The evidence indicates hominids have always been communal


Lee Olsen:
"Humans are phenomenal endurance runners,
in terms of speed, cost, and distance," says Lieberman. You can
actually outrun a pony easily." And yet, he points out, "no other
primates out there endurance run."

Pgarrone:
I am unconvinced that hominids such as Homo Habilis or the
Australopithecines would have practised persistence/endurance hunting.

Lee Olsen:
"Specifically, longer, more linear bodies are better adapted
for heat loss in dry open environments, where evaporative
heat loss from sweating is very effective.

Marc Verhaegen:
. . . comparative data suggest that none of the features described
by Bramble and Lieberman (2004) are typical either of savannah dwellers or
frequently running animals, whether slow or fast. Until the features are
considered in the context of swimming and wading as well as terrestrial
movement, their interpretations should be considered with extreme caution.
As it is, there is no obvious reason why any of the features cited could not
have been of advantage in a littoral environment. We do not deny that
humans today are adapted to terrestrial locomotion including walking and
moderate running, but in our opinion the peculiar human anatomy is not
directly derivable from a typical primate ancestor who moved from closed to
more open, arid habitats.

Within many contemporary H. sapiens populations there are individuals who
are capable of long distance running, but compared to typical savannah
species, humans are slow and inefficient (Figure 4). Moreover, recent
research suggests that endurance training in athletes sometimes causes
cardial arrhythmias and sudden death (Ector et al. 2007). Even Bramble and
Lieberman (2004) admit that ³humans are mediocre runners in several
respects² and ³running is more costly for humans than for most other
mammals². And since H. erectus generally had, for instance, heavier bones
than H sapiens and longer femoral necks, it must have been an even less
efficient cursorial than extant H. sapiens.

Lee Olsen:
The legs and hip bones of Homo erectus were buttressed by tremendous
thickness and bulges, which denotes a body geared toward endurance
walking and running. An exclusive pact had been made with the terrestrial
realm, and the boy's legs were equipped to cover ground in strides
protracted in both length and hours."
Richard Potts from Humanity's Descent

"Most mammals can't sustain a gallop over 10 to 15 minutes," says Lieberman.
Humans, on the other hand, can continue running for hours while using
relatively little energy. "Humans are phenomenal endurance runners,
in terms of speed, cost, and distance," says Lieberman. You can
actually outrun a pony easily." And yet, he points out, "no other
primates out there endurance run."

Pgarrone:
After some research I see there is evidence that early homo (pre-
erectus) did make it out of Africa, and on re-reading Leakey, I see
that all species of homo, including the early/questionable ones, were
runners,

Paul Crowley:
How come, after mastering this
niche, they stopped occupying it?

Bad evolutionary theorists -- such
as the savanna types (e.g. Leakey)
and the aquatic nuts -- love to indulge
in promiscuous niche-swapping. It can
'explain' everything, and avoids all need
for thought.

It seems that they are quite unfamiliar
with all of nature, and the fact that taxa
and species prefer to stick to the same
kind of habitat, and ways of life. They
have no understanding of evolution,
nor of the concept of 'evolutionary
niche'.

Gerrit Hannenberg:
Maybe because that niche disappeared and/or was invaded by other taxa.
The apith taxon that lasted the longest in stratigraphic overlap with
Homo, namely Paranthropus, was also the one with the most extreme
expression of craniodental characters (under the influence of
character displacement to avoid competition?).

If there were no such thing as niche-swapping (shifting would be a
more appropriate term) then the enormous diversity of life on this
planet would be unexplained.

The bipedal hominidae is not a single species and therefore can not be
considered to have had a single niche that remained unchanged from the
most basal member of that clade to its only extant representative. The
morphological change alone within that group is already an argument
against such a position (there is no need for morphological change in
a stable niche).

Claudius Denk:
Paul's point stands. It's you that is unfamiliar with nature.
There is no excuse for the blatant dimwittedness that comes from
anthro-wannabees that have no understand of niche and niche constraints.

Gerrit Hannenberg:
The bipedal hominidae is not a single species and therefore can not be
considered to have had a single niche

Claudius Denk:
Hominids experienced group vs. group competition (Actually it's
community vs. community competition) that accelerated hominid
evolution such that we, eventually, became niche independent. This is
not the case for virtually all other species. Hominid communal
selection is unique in the animal world. And this portends other
aspects of hominid uniqueness.

Another thing that is really obvious from the evidence is the fact
that the stone tools are not found distributed over the greater
savanna. Instead they tend to be found at localities that were well
treed and well watered when these tools/weapons were first deposited
there.

Gerrit Hannenberg:
But who maintains that early hominids like Homo erectus settled down
in the treeless plains? Get rid of the strawman.
Indeed, an early archeological site such as FxJj 50 at Koobi Fora (1.6
mya) was located among the trees in the bend of a paleochannel. This
location would have given the hominids cover and access to fresh water
and raw materials for stone tools. An ideal homebase. Pretty clever.

Claudius Denk:
It wasn't just a home base. It was their community. For most of them
there was rarely ever any reason to leave the locality. This was
their communal territory. What hunting or gathering they did they did
therein.

And another thing Gerrit, who do you think you're kidding? You don't
maintain anything but vagueness. You conventional whackos are
always telling us what you don't say. You never say anything definitive,
preferring the illusion of validity that is part and parcel to being part of
the prevailing paradigm. Admit it, the evidence is consistent with
communalism. It is inconsistent with the hunting/gathering vagueness
that you hide behind.

Real scientists don't hide behind vagueness.

Paul Crowley:
IF pursuit hunting had been the standard
way of life for Homo for the past few
million years, then the population doing
this would be in the millions, and all
other predators (and scavengers) would
be in trouble. Of course, modern homo
would also have all manner of savanna
carnivore adaptations, including fur, a
taste for rotten meat, an ability to live on
very little water and little salt, night-sight,
precocial infants, resistance to savanna
parasites (such as the tsetse fly) and so
on and on.

Taxa generally stick to what they
know -- new branches stay in the same
kind of habitat, and follow much the
same kind of life (i.e. plains-running
carnivores give rise to more of the same,
and not to (say) tree-living vegetarians,
likewise tree-living primates give rise to
more tree-living primates, and not to
plains-running carnivores).

Extraordinary changes can occur in
extraordinary circumstances, such as
after mass-extinctions. There were no
such events in the relevant period.

Gerrit Hannenberg:
The bipedal hominidae is not a single species and therefore can not be
considered to have had a single niche that remained unchanged from the
most basal member of that clade to its only extant representative.

Paul Crowley:
It can very well be considered to have
had a single niche, with the various
speciations being merely the result of
geographical separation -- and a hostile
attitude to strangers, only marginally
intensified over that commonly seen in
nature and among other primates.

****************************

Claudius Denk:
Hominids emerged on the scene--from the very start--as communal,
communally territorialistic, and social. It's the agenda of the
anthropological establishment to conceal this.

The evidence proves communalism. The stone tools are not found
distributed over the greater savanna. Instead they tend to be found
at localities that were well treed and well watered when these
tools/weapons were first deposited there.

This evidence is consistent with the communal territorialism of my
hypothesis. It is inconsistent with the small-band, hunting-gathering
vagueness of conventional theory.

Gerrit has not dispute with this interpretation.

Pgarrone:
As to niche swapping, obviously most species occupy quite stable
niches, but homo is the "first", so must have transcended a sequence
of niches quite rapidly, biologically speaking, to "arrive". Its like
the concept of "Punctuated equilibrium", except there were no
equilibrium points. There do not seem to be any barriers going from
brachiating ape,to a'piths walking on the savanna, to homo habilus
with scavenging and running and stone tools, to erectus with endurance
hunting, to full language and rationality of homo sapiens.

Claudius Denk:
Intelligence is the thing that enables them to leap. And this is the
result of communal selection.

Pgarrone:
You seem to disagree with me, but are masking this disagreement by
pretending not to understand me.

Claudius Denk:
What's to understand. Obviously this notion, endurance hunting, fails to
explain the selective origins of the vast majority of hominid/human
attributes. In relation to other species hominids are highly communal,
highly communicative, communally territorialistic, highly cooperative,
linguistic, etc. Obviously endurance hunting does not, in an of itself,
explain any of these adaptations.

Pgarrone:
As to the small gradual steps that scavenging implies with respect to
A'piths evolving into Homo, obviously it's much easier for an animal
that can only walk to start scavenging then to start cursorial
hunting.

Claudius Denk:
And we're all suppose to pretend not to notice that for a forest dwelling
ape to transition to a scavenging niche is a gigantic step.

Pgarrone:
I don't follow your point with respect to intelligence, communal
selection, and evolutionary leaping, and what it's got to do with what
I wrote.

Claudius Denk:
Do you object to humans being described as communal, intelligent,
cooperative, social? Why?

*****************************

Pgarrone:
The point I was making was that it is definitely possible and
straightforward for humans to engage in cursorial hunting.

Claudius Denk:
We're not dicussing what is possible. We're discussing what is most
parsimonius.

Pgarrone:
Considering your predators with respect to the emergence of Erectus :
- Dire wolves and giant carnivorous bears were uninvolved, as they are
American. (Erectus emerged in Africa)
- the felids such as lions, cheetahs, and Dionfelis (rather than
smilodon, which again is American) are not cursorial hunters. Lions
were not around until 1.5 mya.
Until Dionfelis disappeared about 1.5 mya, hyenas made their living
scavenging their kills. Erectus had emerged by then.
This leaves the African hunting dog, Lycaon Pictus. While these are
formidable cursorial predators, it is not difficult to envisage Homo
having advantages such as posture, vision, and intelligence, as well
as an alternate food supply when game was sparse.

Claudius Denk:
Pretend if you will, the facts are that the predators that existed back then
were even more formidable and numerous than those that presently exist in
east African savanna/monsoon forest habitat. Early hominids, both HE and
A'pith, must have had strategies to deal with these very real predatory
realities.

Pgarrone:
You say scavenging is impossible because homo cannot eat rotten meat.
Yet it is possible to scavenge meat that is not yet rotten, most
likely by stealing a kill. You just have to be smart, and quick.

Claudius Denk:
Again, you make the mistake of arguing based on what is possible rather than
what is most parsimonious. It simply isn't parsimonious to conclude that
hominids regularly competed with dedicated hunters/scavengers.

Pgarrone:
No one is claiming Homo was a nocturnal ambush predator.

Claudius Denk:
I am. Collective, coordinated aggression that would be associated
with ambush hunting at their communal territory (well-watered,
treed localities) *is* consistent with what hominids actually are.
Chasing prey over long distances through treeless habitat and
competing with large predators and dedicated scavegers who see
they themselves as food is not consistent with what hominids actually
are.

Shouldn't a hypothesis on hominid evolution explain what hominids actually
are?










.

Quantcast