Re: Q for Lee O, desert running


"Lee Olsen" <paleocity@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1169137014.222756.251740@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Chapstick wrote:
"Lee Olsen" <paleocity@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1169099023.910873.286760@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Chapstick wrote:
"Easy, because we can out run a horse in the desert. Proof is in the
pudding, no matter what your flawed-comparative data tells
you." --Lee,
Sun,
Sep-11-05, 06:38
http://forum.lowcarber.org/archive/index.php/t-263723.html

Hello Lee et. al.,

Is this true? We can outrun a horse on the desert? Can either animal
(human or horse) run for any length on the desert?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/hi/animals/newsid_1804000/1804830.stm

Even better I think...

mclark found this one
http://www.naturalhistorymag.com/
December 2006-January 2007
Click on 'samplings'
"And the hunters' tracking skills must be exquisite; finding and
following the quarry every time it bolts out of sight or mingles with a
herd is no easy task-teamwork helps. But done right, Liebenberg says,
persistence hunting is so effective that it may have helped select for
the excellent thermoregulatory system, bipedal posture, and long
strides that we all possess."



The entire piece from mclark's link follows... thank you... meanwhile, if
it
(persistence hunting) is better than the bow and arrow, how come we
invented
(evolved) the bow and arrow? <grin> Of course, we DID develop that
tool,

Maybe it was a couch potato who needed to invent the bow and arrow in
the first place :-)

Getting back to this point made in the article: "But done right,
Liebenberg says, persistence hunting is so effective that it may have
helped select for the excellent thermoregulatory system, bipedal
posture, and long strides that we all possess."

http://tinyurl.com/7u5wo
" In fact, he (Homo e) walked and ran with better mechanics than we
do today. The mechanics of his femur, femur head, pelvis, and lower
back are superior to those of today. We have had to sacrifice some of
that efficiency of walking and running to give birth to children with
larger brains."

As more and more innovations came along, the less physical we needed
to be, a feedback loop. Even though we have teeth, we invented the
pressure cooker anyway. One anthropologist quipped that if the rate of
tooth reduction continues at the present rate, in another 50,000 years
humans probably won't have teeth at all.

I agree with the concept that various pressures "caused" our various
adaptions as time went along. (and, although it is off topic for this
thread, I continue to speculate about sexual selection... if it exists and
the rapidity with which it can bring about changes.... and how that alone
might explain some of the hss features.)
So, at one time, running down prey would have been selected for, and at
another, larger female pelvises, and eventually, a more-premature birth
(more helpless infant), etc.
I do wonder how much "we" (meaning the people that post here on sap, and
the rest of humanity that are concerned about questions of evolution) can
depend on odd ball results from something as spectacular as a man beating a
horse on a foot race thru the desert. (and, btw, i read carefully thru the
part about the human taking advantage of the horse's rule-imposed water
breaks) (it is also assumed that neither horse nor man could cross the
desert without sufficient water....implying that if this concept applies to
earliest homo, then he/she would have to have invented a water carrying
technique).
If we accept this result... outrunning a horse on the desert, then we
might have to allow Marc to use the pearl divers, with their ability to dive
to some 125 meters (?) as the norm for humans. Or, that mankind may have
evolved in outer space, since we have been to the moon. (and, perhaps in
our future, some man or woman will survive a period of time with a punctured
spacesuit in zero-g and zero-oxygen.) <grin> We're all aliens! bring on
the Nasca Lines... <grin>
To summarize what I am trying to think... I am interested in a sort of
coherent, complex & dynamic, timeline of human development. I think we all
want that. How did we become this thinking being? and not just another
chimp? Does the chimp "think?" and etc.
--chap




and many others, so obviously something was to an advantage. Perhaps the
"terrain" wasn't perfect in very many places.

I agree that running is not as good as a bow and arrow in some places,
but Lucy and early Homo e did not have a choice in the matter (perfect
terrain or not). They did not have the brain power to invent the bow
and arrow or pressure cooker, hence early Homo's better running
abilities were needed and selected for.



-chap



.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Q for Lee O, desert running
    ... We can outrun a horse on the desert? ... is better than the bow and arrow, ... They did not have the brain power to invent the bow ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)
  • Re: Q for Lee O, desert running
    ... We can outrun a horse on the desert? ... he (Homo e) walked and ran with better mechanics than we ... part about the human taking advantage of the horse's rule-imposed water ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)
  • Re: Q for Lee O, desert running
    ... We can outrun a horse on the desert? ... he (Homo e) walked and ran with better mechanics than we ... part about the human taking advantage of the horse's rule-imposed water ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)
  • OT - songs that were a hit but shouldnt have been.
    ... So how about America - Horse With No Name ... I've been through the desert on a horse with no name ... It felt good to be out of the rain ... 'Cause there ain't no one for to give you no pain ...
    (uk.media.tv.misc)
  • Re: Q for Lee O, desert running
    ... Chapstick wrote: ... We can outrun a horse on the desert? ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)
Quantcast