Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [AAT] The hominin diet

Expand Messages
  • Stephen Munro
    ... SM: But modern hunter-gatherers are anatomically different to early Homo species such as ergaster and erectus. IMO there is insufficient evidence to
    Message 1 of 512 , Feb 4, 2001
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      >From: Marcel Williams <newpapyrus@...>
      >Reply-To: AAT@yahoogroups.com
      >To: AAT@yahoogroups.com
      >Subject: [AAT] The hominin diet
      >Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2001 17:27:35 -0800 (PST)
      >
      >
      >--- Stephen Munro <smunro58@...> wrote:
      > >
      > >
      > >
      > > >From: Marcel Williams <newpapyrus@...>
      > > >Reply-To: AAT@yahoogroups.com
      > > >To: AAT@yahoogroups.com
      > > >Subject: Re: [AAT] Brain-size
      > > >Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2001 11:09:22 -0800 (PST)
      > > >
      > > >
      > > >--- Marc Verhaegen
      > > <marc.verhaegen@...>
      > > >wrote:
      > > > > >> >Very interesting on brain-size and diet is
      > > the
      > > > > following:
      > > > > >>
      > > > >
      > > >
      > >
      > >http://www.beyondveg.com/billings-t/comp-anat/comp-anat-1a.shtml
      > > > > >> >Comments are welcome. Kees
      > > > > >>
      > > > > >> It seems to be the usual stuff, eg, the
      > > > > Aiello-Wheeler nonsense.
      > > > > >> They should consider the seaside hypothesis.
      > > > > Marc
      > > > > >
      > > > > >Would you care to be more specific in your
      > > > > rejection of this paper? why is
      > > > > >it "nonsense"? John H. Langdon
      > > > >
      > > > >
      > > > > It's an example of a just-so explanation without
      > > > > considering the comparative
      > > > > evidence. Instead of postulating far-fetched
      > > > > explanations for our large
      > > > > brain, they should consider other mammals with
      > > large
      > > > > brains. That's the
      > > > > problem with the "traditional" PAs, John.
      > > > >
      > > > > I didn't meant anything pejorative with "usual
      > > > > stuff". It's a beautiful
      > > > > website (to counter vegetarian ideas?) but it
      > > seems
      > > > > to follow slavishly the
      > > > > traditional PA ideas & to take them for granted.
      > > > >
      > > > > Marc
      > > >
      > > >MW: Sorry but I disagree Marc. All the articles on
      > > >this site seem to do is to simply note what has
      > > been
      > > >observed in the wild as far as primate dietary
      > > >behavior is concerned. there is certainly nothing
      > > >wrong with observing and noting the facts. And I
      > > find
      > > >that the large amount of insectivory amongst
      > > primates
      > > >is very interesting. The articles note that there
      > > >seems to be a strong preference in practically all
      > > >primates for animal protein-- when they can easily
      > > >get their hands on it. Very interesting.
      > > >
      > > >Marcel F. Williams
      > > >2/3/01
      > >
      > > Stephen: I think the point Marc is making, and I
      >tend to
      > > agree (though admittedly I
      > > only looked briefly at said articles), is that the
      > > author seems to assume
      > > humans were running around on the savanna 2.5
      > > million years ago, either
      > > directly hunting, or scavenging meat. There doesn't
      > > seem to be any mention
      > > of fish or shellfish, yet erectus fossils are almost
      > > always associated with
      > > fish and/or shellfish. IMO erectus was probably much
      > > better adapted to
      > > exploit aquatic resources than savanna resources,
      > > but reading these articles
      > > you wouldn't think so.
      > >
      > > Stephen.
      > >
      >MW: But that is true of hunter-gatherers even today.
      >Some hunter-gatherers exploit aquatic resources some
      >exploit terrestrial resources.

      SM: But modern hunter-gatherers are anatomically different to early Homo
      species such as ergaster and erectus. IMO there is insufficient evidence to
      automatically assume (as the article we're discussing here does) that early
      Homo was capable of exploiting terrestrial resources to the extent that
      anatomically modern humans can.

      Stephen.


      Homo exploits whatever
      >is easily available in its environment and that has
      >probably been true for the last 2.6 million years. And
      >2.5 million years ago there was pretty much nothing
      >but savanna during the glacial period because the
      >rainforest had shrunk into only a few patches of
      >refugia.
      >The first non-African members of Homo do not show up
      >in the fossil record until the next interglacial
      >period which probably began around 2.1 million years
      >ago which was a period of rainforest expansion and
      >when desert barriers were turned into trekable
      >savannas.
      >
      >Marcel F. Williams
      >2/3/01
      >
      >__________________________________________________
      >Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
      >a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/

      _________________________________________________________________________
      Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
    • Elaine Morgan
      ... From: Marc Verhaegen To: AAT@yahoogroups.com Date: Tuesday, April 17, 2001 4:17 PM Subject: Re:
      Message 512 of 512 , Apr 17 9:54 AM
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        -----Original Message-----
        From: Marc Verhaegen <marc.verhaegen@...>
        To: AAT@yahoogroups.com <AAT@yahoogroups.com>
        Date: Tuesday, April 17, 2001 4:17 PM
        Subject: Re: [AAT] The Earliest Members of Homo



        >>>AFAIK the wading orangs in mangrove forests probably came from the
        >>>branches.
        >>
        >>They are hypothetical apes so no-one can ever know.
        >
        >They're not hypothetical!? I mean the orangs that have been seen wading
        >probably came from the branches into the water.

        My turn to say sorry. I thought you meant early gorillas.

        Elaine
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.