. Shark eats mammals that eat fish. Fishless meat isn't
interesting for a shark. -- Mario

People are not in the water much, because it is usually cold, where
Great White sharks habitually eat seals or sea lions. In those areas,
people in the water are rather frequently attacked, considering the low
frequency of people being in the water. It is an easy mistake to make,
the shark isn't deliberately targeting humans, and the shark often
breaks off the attack. That may well be because of the lack of fish
taste. This does not mean that the human in question isn't badly
damaged or even killed.

Yes, but humans aren't attacked. Usually are attacked humans on surf
boards, which resamble seal from beneath. Aquatic ape didn't have surf
board. There is no reason for shark to attack a human. It only attacks if it
mistakes it for seal.

Aquatic apes were probably common in the environment, had the same
fish-smell as other aquatic mammals and were much more likely to be
attacked and actually consumed than a guy on a surf-board. However,
that presupposes common aquatic apes. This is not a problem with the
aquatic ape theory, it is an objection to the aquatic ape theory that
has no foundation in reality.

Predators do not keep animal populations from moving into suitable
environments. You have been very busy contradicting and objection that
could be met with "so what." The savannah is full of predators that are
just as dangerous as sharks and has many nasty and aggressive herbivors
as well. Just because they have developed a fear of man that shrks
mostly lack is no reason to suppose that the savannah would have been
less dangerous, in terms of predation, than the sea.


Bull sharks in the tropics and warmer temperate zones have attacked
humans on many documented occasions. On the other hand, given the large
number of people who enter the water and the small number of attacks,
comparitively small, there probably isn't a propensity for bull sharks
to attack humans.

Scientiests understand that sharks don't attack humans. But attacks
do occure, so they took effort to understand why. When analizing attacks,
they've found out that those attacks occure in murky water. Bull sharks live
in murky water. It has numerous senses to sense prey. But, when water is so
murky that shark cannot find out what it is, it finely decides to taste it.
After tasting it, it lets go human.

This fits the observation that so many shark attacks end up with the
human alive. Since some percentage MORE would be non-fatal if the human
did not drown while injured, the idea that sharks are not all that
interested in humans today is quite reasonable.

Per my version of AAT we were living in clear waters of rocky coast.

The number of documented attacks by all the other shark species
combined is almost miniscule.

Shark attacks are a widely exaggerated phenomenon. A complete denial of
the phenomenon is foolish as it destroys the credibility of the denier
when one attack is properly documented.

Hm. I reapeat, sharks aren't a problem in my AAT scenario.

It isn't that I don't understand our argument. It is that your
reasoning is sound but there are documented instances where the real
world did not follow your reasoning.

Yes, but more thorough understanding of this explains the situation.
And, for my version of AAT the situation is clear. -- Mario

Shark attacks were never a problem for your version of AAT. Sharks,
crocodilles, orcas, lions, tigers and bears. Any of them can be a
problem for an individual. Predators are not going to be the primary
cause of anything species-wide. The only predation that has been shown
to destroy a species is predation BY man.

The lack of any level of proof is a problem but that does not keep it
from being an interesting idea with some chance of being true.

Will in New Haven

--

"Win the easy pots. Loud, violent confrontaions are for d*gs." Feather
in _Poker for Cats_

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Terra firma hominids
    ... please note that often shark attacks on modern humans ... relate to body boards etc. on people in water for recreational ... Sharks don't attack humans. ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)
  • Re: Terra firma hominids
    ... though I don't know anything suggesting that attacks are common. ... Shark has never been on land. ... Sharks don't attack humans. ... people in the water are rather frequently attacked, ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)
  • Re: Terra firma hominids
    ... don't know anything suggesting that attacks are common. ... Shark has never been on land. ... Shark eat meat that has ... in the day time, freezing at nights with no water or food, over 200 miles from ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)
  • Re: Terra firma hominids
    ... Shark has never been on land. ... Meat isn't a food for shark. ... There are three major kinds of unprovoked shark attacks. ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)
  • Re: Terra firma hominids
    ... don't know anything suggesting that attacks are common. ... Shark has never been on land. ... Shark eat meat that has ... in the day time, freezing at nights with no water or food, over 200 miles from ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)
Quantcast