Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!fu-berlin.de!Iskon!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Mario Petrinovic <mario.petrinovic1@zg.htnet.hr>
Newsgroups: sci.anthropology.paleo
Subject: Re: When we became bipedal
Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2024 23:11:06 +0200
Organization: Iskon Internet d.d.
Lines: 64
Message-ID: <v64epa$9l2$1@sunce.iskon.hr>
References: <v5qngq$5au$1@sunce.iskon.hr> <v5sl7b$n58h$1@dont-email.me>
 <v5uctj$rau$1@sunce.iskon.hr> <v5v04d$17081$4@dont-email.me>
 <v5v9gf$grb$1@sunce.iskon.hr> <v5vk3l$1akbe$4@dont-email.me>
 <v5vlqf$oro$1@sunce.iskon.hr> <v5vt7g$1fnh5$2@dont-email.me>
 <v6168g$si9$1@sunce.iskon.hr> <v61t6t$1pkmt$6@dont-email.me>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 78-0-168-16.adsl.net.t-com.hr
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: sunce.iskon.hr 1720041066 9890 78.0.168.16 (3 Jul 2024 21:11:06 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: abuse@iskon.hr
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 3 Jul 2024 21:11:06 +0000 (UTC)
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <v61t6t$1pkmt$6@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 3609

On 2.7.2024. 23:58, JTEM wrote:
>   Mario Petrinovic wrote:
> 
>>          Ah, you know sooo much. Apes were the predominant species in 
>> canopy in Miocene, and at that time the whole
> 
> Pure conjecture.
> 
> I'm not disputing your right to conjecture, only noting that there
> is better conjecture... ideas that are not so reliant on a lack of
> information.
> 
> I subscribe to the good Doctor's model, or a variant there of, where
> "Apes" evolved from a bipedal ancestor.
> 
> In other words, an early Waterside (Aquatic Ape) evolved FIRST, then
> what we call apes began to split off... and this "Splitting off" was
> a process that never ended during the entire evolution, right up to
> so called "Modern Man."
> 
> It works. It fits.
> 
> "Da wived in jungles" does not.
> 
> We did not evolve in the tree tops any more than we evolved on the
> savanna, i.e. "not at all."
> 
>>          So, first you had bipedal ancestors, then what?
> 
> Actually, FIRST we had waterside (Aquatic Ape)
> 
> The good Doctor has a plausible start:  Insular Isolation
> 
> Isolation of a group on an island is strongly associated with Insular
> Dwarfism, but not only is it also associated with Insular Gigantism
> but is has been argued that Gigantism precedes Dwarfism....
> 
> FIRST they get large, because of the lack of predators AND the fact
> that they are in competition with each other... themselves.
> 
> So they get big. Selective pressures are on "Big"
> 
> THEN what normally happens is that these BIGGER animals with no
> natural predators exhaust all their resources. Suddenly the selective
> pressures are on SMALL... Dwarfism. But what if...
> 
> What if these larger animals, instead of exhausting resources and
> growing small, what if these animals INSTEAD turned to exploiting
> the sea?  With this new high protein diet they could grow even
> larger!
> 
> No downward pressures, they continue to experience all the selective
> pressures on "Bigger."
> 
> There. We go from a fruit & nut eating tree monkey to something much
> larger, consuming protein...
> 
> THEN we add the usual Aquatic Ape arguments on upright posture,
> bipedalism, larger brain...

		Animals are different on islands because on islands you lack 
predators. Do you know of any animal that evolved on islands that 
survived on mainland? Of course, not. Good Dr. Moreau's island.