H.erectus cut meat with oyster shell
Marc Verhaegen
Magus
intresting news! thanks!
Marc Verhaegen wrote:
> http://www.nrc.nl/wetenschap/article335082.ece
rmacfarl
Marc Verhaegen
"Magus" <mcag...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1149775944.4...@y43g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> There is some translation? I don't understand nederlands. It seemes an
> intresting news! thanks!
> > http://www.nrc.nl/wetenschap/article335082.ece
Journal of Archaeological Science
Article in Press, Corrected Proof - Note to users
doi:10.1016/j.jas.2006.03.013
Copyright © 2006 Elsevier Ltd All rights reserved.
Shell tool use by early members of Homo erectus in Sangiran, central Java,
Indonesia: cut mark evidence
Kildo Choi & Dubel Driwantoro
Available online 19 May 2006.
Abstract
Sangiran has been known as a source of fossil Homo erectus but is better
known for the absence of archaeological tools. Cut mark analysis of
Pleistocene mammalian fossils documents 18 cut marks inflicted by tools of
thick clamshell flakes on two bovid bones created during butchery at the
Pucangan Formation in Sangiran between 1.6 and 1.5 million years ago. These
cut marks document the use of the first tools in Sangiran and the oldest
evidence of shell tool use in the world.
Marc Verhaegen
http://allserv.rug.ac.be/~mvaneech/outthere.htm
richard...@yahoo.com
Many thanks, Ross.
Despite the source, this was very helpful.
Regards
Richard
richard...@yahoo.com
The only slightly misleading part of the original article (and
therefore the headline of this thread) is that the shell was almost
certainly not of an oyster (scarce in SE Asia) but of a tridacna
(giant) clam, species of which grow from about 3" to about 6ft long.
They are easily harvested, because they sit on the bottom with their
mouths agasp, filter feeding. The shells can certainly be very thick,
and breakable, producing sharp edges.
On the other hand, though, SE Asian mangrove oysters that can often be
plentiful, already have very sharp, tough edges that could be used as
tools, if only someone could work out a way of getting them off the
trees.
This seems to be the first experimentation on other tool materials to
try and explain the 'Movius Line' that cuts off the Acheulian stone
tool tradition (handaxes) somewhere west of Java. While Western H
erectus couldn't find such large shells (except on the African and
Arabian coasts) there was every incentive to carry around a chunk of
flint, obsidian, chalcedony, or whatever, and knock off flakes for
cutting every so often. You'd find it difficult to carry around a large
tridacna shell, and it doesn't fracture in a very controlled way.
regards
Richard
deowll
"rmacfarl" <rmac...@alphalink.com.au> wrote in message
news:1149805249.9...@f6g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
Interesting. I think I understand what this person was trying to say.
Rich Travsky
Yes, with the added irony that the shell was sought and used for cutting
meat ;)
Marc Verhaegen
"Rich Travsky" <traR...@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
news:448E4284...@hotmMOVEail.com...
1) Only idiots believed that tool-using shoreline omnivores
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AAT would not have used the shells from the
foods they ate to butcher just-drowned corpses they found at the waterside.
2) If you had read the paper, you had known that the authores has searched
several collections of fossils bovids to find only 2 (two) fossil bones with
cutmarks.
3) Do you still believe, my boy, that oysters grow in savannas... :-D
http://allserv.rug.ac.be/~mvaneech/outthere.htm
http://allserv.rug.ac.be/~mvaneech/Symposium.html
http://allserv.rug.ac.be/~mvaneech/Verhaegen.html
Marc Verhaegen
"Rich Travsky" <traR...@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
news:448E4284...@hotmMOVEail.com...
> > > > http://www.nrc.nl/wetenschap/article335082.ece
> > Despite the source, this is an interesting article:
> > http://tinyurl.com/pplqt
> Yes, with the added irony that the shell was sought and used for cutting
> meat
1) Shell sought?? Where do you get that? Still making up your own "facts"?
2) Any idea why shoreline omnivores http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AAT would
not use oyster shells when they found dead buffalos at the waterside?
3) If you had read the paper, my boy, you had known that the authors had to
search 5 large collections of fossil bovids to find 2 fossil bones with
cut-marks.
4) Perhaps you believe oysters grow in savannas?
;)
Rich Travsky
>
> "Rich Travsky" <traR...@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
> news:448E4284...@hotmMOVEail.com...
>
> > > Magus wrote:
> > > > There is some translation? I don't understand nederlands. It seemes an
> > > > intresting news! thanks!
>
> > > > Marc Verhaegen wrote:
> > > > > http://www.nrc.nl/wetenschap/article335082.ece
>
> > > Despite the source, this is an interesting article:
> > > http://tinyurl.com/pplqt
>
> > Yes, with the added irony that the shell was sought and used for cutting
> > meat ;)
>
> 1) Only idiots believed that tool-using shoreline omnivores
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AAT would not have used the shells from the
> foods they ate to butcher just-drowned corpses they found at the waterside.
No one said they didn't or wouldn't.
> 2) If you had read the paper, you had known that the authores has searched
> several collections of fossils bovids to find only 2 (two) fossil bones with
> cutmarks.
Which changes nothing.
> 3) Do you still believe, my boy, that oysters grow in savannas... :-D
http://ioa.ucla.edu/backdirt/Fallwinter00/oti.html
...
The second was studying the origins of early farming in this part of savanna
West Africa, most commonly associated with the term Kintampo complex in nearby
Ghana (see map), a culture that flourished during the second millennium bc.
Some other, more short-term goals included locating actual Kintampo sites
and investigating the nature and chronology of freshwater oyster shell
exploitation first described by Gehrts in 1915.
...
;)
Rich Travsky
>
> "Rich Travsky" <traR...@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
> news:448E4284...@hotmMOVEail.com...
>
> > > > > http://www.nrc.nl/wetenschap/article335082.ece
>
> > > Despite the source, this is an interesting article:
> > > http://tinyurl.com/pplqt
>
> > Yes, with the added irony that the shell was sought and used for cutting
> > meat
>
> 1) Shell sought?? Where do you get that? Still making up your own "facts"?
Do you think the oyster went to the erectus? ;)
> 2) Any idea why shoreline omnivores http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AAT would
> not use oyster shells when they found dead buffalos at the waterside?
Where your article say buffalos?
> 3) If you had read the paper, my boy, you had known that the authors had to
> search 5 large collections of fossil bovids to find 2 fossil bones with
> cut-marks.
Which changes nothing. Where in
does it say bovids?
> 4) Perhaps you believe oysters grow in savannas?
http://ioa.ucla.edu/backdirt/Fallwinter00/oti.html
Marc Verhaegen
"Rich Travsky" <traR...@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
> Marc Verhaegen wrote:
> >
> > "Rich Travsky" <traR...@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
> > news:448E4284...@hotmMOVEail.com...
> >
> > > > > > http://www.nrc.nl/wetenschap/article335082.ece
> >
> > > > Despite the source, this is an interesting article:
> > > > http://tinyurl.com/pplqt
> >
> > > Yes, with the added irony that the shell was sought and used for
cutting
> > > meat
> >
> > 1) Shell sought?? Where do you get that? Still making up your own
"facts"?
>
> Do you think the oyster went to the erectus?
??
Why should they have sought for shellls?? My boy, they had plenty of shells.
Inform a bit http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AAT. ;)
> > 2) Any idea why shoreline omnivores http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AAT
would
> > not use oyster shells when they found dead buffalos at the waterside?
> Where your article say buffalos?
Where your article says not? My boy, my point is that there's no reason why
these shoreline people would not have used oyster shells to butcher whatever
they found where they lived.
> > 3) If you had read the paper, my boy, you had known that the authors had
to
> > search 5 large collections of fossil bovids to find 2 fossil bones with
> > cut-marks.
> Which changes nothing.
2 pieces of bone in 5 large collections, my boy, exactly what we expected if
these shoreline people now & then butchered carcasses they found at the
water.
Where in
> http://tinyurl.com/pplqt
> does it say bovids?
Sorry, lions I meant. OK now, Travsky?
> > 4) Perhaps you believe oysters grow in savannas?
> http://ioa.ucla.edu/backdirt/Fallwinter00/oti.html
> ...
> The second was studying the origins of early farming in this part of
savanna
> West Africa, most commonly associated with the term Kintampo complex in
nearby
> Ghana (see map), a culture that flourished during the second millennium
bc.
> Some other, more short-term goals included locating actual Kintampo sites
and
> investigating the nature and chronology of freshwater oyster shell
exploitation
> first described by Gehrts in 1915.
> ...
Yes, Travsky, yes, my boy, oysters are always found in savannas, always.
(Fanatics do everything to keep their Holy Savanna Religion...)
pete
> Savanna Religion...)
Savannah hypothesis went out a long time ago.
Any references to it anymore,
can only be considered as strawman arguments.
Stop it.
--
pete
Marc Verhaegen
"pete" <pfi...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:449B39...@mindspring.com...
> Marc Verhaegen wrote:
> > Savanna Religion...)
??
No, no, unfortunately, the Savanna Religion is still very much aline, see
only the endurance running & the Savannahstan hypotheses the last 2 years in
serious journals (see below). As long as PAs produce savanna nonsense,
their minds are closed to reality.
"Born to Run??"
Bramble and Lieberman in a recent paper in Nature propose that early Homo
evolved adaptations for endurance running (ER) in open terrestrial
environments1. However, it is not clear why the authors have chosen ER as
the specific locomotion style worth examining in terms of its role in human
evolution. Indeed, a plausible alternative is not considered and one can ask
why they did not take into account swimming and diving - locomotion styles
that radically differentiate humans from all other primates.
Darwin2 noticed how Tahitians "dive and fish like otters" and
"have the dexterity of amphibious animals in the water". Human swimmers can
cross the English Channel, free-dive more than seventy metres deep and hold
their breath for more than five minutes3. There is archaeological evidence
for long-standing familiarity with the sea from the occupation of the island
of Flores by 800,000 years ago4, and for the most likely use of swimming and
diving to procure food resources, such as 125,000-years-old shell middens5
and Acheulian tools discovered in ancient reefs in Eritrea6. Today many
human populations, such as the Moken of Malaysia, use these forms of
locomotion. Moken children swim before they can walk on land, gather
shellfish while diving with eyes wide open and have astonishing visual
acuity under water7.
As Bramble and Lieberman1 admit, the assumed ER lifestyle of our
ancestors is completely hypothetical: ER is seen only occasionally in a few
human populations and can impossibly have been selected for without devices
for carrying drinking water. If early Homo individuals had been endurance
runners, evolutionary theory would predict the acquisition of features
typical of ER, or at least of cursorial primates such as baboons, for
instance, quadrupedalism and digitigrady. But instead Homo evolved
unexpected features not seen in typical endurance runners, nor in our
closest relative Pan, for instance, profuse thermoregulatory sweating
(requiring water and sodium), fur loss (exposing skin to solar radiation),
subcutaneous fat tissues (a heavy burden for runners) and larger breasts
(making ER more difficult for half of the population).
There is another - much more consistent - evolutionary model8
that could account for the features Bramble and Lieberman1 describe, as well
as for several other features.
1.8 million-year-old Homo fossils or tools have been found from
Algeria in the West (Aïn Hanech) to Java in the East (Mojokerto), in
floodplains, near open waters, in swampy deposits and in beach and
palaeo-shore deposits9,10. Apparently Homo ergaster-erectus dispersed in a
remarkably short evolutionary time, and the easiest way to do so was
apparently by following the coasts11. If coasts were a preferred habitat, it
should not come as a surprise that our ancestors collected bird and turtle
eggs and shellfish from the rocks and tidal flats, and stranded animals
along the beach (as has been shown to be the case12), covered long distances
walking on seashores and estuaries, and learnt to wade, swim and dive for
seafood.
This "amphibious" lifestyle - which does not exclude later
evolution of ER or long-distance terrestrial bipedalism1 - would explain the
typically human traits that Bramble and Lieberman1 in their Table 1 -
without supporting anatomical comparisons with cursorial animals - ascribe
to ER. For instance, regular swimming and diving would account for a more
linear body build and a more versatile spine, for hypertrophied gluteus
maximus muscles, forearm shortening, low, wide shoulders and a barrel-shaped
thorax, for enlarged posterior and anterior semicircular canals (for
equilibrium adjustment) and for expanded neurocranial and paravertebral
venous networks (as in diving mammals13). It can be asked whether the tendon
adaptations Bramble and Lieberman ascribe to ER could not be explained by
swimming and beach-combing followed by terrestrial bipedalism. And if our
ancestors had been strongly reliant on ER, should we not have had, like
cursorial mammals, less plantigrady and longer toes?
The littoral hypothesis can account directly for typical Homo
features not mentioned by Bramble and Lieberman1, such as brain enlargement
(seafood is rich in brain-specific poly-unsaturated fatty acids14),
masticatory reduction (for consumption of seafood), olfactory reduction
(extremely unlikely in open terrestrial environments), the appearance of an
external nose (protecting the airway entrance when swimming), and in Homo
erectus the acquisition of a dense skeleton (an unlikely burden in ER, but
typically seen in slow diving species).
Michael Crawford,
Marc Verhaegen,
Stephen Munro,
Bernard Harper,
Mario Vaneechoutte.
1. Bramble, D. M. & D. E. Lieberman. Endurance Running and the evolution of
Homo. Nature 432, 345-352 (2004).
2. Darwin, C. Voyage of the Beagle. Henry Colburn (1839).
3. Schagatay, E. et al. Effects of physical- and apnea training on apneic
time and diving response in humans. Eur. J. Appl. Physiol. 82, 161-169
(2000).
4. Morwood, M. J. et al. Archeology and age of a new hominin from Flores in
eastern Indonesia. Nature 431, 1087-1091 (2004).
5. Klein, R. et al. The Yserfontein 1 Middle Stone Age site, South Africa,
and early human exploitation of coastal resources. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. U.
S. A. 101, 5708-5715 (2004).
6. Walter, R. C. et al. Early human occupation of the Red Sea coast of
Eritrea during the last interglacial. Nature 405, 65-69 (2000).
7. Gislén, A. et al. Superior underwater vision in a human population of Sea
Gypsies. Curr. Biol. 13, 833-836 (2003).
8. Verhaegen, M., P.-F. Puech & S. Munro. Aquarboreal ancestors? Trends in
Ecol. & Evol. 17, 212-217 (2002).
9. Dennell, R. Dispersal and colonisation, long and short chronologies: how
continuous is the Early Pleistocene record for hominids outside East Africa.
J. Hum. Evol. 45, 421-440 (2003).
10. Petraglia, M. D. The Lower Paleolithic of the Arabian Peninsula:
occupations, adaptations and dispersals. J. World Prehist. 17, 141-179
(2003).
11. Stringer, C. Coasting out of Africa. Nature 405, 24-27 (2000).
12. Gutierrez, M. et al. Exploitation d'un grand cétacé au Paléolithique
ancien: Le site de Dungo V à Baia Farta (Benguela, Angola). C. R. Acad. Sci.
Paris 332, 357-362 (2001).
13. Slijper, E. J. Walvissen. Centen, Amsterdam (1958).
14. Broadhurst, L. C. et al. Brain-specific lipids from marine, lacustrine,
or terrestrial food resources: potential impact on early African Homo
sapiens. Comp. Biochem. Physiol. B 131, 653-673 (2002).
http://allserv.rug.ac.be/~mvaneech/outthere.htm
http://allserv.rug.ac.be/~mvaneech/Symposium.html
--Marc Verhaegen
pete
` Marc Verhaegen wrote:
` > Savanna Religion...)
Lee Olson still seems somewhat keen on it, though it's hard to tell
exactly what form/epoch he endorses...
--
==========================================================================
vincent@triumf[munge].ca Pete Vincent
Disclaimer: all I know I learned from reading Usenet.
Marc Verhaegen
"pete" <vin...@triumfunspam.ca> wrote in message
news:e7hunv$50p$1...@nntp.itservices.ubc.ca...
> on Fri, 23 Jun 2006 00:44:53 GMT, pete <pfi...@mindspring.com> sez:
> ` Marc Verhaegen wrote:
>
> ` > Savanna Religion...)
> ` Savannah hypothesis went out a long time ago.
> ` Any references to it anymore,
> ` can only be considered as strawman arguments.
> ` Stop it.
> Lee Olson still seems somewhat keen on it, though it's hard to tell
> exactly what form/epoch he endorses...
Who cares? The savanna nonsense is just nonsense.
--Marc
richard...@yahoo.com
> on Fri, 23 Jun 2006 00:44:53 GMT, pete <pfi...@mindspring.com> sez:
> ` Marc Verhaegen wrote:
>
> ` > Savanna Religion...)
>
> ` Savannah hypothesis went out a long time ago.
> ` Any references to it anymore,
> ` can only be considered as strawman arguments.
> ` Stop it.
>
> Lee Olson still seems somewhat keen on it, though it's hard to tell
> exactly what form/epoch he endorses...
Rich Travsky appears to do so too, in his comment:
4) Perhaps you believe oysters grow in savannas?
http://ioa.ucla.edu/backdirt/Fallwinter00/oti.html
where the only mention of savannah of a purely and very obviously
riverine culture investigation is the country that the river runs
through
On such criteria, the Ancient Egyptians could be said to have developed
a high-achieving, long lasting desert culture.
Marc Verhaegen
<richard...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1151326862.8...@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> pete wrote:
> > on Fri, 23 Jun 2006 00:44:53 GMT, pete <pfi...@mindspring.com> sez:
> > ` Marc Verhaegen wrote:
> >
> > ` > Savanna Religion...)
> >
> > ` Savannah hypothesis went out a long time ago.
> > ` Any references to it anymore,
> > ` can only be considered as strawman arguments.
> > ` Stop it.
> >
> > Lee Olson still seems somewhat keen on it, though it's hard to tell
> > exactly what form/epoch he endorses...
>
> Rich Travsky appears to do so too, in his comment:
>
> 4) Perhaps you believe oysters grow in savannas?
> http://ioa.ucla.edu/backdirt/Fallwinter00/oti.html
>
> where the only mention of savannah of a purely and very obviously
> riverine culture investigation is the country that the river runs
> through
>
> On such criteria, the Ancient Egyptians could be said to have developed
> a high-achieving, long lasting desert culture.
Yes. They do anything for not having to abandon their savanna belief.
--Marc
http://allserv.rug.ac.be/~mvaneech/outthere.htm
Rich Travsky
>
> "Rich Travsky" <traR...@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
> news:449A1371...@hotmMOVEail.com...
> > Marc Verhaegen wrote:
> > > "Rich Travsky" <traR...@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
> > > news:448E4284...@hotmMOVEail.com...
> > >
> > > > > > > http://www.nrc.nl/wetenschap/article335082.ece
> > >
> > > > > Despite the source, this is an interesting article:
> > > > > http://tinyurl.com/pplqt
> > >
> > > > Yes, with the added irony that the shell was sought and used for
> cutting
> > > > meat
> > >
> > > 1) Shell sought?? Where do you get that? Still making up your own
> "facts"?
> >
> > Do you think the oyster went to the erectus?
>
> ??
> Why should they have sought for shellls?? My boy, they had plenty of shells.
> Inform a bit http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AAT. ;)
They didn't look for shells? How did they acquire them? ;)
> > > 2) Any idea why shoreline omnivores http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AAT
> would
> > > not use oyster shells when they found dead buffalos at the waterside?
>
> > Where your article say buffalos?
>
> Where your article says not? My boy, my point is that there's no reason why
The article DOESN'T mention buffaloes.
> these shoreline people would not have used oyster shells to butcher whatever
> they found where they lived.
Hominids are quite clever - who says they wouldn't use what's at hand?
> > > 3) If you had read the paper, my boy, you had known that the authors had
> to
> > > search 5 large collections of fossil bovids to find 2 fossil bones with
> > > cut-marks.
>
> > Which changes nothing.
>
> 2 pieces of bone in 5 large collections, my boy, exactly what we expected if
> these shoreline people now & then butchered carcasses they found at the
> water.
I and others have more than once told you water sources are great places to hunt
and scavenge because animals have to drink. What is surprising about that?
> Where in
> > http://tinyurl.com/pplqt
> > does it say bovids?
>
> Sorry, lions I meant. OK now, Travsky?
Changes nothing.
> > > 4) Perhaps you believe oysters grow in savannas?
>
> > http://ioa.ucla.edu/backdirt/Fallwinter00/oti.html
> > ...
> > The second was studying the origins of early farming in this part of
> savanna
> > West Africa, most commonly associated with the term Kintampo complex in
> nearby
> > Ghana (see map), a culture that flourished during the second millennium
> bc.
> > Some other, more short-term goals included locating actual Kintampo sites
> and
> > investigating the nature and chronology of freshwater oyster shell
> exploitation
> > first described by Gehrts in 1915.
> > ...
>
> Yes, Travsky, yes, my boy, oysters are always found in savannas, always.
Oysters are not always found at seashores. I've lived on Florida coasts.
Some stretches have shellfish, some don't.
> (Fanatics do everything to keep their Holy Savanna Religion...)
As opposed to the discredited aquatic religion... ;)
Rich Travsky
>
> pete wrote:
> > on Fri, 23 Jun 2006 00:44:53 GMT, pete <pfi...@mindspring.com> sez:
> > ` Marc Verhaegen wrote:
> >
> > ` > Savanna Religion...)
> >
> > ` Savannah hypothesis went out a long time ago.
> > ` Any references to it anymore,
> > ` can only be considered as strawman arguments.
> > ` Stop it.
> >
> > Lee Olson still seems somewhat keen on it, though it's hard to tell
> > exactly what form/epoch he endorses...
>
> Rich Travsky appears to do so too, in his comment:
All I did was find and post that such seems to occur.
> 4) Perhaps you believe oysters grow in savannas?
> http://ioa.ucla.edu/backdirt/Fallwinter00/oti.html
>
> where the only mention of savannah of a purely and very obviously
> riverine culture investigation is the country that the river runs
> through
>
> On such criteria, the Ancient Egyptians could be said to have developed
> a high-achieving, long lasting desert culture.
So what DID they have?
Marc Verhaegen
"Rich Travsky" <traR...@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
> > > > > > > > http://www.nrc.nl/wetenschap/article335082.ece
> > > > > > Despite the source, this is an interesting article:
> > > > > > http://tinyurl.com/pplqt
> > > > > Yes, with the added irony that the shell was sought and used for
> > cutting
> > > > > meat
> > > > 1) Shell sought?? Where do you get that? Still making up your own
> > "facts"?
> > > Do you think the oyster went to the erectus?
> > ??
> > Why should they have sought for shellls?? My boy, they had plenty of
shells.
> > Inform a bit http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AAT
> They didn't look for shells? How did they acquire them? ;)
My boy ;) can't you acquire a shell when there are plenty of them? ;)
Already found 1 argument, my boy ;) why you are so fanatically convinced
that H.erectus did not follow the coasts when they went to Java? 1 single
little argument? ;) Or does Mojokerto lie in the savanna IYO? ;)
:-D
http://allserv.rug.ac.be/~mvaneech/outthere.htm
Marc Verhaegen
> > > on Fri, 23 Jun 2006 00:44:53 GMT, pete <pfi...@mindspring.com> sez:
> > > ` Marc Verhaegen wrote:
> > > ` > Savanna Religion...)
> > > ` Savannah hypothesis went out a long time ago.
> > > ` Any references to it anymore,
> > > ` can only be considered as strawman arguments.
> > > ` Stop it.
No, no, unfortunately there are still a lot of fanatics who believe these
ideas & who claim to be scientists.
Luckily, leading PAs like Stringer & Tobias are more open-minded.
http://allserv.rug.ac.be/~mvaneech/outthere.htm
Rich Travsky
>
> "Rich Travsky" <traR...@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
> news:44AB1A97...@hotmMOVEail.com...
>
> > > > > > > > > http://www.nrc.nl/wetenschap/article335082.ece
>
> > > > > > > Despite the source, this is an interesting article:
> > > > > > > http://tinyurl.com/pplqt
>
> > > > > > Yes, with the added irony that the shell was sought and used for
> > > cutting
> > > > > > meat
>
> > > > > 1) Shell sought?? Where do you get that? Still making up your own
> > > "facts"?
>
> > > > Do you think the oyster went to the erectus?
>
> > > ??
> > > Why should they have sought for shellls?? My boy, they had plenty of
> shells.
> > > Inform a bit http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AAT
>
> > They didn't look for shells? How did they acquire them? ;)
>
> My boy ;) can't you acquire a shell when there are plenty of them? ;)
"Why should they have sought for shellls?" that's you!
> Already found 1 argument, my boy ;) why you are so fanatically convinced
> that H.erectus did not follow the coasts when they went to Java? 1 single
> little argument? ;) Or does Mojokerto lie in the savanna IYO? ;)
Little one, there's no ocean coastline in the middle of China... ;)
Marc Verhaegen
"Rich Travsky" <traR...@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
> > > > > > > > > > http://www.nrc.nl/wetenschap/article335082.ece
> > > > > > > > Despite the source, this is an interesting article:
> > > > > > > > http://tinyurl.com/pplqt
> > > > > > > Yes, with the added irony that the shell was sought and used
for
> > > > cutting
> > > > > > > meat
> > > > > > 1) Shell sought?? Where do you get that? Still making up your
own
> > > > "facts"?
> > > > > Do you think the oyster went to the erectus?
> > > > ??
> > > > Why should they have sought for shellls?? My boy, they had plenty of
> > shells.
> > > > Inform a bit http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AAT
> > > They didn't look for shells? How did they acquire them? ;)
> > My boy ;) can't you acquire a shell when there are plenty of them?
;)
> "Why should they have sought for shellls?" that's you!
My boy, they had plenty of shells, inform a bit
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AAT Why would they have sought for a shell??
;)
> > Already found 1 argument, my boy ;) why you are so fanatically
convinced
> > that H.erectus did not follow the coasts when they went to Java? 1
single
> > little argument? ;) Or does Mojokerto lie in the savanna IYO? ;)
> Little one, there's no ocean coastline in the middle of China... ;)
1) My boy, we're not speaking of today. ;)
2) I hope you're not claiming that there were no rivers in China? ;)
3) AFAIK, all sites in China lay next to large bodies of water. Of course,
you know this of Zhoukoudian (at least I hope you know this), but FYI on the
earliest site in China: Majuangou ~1.66 Ma: lake-filled basin, evidence of
numerous aquatic mollusc shells, leaves & fruits of aquatic plants = low
energy lakeshore or marsh environment (Zhu cs. 2004). ;)
"aquatic mollusc shells" - shells sought?? ;)
Got it finally? ;)
Rich Travsky
No one is asking about the quantity of shells, just asking you how they came
by them.
> > > Already found 1 argument, my boy ;) why you are so fanatically
> convinced
> > > that H.erectus did not follow the coasts when they went to Java? 1
> single
> > > little argument? ;) Or does Mojokerto lie in the savanna IYO? ;)
>
> > Little one, there's no ocean coastline in the middle of China... ;)
>
> 1) My boy, we're not speaking of today. ;)
We only need to go back a few million years and there's still no ocean
coastling in the middle of China... ;)
> 2) I hope you're not claiming that there were no rivers in China? ;)
My boy, no one claims that, just pointing out the large stretches of land
in between them.
> 3) AFAIK, all sites in China lay next to large bodies of water. Of course,
> you know this of Zhoukoudian (at least I hope you know this), but FYI on the
> earliest site in China: Majuangou ~1.66 Ma: lake-filled basin, evidence of
> numerous aquatic mollusc shells, leaves & fruits of aquatic plants = low
> energy lakeshore or marsh environment (Zhu cs. 2004). ;)
And "the oldest record of stone-tool processing of animal tissues in east Asia"
animal tissues, not aquatic plants or fruits ;)
> "aquatic mollusc shells" - shells sought?? ;)
Stone tools - not shells sought ;)
> Got it finally? ;)
I've alsways had it - just waiting for YOU. How did they get the shells?
Marc Verhaegen
"Rich Travsky" <traR...@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
> > > > > > > > > > http://tinyurl.com/pplqt
....
> No one is asking about the quantity of shells, just asking you how they
came
> by them.
??
Don't you know anything??
Sigh.
AFAIK *every* early Homo fossil (as opposed to most apiths?) is found next
to lots of shells, eg,:
- Shungara Fm: molluscs incl.fresh water oyster Etheria reefs, fish, crocs,
hippos ... "proximal river settings" (Clark Howell cs.1987:696).
- Senga 5A site 2-2.3 Ma: gastropods, bivalves, fish, hippos ... "low-energy
littoral lacustrine setting" (Harris cs.1987:724).
- Pabbi Hills Pakistan 2 Ma: turtles, crocs, aquatic gastropods, bivalves,
large slow-moving river, clean water <5m deep (Dennell 2004).
- Chiwondo Beds Malawi: fish, turtles, crocs, "Molluscan shell beds crop out
as benches up to several meters thick and several hundred meters wide"
(Schrenk cs.1995:59).
- Chemeron KNM BC 1: "mollusc remains accumulated to form shelly limestones"
(Martyn & Tobias 1967).
- Dmanisi 1.8 Ma "lake or pond rich in lacustrine resources" (David
Lordkipanidze).
- Mojokerto Java 1.5-1.8 Ma: coastal deltaic environment, fresh water &
marine molluscs (Huffman 2001).
- Majuangou China 1.66 Ma: numerous molluscs, low energy lakeshore or marsh
(Zhu cs.2004).
- Erk-el-Ahmar & 'Ubeidiya: fresh water gastropods, bivalves, fish, turtles,
hippos... (Tchernov 1973).
- Middle Awash Ethiopia, Daka Member of the Bouri Fm 1 Ma: abundant hippo,
gastropods, bivalves, alluvial lakeside beaches or shallow water deposits
(Asfaw cs.2002).
- Dungo V Angola >1 Ma: exploitation of a large whale Balaenoptera sp on a
former beach, numerous molluscs, other marine invertebrates, shark teeth
(Gutierrez cs.2001).
- etc.
- etc.
> > > > Already found 1 argument, my boy ;) why you are so fanatically
> > convinced
> > > > that H.erectus did not follow the coasts when they went to Java? 1
> > single
> > > > little argument? ;) Or does Mojokerto lie in the savanna IYO?
;)
> > > Little one, there's no ocean coastline in the middle of China... ;)
> > 1) My boy, we're not speaking of today. ;)
> We only need to go back a few million years and there's still no ocean
> coastling in the middle of China... ;)
Why do you believe it was, Travsky?? any arguemnts?
Majuangou 1.66 Ma: numerous molluscs, lakeshore or marsh (Zhu cs.2004).
Zhoukoudian: "big river & possibly a lake ... reeds ...otters, beavers ...
(Jia 1975).
Many beavers in your savanna, Travsky.
Enough nonsense: snip the rest.
AAT (waterside adaptations of the genus Homo) is based on the
behavior-anatomy-physiology-DNA of living humans vs. chimps & other animals.
Waterside ancestors collecting coconuts, fruits, bird eggs, turtles, shell-,
crayfish, algae etc. explains unique Homo traits (not seen in apes or
australopiths) better than plains- or forest-dwelling : brain size, diving
skills, breath control, vocality, small mouth & chewing muscles, tongue bone
descent, longer airway, projecting nose, poor sense of smell, handiness,
tool use, late puberty, long legs, aligned body, poor climbing, fur loss,
fatness, high needs of water, sodium, iodine & poly-unsaturated fatty acids
etc.
Homo & Pan split ~6-4 Ma. Most likely, Homo populations dispersed along
coasts & rivers, in savannas & elsewhere : in spite of sea level
fluctuations (difficult fossilisation), Homo tools/fossils 2.5-0.1 Ma are
found near Rift valley lakes, Indian Ocean & African coasts : Mojokerto,
Dungo V Baia Farta, Terra Amata, Table Bay, Eritrea etc. (18 km sea crossing
to reach Flores http://allserv.rug.ac.be/~mvaneech/outthere.htm ).
http://allserv.rug.ac.be/~mvaneech/Symposium.html
http://allserv.rug.ac.be/~mvaneech/Fil/Verhaegen_Human_Evolution.html
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AAT
Rich Travsky
>
> "Rich Travsky" <traR...@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
> news:44DD6E15...@hotmMOVEail.com...
>
> > > > > > > > > > > http://tinyurl.com/pplqt
> ....
>
> > No one is asking about the quantity of shells, just asking you how they
> came
> > by them.
>
> ??
> Don't you know anything??
Yes, since I'm asking you how they came by them.
Nothing relevant there.
> > > > > Already found 1 argument, my boy ;) why you are so fanatically
> > > convinced
> > > > > that H.erectus did not follow the coasts when they went to Java? 1
> > > single
> > > > > little argument? ;) Or does Mojokerto lie in the savanna IYO?
> ;)
>
> > > > Little one, there's no ocean coastline in the middle of China... ;)
>
> > > 1) My boy, we're not speaking of today. ;)
>
> > We only need to go back a few million years and there's still no ocean
> > coastling in the middle of China... ;)
>
> Why do you believe it was, Travsky?? any arguemnts?
> Majuangou 1.66 Ma: numerous molluscs, lakeshore or marsh (Zhu cs.2004).
Horse, deer, hyaena, etc remains found - any of these aquatic? No?
> Zhoukoudian: "big river & possibly a lake ... reeds ...otters, beavers ...
Deer, rhino, sika...
> (Jia 1975).
> Many beavers in your savanna, Travsky.
Lots of hyaena in the water Marc? ;)
Marc Verhaegen
"Rich Travsky" <traR...@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
Says enough, my boy.
No need to read the rest of your nonsense.