J. Moore (
Wed, 27 Apr 94 12:22:00 -0400

Pn> It just seems that with so many new things happening in
Pn> paleoanthropology why do people want to continue to beat a dead aquatic
Pn> ape?
Pn> Philip Nicholls

It so happens I know the answer to this, having figured it out by
reading reaction to Nancy Tanner's work. The reaction was rarely if ever
to the actual work, you see, and her work was usually presented as a
reaction to work done by Isaac and/or Lovejoy, even though her stuff was
done earlier than their's.

People just don't want to do the work needed to make sense of human
evolution (you need to do quite a lot of research not only with bones,
but also with primatology and cultural anthro). It's hard to do this,
and folks just don't want to. The AAT, being made up (literally!) of
bits of bull____, is a whole lot easier to read and argue for. As only
one example, we see the recent posts in which Mr. Greene argued that the
waters are so safe and comforting, away from predators, even though even
a moments real thought would've made him think of crocidiles (still
common killers of modern humans in both fresh and salt water) and of
course sharks, which kill so well and so often even in very shallow
coastal waters. Only by ignoring the obvious can the AAT proponents do
this sort of thing, but, believe me, many many people, even among
academics, make an art of ignoring the obvious.

Jim Moore

* Q-Blue 1.0 *