Chimp 'hammers' fuel evolutionary debate
Bodega
Hammers' Fuel Evolutionary Debate
Science Daily - A University of Calgary archaeologist has found the
first prehistoric evidence of chimpanzee technology, adding credence
to the theory that some of humanity's behavioural hallmarks were
actually inherited by both humans and great apes from a common
ancestor.
Examples of some of the stones that were excavated. Analysis shows
they were used by chimpanzees some 4,300 years ago to crack nuts.
(Photo illustration courtesy of University of Calgary)
Dr. Julio Mercader, one of the few archaeologists in the world who
studies the material culture of great apes, especially chimpanzees,
uncovered stone 'hammers' last year in the Taï rainforest of Africa's
Côte D'Ivoire (Ivory Coast) that date back 4,300 years.
Mercader and co-investigators from Germany, UK, the U.S. and Canada
report on the findings in the latest edition of PNAS, the Proceedings
of the National Academy of Sciences. PNAS is in the top echelon of
academic journals internationally.
"It's not clear whether we hominins invented this kind of stone
technology, or whether both humans and the great apes inherited it
from a common forebear," says Mercader, also a Canada Research Chair
in Tropical Archaeology. "There weren't any farmers living in this
region 4,300 years ago, so it is unlikely that chimpanzees picked it
up by imitating villagers, like some scientists used to claim."
The stone hammers that the team discovered, essentially irregularly
shaped rocks about the size of cantaloupes -- with distinctive
patterns of wear -- were used to crack the shells of nuts.
The research demonstrates conclusively that the artifacts couldn't
have been the result of natural erosion or used by humans. The stones
are too large for humans to use easily and they also have the starch
residue from several nuts known to be staples.
More at:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/02/070212184608.htm
Frank J
I wonder how many people will read little more than the words "fuel
evolutionary debate" in the title, and interpret (wrongly) that this
finding somehow threatens the entire theory, or heaven forbid, the
fact of common descent.
Bobby Bryant
"Bodega" <michael...@worldnet.att.net> writes:
> Researchers Unearth 4,300-year-old Chimpanzee Technology; 'Stone
> Hammers' Fuel Evolutionary Debate
>
> Science Daily - A University of Calgary archaeologist has found the
> first prehistoric evidence of chimpanzee technology, adding credence
> to the theory that some of humanity's behavioural hallmarks were
> actually inherited by both humans and great apes from a common
> ancestor.
I've previously mentioned seeing a film of monkeys (capuchin, IIRC)
using stones brought up from a nearby stream to crack nuts on a
big stone "anvil" in the middle of the forest.
South America, IIRC.
--
Bobby Bryant
Reno, Nevada
Remove your hat to reply by e-mail.
A.Carlson
This story just reinforces how much we have in common with our fellow
primates and that this interrelationship is more a matter of degree
than of differences, particularly as it relates to behavior. The
observation about common behavior was actually cited in the early 20th
Century in support of primate-human evolution and common descent.
I fail to see why this should "fuel evolutionary debate" at all since
it only furthers the status quo and no amount of new information is
likely to sway the other side in any case since they don't even
consider what we already knew before this.
rmj
"Bodega" <michael...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:1171412806.6...@q2g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
But humans are larger than apes. And don't humans eat nuts.
>
> More at:
> http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/02/070212184608.htm
>
The page wouldn't come up for me. How can they be sure apes and not people
used the hammers?
>
John Wilkins
> "Bodega" <michael...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
> news:1171412806.6...@q2g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
...
> > The research demonstrates conclusively that the artifacts couldn't
> > have been the result of natural erosion or used by humans. The stones
> > are too large for humans to use easily and they also have the starch
> > residue from several nuts known to be staples.
>
> But humans are larger than apes. And don't humans eat nuts.
Some gorilla males may beg to differ.
...
--
John S. Wilkins, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Biohumanities Project
University of Queensland - Blog: scienceblogs.com/evolvingthoughts
"He used... sarcasm. He knew all the tricks, dramatic irony, metaphor,
bathos, puns, parody, litotes and... satire. He was vicious."
rmj
"John Wilkins" <j.wil...@uq.edu.au> wrote in message
news:1htj4ko.faxje7up1dhlN%j.wil...@uq.edu.au...
> rmj <gle...@jps.net> wrote:
>
>> "Bodega" <michael...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
>> news:1171412806.6...@q2g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> ...
>> > The research demonstrates conclusively that the artifacts couldn't
>> > have been the result of natural erosion or used by humans. The stones
>> > are too large for humans to use easily and they also have the starch
>> > residue from several nuts known to be staples.
>>
>> But humans are larger than apes. And don't humans eat nuts.
>
> Some gorilla males may beg to differ.
Is that what the article claimed? And weren't men stronger then than we who
live in comfort?
Mitchell Coffey
> rmj <gle...@jps.net> wrote:
> > "Bodega" <michael.palm...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
> >news:1171412806.6...@q2g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> ...
> > > The research demonstrates conclusively that the artifacts couldn't
> > > have been the result of natural erosion or used by humans. The stones
> > > are too large for humans to use easily and they also have the starch
> > > residue from several nuts known to be staples.
>
> > But humans are larger than apes. And don't humans eat nuts.
>
> Some gorilla males may beg to differ.
And stone hammers aren't the half of it. My a few years ago if you
went down to the National Zoo at a quiet moment, one could watch the
orangs as they'd amble over to a CRT screen with an over-size keyboard
with great big glyphs instead of keys, and gape in awe as they touch
typed out little messages on the screen.
Oh, and what is it with this dumb-ass McCarthyite mutherfuck running
your country these days? I thought that national leaders whom the
orangs found too boring when text messaging was an American thing.
Even most Americans now know that when visiting the White House you
must never, ever drink the Kool Aid. I've been meaning to ask.
Mitchell
A.Carlson
>
>"John Wilkins" <j.wil...@uq.edu.au> wrote in message
>news:1htj4ko.faxje7up1dhlN%j.wil...@uq.edu.au...
>> rmj <gle...@jps.net> wrote:
>>
>>> "Bodega" <michael...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
>>> news:1171412806.6...@q2g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>> ...
>>> > The research demonstrates conclusively that the artifacts couldn't
>>> > have been the result of natural erosion or used by humans. The stones
>>> > are too large for humans to use easily and they also have the starch
>>> > residue from several nuts known to be staples.
>>>
>>> But humans are larger than apes. And don't humans eat nuts.
>>
>> Some gorilla males may beg to differ.
>
>Is that what the article claimed? And weren't men stronger then than we who
>live in comfort?
Even a much smaller chimpanzee that weighs less than 100 pounds has
the upper body strength over five times that of a man.
http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a1_001b.html
For Jane Goodall's take on this question:
Perhaps surprisingly, an adult male gorilla is also reported to have
the upper body strength five times that of a man!
John Wilkins
For some little time now, our peerless leader's nose has been Bush
brown. So much so that the Democrat/Republican split has now been taken
up along local party lines.
Don't blame me. I couldn't find a sniper's rifle.
Vend
> Even a much smaller chimpanzee that weighs less than 100 pounds has
> the upper body strength over five times that of a man.
>
> http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a1_001b.html
Why? Perhaps because we are runners?
Radix2
Yah - I'm with John here. I didn't vote for the lying sycophant and I
didn't have a gun handy either.
No - I am just (further) ashamed that someone like 'Lil Johnny feels
he can speak of his personal attitude but as our PM representing us,
on foreign election candidates. Howard must be replaced, but not by a
clone. Lines and policy are starting to be drawn and we may be up for
a change. We'll see.
Frank J
>
> - Show quoted text -
You & I fail to see it, but many people will (wrongly) take it that
way. They see any minor disagreement, or any update of current details
as a problem for the whole theory (& common descent, and somethimes
even "evidence" for a young earth). I agree that it *shouldn't* be the
responsibility of scientists and science writers to correct common
misconceptions, but unfortunately it *is* their responsibility because
no one else will step up to the plate. And anti-evolution activists
work overtime to feed public misconceptions. Certain sound bites,
especially in headlines, are used at one's own risk.
John Wilkins
> Yah - I'm with John here. I didn't vote for the lying sycophant and I
> didn't have a gun handy either.
>
> No - I am just (further) ashamed that someone like 'Lil Johnny feels
> he can speak of his personal attitude but as our PM representing us,
> on foreign election candidates. Howard must be replaced, but not by a
> clone. Lines and policy are starting to be drawn and we may be up for
> a change. We'll see.
The only problem is that the Greens won't win much.
Will in New Haven
> "John Wilkins" <j.wilki...@uq.edu.au> wrote in message> >> "Bodega" <michael.palm...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
> >>news:1171412806.6...@q2g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> > ...
> >> > The research demonstrates conclusively that the artifacts couldn't
> >> > have been the result of natural erosion or used by humans. The stones
> >> > are too large for humans to use easily and they also have the starch
> >> > residue from several nuts known to be staples.
>
> >> But humans are larger than apes. And don't humans eat nuts.
>
> > Some gorilla males may beg to differ.
>
> Is that what the article claimed? And weren't men stronger then than we who
> live in comfort?
Hardier, undoubtedly, although it would be difficult to prove.
Stronger, in the sense of lifting more weight? Very likely stronger on
average. However, moderns tend to be larger than our ancestors and the
strongest moderns, athletes who need a great deal of strength for
their sports, are probably stronger than our distant ancestors.
Will in New Haven
--
>
>
>
> > ...
> > --
> > John S. Wilkins, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Biohumanities Project
> > University of Queensland - Blog: scienceblogs.com/evolvingthoughts
> > "He used... sarcasm. He knew all the tricks, dramatic irony, metaphor,
> > bathos, puns, parody, litotes and... satire. He was vicious."- Hide quoted text -
A.Carlson
There is no doubt that it has something to do with the fact that great
apes (other than ourselves) still live in trees to a certain extent
and their physiology reflects this.
As for our on physiology, it is not so much that we are runners but
that we aren't climbers - which of course is what made us runners ;)
The fact that our hands were freed from the mundane task of locomotion
was possibly a major factor in our own brain development.
Desertphile
Humans are not larger than apes: humans are the same size as apes,
because humans are apes.
--
"How did he know where we'd be?!" --- Maggie
"Because we'd be dead if he didn't!" -- Jake Speed
John Bode
> "Bodega" <michael.palm...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
But chimpanzees are much stronger than humans. And, adult chimps may
get as large as an adult human.
rmj
"Bodega" <michael...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:1171412806.6...@q2g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
the size?
Mitchell Coffey
In all truth, I don't approve of jokes like that. But my opinions are
not known to carry much weight, particularly with myself. What
disturbs me is that the more I think about it, the more serious I am
in suggesting that you hold off on comments like that, due to the
small possibility that W's approval ratings could top 40% percent
again and you may wish to gain entry into this country again. You are
beloved here, and that would make many of us sad.
Mitchell
John Wilkins
> On Feb 14, 3:53 am, j.wilki...@uq.edu.au (John Wilkins) wrote:
> > MitchellCoffey<m.cof...@starpower.net> wrote:
...
> > > Oh, and what is it with this dumb-ass McCarthyite mutherfuck running
> > > your country these days? I thought that national leaders whom the
> > > orangs found too boring when text messaging was an American thing.
> > > Even most Americans now know that when visiting the White House you
> > > must never, ever drink the Kool Aid. I've been meaning to ask.
> >
> > For some little time now, our peerless leader's nose has been Bush
> > brown. So much so that the Democrat/Republican split has now been taken
> > up along local party lines.
> >
> > Don't blame me. I couldn't find a sniper's rifle.
>
> In all truth, I don't approve of jokes like that. But my opinions are
> not known to carry much weight, particularly with myself. What
> disturbs me is that the more I think about it, the more serious I am
> in suggesting that you hold off on comments like that, due to the
> small possibility that W's approval ratings could top 40% percent
> again and you may wish to gain entry into this country again. You are
> beloved here, and that would make many of us sad.
>
I of course meant a paintball sniper's rifle.
If we allow the fascists to control what we can say in public, then the
terrorists really have won.
Rolf
"Bodega" <michael...@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:1171412806.6...@q2g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Doesn't this fit with the theory that chimps descended from humans, well -
maybe noe exactly like that, but that, from a species on its way to
bipedalism and eventually evolving int homo sapiens, a branching off took
place, with that branch returning to an arboreal lifestyle.? We must be
dealing with the LCA, last common ancestor of chimps and mankind here.
Why didn't someone build David Attenborugh a time machine?
Vend
>
> In all truth, I don't approve of jokes like that. But my opinions are
> not known to carry much weight, particularly with myself. What
> disturbs me is that the more I think about it, the more serious I am
> in suggesting that you hold off on comments like that, due to the
> small possibility that W's approval ratings could top 40% percent
> again and you may wish to gain entry into this country again. You are
> beloved here, and that would make many of us sad.
>
> Mitchell
He doesn't look like an Arab nor has an Arab-sounding name, so he'll
be ok :D
Don Cates
Sure he does. I have a nice picture of him here (hopefully now
atypical, since he is holding a cigarette) and if you give me a few
days to get up to speed with Photoshop, I can make him as Arabic as
you like.
('though it would probably be easiest if I just put him in a burka)
--
Don Cates ("he's a cunning rascal" - PN)