Re: Help me settle an argument...
- From: "Paul Crowley" <skjhkdjhffr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 1 May 2007 13:15:01 -0400 (EDT)
"Vend" <vend82@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:f15ad0$2p0m$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
I've stated it. There are NO chimp fossils
(although there are a few uncertain bits
that tell us little) so there is no evidence
there. Although Tim White called his
very early hominid 'a bipedal chimp'.
Actually there are two distinguishable species of modern chimps, and
the ancestor couldn't be possibly equal to both of them.
It is generally agreed (from DNA studies)
that bonobos split off from the main chimp
population around 1.5 million years ago.
They are an isolated population on the
southern side of the Congo River.
(Chimps cannot cross major rivers.)
They did not exist at the time of the
chimp/hominid split.
Do Sicilians have a knife fighting tradition?
Yes -- or they used to. Guns have
probably taken over now.
This appears to be made up. Evidence?
It is common knowledge.
Of ignorant people.
Heard of the feuds? Of the Mafia? Of
the weakness of Italian governments?
The population (partly as a result of
all that) were extremely poor and guns
and ammunition were expensive.
Why do asiatics have minimal beards?
Asian people have less visible hair in the whole body than Europeans.
Beards are a different feature from body
hair, and will have a different explanation
-- assuming that you believe this is a
science, and explanations are either
possible or relevant.
Why do we need different explanations for facial and body hair
distribution in Asian people?
They are human features and we should
be able to use evolutionary arguments
to explain them -- and the differences
across human populations.
African wild dogs (Lycaon pictus), for instance, hunt by chasing their
preys in the open African plains until they become exhausted:
"Like most members of the dog family, they are cursorial hunters,
meaning that they pursue their prey in a long, open chase, rather than
relying on stealth as most members of the cat family. Typically, about
85% of their hunts result in a kill."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African_Wild_Dog
Our ancestors probably did something similar.
How did they come to _evolve_ into
this (already occupied) niche?
Wild dogs and hyenas didn't kill every prey.
We can take it that (under your scenario)
they were present almost all the time
while hominids were evolving. They'd
have mopped up all the vulnerable
animals.
Canid and human niches are not totally overlapping,
Are you saying that canids (et al) were
absent from the hominid habitat?
and anyhow a new species can enter in an
occupied niche if it's able to compete with the previous occupants.
It is a highly specialised task, which
most predators do not begin to consider,
and it imposes great demands on the
anatomy of the few which do. No one
claims that early hominids (e.g.
australopiths) were able to do it. So
how would their descendants have
begun to evolve into it?
Consider what happens when rats and domestic cats are introduced in
ecosystems where they were not present.
This is a hopeless analogy. Hominids
were not introduced into Africa, after
having evolved on another continent.
What is different
about humans from other species that
allows weak muscles and fragile bones?
It can't be any kind of running, since no
other prey or predator species (specialising
in running) demonstrates those
characteristics.
I'm skeptical about your claim that humans have the weakest muscles
and bones among all animal species.
It is common knowledge -- among forensic
and anthropological scientists. When
bones are discovered, the first question
is: 'Are they human?'. The answer will
usually come quickly. Alan Walker and Pat
Shipman in their "Wisdom of the Bones"
discuss the issue. Human bones are remarkable
for the 'disaggregated' nature of their cells.
They can be broken easily.
Of course, basic facts like this are ignored
by the PA community in the adherence to
theories about the heroic nature of our
ancestors: "Man, the Hunter". Such myths
go down so much better with students and
with the public generally. It also sounds
more impressive in funding applications.
Who would finance an investigation into
"Man, the Sloth"? Who would want
that on their resume -- especially if it did
not work out too well?
Paul.
.
- Prev by Date: Re: Has human evolution stopped?
- Next by Date: Re: Evolutionist withholds evidence on Haldane's Dilemma
- Previous by thread: Re: Artificial selection: a special case of natural selection?
- Next by thread: Re: Help me settle an argument...
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
