Re: An alternative to ST and AAT

fsflowers (
30 Nov 1996 00:24:23 GMT (Paul Crowley) wrote:
>In article <01bbdbdc$c31d8380$LocalHost@dan-pc>
> "Rohinton Collins" writes:
>> The only thing we know for sure is this: Lucy's bipedalism is more
>> efficient than ape quadrupedalism only during walking.


Why do you say we do not know this? (the paragraph below) I
don't agree that everything indicates the opposite, at least
with my inexperienced and unprofessional opinion.

>We do NOT know this. In fact, everything indicates the opposite.
>Please state exactly how you think Lucy could be more "efficient".
>> So Lucy walked a lot.
>This is most unlikely. Remember -- she "waddled". She was not
>designed for walking a lot.

I also don't understand why you think she waddled. Her anatomy;
her pelvis and hip joints seemed to my inexperienced eyes to
indicate that she walked fairly upright with no waddle, as
someone stated earlier, the feet prints found in the
ash, date about the same time as Lucy, indicate that they
walked with their feet close together which indicate upright

>> If we can find out why she walked a lot, we would find the reason for
>> the evolution of hominid bipedalism.
>You're on the wrong track. Go right back to the start. Lucy's
>ancestors stood and walked upright for utterly different reasons.

Don't you contradict yourself here? Please clarify. I realize I
am very ingnorant in this field, so please don't take offense
at it.