Re: Man-eaters

claudiusd...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
Lee Olsen wrote:
claudiusd...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

now you are
claiming they didn't need these same trees just as desperately at night

I never stated any such thing. You're off your rocker, as usual.

So, if that is the case, they didn't need trees for protection day or
night. Right?

How did you come to this conclusion?

If they did need protection from trees day or night, who would be down
in the garden protecting the what ever it was they were supposed to be
defending? You can't have it both ways moron.

They are only up in the trees when predators are in the immediate
vicinity, dimwit.

How stupid can you get? What if the predator decides not to leave?
Lucy then will come down and beat him up?


(not to mention the obvious night vision handicap)?

What, "obvious night vision handicap?" Why is it that God has not

Leopards see better at night, on the ground or in trees than you (or
apiths) do.

Yeah, so?

What good is a tree that doesn't protect you day and night from a
leopard? What good is a tree if it is necessary to come down out of it
to chase away a predator or a buffalo?

See above.

see above


gifted me with the same ability to see the emperor's new clothes.

I don't know why you see so well at night, maybe God gave you such
exceptional eyesight because he didn't give you any brains.

Any 5-year old
could see the contradiction here.

I guess that pretty much counts you out.

Says the loon who loves to make retractions:
Message-ID: <1164704227.718683.98...
</groups/unlock?msg=04fbb3c26ba8e19a&hl=en&_done=/group/sci.anthropology.paleo/browse_frm/thread/3597d023d7604931%3Fscoring%3Dd%26hl%3Den%26>@80g2000cwy.googlegroups.com>

Jim McGinn: "Both tigers and lions evolved from Sabertoothed cats."

Irrelevant..........,

at least to a person who continually makes ignorant blunders and then
next claims he have the "perfect scenario."

You are a simpleton.

and you are a person who continually makes ignorant blunders and then
next claims he have the "perfect scenario."

Message-ID: <1165098768.578213.303960@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Jim McGinn: "IOW, it makes about as much sense to emplace human
ancestors, including homo,
neanderdudes, and even early humans (before the advent of jeeps and
guns) in treeless savanna habitat as it does to emplace them swimming
alongside crocodiles."

ROTFL

"The analysis shows that the sabertooth cats were a sister group to
the modern cats--that is, they diverged early on from the ancestors of

modern cats and are not closely related to any living felid species."
Barnett et al.: "Evolution of the extinct Sabretooths and the American

cheetah-like cat" Current Biology, Vol. 15, August 9, 2005.

Jim McGinn: "Well then I guess I stand corrected on this point."

You have been corrected on many points, but your someting less than
5-year old mentality doesn't seem to allow you to comprehend them.

I can't figure out what your point is. Assuming you have one.

Niccolo Caldararo: "You really need to do some reading (and I've said
this before). It is embarrassing to you (or should be) for you to
continually make statements which most of us know are unsupported by
the data."

Who is Niccolo Caldararo? Why would anybody care about his opinion,
dimwit.

Message-ID: <1164704227.718683.98...
</groups/unlock?msg=04fbb3c26ba8e19a&hl=en&_done=/group/sci.anthropology.paleo/browse_frm/thread/3597d023d7604931%3Fscoring%3Dd%26hl%3Den%26>@80g2000cwy.googlegroups.com>


Jim McGinn: "Both tigers and lions evolved from Sabertoothed cats."

Niccolo Caldararo is a guy who can see through an illiterate buffoon
like you.

What did they do, sit up in their
trees and piss on cape buffalo and lions to scare them away to keep
them from wrecking their garden?

I think it's comical that you would indicate that buffalo would so
carelessly enter treed habitat, at night given the ambush hunting
tactics of the miocene predators.

No, the idiot idea that "they never ventured more than 50 or maybe a
100 yards from the safety of trees." was a falicy of your own making
that you have totally failed to demonstrate.

Relevance?

Just another imagination statement of yours that has no meaning in the
real world, just like the apith guarding gardens scenario.

Reality is complicated. Get used to it.

Yes, imagination can get pretty complicated if you stir enough of it
together.


Truth is, it would be impossible to
defend their planted gardens day or night.

It's night for their opponents also.

You might try going to the library for the first time in your life and
check out a book called BONES by Lew Binford.

Read it. It's conclusions are dimwitted.

Hearing voices again?

Feel free to relay to us the brilliant insights that you, supposedly,
gleened from your reading of this book.

Who said anything about his conclusions? I think
most of them stink also.

Then why did you present it?

Can't you read, there is a difference between observed facts and
conclusions drawn from them. Even an idiot like you should be able to
figure that out.

That doesn't made his observations about
preadators hunting at night false. These can verified elsewhere:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/transcripts/2519leopards.html
NARRATOR: Tonight, on NOVA: As daylight fades, a silent hunter stalks.
For the first time ever, under the cover of complete darkness, see her
strike. With NOVA's special cameras, go on the hunt with Africa's most
successful big cat. Enter the hidden world of leopards of the night.

Do you have a point?

Yes, I falsified yours.

Or check any good library (which I know you will never do). So much for
your lunatic idea apiths guarded territory or gardens day or night.

Specifically?

Your evidence that they did, specifically?


Let's face it, your silly
hypothesis is the funniest comedy to hit sap since Ed's MAOAC.

Humans currently are effective at defending territory from hebivores.
Why would it have been different for the earliest hominids?

How early? The South African caves prove apiths could not defend any
better than antelope.

Prove? How so? As usual you're just making up facts to fit your
preconceived notions.

Niccolo Caldararo: "You really need to do some reading (and I've said
this before). It is embarrassing to you (or should be) for you to
continually make statements which most of us know are unsupported by
the data."

Can't answer the question. You're a fool.

Message-ID: <1164704227.718683.98...
</groups/unlock?msg=04fbb3c26ba8e19a&hl=en&_done=/group/sci.anthropology.paleo/browse_frm/thread/3597d023d7604931%3Fscoring%3Dd%26hl%3Den%26>@80g2000cwy.googlegroups.com>

Jim McGinn: "Both tigers and lions evolved from Sabertoothed cats."
"The analysis shows that the sabertooth cats were a sister group to
the modern cats--that is, they diverged early on from the ancestors of
modern cats and are not closely related to any living felid species."
Barnett et al.: "Evolution of the extinct Sabretooths and the American
cheetah-like cat" Current Biology, Vol. 15, August 9, 2005.

Jim McGinn: "Well then I guess I stand corrected on this point."

Niccolo Caldararo: "You really need to do some reading (and I've said
this before). It is embarrassing to you (or should be) for you to
continually make statements which most of us know are unsupported by
the data."



Does your lack of intelligence means I need to repeat the same
citations continuously?



Homo e could. Any thing else you would like to
know?

Do you use a crystal ball?

Nope, just a library.

Why do you never include speific references that apply to your point?
Vagueness does not a hypothesis make.


Barnett et al.: "Evolution of the extinct Sabretooths and the American
cheetah-like cat" Current Biology, Vol. 15, August 9, 2005.

Do you want the entire list repeated as an admission of your senile
mind?

Have you always been a lying ***, or do you only do it when
trolling on sap?

.

Quantcast