Re: AAT Theory

David L Burkhead (
10 Oct 1995 16:09:21 GMT

Newsgroups: sci.anthropology.paleo
Subject: Re: AAT Theory
References: <> <45a3dl$> <>
Organization: The University of Akron, Akron, Ohio

In article <> (H. M. Hubey) writes:
> (David L Burkhead ) writes:
>>anything but an aquatic environment. And themperature regulation has
>>advantages that any zoologist could list for you, advantages that
>>don't require an aquatic environment to become apparent.
>Cut the shit. I can teach your zoologists how to design
>heat regulators, heat exchangers, air conditioners, and
>any thing else. Heat regulations, allometric equations, and
>dimensional analysis, and scatter plots must be the most
>sophisticated things you and your friends must have ever
>faced in your lifetimes.

And the buzzwords fly once again. Maybe you are an HVAC
technician, but you are _not_ qualified to lecture to zoologists. You
have demonstrated that _repeatedly_ by your utter ignorance over the
most basic aspects of the field.

You obviously don't know anything about the advantages of
temperature regulating in living organisms and are just making an
ad-hominem to cover up that ignorance.

>Start behaving. If you stopped verbiage and started to
>learn some real science you'd only lose your arrogance
>and pompousness.

Get a psychology reference and look up "projection." That's what
you are doing. You have demonstrated, time and again, that it's _you_
who don't know any real science. Your demands that others "learn some
real science" ring a little hollow when you refuse to read any of the
literature in the field that was suggested to you.

>>_against_ developing temperature regulating systems. Temperature
>>regulation (the key factor of warm-bloodedness) works to keep
>>temperature constant against _changes_ in the external environment.
>>No changes, no need for temperature regulation, no force to weed out
>>those that don't have it.
>Any reasons, using fundamentals of biological processes which
>people like must have in abundance, for the temperature of

It had to be something. Just like it had to be something _else_
for dolphins, and something _else_ for dogs, and something _else_ for
chimps, and something _else_ for camels.

>Remember the lectures that people have been trying to give, about
>the value of prediction? Well, Maxwell in 1865 predicted that
>light was an electro-magnetic wave. That was probably the
>most important event of the century.

And the relevance to the current situation is? That there are
things that Maxwell's equations _didn't_ predict doesn't invalidate
them (since the non-predictions are in things they don't cover).
Likewise the value of temperature regulation, of keeping a constant
temperature, has fairly broad parameters in the range of possible temperatures.

>Here's a challenge to all of you. Reach into the vast recesses
>of your biological, zoological, anatomical knowledge and tell
>us why this temperature and no other. And what could have
>caused it? Anything to do with temperature regulation?

Because it _doesn't_ have to be this temperature. It had to be
_some_ temperature within a fairly broad range, but not particularly
_this_ temperature. And your "aquatic theory" does no better job of
"explaining" things since that broad range is to be found in other
animals, including aquatic animals.

How interesting that AAH proponents such as yourself are so
interested in making challenges, but exempt themselves from having to
meet them. No. That's not right. It's not interesting. It's
happened so often that, frankly, it's getting boring.

>> "Heat loss calculations"? GIGO. Your "calculations" are no
>It's too bad you learned this word GIGO and nothing else.,
>Do you know the connection between those allometric equations
>on mass-surface-area ratios and their relations to heat loss
>calculations and dimensional analysis.

It's too bad taht you learned buzzwords and nothing else.
Otherwise you'd know that the results you get from this kind of
analysis, since you don't _have_ closed-form solutions to the
equations in question, relies heavily on the assumptions you make
going in (the garbage in) so that the results can be whatever you
_want_ them to be (the garbage out). The only way around that is
sophisticated CFD models which include heat transfer (and all the
better packages do) or experimental data. I _have_ the experimental
data, with real people in real water.

>It's strange that you can use some of the results of this
>kind of work without understanding where it comes from. Weren't
>you the guy who was talking about elephants and other large
>animals and why they have to be hairless?

Nope. I never said they "had to be hairless." In fact, I don't
think anyone said they _had_ to be. It was merely pointed out that
several non-aquatic animals _were_ hairless.

And as for "use some of the results of this kind of work without
understanding where it comes from" well, that's the small cooking
vessel accusing the large cooking vessel of having a low albedo. And
in this case, it's the _blind_ small cooking vessel only _thinking_
the large cooking vessel has that low albedo. It's projection once

>> Loss of heavy fur is an important part of this. Those that had
>>"thinner" fur could function in hotter parts of the day than those
>>with heavier fur, leading them to be less culled by predation. The
>>result would be a bias toward less fur.
>And of course, the heat loss calculations are GIGO :-)..

No. The _experimental results_ are not GIGO. Heat loss
calculations based on hidden assumptions are GIGO. Heat loss
calculations that someone has apparently not even _done_ are GIGO. (If
you've done them, why don't you show your work.)

>I had you pegged right. You're a memorizer who likes to
>make noise. Have you undersood anything clearly or is
>this the level of your knowledge for everything you
>claim that you know.

Let's see. I've completed the fluid mechanics course at the
University. I'm taking the CFD course now. I'm doing applications in
CFD and non-linear dynamics at present. I do design work on reentry
systems for space vehicles (heat tranfer, drag, and lift). My faculty
advisor is a hydrodynamics specialist, and I consult with him regularly.
I've also done work in statistical and thermal physics. All this is
more than enough to tell me that your off-the-cuff "assessments" are
essentially worthless. They're shots in the dark hoping to hit

David L. Burkhead

Spacecub - The Artemis Project - Artemis Magazine

Box 831
Akron, OH 44309-0831