Re: Human Evolution and Obesity

H. M. Hubey (
14 Oct 1995 20:10:12 -0400 (David L Burkhead ) writes:

>Back when I was hunting every animal that _I_ ever skinned had fat
>fused to the skin. It didn't matter whether the animal was "aquatic"
>or not.

Is this yet another factor that is being made binary?

I've seen animals get skinned and most of the fat is internal or
fused with/to the muscles. ON some sheep it's just collected in
one spot (the tail).

Sure there is some fat around the skin. But on humans most of the
fat seems to be "fused" to the skin.

> This is _exactly_ the kind of "evidence" on which tha AAH
>rests--claims that something is an "aquatic trait" without any regard
>to whether or not it actually _is_.

If the variables are continuous-valued during verbal discussion
we are allowed and indeed obliged to turn them into binary or
sometimes multiple valued variables. Why is it OK to say that
the pygmies are short and that the Watusis are tall or that
gorillas are large and chimps are small without causing such
a ruckus?

YOu're getting overemotional on your attacks on AAT again. It
almost seems as if you invented the theory of evolution or
the SST or the MST or something all by yourself and that your
lifetime work is being threatened.


Regards, Mark