Re: An alternative to ST and AAT

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: don garick: "Re: Speciation - how do you know?"
• Previous message: Bullwinkle: "Re: Why is Homo sapiens hairless?"

In article <846623877snz@crowleyp.demon.co.uk>, Paul@crowleyp.demon.co.uk wrote:

> If, for some reason, a
> population of chimps began to walk bipedally there would be many, many
> generations where the
> regular chimps would still be far better at getting around...
>
> What's the alternative?
> the first bipedal hominids would have been *more* effective
> at terrestrial progression than their quadrupedal cousins.
>
> Can you make a case for this?
> Paul.

I think the *base* case is that as members of the LCA gradually became
more bipedal they gradually became better at terrestrial progression.
This seems like the simplest and most obvious place to start.

The alternative hypothesis, that as members of the LCA gradually became
more bipedal they gradually became worse(!) at terrestrial progression,
needs to have the case made for it.

Tom

• Next message: don garick: "Re: Speciation - how do you know?"
• Previous message: Bullwinkle: "Re: Why is Homo sapiens hairless?"