Re: Bipedalism and theorizing... was Re: Morgan and creationists
John Waters (jdwaters@dircon.co.uk)
22 Sep 1996 09:54:33 GMT
Paul Crowley <Paul@crowleyp.demon.co.uk> wrote in article
<843309960snz@crowleyp.demon.co.uk>...
>
> Distances in the Gombe are relatively small.
JW: Distances in an Ape ancestors niche could be equally small.
> A female chimp with infant would find bipedal progression
extremely difficult
> if not impossible.
JW: Be careful Paul, I can feel feminist hackles rising. A male
could do this, but a determined and resourceful female could
not. Is that what you are saying?
Perhaps you could accept the possibility that the female could
scamper on a mixture of one handed knuckle walking and
bipedalism. A three day old baby is not very heavy, and the
female would have had a couple of days to experiment in her
birthing place.
> > From the point of view of predator avoidance, bipedalism
would
> > have clear advantages because of the increased elevation of
the
> > head and eyes.
>
> If we're talking of a woodland habitat, this hardly counts.
JW: True, but in a savannah habitat....
>
> The spines of knuckle-walking apes enter the skull towards the
> back, so they naturally look forward at all times.
JW: They naturally look forward when their trunk is vertical. It
is not usually vertical when they are knuckle walking.
>
John
|