"Relocation of the 1936 Mojokerto skull discovery site near Perning, East Java" OF Huffman cs J.hum.Evol.50:431-451
The Mojokerto child probably died along the ancient sea-coast, judging from
- the large extent of the deltaic facies,
- evidence that the calvaria experienced minimal transport.
"Relocation of the 1936 Mojokerto skull discovery site near Perning, East Java" OF Huffman cs J.hum.Evol.50:431-451
https://sci-hub.se/10.1016/j.jhevol.2005.11.002
The Mojokerto child probably died along the ancient sea-coast, judging from >- the large extent of the deltaic facies,
- evidence that the calvaria experienced minimal transport.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/338691956
"The broader Perning palaeo-landscape within the confines of the
Perning catchment (Figure 1b) would have provided a diverse suite
of foraging opportunities for H. erectus (Huffman, 2001a; Huffman &
Zaim, 2003). This study clearly defines 4 major landscape
components that should be considered in evaluating the palaeoecology
of the hominin spp in Java: muddy deltas with widespread Nypa
swamps; a poorly vegetated sandy delta with localized Avicennia; away
from the coast, an extensive river valley with open savanna
grasslands; and in the upper reaches of the catchment, perhumid
forests on volcanoes at least 1500 m, and possibly 3000 m, high
(Figure 8)."
And of course, one should not constrict the paleoecology of such a
wide ranging taxon like Homo erectus to that of a single site.
Op zondag 20 november 2022 om 15:19:12 UTC+1 schreef Pandora:
Thanks for confirming our view:
Only incredible idiots believe our Pleist.ancestors ran after antelopes!
"muddy deltas ... river valleys ... swamps ..."
"Relocation of the 1936 Mojokerto skull discovery site near Perning, East Java" OF Huffman cs J.hum.Evol.50:431-451
https://sci-hub.se/10.1016/j.jhevol.2005.11.002
The Mojokerto child probably died along the ancient sea-coast, judging from
- the large extent of the deltaic facies,
- evidence that the calvaria experienced minimal transport.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/338691956
"The broader Perning palaeo-landscape within the confines of the
Perning catchment (Figure 1b) would have provided a diverse suite
of foraging opportunities for H. erectus (Huffman, 2001a; Huffman &
Zaim, 2003). This study clearly defines 4 major landscape
components that should be considered in evaluating the palaeoecology
of the hominin spp in Java: muddy deltas with widespread Nypa
swamps; a poorly vegetated sandy delta with localized Avicennia; away
from the coast, an extensive river valley with open savanna
grasslands; and in the upper reaches of the catchment, perhumid
forests on volcanoes at least 1500 m, and possibly 3000 m, high
(Figure 8)."
And of course, one should not constrict the paleoecology of such a
wide ranging taxon like Homo erectus to that of a single site.
Op zondag 20 november 2022 om 15:19:12 UTC+1 schreef Pandora:
Thanks for confirming our view:
Only incredible idiots believe our Pleist.ancestors ran after antelopes!
"muddy deltas ... river valleys ... swamps ..."
"Relocation of the 1936 Mojokerto skull discovery site near Perning, East Java" OF Huffman cs J.hum.Evol.50:431-451
https://sci-hub.se/10.1016/j.jhevol.2005.11.002
The Mojokerto child probably died along the ancient sea-coast, judging from >> >- the large extent of the deltaic facies,
- evidence that the calvaria experienced minimal transport.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/338691956
"The broader Perning palaeo-landscape within the confines of the
Perning catchment (Figure 1b) would have provided a diverse suite
of foraging opportunities for H. erectus (Huffman, 2001a; Huffman &
Zaim, 2003). This study clearly defines 4 major landscape
components that should be considered in evaluating the palaeoecology
of the hominin spp in Java: muddy deltas with widespread Nypa
swamps; a poorly vegetated sandy delta with localized Avicennia; away
from the coast, an extensive river valley with open savanna
grasslands; and in the upper reaches of the catchment, perhumid
forests on volcanoes at least 1500 m, and possibly 3000 m, high
(Figure 8)."
And of course, one should not constrict the paleoecology of such a
wide ranging taxon like Homo erectus to that of a single site.
Yes, everything shows H.erectus was littoral:
google "coastal dispersal Pleistocene Homo".
A eurytopic taxon like H. erectus is unlikely to have been confined to
a to any one of these habitats.
The Mojokerto child probably died along the ancient sea-coast, judging from - the large extent of the deltaic facies,
- evidence that the calvaria experienced minimal transport.
The relocated discovery bed is c 20 m stratigraphically above the horizon from which the
widely cited 1.81 +- 0.04 Ma 40/39Ar-date for the skull (Swishercs 1994) was obtained.
Additional field & lab results will be required to determine the skull’s age.
Drimolen, Swartkrans, Olduvai Gorge, Nariokotome, Koobi Fora, Daka,
Dmanisi, Zhoukoudian, all these H.erectus/ergaster sites are not
coastal or sea side.
-Drimolen, Swartkrans, Olduvai Gorge, Nariokotome, Koobi Fora, Daka, Dmanisi, Zhoukoudian, all these H.erectus/ergaster sites are not
coastal or sea side.
Sigh, our kudu runner
- believes that all these are closer relatives of us than of apiths,
- doesn't even know the difference between waterside & coastal...
Running after your antelopes, my little boy, .
On Monday, November 21, 2022 at 3:39:23 PM UTC-5, [email protected] wrote:
Drimolen, Swartkrans, Olduvai Gorge, Nariokotome, Koobi Fora, Daka, Dmanisi, Zhoukoudian, all these H.erectus/ergaster sites are not
coastal or sea side.
Sigh, our kudu runner
- believes that all these are closer relatives of us than of apiths,
- doesn't even know the difference between waterside & coastal...
Running after your antelopes, my little boy, .-
Carnivore Diet
Best against immunological diseases, non-allergenic
Molluscivore Diet
Allergenic
Piscivore Diet
Allergenic
Vegan Diet
Allergenic
Dairy Diet (cows)
Allergenic
https://youtu.be/IfBlM3HfHKs
Carnivore Diet
Best against immunological diseases, non-allergenic
Molluscivore Diet
Allergenic
Piscivore Diet
Allergenic
Vegan Diet
Allergenic
Dairy Diet
Allergenic
Drimolen, Swartkrans, Olduvai Gorge, Nariokotome, Koobi Fora, Daka,
Dmanisi, Zhoukoudian, all these H.erectus/ergaster sites are not
coastal or sea side.
Sigh, our kudu runner
- believes that all these are closer relatives of us than of apiths,
- doesn't even know the difference between waterside & coastal...
On Mon, 21 Nov 2022 12:39:22 -0800 (PST), "[email protected]" <[email protected]> wrote:
Drimolen, Swartkrans, Olduvai Gorge, Nariokotome, Koobi Fora, Daka,
Dmanisi, Zhoukoudian, all these H.erectus/ergaster sites are not
coastal or sea side.
Sigh, our kudu runner
- believes that all these are closer relatives of us than of apiths,
Everything from those sites that has been assigned to Homo
erectus/ergaster is obviously closer to us than to apiths.
E.g. no one has ever expressed any doubt that OH 9 is H. erectus. https://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/human-fossils/fossils/oh-9
- doesn't even know the difference between waterside & coastal...
Elsewhere you say "H.erectus was initially a coastal wader-diver", and
that the emphasis is on coastal dispersal.
The earliest known H. erectus "DNH 134 is strikingly similar to the
Mojokerto H. erectus cranium in overall cranial shape", but at 1.95 -
2.04 Ma Drimolen is not exactly a coastal site. https://sci-hub.se/10.1126/science.aaw7293
All African and most Eurasien H. erectus sites are inland. Mojokerto
is a possible exception, but that does not exactly support your
hypothesis of Homo erectus as a overwhelmingly coastal taxon.
Op dinsdag 22 november 2022 om 16:10:49 UTC+1 schreef Pandora:
On Mon, 21 Nov 2022 12:39:22 -0800 (PST), "[email protected]"
<[email protected]> wrote:
Drimolen, Swartkrans, Olduvai Gorge, Nariokotome, Koobi Fora, Daka,
Dmanisi, Zhoukoudian, all these H.erectus/ergaster sites are not
coastal or sea side.
Sigh, our kudu runner
- believes that all these are closer relatives of us than of apiths,
Everything from those sites that has been assigned to Homo
erectus/ergaster is obviously closer to us than to apiths.
:-D Don't you understand the difference between "assigned" & "is"??
E.g. no one has ever expressed any doubt that OH 9 is H. erectus.
https://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/human-fossils/fossils/oh-9
Never heard of parallel evolution??
PAs even thought that Lucy was their ancestor! :-DDD
- doesn't even know the difference between waterside & coastal...
Elsewhere you say "H.erectus was initially a coastal wader-diver", and
that the emphasis is on coastal dispersal.
Of course, my little boy: how else do you reach Flores?? flying??
The earliest known H. erectus "DNH 134 is strikingly similar to the
Mojokerto H. erectus cranium in overall cranial shape", but at 1.95 -
2.04 Ma Drimolen is not exactly a coastal site.
https://sci-hub.se/10.1126/science.aaw7293
A.robustus & boisei are also strikingly similar.
Pan & Gorilla are also strikingly similar compared to you,
but Pan is a much closer relative of you than Gorilla is.
Got it a bit??
All African and most Eurasien H. erectus sites are inland. Mojokerto
is a possible exception, but that does not exactly support your
hypothesis of Homo erectus as a overwhelmingly coastal taxon.
It's cherry-picking: never heard of shell engravings??
Google "Joordens Munro shell engravings" or so.
PAs even thought that Lucy was their ancestor! :-DDD
She might be.
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.PAs even thought that Lucy was their ancestor! :-DDD
She might be.
:-DDD Waste your own time, my little boy: *think* a bit:
we did not evolve from ape->apith->Homo as still often assumed,
but Gorilla evolved from the HPG-LCA->E.Afr.apiths->gorillas, of course, like Pan evolved from the HP-LCA->S.Afr.apiths->bonobo+chimp:
Gorilla-like features in large E.African australopith crania (only until 1994 - confirmed by all later publications):
• “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 specimens “looked very much like a small female gorilla”. Johanson & Edey 1981 p.351.
• “Other primitive [or 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
see also his fig.1).• 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 (
pattern changed”. Leakey 1981 pp.74-75.• 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.
Chimp+bonobo-like features in S.African australopith crania (only until 1994 - confirmed by all later publications):
• “Alan [Walker] has analysed a number of Au.robustus teeth and they fall into the fruit-eating category. More precisely, their teeth patterns look like those of chimpanzees... Then, when be looked at some H.erectus teeth, be found that the
that of chimpanzees, and (b) the curves for brain volume relative to body weight are essentially parallel in pongids and australopithecines, leading Hofman to conclude that ‘as with pongids, the australopithecines probably differed only in size, not in• “The ‘keystone’ nasal bone arrangement suggested as a derived diagnostic of Paranthropus [robustus] is found in an appreciable number of pongids, particularly clearly in some chimpanzees”. Eckhardt 1987.
• “P.paniscus provides a suitable comparison for Australopithecus [Sts.5]; they are similar in body size, postcranial dimensions and... even in cranial and facial features”. Zihlman cs 1978.
• “A. africanus Sts.5, which... falls well within the range of Pan troglodytes, is markedly prognathous or hyperprognathous”". Ferguson 1989.
• In Taung, “I see nothing in the orbits, nasal bones, and canine teeth definitely nearer to the human condition than the corresponding parts of the skull of a modern young chimpanzee”. Woodward 1925.
• “The Taung juvenile seems to resemble a young chimpanzee more closely than it resembles L338y-6”, a juvenile A.boisei. Rak & Howell 1978.
• “In addition to similarities in facial remodeling it appears that Taung and Australopithecus in general, had maturation periods similar to those of the extant chimpanzee”. Bromage 1985.
• “I estimate an adult capacity for Taung ranging from 404-420 cm2, with a mean of 412 cm2. Application of Passingham’s curve for brain development in Pan is preferable to that for humans because (a) brain size of early hominids approximates
. Bromage & Dean 1985.• In Taung, “pneumatization has also extended into the zygoma and hard palate. This is intriguing because an intrapalatal extension of the maxillary sinus has only been reported in chimpanzees and robust australopithecines among higher primates”
among orang-utans and chimpanzees of ages corresponding to that of Australopithecus”. Schultz 1941.• “That the fossil ape Australopithecus [Taung] ‘is distinguished from all living apes by the... unfused nasal bones…’ as claimed by Dart (1940), cannot be maintained in view of the very considerable number of cases of separate nasal bones
Asian ape genomes.Lucy = FOSSIL GORILLA!
E & S.Afr.apiths evolved in parallel:
-from late-Pliocene "gracile"
-to early-Pleistocene "robust"
-to today's Afr.apes.
Meanwhile, Pliocene Homo lived in S.Asia, as you (should !!) know:
"Lineage-Specific Expansions of Retroviral Insertions within the Genomes of African Great Apes but Not Humans and Orangutans" Chris T Yohn cs 2005 PLoS open access
RV infections of the germline have the potential to episodically alter gene function & genome structure during the course of evolution.
Horizontal transmissions between spp have been proposed, but little evidence exists for such events in the human/great ape lineage of evolution.
Based on analysis of finished BAC chimpanzee genome sequence, we characterize a RV element (Pan troglodytes endogenous RV-1 PTERV1) that has become integrated in the germline of African great ape & Old World monkey spp, but is absent from humans &
voorouders niét in Afrika waren tijdens die hele besmettelijke periode (tenminste ~4–3 Ma?). Leefden ze toen aan Zuid-Aziatische kusten, hun fossiele sporen weggespoeld door tussenijstijdse stijgingen van de zeespiegel?We unambiguously map 287 RV integration sites: c 95.8 % of the insertions occur at non-orthologous regions between closely related spp.
Phylogenetic analysis of the endogenous RV reveals:
the gorilla & chimpanzee elements share a monophyletic origin with a subset of the Old World monkey RV elements, but that the average sequence divergence exceeds neutral expectation for a strictly nuclear inherited DNA molecule.
Within the chimpanzee, there is a significant integration bias against genes, with only 14 of these insertions mapping within intronic regions.
6 out of 10 of these genes, for which there are expression data, show significant differences in transcript expression between human & chimpanzee.
Our data are consistent with a RV infection that bombarded the genomes of chimpanzees & gorillas independently and concurrently, 3–4 Ma.
We speculate on the potential impact of such recent events on the evolution of humans & great apes.
From my recent book:
Door een Pliocene virusbesmetting kregen Afrikaanse primaten (baviaan, meerkat, gorilla, chimp enz.) in hun DNA een stuk virus-DNA (retroviral element) dat ontbreekt bij Aziatische primaten en de mens, en Chris Yohn’s team besluit dat onze
South Asia in Central India far from coasts: Narmada Man, Bimbhetka caves. South east Asia Indonesian archipelago has more, far from there.
suture and well onto an uninflated glabella; and extremely convex inferolateral margins of the orbits such as found in some gorillas”. Walker cs 1986.PAs even thought that Lucy was their ancestor! :-DDD
She might be.:-DDD
Waste your own time, my little boy: *think* a bit:
we did not evolve from ape->apith->Homo as still often assumed,
but Gorilla evolved from the HPG-LCA->E.Afr.apiths->gorillas, of course, like Pan evolved from the HP-LCA->S.Afr.apiths->bonobo+chimp:
Gorilla-like features in large E.African australopith crania (only until 1994 - confirmed by all later publications):
• “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 specimens “looked very much like a small female gorilla”. Johanson & Edey 1981 p.351.
• “Other primitive [or 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
• 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 (seealso his fig.1).
• In O.H.5, “the curious and characteristic features of the Paranthropus skull... parallel some of those of the gorilla”. Robinson 1960.changed”. Leakey 1981 pp.74-75.
• 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.
Chimp+bonobo-like features in S.African australopith crania (only until 1994 - confirmed by all later publications):
• “Alan [Walker] has analysed a number of Au.robustus teeth and they fall into the fruit-eating category. More precisely, their teeth patterns look like those of chimpanzees... Then, when be looked at some H.erectus teeth, be found that the pattern
• “The ‘keystone’ nasal bone arrangement suggested as a derived diagnostic of Paranthropus [robustus] is found in an appreciable number of pongids, particularly clearly in some chimpanzees”. Eckhardt 1987.of chimpanzees, and (b) the curves for brain volume relative to body weight are essentially parallel in pongids and australopithecines, leading Hofman to conclude that ‘as with pongids, the australopithecines probably differed only in size, not in
• “P.paniscus provides a suitable comparison for Australopithecus [Sts.5]; they are similar in body size, postcranial dimensions and... even in cranial and facial features”. Zihlman cs 1978.
• “A. africanus Sts.5, which... falls well within the range of Pan troglodytes, is markedly prognathous or hyperprognathous”". Ferguson 1989.
• In Taung, “I see nothing in the orbits, nasal bones, and canine teeth definitely nearer to the human condition than the corresponding parts of the skull of a modern young chimpanzee”. Woodward 1925.
• “The Taung juvenile seems to resemble a young chimpanzee more closely than it resembles L338y-6”, a juvenile A.boisei. Rak & Howell 1978.
• “In addition to similarities in facial remodeling it appears that Taung and Australopithecus in general, had maturation periods similar to those of the extant chimpanzee”. Bromage 1985.
• “I estimate an adult capacity for Taung ranging from 404-420 cm2, with a mean of 412 cm2. Application of Passingham’s curve for brain development in Pan is preferable to that for humans because (a) brain size of early hominids approximates that
• In Taung, “pneumatization has also extended into the zygoma and hard palate. This is intriguing because an intrapalatal extension of the maxillary sinus has only been reported in chimpanzees and robust australopithecines among higher primates”.Bromage & Dean 1985.
• “That the fossil ape Australopithecus [Taung] ‘is distinguished from all living apes by the... unfused nasal bones…’ as claimed by Dart (1940), cannot be maintained in view of the very considerable number of cases of separate nasal bonesamong orang-utans and chimpanzees of ages corresponding to that of Australopithecus”. Schultz 1941.
Lucy = FOSSIL GORILLA!Asian ape genomes.
E & S.Afr.apiths evolved in parallel:
-from late-Pliocene "gracile"
-to early-Pleistocene "robust"
-to today's Afr.apes.
Okidoki??
Meanwhile, Pliocene Homo lived in S.Asia, as you (should !!) know:
Lineage-Specific Expansions of Retroviral Insertions within the Genomes of African Great Apes but Not Humans and Orangutans
Chris T Yohn cs 2005 PLoS open access
RV infections of the germline have the potential to episodically alter gene function & genome structure during the course of evolution.
Horizontal transmissions between spp have been proposed, but little evidence exists for such events in the human/great ape lineage of evolution.
Based on analysis of finished BAC chimpanzee genome sequence, we characterize a RV element (Pan troglodytes endogenous RV-1 PTERV1) that has become integrated in the germline of African great ape & Old World monkey spp, but is absent from humans &
We unambiguously map 287 RV integration sites: c 95.8 % of the insertions occur at non-orthologous regions between closely related spp.niét in Afrika waren tijdens die hele besmettelijke periode (tenminste ~4–3 Ma?). Leefden ze toen aan Zuid-Aziatische kusten, hun fossiele sporen weggespoeld door tussenijstijdse stijgingen van de zeespiegel?
Phylogenetic analysis of the endogenous RV reveals:
the gorilla & chimpanzee elements share a monophyletic origin with a subset of the Old World monkey RV elements, but that the average sequence divergence exceeds neutral expectation for a strictly nuclear inherited DNA molecule.
Within the chimpanzee, there is a significant integration bias against genes, with only 14 of these insertions mapping within intronic regions.
6 out of 10 of these genes, for which there are expression data, show significant differences in transcript expression between human & chimpanzee.
Our data are consistent with a RV infection that bombarded the genomes of chimpanzees & gorillas independently and concurrently, 3–4 Ma.
We speculate on the potential impact of such recent events on the evolution of humans & great apes.
From my recent book:
Door een Pliocene virusbesmetting kregen Afrikaanse primaten (baviaan, meerkat, gorilla, chimp enz.) in hun DNA een stuk virus-DNA (retroviral element) dat ontbreekt bij Aziatische primaten en de mens, en Chris Yohn’s team besluit dat onze voorouders
The earliest known H. erectus "DNH 134 is strikingly similar to the
Mojokerto H. erectus cranium in overall cranial shape", but at 1.95 -
2.04 Ma Drimolen is not exactly a coastal site.
PAs even thought that Lucy was their ancestor! :-DDD
She might be.
Lucy = FOSSIL GORILLA!
Meanwhile, Pliocene Homo lived in S.Asia, as you (should !!) know:
That would make Homo the ancestor of Gorilla!
Meanwhile, Pliocene Homo lived in S.Asia, as you (should !!) know:
However, LD 350-1 at 2.8 Ma from Ledi Geraru, Afar, Ethiopia is the
only Pliocene specimen of Genus Homo sofar (exclusive of "Homo"
antiquus), and thus from Africa:
"Vertebrate fossils record a faunal turnover indicative of more open
and probably arid habitats: https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.aaa1415
Kudu runner:Fantasy.
That would make Homo the ancestor of Gorilla!:-DDD
These people are even more stupid than I thought.
Incredible!
If you stop running after African antelopes, ape & Homo evolution is not so difficult, e.g.
plate tectonics perfectly explains
- why apes differ from monkeys,
- hominoid splitting-times:
1) India approaching S-Asia 40-30 Ma in the Tethys Ocean formed island archipels = plenty of coastal forests:
the Catarrhini that reached these islands = the earliest Hominoidea,
they gradually became aquarboreal (aqua=water, arbor=tree)
= bipedal wading in swamp forests + vertical climbing arms overhead perfectly explains
- complete tail loss,
- larger body size >monkeys,
- very broad sternum & thorax = more dorsal scapulas = more lateral (rather than ventral) arms,
- centrally-placed lumbar spine (vs dorsally in monkeys & most mammals)
= vertical body-posture for BP wading + climbing.
2) India further underneath S-Asia split lesser (E) & great (W) apes c 25 Ma: - hylobatids followed SE-Asian coastal forests,
- great apes followed the Tethys Sea coasts, still wading-climbing vertically,
google "aquarboreal".
3) The Mesopotamian Seaway closure 15 Ma split
- sivapiths-pongids (E -> SE.Asia) &
- dryopiths-hominids (W -> Tethys=Med.Sea), e.g. BP Trachilos footprints.
In the Tethys-Sea, only the Red Sea hominids survived: HPG.
4) The E.Afr.Rift fm c 8 Ma caused the HP/G split:
Gorilla followed the incipient Rift ->Praeanthropus afarensis->boisei->gorillas.
5) The Zanclean flood 5.3 Ma coincided with (caused?) the Red Sea opening into the Gulf:
- Pan went right, following the E.Afr.coasts->rivers: Australopithecus africanus->robustus->bonobo+chimp // Gorilla,
- Homo went left, following the S.Asian coasts ->H.erectus etc.,
google "coastal dispersal Pleistocene Homo".
:-) From my book: Academic Publ. Utrecht NL 2022
"De Evolutie van de Mens - waarom wij rechtop lopen en kunnen spreken".
That would make Homo the ancestor of Gorilla!
On Thursday, November 24, 2022 at 9:05:29 AM UTC-5, [email protected] wrote:
Kudu runner:
That would make Homo the ancestor of Gorilla!:-DDD
These people are even more stupid than I thought.
Incredible!
If you stop running after African antelopes, ape & Homo evolution is not so difficult, e.g.
plate tectonics perfectly explains
- why apes differ from monkeys,
- hominoid splitting-times:
1) India approaching S-Asia 40-30 Ma in the Tethys Ocean formed island archipels = plenty of coastal forests:
the Catarrhini that reached these islands = the earliest Hominoidea,
they gradually became aquarboreal (aqua=water, arbor=tree)
= bipedal wading in swamp forests + vertical climbing arms overhead perfectly explains
- complete tail loss,
- larger body size >monkeys,
- very broad sternum & thorax = more dorsal scapulas = more lateral (rather than ventral) arms,
- centrally-placed lumbar spine (vs dorsally in monkeys & most mammals)
= vertical body-posture for BP wading + climbing.
2) India further underneath S-Asia split lesser (E) & great (W) apes c 25 Ma:
- hylobatids followed SE-Asian coastal forests,
- great apes followed the Tethys Sea coasts, still wading-climbing vertically,
google "aquarboreal".
3) The Mesopotamian Seaway closure 15 Ma split
- sivapiths-pongids (E -> SE.Asia) &
- dryopiths-hominids (W -> Tethys=Med.Sea), e.g. BP Trachilos footprints. In the Tethys-Sea, only the Red Sea hominids survived: HPG.
4) The E.Afr.Rift fm c 8 Ma caused the HP/G split:
Gorilla followed the incipient Rift ->Praeanthropus afarensis->boisei->gorillas.
5) The Zanclean flood 5.3 Ma coincided with (caused?) the Red Sea opening into the Gulf:
- Pan went right, following the E.Afr.coasts->rivers: Australopithecus africanus->robustus->bonobo+chimp // Gorilla,
- Homo went left, following the S.Asian coasts ->H.erectus etc.,
google "coastal dispersal Pleistocene Homo".
:-) From my book: Academic Publ. Utrecht NL 2022
"De Evolutie van de Mens - waarom wij rechtop lopen en kunnen spreken".
Fantasy.
Fantasy.
DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
Fantasy.
Here's something you might grasp:
Imagine a fertile stretch of beach, one with paleo levels of life
(shellfish, etc) and it would be quite easy for any of us to
survive on it, even if we were magically plopped down on it
without warning. We might not want to eat raw seafood but as
the nearest Sushi bar demonstrates, it's a viable solution. And
if we can start a fire we can use it as a labor saving device --
opening shellfish -- even as we weed out the bad shellfish AND
cook our food!
Next...
Imagine a savanna with paleo levels of life. Magically whisk
you away to it, plop you down and leave you to survive on
your own. You die. In a best case scenario you live for 3 to 6
days, but only if you avoid any predators. It would take you
that long to die of hunger & thirst.
Yet you believe that for millions of years nature has sculpted
your body & mind, adapting it to that savanna, with well under
20k years of agriculture to take some of the edges off...
It's difficult to understand how the savannaists can be so stupid.
Perhaps they reason like this:
1) Our nearest relatives P & G live in Africa,
hence, H must also have lived in Africa.
2) P & G & other primates are QP in forests,
only H is BP outside the forests,
hence leaving the forest explains QP->BP,
and all hominoids with BP traits are H rather than P or G,
hence australopiths ("BP") are our ancestors.
Are the savannaists really so stupid that they don't see the flaws in their reasoning??
It's difficult to understand how the savannaists can be so stupid.
Perhaps they reason like this:
1) Our nearest relatives P & G live in Africa,
hence, H must also have lived in Africa.
2) P & G & other primates are QP in forests,
only H is BP outside the forests,
hence leaving the forest explains QP->BP,
and all hominoids with BP traits are H rather than P or G,
hence australopiths ("BP") are our ancestors.
Are the savannaists really so stupid that they don't see the flaws in their reasoning??
They're never going to agree with you but eventually they will accept your position as correct.
Op zaterdag 26 november 2022 om 01:40:52 UTC+1 schreef JTEM is so reasonable:
It's difficult to understand how the savannaists can be so stupid.
Perhaps they reason like this:
1) Our nearest relatives P & G live in Africa,
hence, H must also have lived in Africa.
2) P & G & other primates are QP in forests,
only H is BP outside the forests,
hence leaving the forest explains QP->BP,
and all hominoids with BP traits are H rather than P or G,
hence australopiths ("BP") are our ancestors.
Are the savannaists really so stupid that they don't see the flaws in their reasoning??
They're never going to agree with you but eventually they will accept your >> position as correct.
:-) No doubt (at least in most respects).
But I'm arguing this already >30 years!
I'm 71 (next week retired!)
and very much hope to see our views accepted before I die...
I read Elaine's "Descent of Woman" (Dutch transl.) in 1972 (50 yrs ago!),
at first I didn't know what to think of it, but after a few years I had no doubt any more,
Since evolution is gradual, and we're not arboreal any more, there had to be an aquarboreal phase once.
Maybe you should get a degree in anthropology first, because they're
not very fond of frauds in Heaven.
...since you can also go directly
from the trees to the ground.
some incredible imbecile:
...since you can also go directly
from the trees to the ground.
MONKEYS THAT GO FROM THE TREES TO THE GROUND BECOME BABOON-like!!
...since you can also go directly
from the trees to the ground.
MONKEYS THAT GO FROM THE TREES TO THE GROUND BECOME BABOON-like!!
No need to shout.
We're not descended from monkeys.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 715 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 44:49:21 |
| Calls: | 12,111 |
| Calls today: | 2 |
| Files: | 15,010 |
| Messages: | 6,518,463 |