Re: Crowley theory
Paul Crowley (Paul@crowleyp.demon.co.uk)
Thu, 19 Oct 95 14:28:54 GMT
In article <Pine.OSF.3.91.951015154338.32764A-100000@moe.cc.utexas.edu>
eohippus@moe.cc.utexas.edu "David Froehlich" writes:
> On Sat, 14 Oct 1995, Paul Crowley wrote:
>
> > > > I presume you accept that there were major disadvantages in becoming
> > > > bipedal - i.e. the mother had to use one or both arms to carry her
> > > > child everywhere she went, meaning that she could not run, climb,
> > > > use a club, or throw rocks when in the presence of a predator, nor
> > > > could she sleep in a tree at night. In fact the viability of her
> > > > existence is questionable.
> > > You still have not addressed my basic question of how you would know if
> > > any of the asumptions are wrong?
> >
> > I just don't understand your point. Would you mind listing the
> > assumptions that I appear to be making, to which the question
> > "how would I know if it was wrong?" could properly be addressed.
> You should be aware of your own assumptions . .
I don't think that I was making *any* significant assumptions. It was
you who stated that I was making unjustifiable ones. I was happy to
consider the possibility because they can be difficult to see. But
it's up to you to point them out.
Paul.
|