Re: An alternative to ST and AAT
Phillip Bigelow (bh162@scn.org)
Mon, 04 Nov 1996 20:32:45 -0800
Thomas Clarke wrote:
>
> In article <327A0E11.7012@scn.org> Phillip Bigelow <bh162@scn.org> writes:
> > 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.
You're right; I don't. The discussion thread is on the relationship
between terrestrial adaptation and bipedal stance. That's all.
I simply listed a few bipedal creatures that had as immediate
ancestors terrestrial quadrupeds (in the case of kangaroos and
kangaroo rats) or terrestrial bipeds (in the case of birds).
The topic is "bipedal adaptation in a terrestrial environment".
> H.s and preceeding hominids and australopithecenes are the only
> animals ever to "walk like a man".
Actually, the only creature to walk EXACTLY like a human is a modern
human. Australopithecenes did not have the hip/foot/ankle/arch
structure to walk "just like a <man> <sic>".
Similarly, the only creatures to walk EXACTLY like birds are birds.
The same can be said of kangaroo locomotion and kangaroo rat locomotion.
Your point is essentially moot. Your point is also extremely
specio-centric in it's logic, but I'll save *that* criticism for
another day.
<pb>
|