Oreopithecus through Australopithecus -- underarm throwing; Homo habilis overarm #156 Rockthrowing theory
Archimedes Plutonium
supracondylar ridge and olecranon fossa; Re: Medial
Epicondyle:Pickford's femur and Plutonium's humerus for stonethrowing
& bipedalism
It was based on some facts from this website:
quoting http://uts.cc.utexas.edu/~bramblet/a...#anchor1840119
The fact was that basically, humans lack a robust lateral
supracondylar ridge and lack a margin of the olecranon fossa.
And I asked this question:
" Question: would lack of these two bones in humans make humans that
much better of a Thrower of rocks and stones than a chimpanzee? Did
those 2 bones get in the way of efficient and skilled throwing? If
true then I suspect I have found the unique signature of Stonethrowing
and that these 2 bones would gradually disappear from Oreopithecus
onwards to Orrorin onwards to humanity."
Today we have more fossil evidence. It would make sense that to
increase throwing efficiency of a chimp
would require the reduction or elimination of bones
that would interfer in efficiency, which is easier for
an evolutionary change than it is to create new bones
that increased throwing efficiency.
But I am faced with new evidence presented by NOVA
series that of flatlining of brain size since Orrorin through
Australopithecus.
I spent a good time tonight seeing if Lucy or Selam
or any of the fossils lacked a supracondylar ridge
and olecranon fossa.
I found no information other than abstracts saying that
there is inconsistency with the Australopithecus fossils.
Up till tonight I presented two possible explanations for the
Australopithecus brain size flatlining. I said either one of these
would explain it:
(1) inbreeding was so harsh that it kept the evolving
changes of throwing proficiency but flatlined the brain
size
(2) the true ancestor of humanity during the Australopithecines was
never found in the fossil record
and any day or year now, someone will find that true
descendent.
But tonight, thinking of an Occam's Razor type of
overview of the situation, I found a third and possibly
the best explanation of flatlining brain size.
(3) Could it be that Oreopithecus through Australopithecus were all
"underarm throwers" and bipeds. And that only when overarm throwing
evolved
first in Homo habilis, that the brain size exploded higher in
capacity.
So that underarm throwing created bipedalism and
the bipedalism enhanced underarm throwing, and this
lasted from 8 million to 3 million years ago, and then
when Homo habilis came about 2 million years ago
with overarm throwing that the brain size increased.
Trouble is that I have no access to the bones of all hominids found so
far to compare their arm, hands,
leg bones. I also would need to check the bones
of chimps for comparison.
Number (3) above is in better agreement with the facts
of evidence. But then again, we often find in evolutionary biology of
"missing links" in the record,
and only after decades of search is a "link" found.
So it just may well be the case that the larger brained
hominid during the Australopithecine era has just never
been found.
And if I could access all the arm and hand and leg fossil bones of
hominids and analyzed them, would
they indicate that the arms of Australopithecus were
clearly beyond underarm throwing and were actually
overarm throwing? Ditto for Orrorin?
And there is one more item in this that has importance is the
behaviour of bludgeoning with a rock held in two
hands. We visualize it as picking up a boulder size rock and smashing
it down on a fellow rival or a predator. I doubt chimpanzees ever
bludgeon with a
boulder.
So I have to consider these three types of Throwing:
(a) underarm throwing
(b) boulder bludgeoning
(c) overarm throwing
It maybe possible that Orrorin through Australopithecus
engaged in both (a) and (b).
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:
> It maybe possible that Orrorin through Australopithecus
> engaged in both (a) and (b).
Gibbons walk and run upright as well as any of other of the great
apes,
besides us. This demonstrates walking and running, to a somewhat
lessor
degree than hominids, came before rock throwing, since they show no
special
interest in it. Chimps can and do throw accuratley for short a
distance without
the major differences found between us and them, like high-arched feet
and
the gluteus maximus found in parallel along with our great throwing
skills. If
rock throwing was the driving force of our evolution, there is no
reason to think
it wouldn't have been so other apes also, since the beginning of
bipedalism
(upright posture) is found in all the great apes and presumably in the
LCA to
all of us. Yet we were the only ones driven from the trees by climate
change.
The lact of good throwing hands and fingers found in "Orrorin
through
Australopithecus" demonstrates a penchant for climbing, not throwing.
The lack of manuports collaborates this observation as none have been
found
with these early hominids.