Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Emergence of bipedalism *not* linked to mobility
1 view
Skip to first unread message
Claudius Denk
Jan 14, 2012, 5:25:21 AM1/14/12
to
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v432/n7015/full/nature03052.html
Homo
Dennis M. Bramble & Daniel E. Lieberman
Abstract
"Striding bipedalism is a key derived behaviour of hominids that
possibly originated soon after the divergence of the chimpanzee and
human lineages. Although bipedal gaits include walking and running,
running is generally considered to have played no major role in human
evolution because humans, like apes, are poor sprinters compared to
most quadrupeds. Here we assess how well humans perform at sustained
long-distance running, and review the physiological and anatomical
bases of endurance running capabilities in humans and other mammals.
Judged by several criteria, humans perform remarkably well at
endurance running, thanks to a diverse array of features, many of
which leave traces in the skeleton. The fossil evidence of these
features suggests that endurance running is a derived capability of
the genus Homo, originating about 2 million years ago, and may have
been instrumental in the evolution of the human body form."
************************************
My reading of this abstract suggests that Bramble and Lieberman are
attempting to obscure the fact that there really is no evidence that
the emergence of bipedalism had much of anything to do with (bipedal)
mobilily. Anatomically there is nothing about early hominids (LCA--5
to 7 mya) that would suggest they were remotely capable of competing
with large, migratory, (and usually quadrupedal) food competitor
species on the basis of migration. In fact, the evidence suggests
that if early hominids did compete with migratory species by way of
increased migration on their own part that they would have maintained
quadrupedalism. This means that the emergence of bipedalism (4 to 7
mya) *must* have had something to do with freeing the hands for other
purposes and not only did it not have anything to do with increased
mobility but it, more likely, had to do with a decrease in mobility,
as we might associate with a shift to communalism and/or
territorialism.
Moreover, it is apparent that Bramble and Lieberman are,
inadvertently, conceding this point by way of the fact that the only
way they can make a case for the sensibility of their assertion is to
skip ahead to Homo Erectus at 2 mya.
Homo
Dennis M. Bramble & Daniel E. Lieberman
Abstract
"Striding bipedalism is a key derived behaviour of hominids that
possibly originated soon after the divergence of the chimpanzee and
human lineages. Although bipedal gaits include walking and running,
running is generally considered to have played no major role in human
evolution because humans, like apes, are poor sprinters compared to
most quadrupeds. Here we assess how well humans perform at sustained
long-distance running, and review the physiological and anatomical
bases of endurance running capabilities in humans and other mammals.
Judged by several criteria, humans perform remarkably well at
endurance running, thanks to a diverse array of features, many of
which leave traces in the skeleton. The fossil evidence of these
features suggests that endurance running is a derived capability of
the genus Homo, originating about 2 million years ago, and may have
been instrumental in the evolution of the human body form."
************************************
My reading of this abstract suggests that Bramble and Lieberman are
attempting to obscure the fact that there really is no evidence that
the emergence of bipedalism had much of anything to do with (bipedal)
mobilily. Anatomically there is nothing about early hominids (LCA--5
to 7 mya) that would suggest they were remotely capable of competing
with large, migratory, (and usually quadrupedal) food competitor
species on the basis of migration. In fact, the evidence suggests
that if early hominids did compete with migratory species by way of
increased migration on their own part that they would have maintained
quadrupedalism. This means that the emergence of bipedalism (4 to 7
mya) *must* have had something to do with freeing the hands for other
purposes and not only did it not have anything to do with increased
mobility but it, more likely, had to do with a decrease in mobility,
as we might associate with a shift to communalism and/or
territorialism.
Moreover, it is apparent that Bramble and Lieberman are,
inadvertently, conceding this point by way of the fact that the only
way they can make a case for the sensibility of their assertion is to
skip ahead to Homo Erectus at 2 mya.
Lee Olsen
Jan 14, 2012, 9:27:47 AM1/14/12
to
Claudius Denk <claudiusd...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
http://tinyurl.com/88sudzv
CD: Postulate #1
About 4 to 6 million years ago
a change in global weather patterns brought
about a change in the annual climate in
our chimpanzee-like ancestor's
habitat from one that was seasonless to one that was
now highly seasonal"
http://forum.lowcarber.org/showthread.php?t=53654
CD: "Every year their patches of
remaining forest, their "community sites," got overrun with
other species. Many of these species would have competed
directly with them for food and thus would have caused the
depletion of resources at a time when these resources were
increasingly scarce, the dry season. Other herbivores may not
have directly competed with them, but all of them brought
predators with them:, lions, tigers, hyenas, dogs, etc."
http://tinyurl.com/68fw585
So which is it, tigers in Africa or hominids in China 4 to 6 million
years ago?
[snip rest of train wreck]
http://tinyurl.com/88sudzv
CD: Postulate #1
About 4 to 6 million years ago
a change in global weather patterns brought
about a change in the annual climate in
our chimpanzee-like ancestor's
habitat from one that was seasonless to one that was
now highly seasonal"
http://forum.lowcarber.org/showthread.php?t=53654
CD: "Every year their patches of
remaining forest, their "community sites," got overrun with
other species. Many of these species would have competed
directly with them for food and thus would have caused the
depletion of resources at a time when these resources were
increasingly scarce, the dry season. Other herbivores may not
have directly competed with them, but all of them brought
predators with them:, lions, tigers, hyenas, dogs, etc."
http://tinyurl.com/68fw585
So which is it, tigers in Africa or hominids in China 4 to 6 million
years ago?
[snip rest of train wreck]
Claudius Denk
Jan 14, 2012, 8:30:43 PM1/14/12
to
Lee Olsen
Jan 14, 2012, 8:48:29 PM1/14/12
to
J.LyonLayden
Jan 14, 2012, 9:59:09 PM1/14/12
to
> Answer the question, you evasive twit.
in Africa during the Miocene. The only reason I can see that you would
keep beating a dead horse is to insult and troll, Lee. No one cares if
someone calls a big extinct feline a lion instead of it's latin
scientific name except nerds with a bone to pick with each other. I am
not sure whether this guy has said something about hominids in Asia 4
to 6 million years ago, but if he did I don't know why it would be
important to this thread or why you need to bring it up. From what I
understand there are a few controversial fossils (or is it teeth) with
extreme dates from Asia that some have claimed are hominids, but most
scientists reject them. However, it wouldn't surprise me if one day
they found some evidence that the austros took the coastal rout long
before their descendents did, since most of their former habitat in
Sunda is underwater now and preservation is poor on all those islands.
Neither would it surprise me if some knowledgeable scientists
hypothesize that austros were spread that far at some point in the
past.
My point is the person who argues from the perspective that he knows
all the facts and any hypothesis or evidence to the contrary is
impossible is only proving to anyone with a reasoning mind that they
are a fool.
Lee Olsen
Jan 14, 2012, 11:16:48 PM1/14/12
to
On Jan 14, 6:59 pm, "J.LyonLayden" <josephlay...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Answer the question, you evasive twit.
>
> What question? I sdaw where Claudius said that there were big felines
> in Africa during the Miocene.
> > Answer the question, you evasive twit.
>
> What question? I sdaw where Claudius said that there were big felines
> in Africa during the Miocene.
http://forum.lowcarber.org/showthread.php?t=53654
CD: "Every year their patches of
remaining forest, their "community sites," got overrun with
other species. Many of these species would have competed
directly with them for food and thus would have caused the
depletion of resources at a time when these resources were
increasingly scarce, the dry season. Other herbivores may not
have directly competed with them, but all of them brought
predators with them:, lions, tigers, hyenas, dogs, etc."
Maybe you can help Jim out with a reference to tigers in Africa?
CD: "Every year their patches of
remaining forest, their "community sites," got overrun with
other species. Many of these species would have competed
directly with them for food and thus would have caused the
depletion of resources at a time when these resources were
increasingly scarce, the dry season. Other herbivores may not
have directly competed with them, but all of them brought
predators with them:, lions, tigers, hyenas, dogs, etc."
J.LyonLayden
Jan 15, 2012, 1:15:16 AM1/15/12
to
But what does a poorly worded reference (or poorly named, if you will)
to feline predators in Africa have to do with this thread, or this
particular poster's ability to put forth a rational argument?
I'm just a musician, but I'm sure glad that other musicians aren't as
nit-picky as you guys. Otherwise I could have my whole credibility
ruined just for calling a Fender guitar a "Gibson" by mistake on a day
when I'm a little hungover and not thinking clearly.
Just wish you guys would stop with the ridiculous one-up-manship; the
signal to noise ratio is getting stupid on this forum...have to weed
through 15 posts of childish insults to get any debating that actually
has any substance to it.
to feline predators in Africa have to do with this thread, or this
particular poster's ability to put forth a rational argument?
I'm just a musician, but I'm sure glad that other musicians aren't as
nit-picky as you guys. Otherwise I could have my whole credibility
ruined just for calling a Fender guitar a "Gibson" by mistake on a day
when I'm a little hungover and not thinking clearly.
Just wish you guys would stop with the ridiculous one-up-manship; the
signal to noise ratio is getting stupid on this forum...have to weed
through 15 posts of childish insults to get any debating that actually
has any substance to it.
Paul Crowley
Jan 15, 2012, 3:22:05 AM1/15/12
to
On 15/01/2012 06:15, J.LyonLayden wrote:
> Just wish you guys would stop with the ridiculous
> one-up-manship; the signal to noise ratio is getting
> stupid on this forum...have to weed through 15 posts
> of childish insults to get any debating that actually
> has any substance to it.
I used to participate in this group -- but the last
> Just wish you guys would stop with the ridiculous
> one-up-manship; the signal to noise ratio is getting
> stupid on this forum...have to weed through 15 posts
> of childish insults to get any debating that actually
> has any substance to it.
year and especially the last few months, it has
become unreadable. Olsen has never been
anything but a spammer and has long been in my
kill-file, but McGinn (in his multiple incarnations)
has joined him there, since he has fallen to Olsen's
level and exceeded him in the production of
empty pointless noise.
Why do they bother? Can't they take their trash
off-line, and exchange their insults in private emails?
Paul.
Lee Olsen
Jan 15, 2012, 8:32:51 AM1/15/12
to
On Jan 14, 10:15 pm, "J.LyonLayden" <josephlay...@gmail.com> wrote:
> But what does a poorly worded reference (or poorly named, if you will)
> to feline predators in Africa have to do with this thread,
"reference"? Jim only references his own delusions.
> But what does a poorly worded reference (or poorly named, if you will)
> to feline predators in Africa have to do with this thread,
> particular poster's ability to put forth a rational argument?
> I'm just a musician, but I'm sure glad that other musicians aren't as
> nit-picky as you guys.
sentence Beethoven wrote the Stars Spangle Banner,
what would you say? You would either nit pick or dump the article in
the trash and go elsewhere.
When a**holes like McGinn and Crowley continually post misinformation,
and it goes uncorrected, it simply drags the group down to their
level...the gutter.
> Otherwise I could have my whole credibility
> ruined just for calling a Fender guitar a "Gibson" by mistake on a day
> when I'm a little hungover and not thinking clearly.
Message-ID: <1164704227....@80g2000cwy.googlegroups.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2008
McGinn: "I don't make statements I can't support."
1. Nobody lived on the savanna until the advent of jeeps and guns.
2. Lions evolved from saber-tooth cats.
3. Apiths never ventured more than 50/100 yds away from a tree.
4. Climate change is not happening presently.
5. Agriculture probably stretches back hundreds
of thousand if not millions of years.
6. Genetic drift is a pseudo-scientific notion.
7. Spears are useless against hyena and lions.
8. ..then what purpose do the stone weapons (spears, bow and
arrow) serve that show up in the fossil record starting about
2.5
mya?
9. Then you should stop;pissing into it.
10. Speak for yourself. I see just fine at night.
11. Uh, er. These artifacts don't come with notes attached to them
that
indicate how they were actually used.
12. Why we see stasis in tool advancement up until a few thousand
years ago.
13. So Paul, now that you've, finally, come to accept the fact that
early
hominids--both A'pith and HE--resided in treed habitat
14. pigs are not found in treeless savanna habitat.........
> Just wish you guys would stop with the ridiculous one-up-manship; the
> signal to noise ratio is getting stupid on this forum...have to weed
> through 15 posts of childish insults to get any debating that actually
> has any substance to it.
your illiterate world? Have you ever read a peer-reviewed journal
paper? I didn't think so.
Lee Olsen
Jan 15, 2012, 8:40:38 AM1/15/12
to
Paul Crowley <dsfdsfd...@sdfsfsfs.com> wrote:
Message-ID: <1160837514.938748.252i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
"Chimps do NOT have the capacity to dig."
Message-ID: <3257D7...@megafauna.com>#1/1
"You really crack me up, Paul Crowley. If you keep it up I'm going to
hurt myself.
First, you present the "fact" that there were no lions in Europe as
evidence that Neanderthals didn't hunt. Then, when someone points out
that there *were* lions in Europe, you claim that as *conclusive*
evidence that Neanderthals didn't hunt.
BTW, you seem to think that the existence of one predator precludes
the
existence of any others. That's rather difficult to believe given
that
in Africa lions, leopards, cheetahs, hyenas, and wild dogs coexist
and
prey on roughly the same species."
Steve Barnard
Message ID: RVsag.9272$j7.3...@news.indigo.ie
"Hand axes were produced by grinding, and at an economical rate by
hominids.
Put them on a pebble beach and they'd be ground (and broken) to dust
within a
few years (or even months)."
Message-ID: <1160837514.938748.252i42g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>
"Chimps do NOT have the capacity to dig."
Message-ID: <3257D7...@megafauna.com>#1/1
"You really crack me up, Paul Crowley. If you keep it up I'm going to
hurt myself.
First, you present the "fact" that there were no lions in Europe as
evidence that Neanderthals didn't hunt. Then, when someone points out
that there *were* lions in Europe, you claim that as *conclusive*
evidence that Neanderthals didn't hunt.
BTW, you seem to think that the existence of one predator precludes
the
existence of any others. That's rather difficult to believe given
that
in Africa lions, leopards, cheetahs, hyenas, and wild dogs coexist
and
prey on roughly the same species."
Steve Barnard
Message ID: RVsag.9272$j7.3...@news.indigo.ie
"Hand axes were produced by grinding, and at an economical rate by
hominids.
Put them on a pebble beach and they'd be ground (and broken) to dust
within a
few years (or even months)."
Claudius Denk
Jan 15, 2012, 1:13:58 PM1/15/12
to
On Jan 14, 6:59 pm, "J.LyonLayden" <josephlay...@gmail.com> wrote:
and Travsky a number of times: anybody worth convincing would be smart
enough to see right through their rather obvious tactics.
Paradigms don't die easy.
Claudius Denk
Jan 15, 2012, 2:06:51 PM1/15/12
to
On Jan 14, 10:15 pm, "J.LyonLayden" <josephlay...@gmail.com> wrote:
only natural for people to be incredulous. Obviously if Olsen,
McDonald, Travsky or anybody else had any real dispute with my
thinking they would just present it. But, they don't. So, in a state
of panic, they lash out with all manner of propaganda tactics.
Darwin faced similar opposition.
Claudius Denk
Jan 15, 2012, 2:34:26 PM1/15/12
to
and spammers. It used to be the AATers, Verhaegen, Morgan, and Algis
Kuliakis (maybe not Algis so much, because he actually did often make
an honest attempt to address issues). But now the tables have
turned. Now it's the conventional theorists who employ the tactics of
desperation.
Lee Olsen
Jan 15, 2012, 9:57:09 PM1/15/12
to
On Jan 15, 11:34 am, Claudius Denk <claudiusd...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> On Jan 15, 12:22 am, Paul Crowley <dsfdsfd...@sdfsfsfs.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 15/01/2012 06:15, J.LyonLayden wrote:
>
> > > Just wish you guys would stop with the ridiculous
> > > one-up-manship; the signal to noise ratio is getting
> > > stupid on this forum...have to weed through 15 posts
> > > of childish insults to get any debating that actually
> > > has any substance to it.
>
> > I used to participate in this group -- but the last
> > year and especially the last few months, it has
> > become unreadable. Olsen has never been
> > anything but a spammer and has long been in my
> > kill-file, but McGinn (in his multiple incarnations)
> > has joined him there, since he has fallen to Olsen's
> > level and exceeded him in the production of
> > empty pointless noise.
>
> > Why do they bother? Can't they take their trash
> > off-line, and exchange their insults in private emails?
>
> > Paul.
>
> As you well know, Paul, this group has always had it's share of trolls
> and spammers.
Particularly of the type that see Miocene tigers in Africa where there
> On Jan 15, 12:22 am, Paul Crowley <dsfdsfd...@sdfsfsfs.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 15/01/2012 06:15, J.LyonLayden wrote:
>
> > > Just wish you guys would stop with the ridiculous
> > > one-up-manship; the signal to noise ratio is getting
> > > stupid on this forum...have to weed through 15 posts
> > > of childish insults to get any debating that actually
> > > has any substance to it.
>
> > I used to participate in this group -- but the last
> > year and especially the last few months, it has
> > become unreadable. Olsen has never been
> > anything but a spammer and has long been in my
> > kill-file, but McGinn (in his multiple incarnations)
> > has joined him there, since he has fallen to Olsen's
> > level and exceeded him in the production of
> > empty pointless noise.
>
> > Why do they bother? Can't they take their trash
> > off-line, and exchange their insults in private emails?
>
> > Paul.
>
> As you well know, Paul, this group has always had it's share of trolls
> and spammers.
weren't any and then claim they are integral to the evolution of
bipedalism.
http://tinyurl.com/88sudzv
CD: Postulate #1
About 4 to 6 million years ago
a change in global weather patterns brought
about a change in the annual climate in
our chimpanzee-like ancestor's
habitat from one that was seasonless to one that was
now highly seasonal"
http://forum.lowcarber.org/showthread.php?t=53654
CD: "Every year their patches of
remaining forest, their "community sites," got overrun with
other species. Many of these species would have competed
directly with them for food and thus would have caused the
depletion of resources at a time when these resources were
increasingly scarce, the dry season. Other herbivores may not
have directly competed with them, but all of them brought
predators with them:, lions, tigers, hyenas, dogs, etc."
http://tinyurl.com/68fw585
CD: "Every year their patches of
remaining forest, their "community sites," got overrun with
other species. Many of these species would have competed
directly with them for food and thus would have caused the
depletion of resources at a time when these resources were
increasingly scarce, the dry season. Other herbivores may not
have directly competed with them, but all of them brought
predators with them:, lions, tigers, hyenas, dogs, etc."
So which is it, tigers in Africa or hominids in China 4 to 6 million
years ago?
> It used to be the AATers, Verhaegen, Morgan, and Algis
> Kuliakis (maybe not Algis so much, because he actually did often make
> an honest attempt to address issues). But now the tables have
> turned. Now it's the conventional theorists who employ the tactics of
> desperation.
mya, I can't even imagine what fictitious animals are represented by
"etc."
Claudius Denk
Jan 16, 2012, 1:12:22 AM1/16/12
to
implications of the dry season associated with the onset of monsoon
climate 7 to 8 mya and how the predator infested treeless habitat that
surrounded their treed community site left them largely, if not
completely, isolated at these treed, well-watered, enclaves.
Lee Olsen
Jan 16, 2012, 9:44:01 AM1/16/12
to
> > > It used to be the AATers, Verhaegen, Morgan, and Algis
> > > Kuliakis (maybe not Algis so much, because he actually did often make
> > > an honest attempt to address issues). But now the tables have
> > > turned. Now it's the conventional theorists who employ the tactics of
> > > desperation.
>
> > If you are delusional enough to think tigers were in Africa 4 to 6
> > mya, I can't even imagine what fictitious animals are represented by
> > "etc."
>
> Well, Lee. I think it's great that you are starting to understand the
> implications of the dry season associated with the onset of monsoon
Do you have a reference for that or did you make it up like your
African tiger data?
>and how the predator infested treeless habitat
> that
> surrounded their treed community site left them largely, if not
> completely, isolated at these treed, well-watered, enclaves.
to believe your imaginary "treed community" is not a figment of you
imagination also.
Claudius Denk
Jan 16, 2012, 11:14:32 AM1/16/12
to
On Jan 16, 6:44 am, Lee Olsen <paleoc...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Jan 15, 10:12 pm, Claudius Denk <claudiusd...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
http://tinyurl.com/88sudzv
CD: Postulate #1
About 4 to 6 million years ago
a change in global weather patterns brought
about a change in the annual climate in
our chimpanzee-like ancestor's
habitat from one that was seasonless to one that was
now highly seasonal"
http://forum.lowcarber.org/showthread.php?t=53654
CD: "Every year their patches of
remaining forest, their "community sites," got overrun with
other species. Many of these species would have competed
directly with them for food and thus would have caused the
depletion of resources at a time when these resources were
increasingly scarce, the dry season. Other herbivores may not
have directly competed with them, but all of them brought
predators with them:, lions, tigers, hyenas, dogs, etc."
http://tinyurl.com/68fw585
Lee Olsen:
> On Jan 15, 10:12 pm, Claudius Denk <claudiusd...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
http://tinyurl.com/88sudzv
CD: Postulate #1
About 4 to 6 million years ago
a change in global weather patterns brought
about a change in the annual climate in
our chimpanzee-like ancestor's
habitat from one that was seasonless to one that was
now highly seasonal"
http://forum.lowcarber.org/showthread.php?t=53654
CD: "Every year their patches of
remaining forest, their "community sites," got overrun with
other species. Many of these species would have competed
directly with them for food and thus would have caused the
depletion of resources at a time when these resources were
increasingly scarce, the dry season. Other herbivores may not
have directly competed with them, but all of them brought
predators with them:, lions, tigers, hyenas, dogs, etc."
http://tinyurl.com/68fw585
So which is it, tigers in Africa or hominids in China 4 to 6 million
years ago?
Claudius Denk:
years ago?
It's not important. Don't worry about this.
Well, Lee. I think it's great that you are starting to understand the
implications of the dry season associated with the onset of monsoon
that surrounded their treed community site left them largely, if not
completely, isolated at these treed, well-watered, enclaves.
Lee Olsen:
completely, isolated at these treed, well-watered, enclaves.
What predator, are you still referring to the African tiger?
Claudius Denk:
Any and all.
Lee Olsen
Since you got caught falsifying African tiger data, there is no reason
to believe your imaginary "treed community" is not a figment of you
imagination also.
Claudius Denk
to believe your imaginary "treed community" is not a figment of you
imagination also.
http://goo.gl/AnPSf
Lee Olsen
Jan 16, 2012, 12:03:53 PM1/16/12
to
> Don't worry about this.
>
> Well, Lee. I think it's great that you are starting to understand the
> implications of the dry season associated with the onset of monsoon
> climate 7 to 8 mya. and how the predator infested treeless habitat
> that surrounded their treed community site left them largely, if not
> completely, isolated at these treed, well-watered, enclaves.
>
> Lee Olsen:
> What predator, are you still referring to the African tiger?
>
> Claudius Denk:
> Any and all.
>
> Lee Olsen
> Since you got caught falsifying African tiger data, there is no reason
> to believe your imaginary "treed community" is not a figment of you
> imagination also.
>
> Claudius Denkhttp://goo.gl/AnPSf
http://tinyurl.com/68fw585
RichTravsky
Jan 17, 2012, 11:36:54 PM1/17/12
to
Claudius Denk wrote:
>
> http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v432/n7015/full/nature03052.html
> Homo
> Dennis M. Bramble & Daniel E. Lieberman
>
> Abstract
> "Striding bipedalism is a key derived behaviour of hominids that
> possibly originated soon after the divergence of the chimpanzee and
> human lineages. Although bipedal gaits include walking and running,
> running is generally considered to have played no major role in human
> evolution because humans, like apes, are poor sprinters compared to
> most quadrupeds. Here we assess how well humans perform at sustained
> long-distance running, and review the physiological and anatomical
> bases of endurance running capabilities in humans and other mammals.
> Judged by several criteria, humans perform remarkably well at
> endurance running, thanks to a diverse array of features, many of
> which leave traces in the skeleton. The fossil evidence of these
> features suggests that endurance running is a derived capability of
> the genus Homo, originating about 2 million years ago, and may have
> been instrumental in the evolution of the human body form."
>
> ************************************
> My reading of this abstract suggests that Bramble and Lieberman are
> attempting to obscure the fact that there really is no evidence that
> the emergence of bipedalism had much of anything to do with (bipedal)
What part of
>
> http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v432/n7015/full/nature03052.html
> Homo
> Dennis M. Bramble & Daniel E. Lieberman
>
> Abstract
> "Striding bipedalism is a key derived behaviour of hominids that
> possibly originated soon after the divergence of the chimpanzee and
> human lineages. Although bipedal gaits include walking and running,
> running is generally considered to have played no major role in human
> evolution because humans, like apes, are poor sprinters compared to
> most quadrupeds. Here we assess how well humans perform at sustained
> long-distance running, and review the physiological and anatomical
> bases of endurance running capabilities in humans and other mammals.
> Judged by several criteria, humans perform remarkably well at
> endurance running, thanks to a diverse array of features, many of
> which leave traces in the skeleton. The fossil evidence of these
> features suggests that endurance running is a derived capability of
> the genus Homo, originating about 2 million years ago, and may have
> been instrumental in the evolution of the human body form."
>
> ************************************
> My reading of this abstract suggests that Bramble and Lieberman are
> attempting to obscure the fact that there really is no evidence that
> the emergence of bipedalism had much of anything to do with (bipedal)
The fossil evidence of these features suggests that endurance running is
a derived capability of the genus Homo
> mobilily. Anatomically there is nothing about early hominids (LCA--5
> to 7 mya) that would suggest they were remotely capable of competing
> with large, migratory, (and usually quadrupedal) food competitor
> species on the basis of migration. In fact, the evidence suggests
> that if early hominids did compete with migratory species by way of
> increased migration on their own part that they would have maintained
> quadrupedalism. This means that the emergence of bipedalism (4 to 7
> mya) *must* have had something to do with freeing the hands for other
> purposes and not only did it not have anything to do with increased
> mobility but it, more likely, had to do with a decrease in mobility,
> as we might associate with a shift to communalism and/or
> territorialism.
>
> Moreover, it is apparent that Bramble and Lieberman are,
> inadvertently, conceding this point by way of the fact that the only
> way they can make a case for the sensibility of their assertion is to
> skip ahead to Homo Erectus at 2 mya.
RichTravsky
Jan 22, 2012, 11:26:55 PM1/22/12
to
> > mobilily. Anatomically there is nothing about early hominids (LCA--5
> > to 7 mya) that would suggest they were remotely capable of competing
> > with large, migratory, (and usually quadrupedal) food competitor
> > species on the basis of migration. In fact, the evidence suggests
> > that if early hominids did compete with migratory species by way of
> > increased migration on their own part that they would have maintained
> > quadrupedalism. This means that the emergence of bipedalism (4 to 7
> > mya) *must* have had something to do with freeing the hands for other
> > purposes and not only did it not have anything to do with increased
> > mobility but it, more likely, had to do with a decrease in mobility,
> > as we might associate with a shift to communalism and/or
> > territorialism.
> >
> > Moreover, it is apparent that Bramble and Lieberman are,
> > inadvertently, conceding this point by way of the fact that the only
> > way they can make a case for the sensibility of their assertion is to
> > skip ahead to Homo Erectus at 2 mya.
>
> You haven't read the whole paper, have you?
RichTravsky
Jan 29, 2012, 11:16:21 PM1/29/12
to
RichTravsky
Feb 5, 2012, 6:39:29 PM2/5/12
to
RichTravsky wrote:
> Claudius Denk wrote:
> >
> > http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v432/n7015/full/nature03052.html
> > Endurance running and the evolution of Homo
> Claudius Denk wrote:
> >
> > http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v432/n7015/full/nature03052.html
Claudius Denk
Feb 7, 2012, 5:54:27 AM2/7/12
to
following: Saying they are capable of endurance running is a far cry
from saying that, therefore, they lived a life in which they were
constantly migratory to obtain food from day to day. IOW, there is
nothing in the observation that they were capable of endurance running
that would bring us to the conclusion that, therefore, they were not
the highly communal creatures of my ecological gatekeeper hypothesis.
That is my point.
> No answer.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > > mobilily. Anatomically there is nothing about early hominids (LCA--5
> > > to 7 mya) that would suggest they were remotely capable of competing
> > > with large, migratory, (and usually quadrupedal) food competitor
> > > species on the basis of migration. In fact, the evidence suggests
> > > that if early hominids did compete with migratory species by way of
> > > increased migration on their own part that they would have maintained
> > > quadrupedalism. This means that the emergence of bipedalism (4 to 7
> > > mya) *must* have had something to do with freeing the hands for other
> > > purposes and not only did it not have anything to do with increased
> > > mobility but it, more likely, had to do with a decrease in mobility,
> > > as we might associate with a shift to communalism and/or
> > > territorialism.
>
> > > Moreover, it is apparent that Bramble and Lieberman are,
> > > inadvertently, conceding this point by way of the fact that the only
> > > way they can make a case for the sensibility of their assertion is to
> > > skip ahead to Homo Erectus at 2 mya.
>
> > You haven't read the whole paper, have you?
>
> No answer.
habitat, do you?
Lee Olsen
Feb 8, 2012, 8:44:13 AM2/8/12
to
>But you need to understand the
> following: Saying they are capable of endurance running is a far cry
> from saying that, therefore, they lived a life in which they were
> constantly migratory to obtain food from day to day.
to the lowlands and scatter it throughout numerous lake basins if they
spent their time hiding in trees and tending garden-like patches?
The fact that they were mobile and not sedentary is demonstrated by
tracing lithic sources. You need to lean that basic fact and the
source of endurance running is Homo, not Lucy.
Claudius Denk
Feb 8, 2012, 4:35:46 PM2/8/12
to
contradiction when I see one.
> > But you need to understand the
> > following: Saying they are capable of endurance running is a far cry
> > from saying that, therefore, they lived a life in which they were
> > constantly migratory to obtain food from day to day.
>
> How did "Homo" get rock (traced to the sides of Mt. Olorgesailie) down
> to the lowlands and scatter it throughout numerous lake basins if they
> spent their time hiding in trees and tending garden-like patches?
the large, fast, mammalian predators that infested the treeless
habitat of late miocene and pliocene savanna habitat of eastern
Africa. If you are not willing to address this issue directly
then, . . . well, maybe this would be a time for you to reconsider
your participation in a discussion oriented group like SAP? Sorry to
be so blunt, but this might be a good wake-up call for you: stay on
topic or kindly go away.
Sincerely,
BTW, there's a big difference between carrying rock down a hill in
treed habitat and confronting large predators in treeless habitat.
(You, obviously, already realize this and are just playing dumb.)
Lee Olsen
Feb 8, 2012, 5:07:47 PM2/8/12
to
I'm also able to comprehend and directly confront a blatant
contradiction when I see one.
> Explain to us
contradiction when I see one.
It has been explained X number of times since I've been on this list
and probably more before that. If you are having problems with
dementia or have forgotten how to use the forum search box, then that
is evidence you need to seek help.
Claudius Denk
Feb 8, 2012, 6:38:38 PM2/8/12
to
imagination.
Lee Olsen
Feb 8, 2012, 7:52:20 PM2/8/12
to
two minutes you wouldn't need it in the first place.
Claudius Denk
Feb 8, 2012, 8:13:52 PM2/8/12
to
the reason you won't answer the question is because I'm too dumb to
understand? Is that it?
Lee Olsen
Feb 9, 2012, 11:45:32 AM2/9/12
to
word like "running" into the forum search box and that is your reply?
Second. You also admitted you are too dumb to quote someone directly:
McGinn: "Explain to us how they regularly outsprinted
the large, fast, mammalian predators that infested the treeless
habitat of late miocene and pliocene savanna habitat of eastern
Africa."
Since I never said they did (and you can't supply the quote where that
habitat of late miocene and pliocene savanna habitat of eastern
Africa."
was ever said) either you are deliberately lying or just plain
dumb....which is it?
RichTravsky
Feb 9, 2012, 11:40:11 PM2/9/12
to
are social creatures. Second, human ancestors could run. "Constantly migratory"
is nonsense. Think "territories" instead...
> > No answer.
>
> > > > mobilily. Anatomically there is nothing about early hominids (LCA--5
> > > > to 7 mya) that would suggest they were remotely capable of competing
> > > > with large, migratory, (and usually quadrupedal) food competitor
> > > > species on the basis of migration. In fact, the evidence suggests
> > > > that if early hominids did compete with migratory species by way of
> > > > increased migration on their own part that they would have maintained
> > > > quadrupedalism. This means that the emergence of bipedalism (4 to 7
> > > > mya) *must* have had something to do with freeing the hands for other
> > > > purposes and not only did it not have anything to do with increased
> > > > mobility but it, more likely, had to do with a decrease in mobility,
> > > > as we might associate with a shift to communalism and/or
> > > > territorialism.
> >
> > > > Moreover, it is apparent that Bramble and Lieberman are,
> > > > inadvertently, conceding this point by way of the fact that the only
> > > > way they can make a case for the sensibility of their assertion is to
> > > > skip ahead to Homo Erectus at 2 mya.
> >
> > > You haven't read the whole paper, have you?
> >
> > No answer.
>
> Surely you don't envision homo erectus hunting large game in treeless
> habitat, do you?
RichTravsky
Feb 9, 2012, 11:42:21 PM2/9/12
to
And: "Well, if the first form of agriculture involved pest control
using rocks and sticks against large mammalian pests....." - you
Claudius Denk
Feb 10, 2012, 12:00:25 AM2/10/12
to
> Second, human ancestors could run. "Constantly migratory"
> is nonsense. Think "territories" instead...
territorialism?
RichTravsky
Feb 14, 2012, 10:56:17 PM2/14/12
to
Claudius Denk wrote:
> On Feb 9, 8:40 pm, RichTravsky <traRvE...@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote:
> > Claudius Denk wrote:
> > > On Jan 29, 8:16 pm, RichTravsky <traRvE...@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote:
> > > > RichTravsky wrote:
> > > > > Claudius Denk wrote:
> >
> > > > > >http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v432/n7015/full/nature03052.html
> > > > > > Homo
> > > > > > Dennis M. Bramble & Daniel E. Lieberman
> >
> > > > > > Abstract
> > > > > > "Striding bipedalism is a key derived behaviour of hominids that
> > > > > > possibly originated soon after the divergence of the chimpanzee and
> > > > > > human lineages. Although bipedal gaits include walking and running,
> > > > > > running is generally considered to have played no major role in human
> > > > > > evolution because humans, like apes, are poor sprinters compared to
> > > > > > most quadrupeds. Here we assess how well humans perform at sustained
> > > > > > long-distance running, and review the physiological and anatomical
> > > > > > bases of endurance running capabilities in humans and other mammals.
> > > > > > Judged by several criteria, humans perform remarkably well at
> > > > > > endurance running, thanks to a diverse array of features, many of
> > > > > > which leave traces in the skeleton. The fossil evidence of these
> > > > > > features suggests that endurance running is a derived capability of
> > > > > > the genus Homo, originating about 2 million years ago, and may have
> > > > > > been instrumental in the evolution of the human body form."
> >
> On Feb 9, 8:40 pm, RichTravsky <traRvE...@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote:
> > Claudius Denk wrote:
> > > On Jan 29, 8:16 pm, RichTravsky <traRvE...@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote:
> > > > RichTravsky wrote:
> > > > > Claudius Denk wrote:
> >
> > > > > >http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v432/n7015/full/nature03052.html
> > > > > > Homo
> > > > > > Dennis M. Bramble & Daniel E. Lieberman
> >
> > > > > > Abstract
> > > > > > "Striding bipedalism is a key derived behaviour of hominids that
> > > > > > possibly originated soon after the divergence of the chimpanzee and
> > > > > > human lineages. Although bipedal gaits include walking and running,
> > > > > > running is generally considered to have played no major role in human
> > > > > > evolution because humans, like apes, are poor sprinters compared to
> > > > > > most quadrupeds. Here we assess how well humans perform at sustained
> > > > > > long-distance running, and review the physiological and anatomical
> > > > > > bases of endurance running capabilities in humans and other mammals.
> > > > > > Judged by several criteria, humans perform remarkably well at
> > > > > > endurance running, thanks to a diverse array of features, many of
> > > > > > which leave traces in the skeleton. The fossil evidence of these
> > > > > > features suggests that endurance running is a derived capability of
> > > > > > the genus Homo, originating about 2 million years ago, and may have
> > > > > > been instrumental in the evolution of the human body form."
> >
> > > > > > My reading of this abstract suggests that Bramble and Lieberman are
> > > > > > attempting to obscure the fact that there really is no evidence that
> > > > > > the emergence of bipedalism had much of anything to do with (bipedal)
> >
> > > > > What part of
> >
> > > > > The fossil evidence of these features suggests that endurance running is
> > > > > a derived capability of the genus Homo
> >
> > > > > did you not understand?
> >
> > > I understand that perfectly. But you need to understand the
> > > following: Saying they are capable of endurance running is a far cry
> > > from saying that, therefore, they lived a life in which they were
> > > constantly migratory to obtain food from day to day. IOW, there is
> > > nothing in the observation that they were capable of endurance running
> > > that would bring us to the conclusion that, therefore, they were not
> > > the highly communal creatures of my ecological gatekeeper hypothesis.
> >
> > > That is my point.
> >
> > Obviously, your hypothesis is wrong. First of all, primates in general
> > are social creatures.
>
> Uh, yeah. So?
Then there's nothing special about it.
> > > > > > attempting to obscure the fact that there really is no evidence that
> > > > > > the emergence of bipedalism had much of anything to do with (bipedal)
> >
> > > > > What part of
> >
> > > > > The fossil evidence of these features suggests that endurance running is
> > > > > a derived capability of the genus Homo
> >
> > > > > did you not understand?
> >
> > > I understand that perfectly. But you need to understand the
> > > following: Saying they are capable of endurance running is a far cry
> > > from saying that, therefore, they lived a life in which they were
> > > constantly migratory to obtain food from day to day. IOW, there is
> > > nothing in the observation that they were capable of endurance running
> > > that would bring us to the conclusion that, therefore, they were not
> > > the highly communal creatures of my ecological gatekeeper hypothesis.
> >
> > > That is my point.
> >
> > Obviously, your hypothesis is wrong. First of all, primates in general
> > are social creatures.
>
> Uh, yeah. So?
> > Second, human ancestors could run. "Constantly migratory"
> > is nonsense. Think "territories" instead...
>
> Wait a minute. I'm confused. Aren't I the one that told you about
> territorialism?
From last December:
Me: All you did was take territory defense and twist it around.
You: I suppose.
Also from last December:
Me: But then, we all know all you are doing is dressing up territorial
defense...
You: Well, I actually don't disagree with you on this point. But I'm
thinking this might be a good thing.
> > > > No answer.
> >
> > > > > > mobilily. Anatomically there is nothing about early hominids (LCA--5
> > > > > > to 7 mya) that would suggest they were remotely capable of competing
> > > > > > with large, migratory, (and usually quadrupedal) food competitor
> > > > > > species on the basis of migration. In fact, the evidence suggests
> > > > > > that if early hominids did compete with migratory species by way of
> > > > > > increased migration on their own part that they would have maintained
> > > > > > quadrupedalism. This means that the emergence of bipedalism (4 to 7
> > > > > > mya) *must* have had something to do with freeing the hands for other
> > > > > > purposes and not only did it not have anything to do with increased
> > > > > > mobility but it, more likely, had to do with a decrease in mobility,
> > > > > > as we might associate with a shift to communalism and/or
> > > > > > territorialism.
> >
> > > > > > Moreover, it is apparent that Bramble and Lieberman are,
> > > > > > inadvertently, conceding this point by way of the fact that the only
> > > > > > way they can make a case for the sensibility of their assertion is to
> > > > > > skip ahead to Homo Erectus at 2 mya.
> >
> > > > > You haven't read the whole paper, have you?
> >
> > > > No answer.
> >
> > > Surely you don't envision homo erectus hunting large game in treeless
> > > habitat, do you?
> >
> > What treeless habitat?
Claudius Denk
Feb 15, 2012, 12:14:59 AM2/15/12
to
>
> > > Second, human ancestors could run. "Constantly migratory"
> > > is nonsense. Think "territories" instead...
>
> > Wait a minute. I'm confused. Aren't I the one that told you about
> > territorialism?
>
> No. I told you, and you agreed with me.
hypothesis a long time ago and just never bothered to tell it to
anybody until now?
> From last December:
>
> Me: All you did was take territory defense and twist it around.
>
> You: I suppose.
>
> Also from last December:
>
> Me: But then, we all know all you are doing is dressing up territorial
> defense...
>
> You: Well, I actually don't disagree with you on this point. But I'm
> thinking this might be a good thing.
quotes you got nothing.
Claudius Denk
Feb 15, 2012, 12:57:55 PM2/15/12
to
RichTravsky
Feb 19, 2012, 11:19:45 PM2/19/12
to
0 new messages