1. Forum
  2. Usenet
  3. SCI.ANTHROPOLOGY.PALEO

  • savanna nonsense

    From [email protected]@21:1/5 to All on Thu Nov 17 09:38:23 2022
    Professor Phillip Tobias (who held the chair of Raymond Dart) was initially sympathetic to the savannah model, but in 1995, he exclaimed: “We were all profoundly and unutterably wrong! ... Open the window and throw out the savannah hypothesis; it’s
    dead and we need a new paradigm ... All the former savannah supporters (including myself) must now swallow our earlier words in the light of the new results from the early hominid deposits.” (Tobias, 1995).

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From JTEM is so reasonable@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Thu Nov 17 14:02:20 2022
    [email protected] wrote:

    Professor Phillip Tobias (who held the chair of Raymond Dart) was initially sympathetic to the savannah model, but in 1995, he exclaimed: “We were
    all profoundly and unutterably wrong! ... Open the window and throw out
    the savannah hypothesis; it’s dead and we need a new paradigm ... All the former savannah supporters (including myself) must now swallow our
    earlier words in the light of the new results from the early hominid deposits.” (Tobias, 1995).

    The only thing more difficult than learning is unlearning. That's the curse of savanna idiocy: We all learned it first!

    We have to unlearn it before we can learn something better...

    Me? That's my life. My whole life I've been presented with ideas I was FORCED to challenge, to test. So it's nothing new to me. It was never about "Learning" an idea like savanna idiocy, it was about modeling -- getting all the pieces to fit.

    Everything fits Aquatic Ape. Everything. While savanna idiocy leaves us asking a boat load of unanswered questions. Like...

    #1.

    How does savanna idiocy account for all the separate, distinct Homo populations (Neanderthal, Denisovan, etc)?

    It doesn't.

    How does Aquatic Ape account for/explain them?

    Easy: Periodically, groups pushed inland, settled & adapted to their new and distinct environments, resulting in new and distinct populations of Homo.

    #2.

    How does savanna idiocy even get Homo to all these different far-flung points?

    It doesn't. They couldn't carry a savanna around with them, to feed.

    How does Aquatic Ape account for/explain get them there?

    It's inescapable! They were on the coastline, waterside, consuming resources and then moving on for proverbial "Greener Pastures" (more fertile beaches) when pickings grew slim. Eventually they were going to cross continents, each everywhere...

    Aquatic Ape explains what we know. Savanna idiocy can't.





    -- --

    https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/701137037768753152

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_l@21:1/5 to JTEM is so reasonable on Thu Nov 17 15:02:26 2022
    On Thursday, November 17, 2022 at 5:02:22 PM UTC-5, JTEM is so reasonable wrote:
    [email protected] wrote:

    Professor Phillip Tobias (who held the chair of Raymond Dart) was initially
    sympathetic to the savannah model, but in 1995, he exclaimed: “We were all profoundly and unutterably wrong! ... Open the window and throw out the savannah hypothesis; it’s dead and we need a new paradigm ... All the
    former savannah supporters (including myself) must now swallow our
    earlier words in the light of the new results from the early hominid deposits.” (Tobias, 1995).
    The only thing more difficult than learning is unlearning. That's the curse of
    savanna idiocy: We all learned it first!

    We have to unlearn it before we can learn something better...

    Me? That's my life. My whole life I've been presented with ideas I was FORCED
    to challenge, to test. So it's nothing new to me. It was never about "Learning"
    an idea like savanna idiocy, it was about modeling -- getting all the pieces to fit.

    Everything fits Aquatic Ape. Everything. While savanna idiocy leaves us asking
    a boat load of unanswered questions. Like...

    #1.

    How does savanna idiocy account for all the separate, distinct Homo populations
    (Neanderthal, Denisovan, etc)?

    It doesn't.

    How does Aquatic Ape account for/explain them?

    Easy: Periodically, groups pushed inland, settled & adapted to their new and distinct environments, resulting in new and distinct populations of Homo.

    #2.

    How does savanna idiocy even get Homo to all these different far-flung points?

    It doesn't. They couldn't carry a savanna around with them, to feed.

    How does Aquatic Ape account for/explain get them there?

    It's inescapable! They were on the coastline, waterside, consuming resources and then moving on for proverbial "Greener Pastures" (more fertile beaches) when pickings grew slim. Eventually they were going to cross continents, each
    everywhere...

    Aquatic Ape explains what we know. Savanna idiocy can't.





    -- --

    https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/701137037768753152
    GIGO.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From JTEM is so reasonable@21:1/5 to All on Thu Nov 17 15:28:50 2022
    DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:

    [...]


    Proving you have no idea what "GIGO" means and how to use it
    is NOT as effective an "Argument" as you clearly believe it to be.





    -- --

    https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/701137037768753152

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_l@21:1/5 to JTEM is so reasonable on Thu Nov 17 17:36:54 2022
    On Thursday, November 17, 2022 at 6:28:51 PM UTC-5, JTEM is so reasonable wrote:
    DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:

    [...]


    Proving you have no idea what "GIGO" means and how to use it
    is NOT as effective an "Argument" as you clearly believe it to be.





    -- --

    https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/701137037768753152
    GIGO.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From JTEM is so reasonable@21:1/5 to All on Thu Nov 17 19:33:06 2022
    DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:

    GIGO.

    If you're not going to take your meds can you at least start your own
    thread, where you and your OCD can post "GIGO" 80 or 372 times
    in succession, getting it out of your system, and leaving it to the
    grownup to talk?

    Thanks in advance.





    -- --

    https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/701137037768753152

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Pandora@21:1/5 to [email protected] on Fri Nov 18 11:46:17 2022
    On Thu, 17 Nov 2022 09:38:23 -0800 (PST), "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:

    Professor Phillip Tobias (who held the chair of Raymond Dart) was initially sympathetic
    to the savannah model, but in 1995, he exclaimed: �We were all profoundly and unutterably
    wrong! ... Open the window and throw out the savannah hypothesis; it�s dead and we need
    a new paradigm ... All the former savannah supporters (including myself) must now swallow
    our earlier words in the light of the new results from the early hominid deposits.� (Tobias, 1995).

    Professor Manuel Dominguez-Rodrigo in 2014: "the savanna hypothesis
    not only has not been falsified but its heuristics are stronger than
    ever before."
    https://sci-hub.se/10.1086/674530

    See also:
    https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108961646

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_l@21:1/5 to Pandora on Fri Nov 18 09:20:47 2022
    On Friday, November 18, 2022 at 5:46:19 AM UTC-5, Pandora wrote:
    On Thu, 17 Nov 2022 09:38:23 -0800 (PST), "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:

    Professor Phillip Tobias (who held the chair of Raymond Dart) was initially sympathetic
    to the savannah model, but in 1995, he exclaimed: “We were all profoundly and unutterably
    wrong! ... Open the window and throw out the savannah hypothesis; it’s dead and we need
    a new paradigm ... All the former savannah supporters (including myself) must now swallow
    our earlier words in the light of the new results from the early hominid deposits.” (Tobias, 1995).
    Professor Manuel Dominguez-Rodrigo in 2014: "the savanna hypothesis
    not only has not been falsified but its heuristics are stronger than
    ever before."
    https://sci-hub.se/10.1086/674530

    See also:
    https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108961646
    Savanna(h) originally meant 'tree-less grassland', which could include seasonal sedge wetlands and/or a few shrubby trees.
    These days it can mean almost anything but completely closed canopy forest, as long as some grass is present.
    Doesn't matter, hominoids became bipedal while arboreal.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From [email protected]@21:1/5 to All on Fri Nov 18 14:05:51 2022
    Op vrijdag 18 november 2022 om 18:20:49 UTC+1 schreef DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves:


    Professor Phillip Tobias (who held the chair of Raymond Dart) was initially sympathetic
    to the savannah model, but in 1995, he exclaimed: “We were all profoundly and unutterably
    wrong! ... Open the window and throw out the savannah hypothesis; it’s dead and we need
    a new paradigm ... All the former savannah supporters (including myself) must now swallow
    our earlier words in the light of the new results from the early hominid deposits.” (Tobias 1995).

    Professor Manuel Dominguez-Rodrigo in 2014: "the savanna hypothesis
    not only has not been falsified but its heuristics are stronger than
    ever before." https://sci-hub.se/10.1086/674530
    See also https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108961646

    Savanna(h) originally meant 'tree-less grassland', which could include seasonal sedge wetlands and/or a few shrubby trees.
    These days it can mean almost anything but completely closed canopy forest, as long as some grass is present.
    Doesn't matter, hominoids became bipedal while arboreal.

    No, my boy: while aquarboreal: wading made them BP = head above the water + grasping branches overhead:
    google "aquarboreal".

    Hominoid evolution is not so difficult in general IMO: plate tectonics:
    -India c 40 Ma approaching Eurasia formed archipelagoes + coastal forests: aqua+arbor:
    Catarrhini reaching these islands of course became more aquarboreal = Hominoidea,
    -India further underneath Eurasia split them into hylobatids (E) & great apes (W) along Tethys Ocean coastal forests,
    -the Mesopotamian Seaway closure c 25 Ma split great apes in the Tethys Sea into dryopiths-hominids (E: along Med.Sea) & sivapiths-pongids (W: S-Asian coastal forests),
    -Messinian Salinity crisis: only the Red Sea hominids survived,
    -Zanclean Flood c 5 Ma opened the Red Sea into the Ind.Ocean?
    -- Pan went right, along the E.Afr.coast ->africanus->robustus->bonobo-chimp, -- Homo went left, along the S.Asian coastal ->Java etc. H.erectus etc.:
    google "coastal dispersal Pleistocene Homo".

    --- 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 Fri Nov 18 14:15:45 2022
    On Friday, November 18, 2022 at 5:05:52 PM UTC-5, [email protected] wrote:
    Op vrijdag 18 november 2022 om 18:20:49 UTC+1 schreef DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves:
    Professor Phillip Tobias (who held the chair of Raymond Dart) was initially sympathetic
    to the savannah model, but in 1995, he exclaimed: “We were all profoundly and unutterably
    wrong! ... Open the window and throw out the savannah hypothesis; it’s dead and we need
    a new paradigm ... All the former savannah supporters (including myself) must now swallow
    our earlier words in the light of the new results from the early hominid deposits.” (Tobias 1995).
    Professor Manuel Dominguez-Rodrigo in 2014: "the savanna hypothesis
    not only has not been falsified but its heuristics are stronger than ever before." https://sci-hub.se/10.1086/674530
    See also https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108961646

    Savanna(h) originally meant 'tree-less grassland', which could include seasonal sedge wetlands and/or a few shrubby trees.
    These days it can mean almost anything but completely closed canopy forest, as long as some grass is present.
    Doesn't matter, hominoids became bipedal while arboreal.
    No, my boy: while aquarboreal: wading made them BP

    Didn't do that for monkeys either, not even proboscis & crab-eater monkeys.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From JTEM is so reasonable@21:1/5 to Pandora on Fri Nov 18 20:37:02 2022
    Pandora wrote:

    Professor Manuel Dominguez-Rodrigo in 2014: "the savanna hypothesis
    not only has not been falsified

    Lol!

    He might as well claim that the moon being made out of green cheese has
    not been falsified... Sheesh!

    And when you figure out that Google thing, do that search on fallacious arguments, try to figure out when one you just posted here, now.

    I'll give you a hint: You're not posting the "Argument" from a perceived authority, you're posting an opinion absent any facts, any reasoning.

    HINT II: "So&So says this is wrong BECAUSE...."

    "So&So says this is wrong BECAUSE" is an argument. "So&So says this
    is wrong" is something an idiot says.



    -- --

    https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/701231935675121664

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From [email protected]@21:1/5 to All on Sat Nov 19 06:37:45 2022
    Professor Phillip Tobias (who held the chair of Raymond Dart) was initially sympathetic
    to the savannah model, but in 1995, he exclaimed: “We were all profoundly and unutterably
    wrong! ... Open the window and throw out the savannah hypothesis; it’s dead and we need
    a new paradigm ... All the former savannah supporters (including myself) must now swallow
    our earlier words in the light of the new results from the early hominid deposits.” (Tobias 1995).

    Some kudu runner:

    Doesn't matter, hominoids became bipedal while arboreal.

    No, my boy: while aquarboreal: wading made them BP ...

    Didn't do that for monkeys either, not even proboscis & crab-eater monkeys.

    Thanks, my boy: Nasalis is a nice illustration of the very first steps from arboreal to aquarboreal: more upright, flatter feet, already shorter tail etc.
    Early hominoidea c 30 Ma were already further: tail loss, larger body size, more vertical & central spine, broader sternum-thorax-pelvis etc.

    Google "aquarboreal".

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