Flores man probably Australopithecus; and mistake in Lucy's brachial index #149 Stonethrowing theory
Archimedes Plutonium
leg index's. From looking at Flores man, there is obviously huge
controversy with every researcher
having a different end conclusion. However, there
is one fact that is important in the detail of the
157 mm complete radius, implying a brachial
index of 78% which is close to that of humans,
yet whose brain capacity was that of a chimps.
Since Flores was a toolmaker, this proves that
small brains had nothing to do with human evolution
and that the Throwing and tool making was the
evolutionary pressure on early hominids. The
literature never mentions "inbreeding" which is
the confusing mechanism in human evolution.
Inbreeding causes a flatlining of brain size,
but the evolutionary pressure is on the increasing
of Throwing.
According to NATURE, Flores man had a brachial index for LB1 from a
complete radius of 157mm long for an index of 78%. Humans, according
to Table 2
below have a brachial index of 79%
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homo_floresiensis#Bone_structure
--- quoting from Wikipedia on Flores man ---
Another study supporting the separate species hypothesis was published
by Matthew Tocheri et al., who studied H. floresiensis wrist bones.
They compared three carpal bones believed to belong to LB1 with carpal
bones of modern humans, some earlier hominids and African apes. They
concluded that the carpals from the Liang Bua cave resembled ape
carpal bones and were significantly different from the bones of H.
sapiens, Homo neanderthalensis or even Homo antecessor, and that they
were comparable to carpal bones of Australopithecus.
--- end quoting ---
http://www.indiana.edu/~ensiweb/pap.garh.html
--- quoting from above website at indiana.edu ---
Table 2: Body 2Proportions of Some Important Fossils (Compared With
Modern
Humans and the Most Humanlike Ape (the Bonobo or "Pygmy Chimpanzee")
34Brachial index:
Radius as % of humerus
5Humerofemoral index:
Humerus as % of femur
Pan paniscus (Bonobo)
91.9
97.8 ± 2.1
A. afarensis ("Lucy" skeleton)
90.7
84.6 ± 2.8
Bouri (perhaps A. garhi)
97.9
ca. 70.4
H. habilis (OH 62)
[79.5 - 93.2]
[94.3 ± 7.7]
Homo sapiens (African)
79.6 ± 2.5
73.3 ± 1.7
2"±" means, for living forms, the sample standard deviation of the
estimate. See especially Korey (1990), who shows how the Homo habilis
data have been grossly overinterpreted.
34The brachial index calculates the length of the forearm as a
proportion of the upper arm.
5The humerofemoral index calculates the relative lengths of the arms
and legs by comparing the upper arm to the thigh.
--- end quoting Indiana.edu website ---
I am going to insist that Indiana reevaluate their website as that the
Lucy bracial index and Bouri
are erroneous. First of all, Lucy had no complete
radius or ulna, and so the 90.7 percent is rather
just made up. Ditto for Bouri.
Archimedes Plutonium
www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom
where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies
Lee Olsen
<plutonium.archime...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Since Flores was a toolmaker, this proves that
> small brains had nothing to do with human evolution
> and that the Throwing and tool making was the
> evolutionary pressure on early hominids.
What that bit of silliness proves is why you are here on sap playing
in
the minor leagues rather than in the peer-reviewed journals with
the pros.
FYI:
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v432/n7015/full/nature03052.html
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."