Re: Why is Homo sapiens hairless?
Phil Nicholls (pnich@digiworldinc.com)
Thu, 21 Nov 1996 03:11:22 GMT
Paul@crowleyp.demon.co.uk (Paul Crowley) wrote:
>In article <01bbd4c2$6600e820$LocalHost@dan-pc>
> rohinton@collins.prestel.co.uk "Rohinton Collins" writes:
>
>> Whether it was hunting/foraging/scavenging, it would certainly
>> have given her species an advantage, one that would have perhaps have even
>> been necessary for her species to become successful terrestrial bipeds.
>> After all, there were plenty of other species of mammal which had been
>> around in this niche for a lot longer.
>
>You cannot put forward a wild theory with absolutely no evidence
>and claim to be doing science. You might as well suggest that
>Lucy had wings attached to her shoulder blades. They would
> "certainly have given her species an advantage, one that would
> have perhaps have even been necessary for her species to become
> successful terrestrial bipeds . . . . "
Well, Gee, Paul, I've been saying this to you for some time now.
>> But I do agree that the australopithecines
>> most probably did not hunt. But they certainly foraged and scavenged.
>There is no evidence at all for scavenging. And how would they get
>to the kills before all the other predators?
There is plenty of evidence for scavanging. It's not conclusive but
it is there. Scavenging, Paul, means that you get what's left over
when the predators are done. If they ge there before the other
predators, that makes them predators, not scavangers.
Phil Nicholls
pnich@digiworldinc.com
"To ask a question, you must first know
most of the answer." Robert Sheckley
|