some errors in 2nd NOVA show with Turkana boy #147; Stonethrowing, central theory of anthropology
Archimedes Plutonium
Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
>
> > (i) I am 170 cm tall.
> > (ii) My distance of center-of-hand to elbow equals distance of elbow
> > to
> > shoulder = 29 cm
> > (iii) My distance of knee to hip equals distance of knee to foot =
> 51
> > cm
> > (iv) My distance of tip of index finger to elbow equals distance
> of
> > knee to
> > ankle of foot = 41 cm
> > (v) When standing upright and holding the legs straight, my
> distance
> > of hip to ankle is equal to distance of tip of fingers at ankle to
> > hip. This equals 91 cm. In other words, doing a exercise of knee
> > straights.
>
Second program of this 3 part series was more interesting than I
expected.
It had a sort of "main character" in the Turkana boy which has picture
on Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turkana_boy
Now from looking at that picture of Turkana boy, I can discern that
the radius
and ulna are equal to the humerus in length. And according to my own
data
on midpoints the distance of center of hand to elbow has to equal the
distance
of elbow to shoulder. So we still see vestiges of apelike bone anatomy
that has
not yet fully evolved to a maximum efficiency of throwing. Remembering
of
course that the apes radius and ulna are longer than the humerus. Now
the question
is, whether the distance for Lucy and Selam of their center of hand to
elbow is
equal to elbow to shoulder. In Orrorin we cannot make this evaluation
since we
only have the humerus, but we do have a femur of Orrorin to give us
some idea
of how far progressed in throwing was Orrorin compared to a modern
chimp who
cannot throw overarm at all.
I also notice from Turkana boy that the lower arm length with the hand
would exceed
the distance of knee to foot, so it is thus good evidence that there
was considerable
more evolving to be done for Turkana boy to become our species. And
the running
of Turkana boy would not have been those long distances marathons that
Mr. Lieberman
is suggesting. In fact, the end scenario posed in the NOVA film would
be closer
to what I have outlined, as that our early ancestors made the Rivers
their homes
since Turkana boy died in the River. That it is preposterous to think
Homo erectus
was long distance runners given that their bone anatomy was not quite
what Homo
sapiens was with regard to leg bones. It is far easier to see that
Rivers supplied ample
rocks on their shores and that early hominids lived right along the
river banks and easily
killed animals coming to drink. What are the probabilities of finding
an hominid fossil
on the River if the River was not their home?
Has any Anthropologist who found early hominids investigated as to how
far from a
River those fossils were found? It may be the case that all fossils of
hominids found
were all very close to a River while they lived. And it seems as
though hippotamus
fossils are always found in association with those hominid fossils,
which further
indicates these protohumans were living on Rivers and doing so because
of throwing.
There was a error of the gorilla lice in connection with dating when
hominids became
ever more nonhairy. In the NOVA show this was a idea that in my
opinion was over
explored in order to make the case that Turkana boy was a marathon
runner, as to
not overheat and thus bring down a African antelope by running it to
death. Seems rather
odd that Mr. Lieberman proposes bipedalism as least energy, and then
hypocritically
proposes running marathon in the midday sun to run down dinner when
all the tribe
needed to do is bask in the sun at the edge of the River bank and
pommel a thirsty
animal with rockthrowing. So in one concept, Lieberman goes for least
energy, and
in another, he goes for all out maximum energy.
But the flaw of reasoning of the gorilla lice onto hominids to try to
discern the
age at which we became nonhairy, is that the age comes out to be about
the
time of Lucy and Selam. So this throws a monkey-wrench (thanks for the
pun)
into the concept of marathon running down meat dinners because we do
not
see that scenario unfolding of Lucy or Selam like tribes some 4
million years
ago. What we can see, is that Australopithecines as well as Homo
habilis
and Homo erectus of Turkana boy all living along River banks and
stonethrowing
their way of living in gaining food.
I also find a error or flaw of reasoning as to the size of Turkana boy
based
on some microanalysis of the fossil, where Turkana boy is 160 cm tall,
but
where some microanalysis puts him at 185 cm (6'1"). I was not paying
close
attention as to that analysis, but I am rather confident it is flawed
and that
Turkana boy was a full grown man, not a boy and was 5'3" tall.
Perhaps the largest errors or error inducing information is the Hobbit
of this
tiny species found in some south Asian island with small brains yet
had
a full compliment of tools. The program suggested that miniaturization
is
due to isolation and where the energy or food supply is limit. I agree
those
are factors but that one other factor is very important and perhaps
evolutionary
biology has never acknowledged. That when a small tribe of a species
becomes
isolated, that the inbreeding is so large and deleterious, that it
keeps brain size
small and body size small. Granted the limited resources of food
energy, but also
the huge amount of inbreeding weakens the gene pool. And about the
only thing
that keeps evolving that is hugely beneficial is the throwing or tools
industry.
As one of the anthropologists on the program elated in words to the
effect:
"Well that throws out the idea that small brains cannot have a tool
industry."
Another error of logic that the 2nd program displayed of the 1st
program is that
all of a sudden the Climate Change theory of Potts is no longer
needed, and since
it is no longer needed means it was never needed in the 1st program.
There are other errors but let me end this post by saying what really
should be
done by the anthropology community, rather than these patchworks of
silly
irrelevant and erroneous theories. One theory that ties every hominid
to
Homo sapiens is the fact that we are the only creatures that throw
overarm
and with deadly precision. Every animal in Africa knows what a human
bending
down and doing something near the ground, those animals all know what
that
means, especially predators. They know that the band of humans is
about to
throw rocks at them. They (animals of Africa) know this because of 6
million years
of living with rockthrowing Hominids.
Simply take all the hominid fossils of arm and leg bones found so far,
and compare
them as to midpoints of elbow, knee and hip for Stonethrowing theory.
So I think what you will find is that the Hobbit was a Homo erectus
only living
in a inbreeding isolated island. That the arm and leg bones of Hobbit
were
as fully throwing as what Turkana boy was. I think you will find that
the arm
and leg bones of Lucy and Selam fit nicely with their 3 or 4 million
age period
even though their brain size was that of apelike. We must dismiss the
brain
size as an indicator of evolution. Dismiss it as that of the result of
the
massive Inbreeding that was unavoidable. A band or tribe of
rockthrowers
has to depend on others and so a life of team-throwing suffers massive
inbreeding and the result is good throwers but a flatlining of brain
size.
So get off the data of brain size and get off the data of teeth.
Concentrate
and focus on arm and leg bone proportions and how you can evolve
the bones of a chimp into that of elbow, knee, hip midpoints.
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:
>
> Second program of this 3 part series was more interesting than I
> expected.
> It had a sort of "main character" in the Turkana boy which has picture
> on Wikipedia:
NOVA and Wiki are no substitute for peer-reviewed journals. Only a
crank
would think they were.
FYI:
"The Turkana boy tells us that early H. erectus, besides being a
tall biped,
had arms and legs proportioned like a modern human's. For his height,
his
arms were not as long as those of Lucy, Lucy's Child or so far as we
know,
any other prior hominid. He lacked the apish details that, in earlier
bipeds,
suggest occasional tree climbing. The legs and hip bones of Homo
erectus
were buttressed by tremendous thickness and bulges, which denotes a
body geared toward endurance walking and running. An exclusive pact
had
been made with the terrestrial realm, and the boy's legs were
equipped to
cover ground in strides protracted in both length and hours."
Richard Potts from Humanity's Descent
W.-J. Wang and R. H. Crompton 2004
The role of load-carrying in the evolution of modern body
proportions
J. Anat. 204 pp417–430
"Our hypothesis
that there is a direct relationship between the acquisition
of modern postcranial proportions and increased
ranging/transport distances at around 1.8–1.5 Ma appears
to be borne out, although other selective factors, such
as thermoregulatory influences (see Ruff, 1991; Wheeler,
1992) and adaptations for throwing (see Dunsworth
et al. 2003), are likely to have played an important
(although probably interdependent) role."
Holger Preuschoft 2004
Mechanisms for the acquisition of habitual bipedality:
are there biomechanical reasons for the acquisition of
upright bipedal posture?
J. Anat. 204 pp363–384
"adaptations for throwing" have already been discussed
and accepted by the field when describling the Turkana Boy.
He was an excellent runner and thrower. However,
bipedalism had already been around for millions of years
before this runner/thrower evolved. His stature did not
occur until flintknapping had been around for over a
million years and obviously, as Nick Toth pointed out
years ago, there is a close correlation between the evolution
of stone tools, precision grip, flintknapping, and throwing.
With flintknapping, manuport evidence also turns up. Duh,
evidence of something thrown and no more tree climbing
abilities as can be seen with the rest of Homo's close
cousins, the apes and A'piths.