Re: An alternative to ST and AAT
John Waters (jdwaters@dircon.co.uk)
30 Nov 1996 21:08:49 GMT
Phillip Bigelow <bh162@scn.org> wrote in article
<329CF39A.3BD9@scn.org>...
> John Waters wrote:
>
> > JW: I tend to feel a general answer is often a load of
> > mush. It is the details which are interesting. Would
you
> > care to outline the basic questions you think we should
be
> > anwering here?
>
> My favorites are outlined below.
(Snipped a list of pertinent questions)
JW: These are interesting questions Phillip, although I am
not sure that I understand them all. For example, this
question :
> How many different species of each hominid can we
find?
JW: What do you mean by each hominid here? Could the
question also read *How many different species of hominid
can we find*. Or is that a different question?
> How different from each other are these distinct
species?
JW: At the current rate, it seems that virtually every
fossil hominid will be classified as a separate species.
Are you calling for a re-examination of the rules of
classification here? I have often wondered about these
Paleontological species.
>
> 2) Analysis of the raw data (on-going, and much to be
done)
> What is the phylogeny of the whole group of fossil
primates,
> based on skeletal structures?
JW: This appears to exclude extant taxa. Is this
deliberate?
> What are the basic biomechanics of the locomotion of
> each fossil taxa? Are they different between
species?
> Is there a temporal trend in biomechanical changes,
> or does the data appear to indicate random change?
JW: Do you think you can reach any useful conclusions if
you exclude extant taxa?
>
> Also note one other thing in my list: not a *single*
question regarding
> how "special" our hominid lineage is. That is because,
philosophically,
> I don't believe that our lineage is that "special" in the
first place.
JW: Amen to that.
John.
|