Re: An alternative to ST and AAT
Thomas Clarke (clarke@acme.ist.ucf.edu)
4 Nov 1996 22:08:23 GMT
In article <327A0E11.7012@scn.org> Phillip Bigelow <bh162@scn.org> writes:
> 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?
Don't you see a difference in these cases.
H.s and preceeding hominids and australopithecenes are the only
animals ever to "walk like a man". [at least I know of no others]
There are lots of saltative bipeds in Australia.
There were lots of bipedal (tripedal?) dinosaurs.
But only one who walks like a man.
Does this not suggest the possibility of special evolutionary
circumstances? If the circumstances were not special then why
are there not lots of animals that walk like a man?
Tom Clarke
P.S. The special circumstances could have been most anything.
I think the question is open as to what they were, but the
special nature is clear.
|