• Apes and swimming

    From Paul Crowley@21:1/5 to All on Thu Dec 23 15:09:56 2021
    Nearly all reptiles and mammals can swim. They've
    been able to do so since their ancestral taxa first
    evolved. Individuals have to migrate; species need to
    be able to expand their range. Selection will ensure
    that only those that can swim rivers will leave
    offspring. So our monkey ancestors certainly could
    swim -- as well as any monkeys today. But apes can't.
    So when and why did that happen? What were the
    selective advantages in losing that ability?

    There were obviously none, as such. The first ape-
    monkeys that lost that ability must have suffered the
    occasional drowning. In normal circumstances, the
    selective effect would be enough to halt the process.
    But, at this time, while this process was going on, there
    were other powerful selective forces in operation
    which swamped it, and made those losses irrelevant.

    I suggest that there is only one likely answer: the
    evolution of brachiation, which necessitated great
    changes in body form. While some proto-gibbons
    would have fallen into water and drowned, what
    mattered to the bulk of the population were much
    longer arms, a different body shape, and a changed
    weight distribution, all of which made swimming
    difficult.

    Once the changes had been made, the gibbons settled
    into a niche where survival did not depend on being
    able to swim to cross bodies of water, and where
    populations found it easier to tolerate the occasional
    loss from drowning rather than implement any
    physical changes that might make swimming possible.
    The species found it easier to build in a fear of water,
    so that individuals minimised any risk they felt obliged
    to take. The larger apes (orangutans, gorillas, chimps)
    that descended from gibbons, inherited these
    characteristics.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From [email protected]@21:1/5 to All on Sun Dec 26 04:11:23 2021
    Op vrijdag 24 december 2021 om 00:09:57 UTC+1 schreef Paul Crowley:

    Nearly all reptiles and mammals can swim.

    swim or swim?
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ztP5PXGKCQU

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_l@21:1/5 to Paul Crowley on Sun Dec 26 06:20:29 2021
    On Thursday, December 23, 2021 at 6:09:57 PM UTC-5, Paul Crowley wrote:
    Nearly all reptiles and mammals can swim. They've
    been able to do so since their ancestral taxa first
    evolved. Individuals have to migrate; species need to
    be able to expand their range. Selection will ensure
    that only those that can swim rivers will leave
    offspring. So our monkey ancestors certainly could
    swim -- as well as any monkeys today. But apes can't.
    So when and why did that happen? What were the
    selective advantages in losing that ability?

    See vertical climber: https://youtu.be/Gregory
    Lateral swinging habitually selected against pronograde swimming, and supplanted it over wooded streams.
    Laryngeal air sacs may have enlarged as upright floats to keep head above surface and grasping branches became an alternative to swimming in larger apes.

    There were obviously none, as such. The first ape-
    monkeys that lost that ability must have suffered the
    occasional drowning. In normal circumstances, the
    selective effect would be enough to halt the process.
    But, at this time, while this process was going on, there
    were other powerful selective forces in operation
    which swamped it, and made those losses irrelevant.

    I suggest that there is only one likely answer: the
    evolution of brachiation, which necessitated great
    changes in body form. While some proto-gibbons
    would have fallen into water and drowned, what
    mattered to the bulk of the population were much
    longer arms, a different body shape, and a changed
    weight distribution, all of which made swimming
    difficult.

    Once the changes had been made, the gibbons settled
    into a niche where survival did not depend on being
    able to swim to cross bodies of water, and where
    populations found it easier to tolerate the occasional
    loss from drowning rather than implement any
    physical changes that might make swimming possible.
    The species found it easier to build in a fear of water,
    so that individuals minimised any risk they felt obliged
    to take. The larger apes (orangutans, gorillas, chimps)
    that descended from gibbons, inherited these
    characteristics.

    Crocs. The European miocene apes (quasi-hylobatids) could probably still swim while evolving slow brachiation, but those in tropical Africa/Asia became non-swimmers.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From I Envy JTEM@21:1/5 to Paul Crowley on Sun Dec 26 14:24:37 2021
    Paul Crowley wrote:

    Nearly all reptiles and mammals can swim. They've
    been able to do so since their ancestral taxa first
    evolved. Individuals have to migrate; species need to
    be able to expand their range. Selection will ensure
    that only those that can swim rivers will leave
    offspring. So our monkey ancestors certainly could
    swim -- as well as any monkeys today. But apes can't.
    So when and why did that happen? What were the
    selective advantages in losing that ability?

    So much for "Humans are apes," huh?

    Chimps doo swim. They don't like it, they're not good at floating
    and they're poorly balanced for the water but they can and do
    swim. Not a lot. Not habitually...

    Chimps were just as well adapted to swimming as we were, as
    we are, and then they peeled off from us -- not the other way
    around -- and adapted to the forest. Swimming was not important
    to them. Larger brains were not important to them. Walking upright
    was not important to them, not in terms of survival. So they evolved
    away from all that in adapting to the trees...

    I propose human predation. That, they were a diverse population
    exploiting multi environments, the other environments moderating
    (or perhaps even overwhelming) any selective pressures that the
    forest population was experiencing. But as the Homo line that they
    split from competed with them more & more -- probably eating them
    as just another meat source -- their evolution was less & less
    influenced by populations outside the forest, until they were the
    last Chimps standing!






    -- --

    https://rumble.com/vr5fsv-confessions-of-an-ex-hippie.html

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paul Crowley@21:1/5 to All on Sun Dec 26 16:16:43 2021
    On Sunday 26 December 2021 at 14:20:31 UTC, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
    On Thursday, December 23, 2021 at 6:09:57 PM UTC-5, Paul Crowley wrote:

    I suggest that there is only one likely answer: the
    evolution of brachiation, which necessitated great
    changes in body form. While some proto-gibbons
    would have fallen into water and drowned, what
    mattered to the bulk of the population were much
    longer arms, a different body shape, and a changed
    weight distribution, all of which made swimming
    difficult.
    [..]
    The larger apes (orangutans, gorillas, chimps)
    that descended from gibbons, inherited these
    characteristics.

    Crocs. The European miocene apes (quasi-hylobatids) could probably
    still swim while evolving slow brachiation, but those in tropical
    Africa/Asia became non-swimmers.

    So you're saying
    A) That European miocene apes evolved from
    monkeys and were the first apes, and that
    they were first primates to develop
    brachiation . . . ?

    B) That this was SLOW brachiation . . .?

    C) That they did this BEFORE some migrated
    to SE Asia, where some descendants evolved
    FAST brachiation and became gibbons . . . ?

    D) That those remaining in Europe were the
    ancestors of gorillas and chimps, while those
    moving to SE Asia were the ancestors of
    orangutans . . . ?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_l@21:1/5 to Paul Crowley on Sun Dec 26 17:07:17 2021
    On Sunday, December 26, 2021 at 7:16:44 PM UTC-5, Paul Crowley wrote:
    On Sunday 26 December 2021 at 14:20:31 UTC, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
    On Thursday, December 23, 2021 at 6:09:57 PM UTC-5, Paul Crowley wrote:

    I suggest that there is only one likely answer: the
    evolution of brachiation, which necessitated great
    changes in body form. While some proto-gibbons
    would have fallen into water and drowned, what
    mattered to the bulk of the population were much
    longer arms, a different body shape, and a changed
    weight distribution, all of which made swimming
    difficult.
    [..]
    The larger apes (orangutans, gorillas, chimps)
    that descended from gibbons, inherited these
    characteristics.

    Crocs. The European miocene apes (quasi-hylobatids) could probably
    still swim while evolving slow brachiation, but those in tropical Africa/Asia became non-swimmers.
    So you're saying
    A) That European miocene apes evolved from
    monkeys and were the first apes, and that
    they were first primates to develop
    brachiation . . . ?

    B) That this was SLOW brachiation . . .?

    C) That they did this BEFORE some migrated
    to SE Asia, where some descendants evolved
    FAST brachiation and became gibbons . . . ?

    D) That those remaining in Europe were the
    ancestors of gorillas and chimps, while those
    moving to SE Asia were the ancestors of
    orangutans . . . ?

    That is one logical possibility, but put the miocene ape expansion center around the southern Black Sea rather than "in" Europe where just a few fossils have been found. The southern Black Sea was probably semi-tropical, warm year-round but not extremely
    hot & humid and croc-filled; the Caucasus and Lebanon mountain ranges not as tall as now, there may have been a migratory route to Levant on-again off-again, and forests around the Iranian plateau to India. There could have been numerous bands going in
    all directions with various morphologies.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From [email protected]@21:1/5 to All on Mon Dec 27 06:33:54 2021
    ...
    B) That this was SLOW brachiation . . .?

    slow brachiation doesn't exist,
    vertical climbing does

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paul Crowley@21:1/5 to I Envy JTEM on Mon Dec 27 08:07:45 2021
    On Sunday, December 26, 2021 at 10:24:37 PM UTC, I Envy JTEM wrote:

    Chimps doo swim. They don't like it, they're not good at floating
    and they're poorly balanced for the water but they can and do
    swim. Not a lot. Not habitually...

    Not in the wild -- ever.

    Chimps were just as well adapted to swimming as we were, as
    we are, and then they peeled off from us -- not the other way
    around -- and adapted to the forest.

    Primates are adapted to the forest. It's where
    they evolved over ~50 Myr. But according to
    you, chimps/humans left the forest, adapting
    to somewhere else. Then chimps returned.

    Ever heard of parsimony?

    Where do gorillas fit in?

    Where do gibbons fit in?

    Swimming was not important to them.

    Swimming is important to all terrestrial species.
    Populations expand by crossing rivers.
    Populations and Individuals need to find new
    territories. They need to be able to survive
    floods. The loss of an inherited ability needs
    to be explained (not 'explained away').

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paul Crowley@21:1/5 to All on Mon Dec 27 08:09:54 2021
    On Monday, December 27, 2021 at 1:07:18 AM UTC, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:

    So you're saying
    A) That European miocene apes evolved from
    monkeys and were the first apes, and that
    they were first primates to develop
    brachiation . . . ?

    B) That this was SLOW brachiation . . .?

    C) That they did this BEFORE some migrated
    to SE Asia, where some descendants evolved
    FAST brachiation and became gibbons . . . ?

    D) That those remaining in Europe were the
    ancestors of gorillas and chimps, while those
    moving to SE Asia were the ancestors of
    orangutans . . . ?

    That is one logical possibility, but put the miocene ape expansion center around the southern Black Sea

    The exact geographical location of this supposed
    event is entirely beside the point. Which is that
    species do not evolve -- for no particular reason --
    at great cost and over much time, new body
    plans.

    Giraffes didn't get long necks so that they could
    survey the country better, and then discover
    that they could eat the leaves of high trees.
    Scorpions didn't evolve stinging tails to impress
    potential mates, and then discover that they
    were handy for killing prey and scaring off
    potential predators . . etc., etc.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paul Crowley@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Mon Dec 27 08:11:05 2021
    On Monday, December 27, 2021 at 2:33:55 PM UTC, [email protected] wrote:

    B) That this was SLOW brachiation . . .?

    slow brachiation doesn't exist,
    vertical climbing does

    I agree. But I'm pretty sure that Daud used the
    phrase "slow brachiation".

    However, all primates do 'vertical climbing'
    (even humans). So why and when did some
    of them adopt a new morphology -- a broad
    flat chest (in place of a narrow, deep one)
    a more central spine, loss of a tail, a shift of
    the shoulder scapulae from the side to the
    back & longer arms?

    Please don't say it was something to do
    with wading.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From [email protected]@21:1/5 to All on Mon Dec 27 09:11:34 2021
    Op maandag 27 december 2021 om 17:11:06 UTC+1 schreef Paul Crowley:

    ...

    However, all primates do 'vertical climbing'
    (even humans). So why and when did some
    of them adopt a new morphology -- a broad
    flat chest (in place of a narrow, deep one)
    a more central spine, loss of a tail, a shift of
    the shoulder scapulae from the side to the
    back & longer arms?
    Please don't say it was something to do
    with wading.

    :-) What else, Pauli?
    Only incredible imbeciles believe it has something to do with running after antelopes.

    Simply google our Trends paper:
    "Aquarboreal Ancestors?".

    Tail loss + broad body + vertical body + large body + ...

    And google "bonobo wading" & "gorilla bai".

    But it might have been more complicated than simply wading ofr sedges or os.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From I Envy JTEM@21:1/5 to Paul Crowley on Mon Dec 27 14:46:21 2021
    Paul Crowley wrote:

    Where do gorillas fit in?

    Saying "Apes can't swim" is debunked. Any ape swimming disproves your
    claim, and humans are apes. Right?

    Gorillas like Chimps evolved into the knuckle walking forest dwellers. If our aquatic ancestors began before gorillas, which I believe they did, all their selective pressure has been away from the water and towards the forest.

    But, again, your premise is wrong.



    -- --

    https://rumble.com/vr5fsv-confessions-of-an-ex-hippie.html

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paul Crowley@21:1/5 to I Envy JTEM on Mon Dec 27 15:33:33 2021
    On Monday 27 December 2021 at 22:46:22 UTC, I Envy JTEM wrote:

    Where do gorillas fit in?

    Saying "Apes can't swim" is debunked.

    I never said it. I said gibbons can't swim.

    Any ape swimming disproves your claim, and humans are apes. Right?

    No. We're talking about wild apes. The
    occasional chimp, trained over years in
    a swimming pool, wouldn't disprove a
    claim about chimps not swimming.

    Gorillas like Chimps evolved into the knuckle walking forest dwellers. If our aquatic ancestors began before gorillas, which I believe they did, all their selective pressure has been away from the water and towards the forest.

    Aquatic bullshit. How come there are no
    populations of aquatic gorillas or aquatic
    chimps today?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paul Crowley@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Mon Dec 27 15:32:35 2021
    On Monday 27 December 2021 at 17:11:35 UTC, [email protected] wrote:

    However, all primates do 'vertical climbing'
    (even humans). So why and when did some
    of them adopt a new morphology -- a broad
    flat chest (in place of a narrow, deep one)
    a more central spine, loss of a tail, a shift of
    the shoulder scapulae from the side to the
    back & longer arms?
    Please don't say it was something to do
    with wading.

    :-) What else, Pauli?

    I've told you '. . what else . . ' and you
    referred to it.

    When a small monkey evolved into a gibbon,
    around 25 ma, it had bring in all these drastic
    morphological changes. In the process, it lost
    its ability to swim. This didn't matter much
    at the time, since it was in the high canopy,
    and could brachiate across most rivers.
    The larger rivers were a problem but, over
    geological time, they changed their courses,
    and species of gibbon occupied nearly all
    the forests of SE Asia.

    Their larger descendants -- orangutans, and
    later gorillas and chimps -- were too heavy
    to brachiate, but they still had certain
    advantages over other primates -- in
    particular large size, while being able to
    sleep in trees. Their broad flat backs,
    'spider-like' limbs, and a nesting capacity
    enabled comfortable nights, out of reach
    of predators.

    Only incredible imbeciles believe it has something to do with running after antelopes.

    Sure, sure. But there's no need to repeat
    that endlessly around here. It's not a prayer.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From [email protected]@21:1/5 to All on Mon Dec 27 23:08:20 2021
    Op dinsdag 28 december 2021 om 00:32:36 UTC+1 schreef Paul Crowley:

    However, all primates do 'vertical climbing'
    (even humans). So why and when did some
    of them adopt a new morphology -- a broad
    flat chest (in place of a narrow, deep one)
    a more central spine, loss of a tail, a shift of
    the shoulder scapulae from the side to the
    back & longer arms?

    Please don't say it was something to do
    with wading.

    :-) What else, Pauli?

    I've told you '. . what else . . ' and you referred to it.

    ??

    When a small monkey evolved into a gibbon,
    around 25 ma,

    small??
    Hylobatids have rel.long gestation: this suggests larger ancestors.

    it had bring in all these drastic
    morphological changes. In the process, it lost
    its ability to swim.

    ??

    This didn't matter much
    at the time, since it was in the high canopy,

    No, no, Pauli, it was in the very low canopy.

    and could brachiate across most rivers.

    :-DDD
    Hylobatid brachiation evolved probably much later, after contact with pongids

    (some nonsense snipped)

    Only incredible imbeciles believe it has something to do with running after antelopes.

    Sure, sure. But there's no need to repeat
    that endlessly around here. It's not a prayer.

    It is: still many PAs believe their ancestors hunted over savannas.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_l@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Mon Dec 27 23:39:38 2021
    On Monday, December 27, 2021 at 9:33:55 AM UTC-5, [email protected] wrote:
    ...
    B) That this was SLOW brachiation . . .?
    slow brachiation doesn't exist,
    vertical climbing does

    All today's fast lateral brachiators evolved from slow lateral brachiators which also climbed vertically.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_l@21:1/5 to Paul Crowley on Mon Dec 27 23:44:46 2021
    On Monday, December 27, 2021 at 11:09:56 AM UTC-5, Paul Crowley wrote:
    On Monday, December 27, 2021 at 1:07:18 AM UTC, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:

    So you're saying
    A) That European miocene apes evolved from
    monkeys and were the first apes, and that
    they were first primates to develop
    brachiation . . . ?

    B) That this was SLOW brachiation . . .?

    C) That they did this BEFORE some migrated
    to SE Asia, where some descendants evolved
    FAST brachiation and became gibbons . . . ?

    D) That those remaining in Europe were the
    ancestors of gorillas and chimps, while those
    moving to SE Asia were the ancestors of
    orangutans . . . ?

    That is one logical possibility, but put the miocene ape expansion center around the southern Black Sea
    The exact geographical location of this supposed
    event is entirely beside the point.

    No, not in Swiss Alps nor Norway, but Germany, Austria, Bulgaria, Hungary, Greece, Spain had fossils but the expansion probably spread out from the Black Sea region.

    Which is that
    species do not evolve -- for no particular reason --
    at great cost and over much time, new body
    plans.

    They do when it is advantageous.


    Giraffes didn't get long necks so that they could
    survey the country better, and then discover
    that they could eat the leaves of high trees.
    Scorpions didn't evolve stinging tails to impress
    potential mates, and then discover that they
    were handy for killing prey and scaring off
    potential predators . . etc., etc.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From I Envy JTEM@21:1/5 to Paul Crowley on Mon Dec 27 23:50:21 2021
    Checkmate...

    Paul Crowley wrote:

    I Envy JTEM wrote:

    Where do gorillas fit in?

    Saying "Apes can't swim" is debunked.

    I never said it. I said gibbons can't swim.

    : So our monkey ancestors certainly could
    : swim -- as well as any monkeys today. But apes can't.

    Although it doesn't come down to a sentence here or there.
    It is what you entire post is about -- this stupid claim -- and
    you're not even aware of what you said.

    Damn.

    Sure you lack reading comprehension but, DAMN! THESE ARE
    YOUR OWN WORDS, YOUR OWN POST that you can't
    comprehend!

    Are you a bot r genuinely retarded?


    -- --

    https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/671765524639825920/

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_l@21:1/5 to I Envy JTEM on Tue Dec 28 07:35:23 2021
    On Tuesday, December 28, 2021 at 2:50:22 AM UTC-5, I Envy JTEM wrote:
    Checkmate...
    Paul Crowley wrote:

    I Envy JTEM wrote:

    Where do gorillas fit in?

    Saying "Apes can't swim" is debunked.

    I never said it. I said gibbons can't swim.
    : So our monkey ancestors certainly could
    : swim -- as well as any monkeys today. But apes can't.
    Although it doesn't come down to a sentence here or there.
    It is what you entire post is about -- this stupid claim -- and
    you're not even aware of what you said.

    Damn.

    Sure you lack reading comprehension but, DAMN! THESE ARE
    YOUR OWN WORDS, YOUR OWN POST that you can't
    comprehend!

    Are you a bot r genuinely retarded?


    -- --

    https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/671765524639825920/
    r.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paul Crowley@21:1/5 to All on Tue Dec 28 14:51:46 2021
    On Tuesday 28 December 2021 at 07:44:47 UTC, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:

    Which is that
    species do not evolve -- for no particular reason --
    at great cost and over much time, new body
    plans.

    They do when it is advantageous.

    Simply not true. Maybe it would be
    advantageous for pigs to fly. But they
    are never going to evolve the necessary
    wings.

    The costs are always relevant. It's easy
    to see the costs to a monkey of evolving
    an ape body shape. You don't posit any
    significant advantages -- while ignoring
    the one in front of your eyes.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paul Crowley@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Tue Dec 28 14:48:37 2021
    On Tuesday 28 December 2021 at 07:08:21 UTC, [email protected] wrote:

    When a small monkey evolved into a gibbon,
    around 25 ma,

    small??
    Hylobatids have rel.long gestation: this suggests larger ancestors.

    A very thin branch on which to hang such a
    weighty conclusion.

    Hylobatids live at least twice as long as most
    monkeys. Maturation times are also roughly
    double. The slow maturation and slow
    gestation suggest that the necessary levels
    of skill (and knowledge?) are much harder
    to acquire.

    1. From studies of both wild and captive animals, gibbons are thought
    to reach sexual maturity at about 6 to 8 years of age, and the siamang (Hylobates syndactylus) at about 8 to 9 years. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31952414/

    2. Age at puberty is given, and some variation discussed. The talapoin,
    a very small monkey, becomes adult at 4½ years for females, 1 or 2
    years later for males. The patas, a rather large monkey, becomes adult
    at 2½ years, for females, and 1 or 2 years later for males. https://www.karger.com/Article/Pdf/155792

    This didn't matter much
    at the time, since it was in the high canopy,

    No, no, Pauli, it was in the very low canopy.

    If they'd lived in the low canopy, they'd have
    encountered bodies of water much more
    often and retained their ability to swim.

    Hylobatid brachiation evolved probably much later, after contact with
    pongids

    Since this is what you've always assumed,
    why then, it must be true.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paul Crowley@21:1/5 to All on Tue Dec 28 14:50:18 2021
    On Tuesday 28 December 2021 at 07:39:39 UTC, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:

    All today's fast lateral brachiators evolved from slow lateral
    brachiators which also climbed vertically.

    What is the basis for this claim?

    (Other than it being the lazy assumption
    of a lot of PA professors, who got it from
    their professors, who got it from their
    professors, who got it from their
    professors . . . .)

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paul Crowley@21:1/5 to I Envy JTEM on Tue Dec 28 14:53:41 2021
    On Tuesday 28 December 2021 at 07:50:22 UTC, I Envy JTEM wrote:

    Checkmate...

    This is what happens when you ignore the
    cardinal rule: "Never wrestle with a pig".

    Saying "Apes can't swim" is debunked.

    I never said it. I said gibbons can't swim.

    : So our monkey ancestors certainly could
    : swim -- as well as any monkeys today. But apes can't.

    To say that it's disproved because humans can swim
    (your line) is to take it out of context -- in numerous
    ways. First, I was talking about the first apes
    (including gibbons) and asking why none of them
    can swim -- not about modern ones. Second --
    and I admit I went wrong in my response --
    unlike almost all other terrestrial animals (incl.
    primates) apes (including humans) CAN'T SWIM
    -- without special training. All other animals are
    born with swimming ability, and need no training.

    This lack of an ability, instinctual in almost all
    terrestrial animals, needs an explanation.

    Although it doesn't come down to a sentence here or there.
    It is what you entire post is about -- this stupid claim -- and
    you're not even aware of what you said.

    The thread is called "Apes and Swimming".
    Your 'contribution' to it is as pointless as ever.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_l@21:1/5 to All on Tue Dec 28 16:12:27 2021
    On Tuesday, December 28, 2021 at 2:44:47 AM UTC-5, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
    On Monday, December 27, 2021 at 11:09:56 AM UTC-5, Paul Crowley wrote:
    On Monday, December 27, 2021 at 1:07:18 AM UTC, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:

    So you're saying
    A) That European miocene apes evolved from
    monkeys and were the first apes, and that
    they were first primates to develop
    brachiation . . . ?

    B) That this was SLOW brachiation . . .?

    C) That they did this BEFORE some migrated
    to SE Asia, where some descendants evolved
    FAST brachiation and became gibbons . . . ?

    D) That those remaining in Europe were the
    ancestors of gorillas and chimps, while those
    moving to SE Asia were the ancestors of
    orangutans . . . ?

    That is one logical possibility, but put the miocene ape expansion center around the southern Black Sea
    The exact geographical location of this supposed
    event is entirely beside the point.
    No, not in Swiss Alps nor Norway, but Germany, Austria, Bulgaria, Hungary, Greece, Spain had fossils but the expansion probably spread out from the Black Sea region.
    Which is that
    species do not evolve -- for no particular reason --
    at great cost and over much time, new body
    plans.
    They do when it is advantageous.

    Giraffes didn't get long necks so that they could
    survey the country better, and then discover
    that they could eat the leaves of high trees.
    Scorpions didn't evolve stinging tails to impress
    potential mates, and then discover that they
    were handy for killing prey and scaring off
    potential predators . . etc., etc.

    I realized I wasn't really answering your deeper question about brachiation and swimming. I've got a new Motorola cell phone coming, I'll respond when its activated. My current phone is corrupted, constantly need to fix keyboard errors.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From I Envy JTEM@21:1/5 to Paul Crowley on Tue Dec 28 19:38:54 2021
    Paul Crowley wrote:

    This is what happens when you ignore the
    cardinal rule: "Never wrestle with a pig".

    You're not a pig you're a bot, posting gibberish.

    To say that it's disproved because humans can swim

    Apes can swim. Humans, yes, but even Chimps are known to
    swim.

    https://www.newscientist.com/gallery/orang-utan-water/

    Oops.

    But even a single example of an ape swimming falsifies the
    ridiculous claim that apes can't swim.




    -- --

    https://rumble.com/vqwxtc-the-worst-of-watch-this-volume-ii.html

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From [email protected]@21:1/5 to All on Wed Dec 29 04:16:35 2021
    Op dinsdag 28 december 2021 om 23:48:38 UTC+1 schreef Paul Crowley:

    When a small monkey evolved into a gibbon,
    around 25 ma,

    No monkey ever evolved into a gibbon.
    Cercopithecoid/hominoid ? c 30 Ma.

    small??
    Hylobatids have rel.long gestation: this suggests larger ancestors.

    A very thin branch on which to hang such a
    weighty conclusion.
    Hylobatids live at least twice as long as most
    monkeys. Maturation times are also roughly
    double.

    Yes, early hominoids were much larger.

    The slow maturation and slow
    gestation suggest that the necessary levels
    of skill (and knowledge?) are much harder
    to acquire.

    Wishful thinking.

    1. From studies of both wild and captive animals, gibbons are thought
    to reach sexual maturity at about 6 to 8 years of age, and the siamang (Hylobates syndactylus) at about 8 to 9 years. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31952414/ >
    2. Age at puberty is given, and some variation discussed. The talapoin,
    a very small monkey, becomes adult at 4½ years for females, 1 or 2
    years later for males. The patas, a rather large monkey, becomes adult
    at 2½ years, for females, and 1 or 2 years later for males. https://www.karger.com/Article/Pdf/155792

    Fine, confirms my view.

    This didn't matter much
    at the time, since it was in the high canopy,

    No, no, Pauli, it was in the very low canopy.

    If they'd lived in the low canopy, they'd have
    encountered bodies of water much more
    often and retained their ability to swim.

    Homonid/pongid c 15 Ma (= Mesopotamian Seaway closure??):
    hylobatids had >10 My to lose swimming abilities.



    Hylobatid brachiation evolved probably much later, after contact with pongids

    Since this is what you've always assumed,
    why then, it must be true.

    Of course, obvious to anybody with a little bit of biological insight: hominoids (vs monkeys):
    -tail loss (coccyx in pelvic bottom)
    -central (not dorsal) spine
    -very wide sternum (Latisternalia)
    -very wide thorax = upright
    -very wide pelvis
    -arms & legs laterally-directed (not ventrally)
    -found on islands
    -etc.
    IOW, they were not pronograde,
    the trunk didn't hang from the spine as in cercopiths,
    but a centrally-placed spine held the body upright:
    early hominoids were often vertical & not exclusively arboreal (e.g. no tail): already 30 yrs ago, I proposed they were aquarboreal = confirmed in the 1990s:
    -lowland gorillas wading sedges,
    -bonobos wading for waterlilies,
    -later also orangs wading,
    google "ape human evolution made easy PPT verhaegen".

    One problem:
    how aquatic were early hominoids?
    very, or only a bit more aquarboreal than extant bonobos?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paul Crowley@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Thu Dec 30 02:53:01 2021
    On Wednesday 29 December 2021 at 12:16:36 UTC, [email protected] wrote:

    When a small monkey evolved into a gibbon,
    around 25 ma,

    No monkey ever evolved into a gibbon.

    I presume you're implying "not directly
    evolved". Gibbons had (at some point)
    ancestors that were monkeys.

    Cercopithecoid/hominoid ? c 30 Ma.

    Not a sentence in English. Are you trying to
    say something?

    early hominoids were much larger.

    How do you know? Or is this just an evidence-free
    belief?

    The slow maturation and slow
    gestation suggest that the necessary levels
    of skill (and knowledge?) are much harder
    to acquire.

    Wishful thinking.

    Not so. Maturation periods are a part of
    the normal selection process, and are as long
    as they need to be. A family (or population)
    that can have successful offspring, which
    mature in (say) 6 years, will do better than
    one that takes 6.5 years. It will produce
    more grandchildren, and more in successive
    generations.

    1. From studies of both wild and captive animals, gibbons are thought
    to reach sexual maturity at about 6 to 8 years of age, and the siamang
    (Hylobates syndactylus) at about 8 to 9 years.
    https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31952414/ >
    2. Age at puberty is given, and some variation discussed. The talapoin,
    a very small monkey, becomes adult at 4½ years for females, 1 or 2
    years later for males. The patas, a rather large monkey, becomes adult
    at 2½ years, for females, and 1 or 2 years later for males.
    https://www.karger.com/Article/Pdf/155792

    Fine, confirms my view.

    Every paragraph in every publication (incl
    https://weeklyworldnews.com/
    will 'confirm your view'. It's what happens
    when you stop trying to be objective.

    This didn't matter much
    at the time, since it was in the high canopy,

    No, no, Pauli, it was in the very low canopy.

    If they'd lived in the low canopy, they'd have
    encountered bodies of water much more
    often and retained their ability to swim.

    Homonid/pongid c 15 Ma (= Mesopotamian Seaway closure??):

    Is that supposed to be an answer?

    hylobatids had >10 My to lose swimming abilities.

    We are not talking only about hylobatids,
    but about apes generally (including humans).
    A distinctive feature of every species of
    Hominoidea is the lack of an instinctive
    capacity to swim. It's present in almost all
    other terrestrial animals, including primates.
    It was lost at some point -- most likely at the
    origin of the taxon.

    Why was it lost?

    Hylobatid brachiation evolved probably much later, after contact with
    pongids

    Since this is what you've always assumed,
    why then, it must be true.

    No answer.

    Of course, obvious to anybody with a little bit of biological insight: hominoids (vs monkeys):
    -tail loss (coccyx in pelvic bottom)
    -central (not dorsal) spine
    -very wide sternum (Latisternalia)
    -very wide thorax = upright
    -very wide pelvis
    -arms & legs laterally-directed (not ventrally)
    -found on islands
    -etc.
    IOW, they were not pronograde,
    the trunk didn't hang from the spine as in cercopiths,
    but a centrally-placed spine held the body upright:
    early hominoids were often vertical & not exclusively arboreal (e.g. no tail):

    Why recite all this again?
    Prayers are not a part of normal science.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From [email protected]@21:1/5 to All on Fri Dec 31 01:55:41 2021
    ... snipped Pauli's usual blabla

    Of course, obvious to anybody with a little bit of biological insight: hominoids (vs monkeys):
    -tail loss (coccyx in pelvic bottom)
    -central (not dorsal) spine
    -very wide sternum (Latisternalia)
    -very wide thorax = upright
    -very wide pelvis
    -arms & legs laterally-directed (not ventrally)
    -found on islands
    -etc.
    IOW, they were not pronograde,
    the trunk didn't hang from the spine as in cercopiths,
    but a centrally-placed spine held the body upright:
    early hominoids were often vertical & not exclusively arboreal (e.g. no tail):

    Why recite all this again?

    Because you're miserably incapable of answering this. :-D

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Primum Sapienti@21:1/5 to All on Fri Dec 31 22:44:09 2021
    DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
    On Thursday, December 23, 2021 at 6:09:57 PM UTC-5, Paul Crowley wrote:

    See vertical climber: https://youtu.be/Gregory

    Darn, video not available anymore.

    Lateral swinging habitually selected against pronograde swimming, and supplanted it over wooded streams.
    Laryngeal air sacs may have enlarged as upright floats to keep head above surface and grasping branches became an alternative to swimming in larger apes.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paul Crowley@21:1/5 to All on Tue Jan 4 13:01:03 2022
    On Sunday 26 December 2021 at 14:20:31 UTC, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:

    So our monkey ancestors certainly could
    swim -- as well as any monkeys today. But apes can't.
    So when and why did that happen? What were the
    selective advantages in losing that ability?

    See vertical climber: https://youtu.be/Gregory

    Has been removed from youtube

    Lateral swinging habitually selected against pronograde
    swimming, and supplanted it over wooded streams.

    This is nonsense. The loss of an inherited
    ability (going back to the first mammals)
    is a major event. 'Lateral swinging' is not
    going to remove it.

    There was a major evolutionary event in
    the ape taxon which selected against
    swimming. What was it?

    Laryngeal air sacs may have enlarged as upright floats to keep
    head above surface and grasping branches became an alternative
    to swimming in larger apes.

    Just silly. Larger apes will encounter bodies of
    water regularly in their daily lives. Often there
    will be food (and other resources) on an island
    in a lake or river, or on the other side of a river.
    Often there will be plants in the water they find
    edible, or which contain vital elements (such a
    iodine). When populations need to move,
    migration over a river or other body of water is
    often highly desirable. They'll fall into water
    (by accident) at least once in their lifetimes, on
    average.

    Crocs.

    All other primates can see, and usually avoid
    crocs.

    The European miocene apes (quasi-hylobatids) could
    probably still swim while evolving slow brachiation, but those in
    tropical Africa/Asia became non-swimmers.

    Why the difference?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_l@21:1/5 to Paul Crowley on Tue Jan 4 22:58:20 2022
    On Tuesday, January 4, 2022 at 4:01:04 PM UTC-5, Paul Crowley wrote:
    On Sunday 26 December 2021 at 14:20:31 UTC, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:

    So our monkey ancestors certainly could
    swim -- as well as any monkeys today. But apes can't.
    So when and why did that happen? What were the
    selective advantages in losing that ability?

    See vertical climber: https://youtu.be/Gregory
    Has been removed from youtube
    Lateral swinging habitually selected against pronograde
    swimming, and supplanted it over wooded streams.
    This is nonsense. The loss of an inherited
    ability (going back to the first mammals)
    is a major event. 'Lateral swinging' is not
    going to remove it.

    Vertical climbing requires lateral mobility: qpal/bpal walk or swim or swing.

    There was a major evolutionary event in
    the ape taxon which selected against
    swimming. What was it?
    Slow swinging, loss of arb. leaping/terr. walking laterally.

    Laryngeal air sacs may have enlarged as upright floats to keep
    head above surface and grasping branches became an alternative
    to swimming in larger apes.
    Just silly. Larger apes will encounter bodies of
    water regularly in their daily lives.

    Swinging reduced swimming in miocene apes.

    Often there
    will be food (and other resources) on an island
    in a lake or river, or on the other side of a river.

    They did not eat them.

    Often there will be plants in the water they find
    edible, or which contain vital elements (such a
    iodine). When populations need to move,
    migration over a river or other body of water is
    often highly desirable. They'll fall into water
    (by accident) at least once in their lifetimes, on
    average.

    Crocs.

    All other primates can see, and usually avoid
    crocs.

    So?

    The European miocene apes (quasi-hylobatids) could
    probably still swim while evolving slow brachiation, but those in
    tropical Africa/Asia became non-swimmers.
    Why the difference?

    Increased arbor-aerial locomotion = decreased aquatic locomotion.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From I Envy JTEM@21:1/5 to All on Thu Mar 3 02:11:50 2022
    DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:

    I realized I wasn't really answering your deeper question about brachiation and swimming. I've got a new Motorola cell phone coming, I'll respond when its activated. My current phone is corrupted, constantly need to fix keyboard errors.

    https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/677696735946145792

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_l@21:1/5 to All on Thu Mar 3 09:40:38 2022
    On Tuesday, December 28, 2021 at 7:12:28 PM UTC-5, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
    On Tuesday, December 28, 2021 at 2:44:47 AM UTC-5, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
    On Monday, December 27, 2021 at 11:09:56 AM UTC-5, Paul Crowley wrote:
    On Monday, December 27, 2021 at 1:07:18 AM UTC, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:

    So you're saying
    A) That European miocene apes evolved from
    monkeys and were the first apes, and that
    they were first primates to develop
    brachiation . . . ?

    B) That this was SLOW brachiation . . .?

    C) That they did this BEFORE some migrated
    to SE Asia, where some descendants evolved
    FAST brachiation and became gibbons . . . ?

    D) That those remaining in Europe were the
    ancestors of gorillas and chimps, while those
    moving to SE Asia were the ancestors of
    orangutans . . . ?

    That is one logical possibility, but put the miocene ape expansion center around the southern Black Sea
    The exact geographical location of this supposed
    event is entirely beside the point.
    No, not in Swiss Alps nor Norway, but Germany, Austria, Bulgaria, Hungary, Greece, Spain had fossils but the expansion probably spread out from the Black Sea region.
    Which is that
    species do not evolve -- for no particular reason --
    at great cost and over much time, new body
    plans.
    They do when it is advantageous.

    Giraffes didn't get long necks so that they could
    survey the country better, and then discover
    that they could eat the leaves of high trees.
    Scorpions didn't evolve stinging tails to impress
    potential mates, and then discover that they
    were handy for killing prey and scaring off
    potential predators . . etc., etc.
    I realized I wasn't really answering your deeper question about brachiation and swimming. I've got a new Motorola cell phone coming, I'll respond when its activated. My current phone is corrupted, constantly need to fix keyboard errors.
    I'll let PC re-ask the question. My phone is great.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paul Crowley@21:1/5 to All on Sat Mar 5 12:49:47 2022
    On Thursday 3 March 2022 at 17:40:39 UTC, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:

    Which is that
    species do not evolve -- for no particular reason --
    at great cost and over much time, new body
    plans.

    They do when it is advantageous.

    Giraffes didn't get long necks so that they could
    survey the country better, and then discover
    that they could eat the leaves of high trees

    I realized I wasn't really answering your deeper question about brachiation >> and swimming. I've got a new Motorola cell phone coming, I'll respond
    when its activated. My current phone is corrupted, constantly need to fix
    keyboard errors.

    I'll let PC re-ask the question. My phone is great.

    The initial question was "Why can't apes swim?"
    That leads to others, such as: "How did the ape
    taxon form?"

    Unlike nearly every other terrestrial vertebrate,
    they are not born with that capacity. Some
    (e.g. humans) can acquire the skill with
    training.

    You say that 'slow climbing' (or some such)
    did it -- while admitting that those behaviours
    are common among monkeys none of which
    lost their ability to swim (nor evolved
    brachiation, centralised spines,flat chests, etc.).

    The loss of swimming abiilty might seem fairly
    minor but, since it's virtually unknown among
    reptiles and mammals, it can't be. I suggest
    that it arose in apes in a similar manner to the
    loss of flying ability in many species of island
    birds. They evolve a distaste for flying over
    water since, in strong winds, they can get
    blown away over the sea and can't get back.
    Likewise, gibbons almost certainly evolved on
    an island in South-East Asia surrounded by
    fast-flowing rivers. Swimming was likely to
    have the same effect. They learnt to avoid
    bodies of water.

    Clearly the loss of this ability came in at the
    inception of the ape taxon, along with the
    large number of radical morphological changes
    (including -- as a minor matter --the loss of the
    tail). Chests became wide and flat instead of
    narrow and deep; shoulder joints moved to the
    top corners of the chest, the scapulae moved
    from the side of the chest to the back.
    Shoulder joints became much stronger and
    more flexible.

    As the rivers changed course, the first
    population of gibbons was able to spread to
    other areas, and become a diverse taxon. Some
    of its species became larger (as we see with
    modern siamangs) and found new niches lower
    in the canopy, eventually finding their way to
    Europe and Africa.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_l@21:1/5 to Paul Crowley on Sat Mar 5 14:10:37 2022
    On Saturday, March 5, 2022 at 3:49:48 PM UTC-5, Paul Crowley wrote:
    On Thursday 3 March 2022 at 17:40:39 UTC, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:

    Which is that
    species do not evolve -- for no particular reason --
    at great cost and over much time, new body
    plans.

    They do when it is advantageous.

    Giraffes didn't get long necks so that they could
    survey the country better, and then discover
    that they could eat the leaves of high trees
    I realized I wasn't really answering your deeper question about brachiation
    and swimming. I've got a new Motorola cell phone coming, I'll respond
    when its activated. My current phone is corrupted, constantly need to fix >> keyboard errors.

    I'll let PC re-ask the question. My phone is great.
    The initial question was "Why can't apes swim?"

    Apes /hominoids evolved vertical upright climbing and lateral upright slow brachiation and arboreal upright bipedal locomotion, their hands and feet specialized for grasping, hook-like features gradually increased but weren't present yet, and swimming
    became less and less useful. Laryngeal air sacs developed as a result of panic-stimuli (dominance upper body inflated, vocal hyperventilation prevention, and probably arboreal falls producing water upper-body/face-up flotation rather than pronograde
    swimming posture.

    That leads to others, such as: "How did the ape
    taxon form?"

    Unlike nearly every other terrestrial vertebrate,
    they are not born with that capacity. Some
    (e.g. humans) can acquire the skill with
    training.

    Homo split from other hominoids ~6ma becoming forest floor dwellers due to the chromosome inversion and inverted their shelters and their body's limb lengths, and lost their small? air sacs because loud vocal & upper-body displays became less significant
    than quiet speech and leg power in lateral upright bipedalism with carrying toddlers/shelters/tools.

    You say that 'slow climbing'

    I never mentioned 'slow climbing' before, just upright vertical climbing and slow brachiation in early hominoids, further specialized by today's great apes. No Old World Monkey had these traits, being primarily pronograde terrestrially, arboreally and
    aquatically

    (or some such)
    did it -- while admitting that those behaviours
    are common among monkeys none of which
    lost their ability to swim (nor evolved
    brachiation, centralised spines,flat chests, etc.).

    The loss of swimming abiilty might seem fairly
    minor but, since it's virtually unknown among
    reptiles and mammals, it can't be. I suggest
    that it arose in apes in a similar manner to the
    loss of flying ability in many species of island
    birds. They evolve a distaste for flying over
    water since, in strong winds, they can get
    blown away over the sea and can't get back.
    Likewise, gibbons almost certainly evolved on
    an island in South-East Asia surrounded by
    fast-flowing rivers. Swimming was likely to
    have the same effect. They learnt to avoid
    bodies of water.

    Gibbons primary habitat is rainforest along shallow streams, not large rivers, though that may be a result of immigration of monkey troops foraging along rivers.

    Contd


    Clearly the loss of this ability came in at the
    inception of the ape taxon, along with the
    large number of radical morphological changes
    (including -- as a minor matter --the loss of the
    tail). Chests became wide and flat instead of
    narrow and deep; shoulder joints moved to the
    top corners of the chest, the scapulae moved
    from the side of the chest to the back.
    Shoulder joints became much stronger and
    more flexible.

    As the rivers changed course, the first
    population of gibbons was able to spread to
    other areas, and become a diverse taxon. Some
    of its species became larger (as we see with
    modern siamangs) and found new niches lower
    in the canopy, eventually finding their way to
    Europe and Africa.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_l@21:1/5 to All on Sat Mar 5 16:40:33 2022
    On Saturday, March 5, 2022 at 5:10:38 PM UTC-5, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
    On Saturday, March 5, 2022 at 3:49:48 PM UTC-5, Paul Crowley wrote:
    On Thursday 3 March 2022 at 17:40:39 UTC, DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:

    Which is that
    species do not evolve -- for no particular reason --
    at great cost and over much time, new body
    plans.

    They do when it is advantageous.

    Giraffes didn't get long necks so that they could
    survey the country better, and then discover
    that they could eat the leaves of high trees
    I realized I wasn't really answering your deeper question about brachiation
    and swimming. I've got a new Motorola cell phone coming, I'll respond >> when its activated. My current phone is corrupted, constantly need to fix
    keyboard errors.

    I'll let PC re-ask the question. My phone is great.
    The initial question was "Why can't apes swim?"
    Apes /hominoids evolved vertical upright climbing and lateral upright slow brachiation and arboreal upright bipedal locomotion, their hands and feet specialized for grasping, hook-like features gradually increased but weren't present yet, and swimming
    became less and less useful. Laryngeal air sacs developed as a result of panic-stimuli (dominance upper body inflated, vocal hyperventilation prevention, and probably arboreal falls producing water upper-body/face-up flotation rather than pronograde
    swimming posture.
    That leads to others, such as: "How did the ape
    taxon form?"

    Unlike nearly every other terrestrial vertebrate,
    they are not born with that capacity. Some
    (e.g. humans) can acquire the skill with
    training.
    Homo split from other hominoids ~6ma becoming forest floor dwellers due to the chromosome inversion and inverted their shelters and their body's limb lengths, and lost their small? air sacs because loud vocal & upper-body displays became less
    significant than quiet speech and leg power in lateral upright bipedalism with carrying toddlers/shelters/tools.

    You say that 'slow climbing'
    I never mentioned 'slow climbing' before, just upright vertical climbing and slow brachiation in early hominoids, further specialized by today's great apes. No Old World Monkey had these traits, being primarily pronograde terrestrially, arboreally and
    aquatically
    (or some such)
    did it -- while admitting that those behaviours
    are common among monkeys none of which
    lost their ability to swim (nor evolved
    brachiation, centralised spines,flat chests, etc.).

    The loss of swimming abiilty might seem fairly
    minor but, since it's virtually unknown among
    reptiles and mammals, it can't be. I suggest
    that it arose in apes in a similar manner to the
    loss of flying ability in many species of island
    birds. They evolve a distaste for flying over
    water since, in strong winds, they can get
    blown away over the sea and can't get back.
    Likewise, gibbons almost certainly evolved on
    an island in South-East Asia surrounded by
    fast-flowing rivers. Swimming was likely to
    have the same effect. They learnt to avoid
    bodies of water.
    Gibbons primary habitat is rainforest along shallow streams, not large rivers, though that may be a result of immigration of monkey troops foraging along rivers.

    Contd

    You contend that isolated/islanded apes and avians were selected against transit through (fast/strong) (air/water) currents, and this resulted in morphological/behavioral/genetic evolution diverging from their ancestral patterns.
    There are many species of flightless cranes occupying islands, though they resemble each other, their closest kin are flighted cranes, not similar flightless cranes on other islands (usually, some exceptions). Afaik, gibbon species have different
    chromosome counts, so at least there, this might agree with your claim. But great apes share the same count of 48 chromosomes, suggesting a non-islanded situation.

    Clearly the loss of this ability came in at the
    inception of the ape taxon, along with the
    large number of radical morphological changes
    (including -- as a minor matter --the loss of the
    tail).

    The crab eating macaque, the oyster eating capuchin, the brachiating spider monkey and the swimming proboscis monkey all have very long tails.

    Chests became wide and flat instead of
    narrow and deep;

    Many semi-aquatics partly share this, not deep nor flat, but rounded and broad

    shoulder joints moved to the
    top corners of the chest, the scapulae moved
    from the side of the chest to the back.
    Shoulder joints became much stronger and
    more flexible.

    Surely adaptations selected for by vertical upright climbing & slow brachiation, arboreal foraging and sleeping. But plausibly associated with anti-swimming evolution. (Complementing laryngeal air sac enlargement not seen in monkeys).

    As the rivers changed course, the first
    population of gibbons was able to spread to
    other areas, and become a diverse taxon. Some
    of its species became larger (as we see with
    modern siamangs) and found new niches lower
    in the canopy, eventually finding their way to
    Europe and Africa.

    The oldest fossil gibbon is from India iirc, and some similar (later?) fossils in Europe.
    At this time, due to paucity of fossils, it is hard to accept or test any claims.
    Yours is not merely fantasy, there is logical structure and some potentially supporting evidence.
    DD

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)