|
|
Re: Review of Human Evolution
debra mckay (debra.mckay@utoronto.ca)
Thu, 16 Jan 1997 19:10:38 GMT
susansf@aol.com (SUSANSF) wrote:
>Minor booboos? Okay, I must've been staring at the photos too long and not
>paying attention to the text as I should, but what were the mistakes?
Minor, like I say--a couple of captions mixed up on photos (p252), and the
cladogram (p. 38) was puzzling--there's a stray circle (indicating a node,
I assume) with no branch--in fact, now that I look at it again, I see
that there are *two* stray circles with no branches. It makes it hard
to figure out just what the heck is meant by this hypothesis, since there
is no explanation provided in the text, and it departs from Tattersall's
(from which it is apparently derived). But that's the problem with
using cladograms in popular works, I guess--they are more to illustrate a point
than to actually provide a true hypothesis.
>"Osteo U" is our name for TW's Human Osteology class.... we call it a
>University since once you're in the class, you enter a world outside of
>the regular college one.... into ... "Osteo U" Sounds like fun, but it was
>pretty hellish too :) Basically your life revolved around Osteo U if you
>were a serious student. I haven't read the textbook Human Osteology.....
>but it most likely is the same Osteo U. mentioned. I still have a class
>photo.... with my hands inside the mysterious "Black Box." If you think
>id's of bones by sight was tough, try doing it by touch only!!!!!!!
>
Yeah, we did that too in our course. I sorta liked the metrics tests--
you know, id the bone, side it, sex it, take the relevant measurements and
calculate the formulae all in about a minute and a half. Who says this
stuff isn't fun??
Deb
>Susan
>susansf@netcom.com (newsreader down temporarily)
>
>
>
>
|