Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!news.quux.org!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: JTEM <jtem01@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: sci.anthropology.paleo
Subject: Re: Stone selection by wild chimpanzees shares patterns with Oldowan
 hominins
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2025 13:36:29 -0500
Organization: Eek
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <vlh7rd$1ntns$6@dont-email.me>
References: <vktg0b$1gqpd$2@dont-email.me> <vktpkp$gg5$1@sunce.iskon.hr>
 <vktps2$gt2$1@sunce.iskon.hr> <vkv2f6$1pbca$7@dont-email.me>
 <vkvkfp$rko$1@sunce.iskon.hr> <vkvrha$22fus$4@dont-email.me>
 <vl01q1$4ul$1@sunce.iskon.hr> <vl23rv$2fg66$3@dont-email.me>
 <vl2ed7$t6v$1@sunce.iskon.hr> <vl2r9h$2ltim$4@dont-email.me>
 <vl4fe1$dd9$1@sunce.iskon.hr> <vl5eqh$37v87$2@dont-email.me>
 <vl5rti$d6u$1@sunce.iskon.hr> <vl7bvg$3itej$1@dont-email.me>
 <vl9n63$8j1$1@sunce.iskon.hr> <vlakga$bmmh$1@dont-email.me>
 <vlapqo$j7$1@sunce.iskon.hr> <vld5lp$t0cc$4@dont-email.me>
 <vlf9ss$blv$1@sunce.iskon.hr> <vlfdki$1a754$1@dont-email.me>
 <vlg400$u3c$1@sunce.iskon.hr>
Reply-To: jtem01@gmail.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2025 19:36:30 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="369c23c6f5f14637894c497225ee6082";
	logging-data="1832700"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+EMpFpnKhK9fMMEDs8wiRV"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:fL7JJW2Ff1AsbFBluvW2dZPDu/g=
In-Reply-To: <vlg400$u3c$1@sunce.iskon.hr>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 2666

  Mario Petrinovic wrote:

>          First, who says that Kenyanthropus isn't ancestor of Homo. 

First, Australopithecus is considered an ancestor of Homo under
current conventions. I personally like the good Doctor's model
where it's not but, under current conventions it is thought of
as an ancestor.

Second, an ancestor of Homo isn't Homo.

This brings us full circle:  Evidence for tool use extends back
further than Homo and you didn't know this.

> Second, since you need really special conditions to preserve bones, and 
> you don't need any conditions to preserve stone tools, it is the 
> simplest possible logic (which you are unable to do) that the stone tool 
> of Homo will preserve better than the bones of Homo.

Ironically, the best evidence for pre Homo tool use is cut marks
on bones.

Wow. You're doing  /Terrible/  here.




-- 
https://jtem.tumblr.com/tagged/The%20Book%20of%20JTEM/page/5