longitudinal arch of human foot

[marc verhaegen]

Arched footprints preserve the motions of fossil hominin feet
Kevin G Hatala, Stephen M Gatesy & Peter L Falkingham 2023
Nature Ecology & Evolution 7:32-41

The longitudinal arch of the human foot is viewed as a pivotal adaptation for BP walking & running.
Fossil footprints from Laetoli-Tanzania & Ileret-Kenya are believed to provide direct evidence of longitudinally arched feet in hominins from the Plio- & Pleistocene resp.
We studied the dynamics of track-fm: biplanar X-ray, 3Dl animation & discrete element particle simulation.
Here, we demonstrate:
longitudinally arched footprints are false indicators of foot anatomy,
instead they are generated through a specific pattern of foot kinematics, characteristic of human walking.
Analyses of fossil hominin tracks from Laetoli show only partial evidence of this walking style: similar heel-strike, but different pattern of propulsion.
The earliest known evidence for fully modern human-like BP kinematics comes from the early Pleistocene Ileret tracks,
these were presumably made by members of the genus Homo.
This result
- signals important differences in the foot kinematics recorded at Laetoli & Ileret,
- underscores an emerging picture of locomotor diversity within the hominin clade.

____

Yes, of course, human walking is very special.
I tried to send a comment, something like this:
- The earliest Hominoidea already had some form of BPity, google "aquarboreal".
- The use of the word "hominin" presupposes australopiths as closer relatives of Homo than of Pan or Gorilla (wrong IMO, e.g. my Hum.Evol.papers 1994 & 1996).
- The Miocene footprints of Trachilos (Medit.Sea-coast) were already BP.
- Hylobatids are (still?) mostly vertical.
- Cursorial mammals don't have longitudinal foot arches AFAIK, but are unguli- or digitigrade.
- There's no evidence of correlation of BPity with longitudinal arches in other tetrapods AFAIK.

How our foot-arches evolved is not so difficult to understand IMO, e.g.
- wading-climbing Mio-Pliocene Hominoidea, google “aquarboreal”
- wading-diving early-Pleistocene Homo, e.g. H.erectus, google “pachyosteosclerosis”
- wading-walking late-Pleistocene Homo, google “gondwanatalks Verhaegen Bonne”

[JTEM is my hero]

marc verhaegen wrote:

> Arched footprints preserve the motions of fossil hominin feet
> Kevin G Hatala, Stephen M Gatesy & Peter L Falkingham 2023
> Nature Ecology & Evolution 7:32-41

People don't seem to be "Getting" this but, there is no real evidence
for this arch until AFTER the chromosome fusion... believed to have
happened less than 2 million years ago.

Now you have to actually know a little something about the good
Doctor's position to grasp what this means. But he makes a
great deal out of erectus and the evidence for diving.

Maybe we can say "Swimming," because underwater swimming
is still swimming.

The good Doctor isn't speculating here, he's pointing to the physical
evidence for this. He's explaining the physical evidence: "Their
remains looks this way because they were diving."

AND THIS he's seeing in finds that existed AFTER the chromosome
fusion.

So what it looks like to me is that our ancestors were waterside.They
lived along the shore. They exploited the sea. The consumed
resources and then moved on. And as they did this, at various points
in time (and places) groups branched off, pushed inland and adapted.
But they would have remained co fertile for quite some time.

The waterside group would have been moderating the adaptions, the
evolution of the inland groups. The inland groups would have been
moderating the evolution of the waterside group...

AFTER THE CHROMOSOME FUSION, all this interbreeding, this
moderation of the evolution just kind of stopped. The chromosome
fusion was a barrier to interbreeding. This allowed the waterside
group to better adapt to the water, as they were no longer being
influenced by the inland populations. AND IT WAS AT THIS POINT
where the arch seems to pop into evidence.

Too complicated for savanna mouth breathers?

No doubt.

But consider also that bipedalism is VASTLY older than is Homo,
YES amongst our ancestors. Starting with us, drawing a line
backwards though all our potential ancestors, most of the history
of bipedalism in our line was already over before Homo arose. So
this arch can't be associated with bipedalism. It wasn't MILLIONS
OF YEARS OF EVOLUTION that produced this arch. It was, at
most, a few hundred thousand years following the chromosome
fusion. Which strongly suggests environment as the factor. We
stopped being influenced by the more primitive inland groups,
we adapted more fully to waterside..

It's all actually pretty brilliant. So brilliant that it has been lost
entirely on every last opponent to Aquatic Ape. Not one has
read the good Doctor's words and grasped their significance.

The collective minds of Out of Africa purists across at least
three groups that I follow, and never once has one grasped
a word of this stuff.

Congratulations.





-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/722677680584179712

[Pro Plyd]

marc verhaegen wrote:
>

I posted this in April and formatted it better than
you did and the abstract in its entirety which
you apparently were afraid to do.

I also included the link which you seemed also afraid
to do...

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41559-022-01929-2
Published: 05 January 2023

Abstract

The longitudinal arch of the human foot is viewed as

a pivotal adaptation for bipedal walking and running.
Fossil footprints from Laetoli, Tanzania, and Ileret,
Kenya, are believed to provide direct evidence of

longitudinally arched feet in hominins from the

Pliocene and Pleistocene, respectively. We studied
the dynamics of track formation using biplanar X-ray,
three-dimensional animation and discrete element
particle simulation. Here, we demonstrate that

longitudinally arched footprints are false indicators

of foot anatomy; instead they are generated through a
specific pattern of foot kinematics that is

characteristic of human walking. Analyses of fossil
hominin tracks from Laetoli show only partial evidence

of this walking style, with a similar heel strike but
a different pattern of propulsion. The earliest known
evidence for fully modern human-like bipedal kinematics
comes from the early Pleistocene Ileret tracks, which

were presumably made by members of the genus Homo. This

result signals important differences in the foot
kinematics recorded at Laetoli and Ileret and underscores

an emerging picture of locomotor diversity within the
hominin clade.

"The longitudinal arch is often cited as an important
evolutionary innovation of the human foot that contributed
to proficient bipedal walking and adept endurance running
in our fossil relatives..."

"Given the challenges of interpreting arches from fossil
feet, the Laetoli and Ileret tracks are considered the
least equivocal evidence for a deep history of
longitudinally arched foot morphologies in hominin
evolution."

"While isolated analyses of skeletal fossils have
generated conflicting interpretations about whether
the A. afarensis foot functioned like that of a modern
human, our analysis of the arched Laetoli footprints
provides a unique kinematic synthesis. Brought into view
through this new lens is a pattern of foot function and
bipedal locomotion that was human-like in some ways
yet still importantly different."

"In contrast, 1.5 Ma tracks from Ileret, Kenya, preserve
the earliest evidence for a fully human-like pattern of
foot kinematics. Tracks from Ileret (total n = 4 from
three trackways) have RAVs where we would expect similarly
deep modern human tracks to fall (Fig. 4a). These data
provide new evidence to support inferences of human-like
foot kinematics in Homo erectus. We emphasize, however,
that our track ontogeny results simultaneously invalidate
direct association between arched footprint morphology and
arched foot anatomy at Ileret11. In contrast with the
Laetoli examples above, it appears that the Ileret tracks
are fully consistent with not only a heel–sole–toe rollover
pattern but also a pattern of forefoot propulsion closer to
that observed in modern humans."

"The results of our track analyses suggest that important
changes to foot anatomy and function occurred at or before
the emergence of the genus Homo, where a suite of postcranial
changes could correspond to selective influences of locomotor
behaviours such as long-distance walking or endurance running."

[JTEM is my hero]

Pro Plyd wrote:

> Abstract
> The longitudinal arch of the human foot is viewed as
> a pivotal adaptation for bipedal walking and running.

Bipedalism stretches back MILLIONS of years prior to the
evolution of the first Homo. The arch is not present until
significantly later. Clearly what is stated here is falsified.

It's bullshit.

What's more: This has been pointed out to you REPEATEDLY.

You are dogmatic. Stupid, yes, but dogmatic. You're not
thinking, you're not "Arguing" you're trying to enforce your
dogma, and looking stupid for the effort.

> Fossil footprints from Laetoli, Tanzania, and Ileret,
> Kenya, are believed to provide direct evidence of
> longitudinally arched feet in hominins from the
> Pliocene and Pleistocene, respectively.

[...]

> Here, we demonstrate that
> longitudinally arched footprints are false indicators
> of foot anatomy

And I'm not exaggerating here in the least! You're
cite DOES NOT say what you think it says. It's actually
supporting the good Doctor.

It's consistent with the good Doctor's position, and
entirely inconsistent with your own. AND THIS HAS
BEEN POINTED OUT REPEATEDLY, in a number of
threads. You're just too far gone to adapt to reality.

You're a goddamn idiot!

Have a nice day.




-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/719144199654621184

[marc verhaegen]

An idiot who believes his anestor ran after kudus repeated this nonsense:

> https://www.nature.com/articles/s41559-022-01929-2

Arched footprints preserve the motions of fossil hominin feet

Kevin G Hatala cs 2023 Nat.Ecol.Evol.7:32-41
The longitudinal arch of the Hs foot is viewed (:-DDD yes, by kudu runners --mv) as a pivotal adaptation for BP walking & running.
Fossil footprints (Laetoli-Tanzania vs Ileret-Kenya) are believed to provide direct evidence of longitudinally arched feet (Plio- vs Pleist.hominins).
We studied the dynamics of track-fm (biplanar RX, 3Dl animation, discrete element particle simulation):
longitudinally arched footprints are false indicators of foot anatomy:
they are generated thru specific pattern of foot kinematics, characteristic of human walking.
Analyses of Laetoli hominin tracks show only partial evidence of this walking-style: similar heel-strike, but different pattern of propulsion.
The earliest known evidence for Hs-like BP kinematics comes from the early-Pleistocene Ileret tracks, presumably made by Homo.
This result
- signals important differences in the foot kinematics recorded at Laetoli & Ileret,
- underscores an emerging picture of hominin locomotor diversity.
____

Yes, of course, human walking is very special:
- Miocene Hominoidea were already BP aquarboreals.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0169534702024904
- Using the word "hominin" presupposes australopiths as closer relatives of Homo than of Pan or Gorilla = wrong, see my Hum.Evol.papers 1994 & 1996.
https://www.academia.edu/8732353/Marc_Verhaegens_papers_in_Human_Evolution

- The Miocene footprints of Trachilos (Medit.Sea-coast) were already BP.

https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=trachilos+footprints
- Gibbons are still vertical.
- Cursorial mammals never have longitudinal foot arches: they run on nails=hooves or toes.
- There's 0 evidence of correlation of BPity with longitudinal arches in other tetrapods.

The kudu runners neglect all these facts:
they're too stupid to answer these.

How our foot-arch evolved is clear, e.g.
- wading-climbing Mio-Pliocene Hominoidea
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0169534702024904
- wading-diving early-Pleistocene H.erectus
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21741646/
- wading-walking late-Pleistocene Homo
https://www.gondwanatalks.com/l/the-waterside-hypothesis-wading-led-to-upright-walking-in-early-humans/

[Pro Plyd]

JTEM is my hero wrote:
> Pro Plyd wrote:
>
>> Abstract
>> The longitudinal arch of the human foot is viewed as
>> a pivotal adaptation for bipedal walking and running.
>
> Bipedalism stretches back MILLIONS of years prior to the

Every bird on the planet is bipedal. Bipedalism goes back to the
Triassic.

[Pro Plyd]

marc verhaegen wrote:
> An idiot who believes his anestor ran after kudus repeated this nonsense:
>
>> https://www.nature.com/articles/s41559-022-01929-2
>
> Arched footprints preserve the motions of fossil hominin feet

Here is the actual abstract

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41559-022-01929-2
Published: 05 January 2023

Abstract
The longitudinal arch of the human foot is viewed as
a pivotal adaptation for bipedal walking and running.
Fossil footprints from Laetoli, Tanzania, and Ileret,
Kenya, are believed to provide direct evidence of
longitudinally arched feet in hominins from the
Pliocene and Pleistocene, respectively. We studied
the dynamics of track formation using biplanar X-ray,
three-dimensional animation and discrete element
particle simulation. Here, we demonstrate that

longitudinally arched footprints are false indicators

[Bob Casanova]

On Thu, 3 Aug 2023 15:16:20 -0600, the following appeared in
talk.origins, posted by Pro Plyd <inva...@invalid.invalid>:

But all you have are evidence, studies, and rigorous
analysis. He has *conviction*! And a *superiority complex*!
And a *medical doctor* (IOW. a bio-mechanic)! There's simply
no contest!
>
--

Bob C.

"The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
the one that heralds new discoveries, is not
'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'"

- Isaac Asimov

[JTEM is my hero]

Pro Plyd wrote:

[...]

According to you, in this thread, you can't follow a conversation, the
context is lost on you immediately i..e. never grasped in the first
place.

And you can't read your own cite! It's supporting the good Doctor,
and you think it's refuting him, you're such an idiot!

Stop trying.





-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/724915878503858176

[JTEM is my hero]

Pro Plyd wrote:

> Here is the actual abstract
> https://www.nature.com/articles/s41559-022-01929-2
> Published: 05 January 2023

: Here, we demonstrate that

: longitudinally arched footprints are false indicators
: of foot anatomy

There. Your own cite disproves you.

Your own cite proves you're an idiot.

Your own cite supports the good Doctor and thoroughly
refutes you.

...you're just too far gone to grasp a word of it.




-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/724915878503858176

[JTEM is my hero]

Gee whiz, exact same stupid mistake, based on the exact same
lack of reading comprehension, coming from more than one
alter... as if the same mentally ill moron is behind the different
handles...

Bob Casanova wrote:

> >Abstract

> > Here, we demonstrate that
> >longitudinally arched footprints are false indicators
> >of foot anatomy; instead they are generated through a
> >specific pattern of foot kinematics that is
> >characteristic of human walking.

Wow. You quoted proof that the good Doctor is right, that
bipedalism can't explain "longitudinally arched footprints"
as they only appear in our ancestors after MILLIONS OF
YEARS of bipedal locomotion.




-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/724915878503858176

[marc verhaegen]

Op donderdag 3 augustus 2023 om 23:21:01 UTC+2 schreef Pro Plyd:

> marc verhaegen wrote:
> > An idiot who believes his anestor ran after kudus repeated this nonsense:
> >
> >> https://www.nature.com/articles/s41559-022-01929-2
> >
> > Arched footprints preserve the motions of fossil hominin feet

Somebody who doesn't understand the word "viewed":
"The longitudinal arch of the human foot is viewed as a pivotal adaptation for bipedal walking & running."
:-DDD
Only incredible imbeciles believe that flat feet + short toes are for running.
They confuse cause & consequence:
we sometimes try to run fast *in spite of* our flat feet.
Ostriches & kangaroos run & jump on their toes.
Hooved mammals run fast (>2x as fast as Hs) on their hooves = nails!
Carnivores need claws: they don't run on their nails, but on their digits.
Swimming & wading tetrapods have flat feet = plantigrady.
This beautifully confirms: we evolved from aquarboreal->littoral->wading-walking:
https://www.gondwanatalks.com/l/the-waterside-hypothesis-wading-led-to-upright-walking-in-early-humans/

______

Prejudiced paper from people who believe they descend from Lucy:
:-DDD

> Here is the actual abstract
> https://www.nature.com/articles/s41559-022-01929-2
> Published: 05 January 2023

> The longitudinal arch of the human foot is viewed as
> a pivotal adaptation for bipedal walking and running.
> Fossil footprints from Laetoli, Tanzania, and Ileret,
> Kenya, are believed to provide direct evidence of
> longitudinally arched feet in hominins from the
> Pliocene and Pleistocene, respectively. We studied
> the dynamics of track formation using biplanar X-ray,
> three-dimensional animation and discrete element
> particle simulation. Here, we demonstrate that
> longitudinally arched footprints are false indicators
> of foot anatomy; instead they are generated through a
> specific pattern of foot kinematics that is
> characteristic of human walking. Analyses of fossil
> hominin tracks from Laetoli show only partial evidence
> of this walking style, with a similar heel strike but
> a different pattern of propulsion. The earliest known
> evidence for fully modern human-like bipedal kinematics
> comes from the early Pleistocene Ileret tracks, which
> were presumably made by members of the genus Homo. This
> result signals important differences in the foot
> kinematics recorded at Laetoli and Ileret and underscores
> an emerging picture of locomotor diversity within the
> hominin clade.

Retroviral DNA shows Pliocene human ancestors were not even in Africa, as everybody knows!
Lucy Praeanthropus afarensis was a fossil relative of Gorilla, of course, e.g.
• “Incisal dental microwear in A.afarensis is most similar to that observed in Gorilla”. Ryan & Johanson 1989.
• The composite skull reconstructed mostly from A.L.333 spms “looked very much like a small female gorilla”. Johanson & Edey 1981:351.
• “Other primitive [= advanced gorilla-like --mv] features found in KNM-WT 17000, but not know or much discussed for A.afarensis, are: very small cranial capacity; low posterior profile of the calvaria; nasals extended far above the frontomaxillar suture and well onto an uninflated glabella; and extremely convex inferolateral margins of the orbits such as found in some gorillas”. Walker cs 1986.
• As for the maximum parietal breadth & the biauriculare in O.H.5 & KNM-ER 406 “the robust australopithecines have values near the Gorilla mean: both the pongids and the robust australopithecines have highly pneumatized bases”. Kennedy 1991.
• In O.H.5, “the curious and characteristic features of the Paranthropus skull... parallel some of those of the gorilla”. Robinson 1960.
• The A.boisei “lineage has been characterized by sexual dimorphism of the degree seen in modern Gorilla for the length of its known history”. Leakey & Walker 1988.
• A.boisei teeth showed “a relative absence of prism decussation”; among extant hominoids, “Gorilla enamel showed relatively little decussation ...”. Beynon & Wood 1986.
etc.etc.etc.
Only incredible imbeciles still believe they descend from Lucy.

[Öö Tiib]

On Thursday, 10 August 2023 at 11:21:09 UTC+3, marc verhaegen wrote:
> Op donderdag 3 augustus 2023 om 23:21:01 UTC+2 schreef Pro Plyd:
> > marc verhaegen wrote:
> > > An idiot who believes his anestor ran after kudus repeated this nonsense:
> > >
> > >> https://www.nature.com/articles/s41559-022-01929-2
> > >
> > > Arched footprints preserve the motions of fossil hominin feet
> Somebody who doesn't understand the word "viewed":
> "The longitudinal arch of the human foot is viewed as a pivotal adaptation for bipedal walking & running."
> :-DDD
> Only incredible imbeciles believe that flat feet + short toes are for running.
> They confuse cause & consequence:
> we sometimes try to run fast *in spite of* our flat feet.
> Ostriches & kangaroos run & jump on their toes.
> Hooved mammals run fast (>2x as fast as Hs) on their hooves = nails!
> Carnivores need claws: they don't run on their nails, but on their digits.
> Swimming & wading tetrapods have flat feet = plantigrady.
> This beautifully confirms: we evolved from aquarboreal->littoral->wading-walking:
> https://www.gondwanatalks.com/l/the-waterside-hypothesis-wading-led-to-upright-walking-in-early-humans/
>
> ______
>
> Prejudiced paper from people who believe they descend from Lucy:
> :-DDD

So nature.com are prejudiced people and full truth is from
sole person blogging on gondwanatalks.com? Possible, but
unlikely.

Who are those everybody and how they know? Do retroviruses
always infect all species on same continent?

> Lucy Praeanthropus afarensis was a fossil relative of Gorilla, of course, e.g.
> • “Incisal dental microwear in A.afarensis is most similar to that observed in Gorilla”. Ryan & Johanson 1989.
> • The composite skull reconstructed mostly from A.L.333 spms “looked very much like a small female gorilla”. Johanson & Edey 1981:351.

Dental microwear indicates diet not specie and looking at 7 pieces
with most of actual skull missing leave too lot to imagination:
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucy_(Australopithecus)#/media/File:Lucy_(Frankfurt_am_Main).jpg>
Does someone say that Selam's skull
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Selam_(Australopithecus)#/media/File:SelamAustralopithecus.jpg>
or Taung Child's
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taung_Child#/media/File:Australopithecus_africanus_-_Cast_of_taung_child_Face.jpg>
skull looks very much like gorilla?

> • “Other primitive [= advanced gorilla-like --mv] features found in KNM-WT 17000, but not know or much discussed for A.afarensis, are: very small cranial capacity; low posterior profile of the calvaria; nasals extended far above the frontomaxillar suture and well onto an uninflated glabella; and extremely convex inferolateral margins of the orbits such as found in some gorillas”. Walker cs 1986.
> • As for the maximum parietal breadth & the biauriculare in O.H.5 & KNM-ER 406 “the robust australopithecines have values near the Gorilla mean: both the pongids and the robust australopithecines have highly pneumatized bases”. Kennedy 1991.
> • In O.H.5, “the curious and characteristic features of the Paranthropus skull... parallel some of those of the gorilla”. Robinson 1960.
> • The A.boisei “lineage has been characterized by sexual dimorphism of the degree seen in modern Gorilla for the length of its known history”. Leakey & Walker 1988.
> • A.boisei teeth showed “a relative absence of prism decussation”; among extant hominoids, “Gorilla enamel showed relatively little decussation ...”. Beynon & Wood 1986.
> etc.etc.etc.
> Only incredible imbeciles still believe they descend from Lucy.

You can only discredit yourself by making such immature remarks.

[Bob Casanova]

On Thu, 10 Aug 2023 02:41:12 -0700 (PDT), the following
appeared in talk.origins, posted by Öö Tiib <oot...@hot.ee>:

Just a note: Adding "further" after "yourself" would make
your comment more accurate. Discrediting him is similar to
making the ocean wet.

[Pro Plyd]

JDUM is my hero wrote:
>

Not now, jon jon, adults are talking.

[Pro Plyd]

gasp, a touch, I do confess!

[Pro Plyd]

JTEM is a zero wrote:
> Pro Plyd wrote:
>
>> Here is the actual abstract
>> https://www.nature.com/articles/s41559-022-01929-2
>> Published: 05 January 2023
>
> : Here, we demonstrate that
> : longitudinally arched footprints are false indicators
> : of foot anatomy
>
> There. Your own cite disproves you.
>
> Your own cite proves you're an idiot.
>
> Your own cite supports the good Doctor and thoroughly
> refutes you.

It's your groomer's cite. LOL

[Pro Plyd]

marc verhaegen wrote:
> Op donderdag 3 augustus 2023 om 23:21:01 UTC+2 schreef Pro Plyd:
>> marc verhaegen wrote:
>>> An idiot who believes his anestor ran after kudus repeated this nonsense:
>>>
>>>> https://www.nature.com/articles/s41559-022-01929-2
>>>
>>> Arched footprints preserve the motions of fossil hominin feet
>
> Somebody who doesn't understand the word "viewed":
> "The longitudinal arch of the human foot is viewed as a pivotal adaptation for bipedal walking & running."
> :-DDD
> Only incredible imbeciles believe that flat feet + short toes are for running.

We don't have flat feet.

> They confuse cause & consequence:
> we sometimes try to run fast *in spite of* our flat feet.

We don't have flat feet.

[JTEM is my hero]

Pro Plyd wrote:

Check it out, retard, your own cite supports the good Doctor:

> > : Here, we demonstrate that
> > : longitudinally arched footprints are false indicators
> > : of foot anatomy

So the actual evidence for "Longitudinally arched" feet is *Way*
younger than bipedalism, like the good Doctor's model would
require.

***
Under his model, either the lack of these longitudinally arched
feet is due to their failure to evolve until a much more recent
point, or they are associated with a population not represented
in the sampling ("aquatic ape"). Either way, the longitudinally
arched feet aren't associated with bipedalism but something
else.
***

This is childishly simple: Seeing how bipedalism is conventionally
dated to as much as five million years earlier than these
longitudinally arched feet, it would be reasonable to expect them
to have evolved much early if they were a result of bipedalism, and
unreasonable to insist that one was the consequence of the
other.

Again, incredible simple here... overly simplistic.

Your own cite proves the good Doctor has a point.




-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/726385068482936832

[JTEM is my hero]

Pro Plyd wrote:

> We don't have flat feet.

Our ancestors did, even after MILLIONS of years of
bipedalism, you idiot.

What part of "HUMAN ORIGINS" are you having difficulty
grasping?




-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/726385068482936832

[JTEM is my hero]

Pro Plyd wrote:

> We don't have flat feet.

We're talking about our ancestor, you nimrod, and they did
have flat feet.

Nice of you to "Keep up" with things..mighty white of you.




-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/727585508731092992

[JTEM is my hero]

You're not brite, not one wit, and your own cite establishes
that your "Longitudinal Arched Feet" aren't associated with
bipedalism..while the good Doctor posits a precursor &
you can't.

This is why you went mental..are still going mental.

Doesn't matter how much or little you like the good Doctors
ideas, you literally have no alternative. None. And further
acting out like a child is never ever going to change this.



-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/727585508731092992

[Pro Plyd]

JTEM is my hero wrote:

> Pro Plyd wrote:
>
>> We don't have flat feet.
>
> Our ancestors did, even after MILLIONS of years of
> bipedalism, you idiot.

And the fossil evidence for that is ->

[Pro Plyd]

JTEM is my hero wrote:

> Pro Plyd wrote:
>
>> We don't have flat feet.
>
> We're talking about our ancestor, you nimrod, and they did
> have flat feet.

Replying twice? Maybe you should see if they make a
child's dosage version of Prevagen...

[Pro Plyd]

JTEM is my hero wrote:

> Pro Plyd wrote:
>
> [...]
>
> According to you, in this thread, you can't follow a conversation, the
> context is lost on you immediately i..e. never grasped in the first
> place.
>
> And you can't read your own cite! It's supporting the good Doctor,
> and you think it's refuting him, you're such an idiot!
>
> Stop trying.

It's your groomer's cite.

https://groups.google.com/g/talk.origins/c/VIXZN0Uzijo

[Bob Casanova]

On Sat, 9 Sep 2023 20:59:06 -0600, the following appeared in

talk.origins, posted by Pro Plyd <inva...@invalid.invalid>:

"groomer's cite"? As contrasted with his and his groomer's
Site?:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OALXV8Jlevo

[JTEM is my hero]

Pro Plyd wrote:

> And the fossil evidence for that is ->

Your. Our. Goddamn. Cite.

Try reading it..for the first time ever.

There are fossilized footprints. They do NOT show the
arched feet that you pretend to show. YOUR OWN CITE
SAYS IT!

Well, on the bright side, at least you idiotically
inappropriate response wasn't "You first." Not this
time.




-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/728024793991069696