Re: Born To Run: What Humans Really Evolved To Do

On Oct 17, 9:16 am, RichTravsky <traRvE...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Claudius Denk wrote:
On Oct 5, 7:23 pm, RichTravsky <traRvE...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Paul Crowley wrote:
RichTravsky wrote:
Claudius Denk wrote:
On Sep 15, 1:17 pm, Andrew.Nowicki...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:

The article suggests that the first running
hominid was Homo erectus.

Absurd.  At best HE was ecologically dominant in their garden
habitat.  They may have tragelled moderate distances, but certainly

Garden habitat???? LOL - what the hell is that?

It may not be exact but it is probably as good a
a term as anything else.  It's the sort of habitat
that humans do their best to recreate when they
have the opportunity -- i.e. when they have money:
well-watered, plenty of trees, lawns, ponds and
other water features, not much in the way of
dense brush.

Your proof that erectus had gardens ->

Your proof they did not?

It's your claim. You back it up.





And while you're at it, reconcile that with the fact erectus ranged far
in the old world - like Africa, southwest Asia, China, and Indonesia.

Erectus ranged over Africa, and into southwest Asia, to China, and
Indonesia - that must've been some garden!

Think of what humans eat -- or did eat before
famining.  OK, you'll find it tough --  but
fruit, roots and certain leaves would have
figured highly.  Where do such things grow?
On high mountains?  In deserts?  On the wide
open savannas?  Have a guess.

Early humans were hunters and getherers.

Your proof that early humans were hunter gatherers?

What do you think they did before agriculture? Duh...

That's how you spread around the world.



They included a lot of things in
their diet since they ranged from Africa, southwest Asia, China, to
Indonesia and the local flora and fauna would have differed greatly....- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Admit it. You have no dispute with anything I'm saying and--more
importantly--you have no hypothesis of your own that even begins to
explain the selective origins of the most communally territorialistic
species that ever existed--hominids. All you have is some dimwitted
(and otherwise vague) notion of early hominids running after prey in
somekind of panacea savanna that is magically free of predators.

What you are saying is so plainly and obviously stupid that I don't
believe that you yourself believe what you are saying. You just can't
admit you are wrong.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: A More Reasonable Interpretation of the Evidence
    ... the large predators found in treeless savanna habitat is inconsistent ... Are you saying that a community of Apiths that wished to keep ... data consistent with the evidence. ... Is there any evidence that they did not have gardens, ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)
  • Re: Ardipith river/lake-side
    ... It's the dry season of the monsoon habitat that gave them no choice but ... hominid evolution it was much more straightforward. ... But the competition was economic in that the communities that survived ... This is how humans evolved from chimps. ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)
  • Re: What were the habitats of early hominids?
    ... Your "waterside" is a habitat. ... Origin of hominid bipedalism ... savanna ungulates but this seems highly improbable. ... There was no empty niche of migrating scavengers to be occupied by ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)
  • Re: Bipedal adaptation
    ... and hominid habitat. ... habitat, ... One thing that has long been noticed about Human evolution is that it ... experienced communal selection. ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)
  • Re: Born To Run: What Humans Really Evolved To Do
    ... hominid was Homo erectus. ... It's the sort of habitat ... You have no dispute with anything I'm saying and--more ... Admit it - you didn't read what I posted. ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)