Re: Refs, please... was... Re: AAT Theory

Thomas Clarke (
11 Oct 1995 13:47:38 GMT

In article <45fbag$> (Phil Nicholls)

> If the SST is a reference to the "savannah theory" Ms. Morgan likes to
> mention in her books I am afraid I have some bad news for your. There
> is not, nor has there ever been, a "savannah theory."

No? What is your theory then of how arboreal apes became hominds?

> That hominids
> occupied African savannahs is a fact, not a theory.

True. Did they occupy the savannah before Lucy and the first family?
Did Lucy and the first family occupy more than the aquatic fringes of
the savannah?

> The imporrtant thing to remember is that the "savannah theory" is a
> creation of Morgans.

Here's your opportunity. Coin a term that those of us fond of the
AAT can use to refer to the alternative of a
> ... number of ideas as to how hominid
> morphology may be a result of adaptation to savannahs.

Tom Clarke