Re: AAT Questions...
J. Moore (j#d#.moore@canrem.com)
Thu, 10 Aug 95 09:34:00 -0500
Si> Jim more writes:
Si> - 7. Humans have young that are born less developed than our relatives,
Si> - and they develop more slowly as well. Aquatic mammals have young
Si> - that are quite advanced compared to similar terrestrial mammals (for
Si> - example, seals as opposed to land-based carnivores), or which grow
Si> - very quickly, or both. Why did the purported aquatic hominids
Si> - change in the opposite direction from other aquatic mammals?
Si> Jim.. Humans have children that are less developed than our relatives
Si> because our brains are so much bigger than our closest relatives. Part
Si> of the reason children are born "early" compared to other creatures is
Si> that if our heads were very much larger then women whould experience an
Si> extreme amount of physical stress during child birth, even more so than
Si> is experienced now. This is why the head of the human infant is "soft"
Si> and contains a partial "soft spot" in the skull so that it is better
Si> able to slip down the birth cannal. In fact, the human brain will
Si> probably not get much larger or women will not be able to walk normally.
Si> Troy Kelley
You have a misunderstanding of how evolution works going on here,
and this has resulted in your telling a just-so story. This
phrase gets a lot of work, I know, but I'll try taking this
opportunity to explain it better.
First problem is this: I asked a question and you answered; the
question was "why are human children born less developed than our
relatives?" and your answer is essentially "because they're born
less developed than our relatives". This part of your answer is
of course an answer that doesn't answer. You elaborate by explaining
the (correct) point that this fact helps allow human children to
grow bigger heads afterward. But you put the cart before the
horse, so to speak, and this is what makes it a just-so story.
You say "Humans have children that are less developed than our
relatives because our brains are so much bigger than our closest
relatives", but the actual fact is quite different, to whit:
"Humans can have brains are so much bigger than our closest relatives
because our have children are born less developed than our relatives".
You see, the difference in wording is fairly subtle, but the
difference in meaning is enormous. Your wording says the cause
of the change is something that the change itself allows; this
would mean that the cause is something from the future, which you
can easily see is impossible.
Jim Moore (j#d#.moore@canrem.com)
* Q-Blue 2.0 *
|