Re: Is this all there is?

Erin Miller (
16 May 1995 09:57:50 -0500

In article <3p96uc$>,
Phil Nicholls <> wrote:
>Cremo and Thompson do a fairly good job of describing some of the
>debate over the Latolei footprints. However, there conclusion that
>this is evidence for anatomically modern Homo sapiens rests on the
>premise that if the foot was modern the rest of the critter was
>modern also. Modern means just like ours.
>Wrong. Very wrong. In most organisms mosaic evolution is the rule,
>not the exception. Assuming that the footprints are modern-looking,
>this may simply be evidence for an early species of Homo, something
>pre- Homo habilis. Anatomically modern Homo sapiens is defined by
>features of the skull, not the foot.

True. And regardless of what sort of creature made those tracks, the
evidence is still there (crystal clear, IMHO) that the foot bones which
are attributed to Austalopithecus afarensis, as much as the D.J/T.W. crew
want to huff and puff and blow the house down, IN NO WAY MADE THOSE
FOOPRINTS. I've yet to hear a sound argument that complies with the
anatomy and the footprints.


"On the internet nobody knows you're a dog ...
but damn if everyone won't know what your cat looks like." -fatz

Erin Miller
University of Chicago / Anthropology Department /