Re: Why Large Gap Between Species...?
Geoff Alex Cohen (firstname.lastname@example.org)
5 Dec 1996 19:17:43 GMT
Nat Turner (email@example.com) wrote:
: Why do you assume there was "competition"? I doubt seriously if piths
: competed against hominids.
I didn't assume. I'm saying that demography theory says that if there
is competition, both extinction of one species and coexistence of
multiple species are possible.
But why would you doubt competition? There is a limited number of
appropriate sleeping habitats; there is a limited amount of fruit or
nuts available for eating; in an arid environment there may well be
a limited number of sources of water.
: >So I theorize without evidence other than extinction of all other hominid
: >(hominoid?) species that homo sapiens can outcompete other hom* species
: Was it really that pat? And why assume a higher homomid was better
: equipped than a lower one? Why were we better equipped to survive than
: homo habilis?
Was it? I don't know. I was just theorizing. Since the question was
how H. sapiens survived while other hominids didn't, then by definition
H. sapiens was better adapted than the others. *Why* were we better
equipped? Good question.