Re: patas & sealions run after kudus (Re: Endurance athletes heavy water consumers

On Aug 30, 12:08 pm, Paul Crowley
<slkwuoiutiuytciu...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Claudius Denk wrote:
All that we know of the
anatomy of early hominids (such as A'piths)
tells us that they were very POOR at walking
-- having short legs, something like chimps.

Well stated.  Yes, as a matter of fact they maintained tree climbing
adaptations

This is nonsense.  They'd have been competing
with chimps, and following an identical life-
style to chimps.  There is no room for two
species in an identical niche.

Absurd. There were no competing species. They were all the same
species.


 > and were incapable of running.  What were they good at?

Standing.  

Hardly 'standing' as such.  They just did
not need much mobility.  They were stocky
and had great upper-body strength.

Vague. And you are avoiding the issue.


 > How would this be useful?  Well, firstly it would be useful

if they were collectively standing their ground against inmigrating
herds of food competitors.  And it would be good for freeing their
hands for wielding rocks and sticks toward the same end.

This 'inmigrating herds' is both bad English
and nonsensical biology.  They had to be
good at wielding weapons (clubs, and maybe
spears) against other hominids.  

Absurd.

Why do you
find that so difficult?  Chimps fight their
own species (often to the death).  

Yes. And they don't use weapons to do this. But we're not talking
about chimps. We're talking about animals that evolved from chimps to
become the most communally territorialistic species that ever
existed. Rocks and sticks would be useful toward this end. The
biggest threat to their survival was the dry season. If they allowed
the fruit and vegetable resources in their treed habitat become
depleted then the opportunity seeking predators would come flooding
into their isolated community and, possibly, massacre the whole
community during the depths of the dry season.

The communities that survived these very stark selective factors were
the ones that were more human.

So do humans.
Why should the intermediate species be so
different?

There's no selection in your scenario. Chimps fighting chimps is not
a scenario for why humans evolved. It's a sceanrio for why chimps
stayed chimps.


In another post you write:
 > > > Did anything you read give you any details on how a
 > > > diminutive, slow moving, creature like A'pith managed
 > > > survive predation from sabertoothed cats and bear-sized
 > > > hyena?

Yet you yourself gives no reasonable answer
to the problem of predation.  

Actually, predation is a very important part of the selective scenario
of my hypothesis. See my hyhpothesis for details.

It is a
horendous one -- if you see the species being
on the African mainland.  Large groups of
hominids would be very easy pickings,
especially at night.

Ever notice that lion and hyena can't climb trees?
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Human brain on an evolutionary sprint!
    ... > chimps never move, ... The hominids were certainly ... IMO, if we theorize large ... >> of constant competition from many other species ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)
  • Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
    ... Your model has NO PREDATORS. ... to be "Chimps don't use clubs". ... hominids would not have ... Neither species needs any special ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)
  • Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
    ... Your model has NO PREDATORS. ... > to be "Chimps don't use clubs". ... > hominids would not have ... Neither species needs any special ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)
  • Re: Apiths Represent a Dramatic Shift in Lifestyle
    ... Hominids are the garden species, ... We should not 'presuppose' that chimps ... > differentiating the peculiarities of hominid evolution. ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)
  • Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
    ... > Which other species have the capacity to ... Chimps do it all the time. ... The chimp-like early hominids would ... >> isolation scenario that would predict this. ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)