Re: A More Reasonable Interpretation of the Evidence


Lee Olsen wrote:
Jim McGinn wrote:
Lee Olsen wrote:
claudiusdenk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx forgot where his fossil lions went

Upon further review:
1) Message-ID: <1165104702.266015.83720@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Jim McGinn: "The Serengeti plains are treeless presently. They were not
treeless when early hominids occupied the same sites."

http://www.serengeti.org
"The Serengeti ecosystem is one of the oldest on earth.

I can't make sense of this statement. The serengeti-like ecosystem
(ethiopian fauna) is, geologically speaking, very young. It emerged
about 8 mya.

I don't think they mean "the first savanna" per se, just "barely
changed" for the time it's been there is how I read it.

?


The essential
features of climate, vegetation and fauna have barely changed in the
past million years."

Well, I think the point in time we stipulated, 2 mya, had a climate
that is considered to have been wetter and warmer. This was before the
ice ages.

Certainly you're not saying we should ignore paleoclimatological data.

If you want to progress in this discipline I suggest you get a better
understanding of the English language and learn how to critically read
what was actually said rather than what you imagine was said. "point in
time"? Do you think human evolution occured at a point in time only at
2 mya? Range in time, not point in time is the only thing I would agree
to.

What's your point?




Contrary to McGinn's ignorant statement, archaeological sites have
existed at Olduvai during the last million years.

Uh, never said they didn't. And what's your point?

Message-ID: <1165098768.578213.303960@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Jim McGinn: "Well, it depends how you interpret it. The supposition
that early man,
including homo, regularly walked or ran over, across, or through
treeless savanna habitat is not viable in that they were largely if not

completely defenseless against the predators thereof."
ID: <1164616361.922426.285660@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Jim McGinn: "we can be fairly certain that they never ventured more
than 50 or maybe a 100 yards from the safety
of trees."

Homo did not need trees for protection as you claimed, that is the
point. The Serengeti Plains are treeless (sometime after 2 mya),
archaeological sites exist there. Does this include exactly at 2 mya or
8 mya? No, never said it did. I just refuted your claim of Homo being
dependent on trees, that was the only issue, in spite of what you think
you might have read.



This means by
definition ("Serengeti Plains") there were sites that were occupied
during treeless times.

By definition?

Gee, Lee, it's just hard to argue with your logic.

The Serengeti has "barely changed" and that means no trees. It is only
in your imagination that "8 mya" got into this.

Evidenc indicates it did change. I'll go with the evidence. You do
what you want.




Specifically
http://www.mnsu.edu/emuseum/archaeology/sites/africa/olduvai_gorge.html
"The gorge was modified by fault shifting and erosion. It is after
these geographical changes that Beds III and IV were created. These two
Beds range from 1,150,000 to 600,000 years ago."

Relevance?

It falsifies your statement: Jim McGinn: "The Serengeti plains are
treeless presently. They were not treeless when early hominids occupied
the same sites."

Obviously it doesn't falsify it. Look at the dates.





3) Message-ID: <1164791885.155272.68090@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Jim McGinn: "Uh, the grasslands of a savannah environment tend to be
treeless, dimwit. This is all but common knowledge."

http://www.blueplanetbiomes.org/savanna.htm
"There are several different types of savannas around the world. The
savannas we are most familiar with are the East African savannas
covered with acacia trees."

How is this relevant? Are you saying treeless habitat did not exist
2mya? Obviously you're not saying this. (Hopefully you're not that
dumb. The fossil record proves that treeless habitat has existed in
East Africa for 8 my.) In which case I'm wondering what your point is.

I only said the archaeological record started at Olduvai at this time
(2 mya). Your truism (for the 2 mya point in time) has nothing to do
with the fact that at some point early Homo was dealing with treeless
habitat, in spite of lions.

Evidence?





You should have been more specific and said savanna plains, not
grasslands. Maybe you will get it right next time.

If you want to progress in this discipline I suggest you get a better
understanding of the paleoclimatological origins of monsoon climate and
the paleontological origins of the Ethiopian fauna.

If you want to progress in this discipline I suggest you get a better
understanding of the English language. I never said anything about 8
mya. I only claimed early Homo was doing just fine in treeless areas
(deserts/Serengeti Plains) contrary to your claim Homo needed to be
within 50-100 yards from them. One of your many problems seems to be
your complete misunderstanding of the habits of lions.

.

Relevant Pages