Re: An alternative to ST and AAT

Thomas Clarke (
5 Nov 1996 14:43:16 GMT

In article <> Phillip Bigelow <> writes:
>Thomas Clarke wrote:

>> In article <> Phillip Bigelow <> writes:
>> > So, bipedalism in the kangaroo rat (Rodentia) shouldn't have happened
>> > either, right? So, bipedalism in non-avian theropods
>> > (Dinosauria) shouldn't have happened, right?

>> Don't you see a difference in these cases.

>You're right; I don't. The discussion thread is on the relationship
>between terrestrial adaptation and bipedal stance.

I came in late so I may be a bit off topic.

>> H.s and preceeding hominids and australopithecenes are the only
>> animals ever to "walk like a man".

>Actually, the only creature to walk EXACTLY like a human is a modern
>human. Australopithecenes did not have the hip/foot/ankle/arch
>structure to walk "just like a <man> <sic>".

Why the "sic"? I was making a tongue in cheek allusion to a popular

Still Australopithecenes walked more like Homo sapiens than did any
other species. There are even fossil footprints. To me there
is Homo and the Australopithecenes and then there is every other

>Similarly, the only creatures to walk EXACTLY like birds are birds.

And how many species of birds are there?

>The same can be said of kangaroo locomotion and kangaroo rat locomotion.

How many species that travel by saltation?

>Your point is essentially moot. Your point is also extremely
>specio-centric in it's logic, but I'll save *that* criticism for
>another day.

That is true. But then anthropology is an extremely specio-centric

Tom Clarke