Re: A More Reasonable Interpretation of the Evidence
- From: claudiusdenk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: 12 Dec 2006 17:28:51 -0800
Lee Olsen wrote:
claudiusdenk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
Lee Olsen wrote:
Jim McGinn wrote:
Lee Olsen wrote:
. . . where are all these weapons?
Learn to use a search engine.
Specifically starting at 2.5 mya. Me specific, do you mean rocks?
Starting about 8 or 8.1 mya. See my post entitled Economic Competition
of A'pith . . .
Rocks? Yes or no?
Of course, yes.
No evidence for any hominid using rocks C 8 mya. There is evidence for
rock use at 2.5 mya, but none for weapon use.
There's also no evidence that contradicts the assertion that they did
as I said. Right?
I wouldn't disagree with that, because rocks are all a hominid needs to
drive predators off of kills.
Incidental Anecdotal. Dimwitted. It explains too little.
It explains all one needs to know if you want to drive most predators
off kills.
Occasionally, in their own treed habitat. Sure. But it was
incidental.
Where, at c 8 mya or 2.5 mya?
Both
McGinn: "stone weapons (spears, bow and arrow) serve that show up in
the fossil record starting about 2.5 mya?"
Still waiting for a list of weapons from you.
Keep waiting.
McGinn: "stone weapons (spears, bow and arrow) serve that show up in
the fossil record starting about 2.5 mya?" You have written stone
weapons (spears, bow and arrow) and 2.5 mya all in the same sentence.
Then I have no other conclusion to draw than you meant they had bows
and arrows at 2.5 mya. [this is a keeper]
.
- References:
- Re: A More Reasonable Interpretation of the Evidence
- From: Jim McGinn
- Re: A More Reasonable Interpretation of the Evidence
- From: Lee Olsen
- Re: A More Reasonable Interpretation of the Evidence
- From: claudiusdenk
- Re: A More Reasonable Interpretation of the Evidence
- From: Lee Olsen
- Re: A More Reasonable Interpretation of the Evidence
- From: Jim McGinn
- Re: A More Reasonable Interpretation of the Evidence
- From: Lee Olsen
- Re: A More Reasonable Interpretation of the Evidence
- From: Jim McGinn
- Re: A More Reasonable Interpretation of the Evidence
- From: Lee Olsen
- Re: A More Reasonable Interpretation of the Evidence
- From: Jim McGinn
- Re: A More Reasonable Interpretation of the Evidence
- From: Lee Olsen
- Re: A More Reasonable Interpretation of the Evidence
- From: claudiusdenk
- Re: A More Reasonable Interpretation of the Evidence
- From: Lee Olsen
- Re: A More Reasonable Interpretation of the Evidence
- From: Jim McGinn
- Re: A More Reasonable Interpretation of the Evidence
- From: Lee Olsen
- Re: A More Reasonable Interpretation of the Evidence
- From: claudiusdenk
- Re: A More Reasonable Interpretation of the Evidence
- From: Lee Olsen
- Re: A More Reasonable Interpretation of the Evidence
- Prev by Date: Re: A More Reasonable Interpretation of the Evidence
- Next by Date: Re: Some people never learn (was re: Fun on PalAnth-L.)
- Previous by thread: Re: A More Reasonable Interpretation of the Evidence
- Next by thread: Re: A More Reasonable Interpretation of the Evidence
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
Loading