Re: Speciation - how do you know?
Paul Crowley (Paul@crowleyp.demon.co.uk)
Mon, 30 Sep 96 19:39:59 GMT
In article <Pine.SOL.3.91.960929211442.10639D-100000@lonestar.jpl.utsa.edu>
dsierra@lonestar.jpl.utsa.edu "David Sierra" writes:
> Why do I get the feelling this is not going to be reconciled?
>
> Some of us feel strongly H.n. were capable (not necessaraly _did_ on a
> regular basis, but certainly had the capacity if needed) of such feats.
No, no. Either they did it all the time, or they hardly did it
at all. Either they had some kind of strategy, like that outlined
by Nick Maclaren, which they developed over generations and used
for making a living or they did something else totally different.
Either they were regular hunters, or they were next to useless
at it. Either they were something like the !Kung or they were
something like me. There is really no half-way house - certainly
not when you're talking about hunting aurochs or the like.
> Others feel just as strongly that the capacity was notably lacking.
>
> Can we just agree to disagree?
But what else is this NG for? It's the ideal place to question
a lot of assumptions that just don't get raised in the professional
literature.
And it is highly relevant. More is known about H.n. than any
other hominid. If we can get a bit more clear about its probable
lifestyle, then we might make better progress elsewhere. My own
feeling is that the "hunting hypothesis" for all hominids should
have been laid to rest a long, long time ago.
Anyway it's fun to trying to work out the full implications of a
point of view.
Paul.
|