Re: Exaptation and cookie cutters

Thomas Clarke (
5 Oct 1995 12:50:52 GMT

In article <44nai5$> writes:
> Elaine Morgan <> graced us with the following
> words:

> [Discussion of "Exaptation" omitted]

> I hope you read Jerry Drawhorn's excellent article on bipedalism. In
> case you haven't I am going to repost it here.

Did my response to his post make it out? No one has commented
about the what I said concerning the implausability of his
picture of the "first family" drowning.

> There is a story about some archaeologists in the US who believed that
> atlatl hooks and weights were fish net hooks and net spacers used to
> make fishing nets. To prove their point they used them to make a
> rather nice fishing net.

Nice story. So what were the atlatl hooks and weights for?

> The problem with making intepretations of functionality in this way
> arre compounded when you try to assign anatomical structures a
> function in a niche they never occupied. It is compounded by the
> "can't prove me wrong" attitude the envelops such stories.

Don't you have any fun in science? Are you limited only to what
is absolutely, iron-clad provable on the basis of well deocumented
obsdrvation? No speculation allowed?

Tom Clarke