Re: An alternative to ST and AAT

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: Phillip Bigelow: "Re: An alternative to ST and AAT"
• Previous message: Marc H. Popek: "Re: CROSSING THE BERING STRAIT? How ridiculous!"

In article <849269317snz@crowleyp.demon.co.uk>, Paul@crowleyp.demon.co.uk wrote:

> In article <01bbdbdc$c31d8380$LocalHost@dan-pc>
> rohinton@collins.prestel.co.uk "Rohinton Collins" writes:
>
> > The only thing we know for sure is this: Lucy's bipedalism is more
> > efficient than ape quadrupedalism only during walking.
>
> We do NOT know this. In fact, everything indicates the opposite.
> Please state exactly how you think Lucy could be more "efficient".
>

Now, hold the phone, Paul. If an animal develops a new trait, especially
one that basically defines his whole lineage from thereafter, I'd accept
that as pretty obvious that the trait was more, not less efficient.
Positions contrary to the obvious rightfully should be supported by the
contrarian. Otherwise we should all have to spend out time reproving the
theory of evolution, gravity, epicyles...:>.

Tom

• Next message: Phillip Bigelow: "Re: An alternative to ST and AAT"
• Previous message: Marc H. Popek: "Re: CROSSING THE BERING STRAIT? How ridiculous!"