Re: "Waterside" is meaningless

On Dec 17, 6:50 am, Algis <algiskuliu...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Dec 17, 1:01 am, mclark <mbclar...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Dec 15, 11:19 pm, Algis <algiskuliu...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

[various and sundry denials, evasions]

You asked me to demonstrate that our ancestors evolved in waterside
habitats more than the ancestors of the chimps and gorillas. I clearly
did that.

You clearly have not.

You evade it.

I've focused on it. I've pleaded with you to recognize
that there are reasons for the disparity in fossils and
that you *still* don't have any ~evidence~ placing our
ancestors any "closer" or "farther away" than any
other creature sharing their habitat. This, apparently,
you can't see or refuse to acknowledge.

You ignore the fact that gallery forests would
require hominids to come down from the trees.

I don't deny the possibility. I don't deny the
possibility that there are at least a thousand
different reasons to climb and descend a tree
trunk. I don't care one way or the other.

You ignore the fact that
living in waterside habitats would actually require some movement
through water.

I don't place any importance on it. You want to
create little vignettes of paleo life, little Ozzie and
Harriet stories among the LCA's? Go ahead, knock
yourself out but you still haven't placed these hominids
~in the water~ such that any selection occurred affecting
our physiognomy. Tick tock, tick tock.

You ignore the fact that there are thousands of fossils
attributed to human ancestors but almost none attributed to Pan.

I do not. I gave you a link to a ~whole raft~ of taphonomy
books. Why do you suppose I did that, Algis? Do you read
nothing outside of your cherished AAT screeds?

You
ignore the fact that many early Homo sapiens sites are coastal (more
than chimps at the very least) and you ignore the clear difference in
swimming ability between extant forms.

I challenge you to provide *any* data in support of your
contention that these hominids were ~coastal~ (with all
your attendant connotations) as opposed to ~terrestrial~.
(coastal being a subset of terrestrial)

Further, I do ~not~ deny that humans and chimps have
differing relationships with water. Show me where I have.
~I have said~ that it doesn't mean what you want it to mean.

It would have been so much easier if you'd just written "yes, i can
see humans have lived in waterside habitats more than chimps since the
LCA" but I guess that would be a heretical thing for you to do. What
on earth would the others say?

I'm not going to say something merely because you
want me to. I will instead say that the AAT is a pantload
and its apologists are ear-deep in the very worst sort
of "science". If they had any sense, they would be
~very~ embarrassed. Honestly, Algis, how can you
read these exchanges and *not* see the argument?

We evolved from apes, not dogs.

Gee thanks, Algis, I sure blew that one.  Now can
we get around to the point?  The dog is diving for
rocks --in the lake.  Is he breathing water?  Should
I call a rescue ...

No. Of course dogs can swim quite well and even dive sometimes. Most
terrestrial animals can. We can. But most apes do not or cannot. There
is a clear differential between our lineage and their's. Face it,
don't deny it.

Who has been denying it? The "debate"
surrounds what it means. Our lineage has
~not~ been affected by water any more than
any other terrestrial vertebrate. Those that think
otherwise must ~support~ their idea. They
do not, cannot, and will not (if history is any
guide).

Algis Kuliukas

"Where is it so shoddy? Where else have my ideas
been shoddy?"-- Algis Kuliukas 10/11/2005

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Updated AAH Definition
    ... Clearly there are no Pan/Gorilla fossils contemporaneous to hundreds ... > much the same habitats" over the last two million years. ... > chimps exclusively. ... > hominins with that of later ones, or you're just gawdawful confused again. ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)
  • Re: Bipedalism in different substrates
    ... Wetland habitats are here and they always have been. ... the facts that Miocene apes of Europe & SE Asia must have lived around ... wading is the most likely to induce bipedalism, ... around 11% drag reduction in water. ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)
  • Re: Ealine Morgan
    ... & chimps can't?" ... Before crossing deep water baboons may survey ... 1993 The Nariokotome Homo ... This is what a real diver looks like. ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)
  • Re: Updated AAH Definition
    ... We also see hominins occupying a *variety* of habits, ... Chimps live in habitats that aren't condusive to fossilization. ... The point is, Algis, ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)
  • Re: Is the AAH a legitimate hypothesis? Of course it is.
    ... > back and re-read how the savanna chimps deal with it. ... waste water to thrive on. ... I didn't say wait around an hour THEN throw rocks, ... Humans were never aquatic - that's ridiculous. ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)