Re: Savanna: a slow demise
Whittet (Whittet@shore.net)
1 Oct 1995 15:36:28 GMT
In article <4463oo$5hj@news.global1.net>, pnich@globalone.net says...
>
>mrdubious@aol.com (Mrdubious) graced us with the following words:
>
>>Phil Nicholls sez:
>>The "savannah theory" is a straw man stuff deleted
>Fact: Pre-hominids were forest dwellers
>Fact: Early hominids were savanna dwellers
>
>The difference between Elaine and most of her critics is how the
>transition took place. Obviously they just didn't walk out onto the
>grasslands one day and say "Boy! What a great place! Think I'll stand
>on two legs now and pick up some tools with my free hands." Yet
>this is what Elaine calls the "Savannah Theory."
>
>The transition is critical. I believe it took place in the zone at
>which forests border on savannas. This is because some of the
>earliest hominids clearly retained arboreal adaptations. It makes a
>great deal of sense.
I am curious:
Was a case of man walking out of the forests onto the Savannah,
or the forests evolving into Savannah as the climate changed?
Did the Savannah then evolve into desert and if so, would the
changes have begun near the center of a continent and spread
toward the edges, eventually forcing man into the sea?
Wouldn't these climatic changes have fluctuated back and forth
repeatedly over the last several million years, eventually
forcing man to adapt to a form which could handle different
enviornments as required?
stuff deleted
>Phil Nicholls
Steve
|