Re: tree-climbing hominids

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: J. Moore: "The Shifting AAT"
• Previous message: JF Dullaart: "AAT: Closing Argument"
• Maybe in reply to: Alex Duncan: "tree-climbing hominids"
• Next in thread: Alex Duncan: "Re: tree-climbing hominids"

In article <hubey.814073190@pegasus.montclair.edu> H. M. Hubey,
hubey@pegasus.montclair.edu writes:
>>1. Flush the "lower vs. higher" misconception down the commode. There
>>ain't such a thing.
>
>Sure there is. HUmans are high up the evolutionary scale.
>Fishes are low. So are bacteria and viruses.

Nope, nope, nope. A full rebuttal goes beyond the scope of
sci.anthro.paleo, but perhaps I should ask: How do you define "higher up
the evolutionary scale?"

chris

• Next message: J. Moore: "The Shifting AAT"
• Previous message: JF Dullaart: "AAT: Closing Argument"
• Maybe in reply to: Alex Duncan: "tree-climbing hominids"
• Next in thread: Alex Duncan: "Re: tree-climbing hominids"