Re: Bipedalism and theorizing... was Re: Morgan and creationists (fwd)
Richard Foy (rfoy@netcom.com)
Sun, 14 Jul 1996 19:33:12 GMT
In article <Pine.SUN.3.94L.960712115001.20789D-100000@bonjour.cc.columbia.edu>,
Ralph L Holloway <rlh2@columbia.edu> wrote:
>
>I'm glad it's all so obvious to you, but in fact I was thinking of all
>those past posts on this group that had human infants grabbing for hair,
>tits, whatever, when they were in their aquatic phase. We still are
>talking about infants hanging on (holding on) to their mother's breasts,
>are we not? How does a lowered nipple equate with a n infant hanging on to
>the breast?
>Ralph Holloway?
I am not sure what posts you are referring to. However, I have seen
nothing posted here that says that human infants could not have hung
on to the mothers head hair in an aquatic enviornment.
--
"The form is the content in motion, and the content is the form at
rest." --Northrup Frye
URL http://www.he.tdl.com/~hfanoe/udc.html Unity and Diversity
|