Re: endurance running nonsense




Op 26-03-2007 10:27, in artikel eu83mo$bdp$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Mario
Petrinovich <mario.petrinovic1@xxxxxxxxxxx> schreef:

Marc Verhaegen:
BTW, baboons use kopjes in savanna, and geladas use cliffs.

Yes, and both are very different from us, don't you think? Any
parallels you see?

They are baboons, monkeys of open spaces. Even such non-adapted
climbers (primates) can use cliffs. But, they have to be adapted for
quadrupedal running in open spaces. In my scenario, we should be adapted
for fast climbing of cliffs, as well as for running downhill.

Also, they have big canines and large groups. I don't think they
climb cliffs in a hurry. They are only using it for sleeping, I believe.

Do humans have parallel features to cliff-hangers or hill-down-runners,
Mario? --Marc

No. I don't see any animal that lives this kind of lifestyle.

IOW, nothing sensible can be said about this.
Hardy's theory OTOH is based on SC fat, fur loss, aligned body etc.

Possibly some monkeys that live in hilly regions could have the similar
conditions for downhill running.
Your version of AAT has parallels in Proboscis monkey and
Oreopithecus. None of them show similarity to bipeds because of that,
although they are completly immersed in that kind of lifestyle.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proboscis_Monkey
³While wading, the monkey uses an upright posture, with the females carrying
infants on their hip. Troops have been filmed continuing to walk upright, in
single file, along forest trails when they emerge on land, the only
non-human mammal, with the exception of gibbons and giant pangolins, known
to use this form of locomotion for any length of time²

But, Harcourt-Smith/Aiello issued a paper called "Fossils, feet and
the evolution of human bipedal locomotion" (2004). They named only two
current hypotheses that they think are valid today:
"a knuckle-walking ancestor was proposed by Washburn (1967) and has
recently been championed by Richmond and colleagues (Richmond & Strait,
2000; Richmond et al. 2001) on the basis of the wrist morphology of A.
afarensis and other early hominins.

On the basis of their belief.
They correctly described some KWing features in anamensis & Lucy (also
described by Leakey in boisei).
But their interpretation is nonsense: there no evidence that the H/P LCA
ever KWed, to the contrary:
- KWing P & G is different, ontogenetically & anatomically (studies of
Inouye).
- Parallel evolution (to the same climatic changes) is to be expected in
strongly resembling spp.
- Not the slightest rudiment of KWing in Hs
http://allserv.rug.ac.be/~mvaneech/Fil/Verhaegen_Human_Evolution.html

Tuttle & Basmajian (1974) rejected
Washburn's original 'knuckle-walking' hypothesis on the grounds that modern
human hands showed no evidence of a knuckle-walking ancestry.

Correctly.

Both Dainton
(2001) and Lovejoy et al. (2001) have also questioned the modern revival of
the hypothesis by offering different interpretations of the A. afarensis
wrist morphology.
A second current hypothesis for the ape-like locomotor behaviour
immediately antecedent to the evolution of bipedalism is the 'climbing
hypothesis' involving vertical climbing and orthograde clambering
behaviours, but no significant terrestrial locomotion (Fleagle et al. 1981).
Tuttle & Basmajian (1974) and Tuttle (1975, 1981) envisage this ancestor as
a small-bodied climber and arboreal bipedal whereas others (e.g. Stern,
1975; Prost, 1980; Hunt, 1996) argue for a larger-bodied ancestor who used
all four limbs to grasp supports during vertical climbing and suspension.
Most recently, Crompton and colleagues (Crompton et al. 2003; Thorpe &
Crompton, 2004) have argued on the basis of comparative bipedal kinematics
that the antecedent locomotor type would have been more similar to
pronograde clambering as observed in modern orang-utans and unknown in
extant African apes."
(I don't understand this last sentence. I think that orang-utans are
orthograde.)

Yes, or even upside-down (suspensory = "anti-pronograde").

The hypothesis of vertical wading-climbing early hominids (H, P & G) is
likely IMO.

As is usually the case, they are missing for just a little, but for
just enough to completly miss the target. IOW, those top scientiests are
very close to my scenario. Also, your version of AAT is also very close to
my scenario, and you are also missing for just a little, : ). There was AAT,
only not in shallow, floaded waters, but on sea cliffs.
My scenario involves vertcal climbing of sea cliffs, plunge diving
and swimming, and feeding on small tree fruits, plus downhill running. I
believe that all those things push in the direction of straight-body
bipedality, but the strongest factor is climbing of vertical surfaces, where
you have the need to position the centre of mass of your body (ie., your
ass) right above your feet. -- Mario

Mario, no comparative data = no evidence.
There were no cliff-hanging hominids or so.

--Marc

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: endurance running nonsense
    ... In my scenario, we should be ... adapted for fast climbing of cliffs, as well as for running downhill. ... immediately antecedent to the evolution of bipedalism is the 'climbing ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)
  • Re: endurance running nonsense
    ... In my scenario, we should be adapted ... for fast climbing of cliffs, as well as for running downhill. ... immediately antecedent to the evolution of bipedalism is the 'climbing ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)
  • Re: endurance running nonsense
    ... In my scenario, we should be ... adapted for fast climbing of cliffs, as well as for running downhill. ... I am talking about bipedality. ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)