Re: An alternative to ST and AAT

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: Michael D. Painter: "Re: MOST IMPORTANT FOSSIL (A human skull as old as coal!)"
• Previous message: Barry Mennen: "Re: Why is Homo sapiens hairless?"

Paul Crowley wrote:

> That's the whole mystery of bipedalism. It should not
> have happened. It does need special justification - <snip>

So, bipedalism in the kangaroo rat (Rodentia) shouldn't have happened
either, right? So, bipedalism in non-avian theropods
(Dinosauria) shouldn't have happened, right? So, bipedalism shouldn't
have happened in all birds (Dinosauria: Theropoda: Aves), right?
So, bipedalism shouldn't have happened in kangaroos (Marsupalia),
right?
Paul, I'm beginning to believe that your idea of a "special
justification" for human bipedalism is nothing more than a specio-
centric view of zoology. The fervor and zeolot-like enthusiasm
that you display for "special justification" is rivaled only in it's
intensity by the religious ramblings of Genesis-promoters.

>This is the fundamental problem of human evolution.

The fundamental problem in human evolution is gathering enough hard
data (fossil evidence) to make meaningful statements about our
origins.
<pb>

• Next message: Michael D. Painter: "Re: MOST IMPORTANT FOSSIL (A human skull as old as coal!)"
• Previous message: Barry Mennen: "Re: Why is Homo sapiens hairless?"