On 24.12.2024. 4:09, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
https://youtu.be/eaeZ3RrzpLA?si=TosTJRtqh35sa77X
This is like saying, we evolved to fly airplanes, just because
today we are capable of flying airplanes
The (wrong) thesis was that we evolved *bipedality* in order to
do endurance running. No, we, obviously, didn't. When bipedality was
already here, then we could adjust it for endurance running.
They want to show that wrong thesis is right by twisting things
upside down. Once again, the thesis that we evolved bipedality in order
to endurance running *is wrong*. We evolved bipedality for some other reasons.
I repeat, a lot of animals are bipedal, including gibbons. The
real question is why we lost the ability to be quadrupedal.
Quadrupedality is extremely important, and ti is much faster than
bipedality, especially in non-endurance applications, which are the
original applications. So, we desperately needed quadrupedality (unlike gibbons, who don't need it at all, and yet, they didn't lose the ability
for it). So, we needed quadrupedality, and yet, we lost it. Why? It has
to be really important reason. I know why, but nobody listens to me.
https://youtube.com/shorts/g2-w3zApZvI?si=WKDj_HkQEt05fjV3
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)