Re: What did AAT Supposedly eat?

Sir CPU (
7 Jan 1995 15:45:25 -0500

-Troy, I know of no one, except you, who has called the known hominid
-fossils as "AAT fossils". As far as I know, even Morgan herself hasn't
-stated such a thing. The hominid fossils in the collections of the
-except for the new discovery of A. ramadus, have all been classified as
-terrestrial bipeds. If any of them _was_ classified as an aquatic
-it would have appeared in a science journal stating this, not to mention
-a plethura of popular magazines from _Time_ to _Weekly Reader_.
- Where on earth do you get your information?

How can you classify anything as terrestrial or semi-aquatic and be
absolutley sure?
This is exactly the point I was making with my "polar bear challenge".
You simply
cannot tell from the fossil remains whether something was semi-aquatic or
not. A terrestrial black bear's fossils and a semi-aquatic polar bear's
fossils would look the same. If you could tell the difference we would
not be having this argument. So you can't say "there are no AAT fossils"
because you can say you know for certain one way or the other.

And just because something has a current classification doesn't mean it is
not wrong. The earth used to be "classified" as flat.

Troy Kelley