If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Christian Science Monitor)   More importantly, what male hominid would voluntarily give up the ability to lick itself and use a toe to scratch behind its ears?   (csmonitor.com) divider line 38
    More: Interesting, hominids, bipedalism, University of York, paces, terrain, males, australopithecines  
•       •       •

2605 clicks; posted to Geek » on 27 May 2013 at 5:17 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



38 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-05-27 05:19:49 PM
Certainly not my cousin Walter.
 
2013-05-27 05:20:38 PM
Well, would I get superior intelligence, greater moment arm in my joints, and a 2-chamber heart in the groin if I gave those up?
 
2013-05-27 05:39:30 PM
Try yoga?
 
2013-05-27 05:40:31 PM

FrancoFile: Well, would I get superior intelligence, greater moment arm in my joints, and a 2-chamber heart in the groin if I gave those up?


Not to mention thick hide that could turn a copper knife.
 
2013-05-27 05:43:38 PM

theorellior: FrancoFile: Well, would I get superior intelligence, greater moment arm in my joints, and a 2-chamber heart in the groin if I gave those up?

Not to mention thick hide that could turn a copper knife.


Or a 36000 year lifespan to travel in a home-made fusion rocket.
 
2013-05-27 05:45:22 PM

FrancoFile: Well, would I get superior intelligence, greater moment arm in my joints, and a 2-chamber heart in the groin if I gave those up?


But I'd lose my winning smile.
 
2013-05-27 06:07:55 PM

FrancoFile: Well, would I get superior intelligence, greater moment arm in my joints, and a 2-chamber heart in the groin if I gave those up?


Just make sure you have plenty of thallium for the garden.
 
2013-05-27 06:17:36 PM
I think that any mutation that took humans away from that ability would probably be a genetic winner.
If I had those abilities, why would I need to find a mate?
 
2013-05-27 06:17:53 PM
Getting a kick out of the headline because I'm licking myself right now.
 
2013-05-27 06:23:42 PM

FoxholeAtheist: FrancoFile: Well, would I get superior intelligence, greater moment arm in my joints, and a 2-chamber heart in the groin if I gave those up?

Just make sure you have plenty of thallium for the garden.


Winnar!
 
2013-05-27 06:25:51 PM
"We have reason to believe that man first walked upright to free his hands for masturbation."
   - Lily Tomlin
 
2013-05-27 06:27:21 PM

MrHappyRotter: Getting a kick out of the headline because I'm licking myself right now.


Careful, now. I heard of this guy my sister's ex-boyfriend's cousin's aunt's best friend knew that broke his neck doing that. True story
 
2013-05-27 06:27:46 PM
The same hominid that gained access to female hominids without facial hair.
 
2013-05-27 06:30:22 PM
Hey, I know this is ancient, but what is the reason the aquatic ape theory never caught on? No evidence? It always struck me as so... plausible?
Much more so than something like this hypothesis on rocky ground.
 
2013-05-27 06:36:30 PM

Vertdang: I think that any mutation that took humans away from that ability would probably be a genetic winner.
If I had those abilities, why would I need to find a mate?


Yup, pretty sure that why we don't have prehensile tails too.
 
2013-05-27 06:40:36 PM

TeamEd: Hey, I know this is ancient, but what is the reason the aquatic ape theory never caught on? No evidence? It always struck me as so... plausible?
Much more so than something like this hypothesis on rocky ground.


Because it wasn't a theory, it was a hypothesis.  With damned little supporting evidence.  Just a big old helping of feminist politics on the side.
 
2013-05-27 06:50:05 PM
If you've ever seen baboons cruising rough terrain at breakneck speed, it would cast some shadow on the certainty with which they present the idea of bipedalism being such a bonus.  Carrying things as the impetus to favoring bipedalism at least makes sense as a thought exercise, because it's easy to imagine a situation where a certain group of apes who could carry crap with them had some edge over another group..  eh, who knows.
 
2013-05-27 06:54:13 PM
My valuation of bipedalism as an evolutionary advantage is directly proportional to the degree it influenced the development of prominent mammary glands in the female of the species.

/mostly kidding
 
2013-05-27 06:54:44 PM
Wait... you guys CAN'T do that?
 
2013-05-27 07:08:56 PM

Mister Peejay: Wait... you guys CAN'T do that?


Beats me. My ears don't really ever get that itchy. Cool that you can though. I assume you wear those five finger shoes, then?
 
2013-05-27 07:13:26 PM

Hollie Maea: Mister Peejay: Wait... you guys CAN'T do that?

Beats me. My ears don't really ever get that itchy. Cool that you can though. I assume you wear those five finger shoes, then?


No, those are silly.  I just take my socks off.
 
2013-05-27 08:27:12 PM

FrancoFile: TeamEd: Hey, I know this is ancient, but what is the reason the aquatic ape theory never caught on? No evidence? It always struck me as so... plausible?
Much more so than something like this hypothesis on rocky ground.

Because it wasn't a theory, it was a hypothesis.  With damned little supporting evidence.  Just a big old helping of feminist politics on the side.


What was so feministy about the aquatic ape idea?  I don't buy it as a main driver of a "why humans are the way they are" story, but there are plenty of coastal hominid finds, and modern humans are a bit weird among primates in our ability to swim pretty well if taught.  I don't recall it being overtly womyn-power! when I read about it years ago.  There's way more wack-tastic ideas running around out there than the aquatic ape.
 
2013-05-27 08:30:47 PM

Bonzo_1116: FrancoFile: TeamEd: Hey, I know this is ancient, but what is the reason the aquatic ape theory never caught on? No evidence? It always struck me as so... plausible?
Much more so than something like this hypothesis on rocky ground.

Because it wasn't a theory, it was a hypothesis.  With damned little supporting evidence.  Just a big old helping of feminist politics on the side.

What was so feministy about the aquatic ape idea?  I don't buy it as a main driver of a "why humans are the way they are" story, but there are plenty of coastal hominid finds, and modern humans are a bit weird among primates in our ability to swim pretty well if taught.  I don't recall it being overtly womyn-power! when I read about it years ago.  There's way more wack-tastic ideas running around out there than the aquatic ape.


One of the main proponents was a wymyn-power nut is all I remember.  Plus no fossil evidence to speak of.
 
Zel
2013-05-27 08:34:54 PM
of course quadrupeds and hominids have four arms when they need to.

//slashies running through the forest as a primeaval apeman. early savannah walkers had to stand upright, and early forest dwellers wore deerskins!
 
2013-05-27 08:43:07 PM

FrancoFile: One of the main proponents was a wymyn-power nut is all I remember.  Plus no fossil evidence to speak of.


The idea itself didn't smell very feministy...maybe she latched onto it because it was controversial.

And there is evidence of hominids living in seaside environments (apparently leaving behind massive piles of shells from tasty molluscs).  Paddling about in the shallows knocking mussels off of rocks I'll believe---But so aquatic we lost our fur?  That's the part that's batshiat.  We'd be far more likely to have a nice thick otterlike pelt if that was the case.
 
2013-05-27 08:47:52 PM

Bonzo_1116: FrancoFile: One of the main proponents was a wymyn-power nut is all I remember.  Plus no fossil evidence to speak of.

The idea itself didn't smell very feministy...maybe she latched onto it because it was controversial.

And there is evidence of hominids living in seaside environments (apparently leaving behind massive piles of shells from tasty molluscs).  Paddling about in the shallows knocking mussels off of rocks I'll believe---But so aquatic we lost our fur?  That's the part that's batshiat.  We'd be far more likely to have a nice thick otterlike pelt if that was the case.


Here you go.  Elaine Morgan.  She was 'irritated' that the savannah hypothesis was male centered, so she latched onto the aquatic thing as a counterweight.
 
2013-05-27 08:52:49 PM
I can't believe the article fails to mention the enormous benefit of being able to see farther. If there are rocks and bushes four feet high all around you, being able to see food and predators over them is an enormous survival advantage.
 
2013-05-27 09:03:14 PM

FrancoFile: Here you go.  Elaine Morgan.  She was 'irritated' that the savannah hypothesis was male centered, so she latched onto the aquatic thing as a counterweight.


LOL.

Morgan first became drawn into scientific writing when reading popularizers of the savannah hypothesis of human evolution such as Desmond Morris. She described her reaction as one of irritation because the explanations were largely male-centered. For instance, she thought that if humans lost their hair because they needed to sweat while chasing game on the savannah that did not explain why women should also lose their hair as, according to the savannah hypothesis, they would be looking after the children.

Who's to say we didn't lose the hair from the women chasing after the kids.  That can be fairly sweaty work, and so is digging up tubers and gathering fruit and such.  She also assumed that only males would be hunting---this is a big assumption.

This is what happens when English majors don't get to go to law school.

/I personally think we dropped the bulk of the body hair because it makes adult pubes and pit hair stand out really well.  That way we can broadcast how very very sexy we are to each other.
 
2013-05-27 09:09:01 PM
One that wants to throw a baseball. Or a rock. Or a spear.

Seriously, man is the only animal that can throw things really far (and accurate). Do you have any idea what kind of crazy ridiculous advantage that is? ...we kill at a distance. Evolutionarily speaking, having a monopoly of that that ability is fricken' god mode.
 
2013-05-27 09:14:15 PM

Ishkur: One that wants to throw a baseball. Or a rock. Or a spear.

Seriously, man is the only animal that can throw things really far (and accurate). Do you have any idea what kind of crazy ridiculous advantage that is? ...we kill at a distance. Evolutionarily speaking, having a monopoly of that that ability is fricken' god mode.


Can a chimp be taught to accurately throw?  I've seen apes tossing things about their enclosures at the zoo, but you're right--no actual throwing, just underhand tossing and flinging.   Remember, even humans need to be taught how to throw well, and we need to practice for years before we are any good at it.

There's got to be some circus chimp out there throwing baseballs.
 
2013-05-27 09:23:01 PM

Bonzo_1116: FrancoFile: Here you go.  Elaine Morgan.  She was 'irritated' that the savannah hypothesis was male centered, so she latched onto the aquatic thing as a counterweight.

LOL.

Morgan first became drawn into scientific writing when reading popularizers of the savannah hypothesis of human evolution such as Desmond Morris. She described her reaction as one of irritation because the explanations were largely male-centered. For instance, she thought that if humans lost their hair because they needed to sweat while chasing game on the savannah that did not explain why women should also lose their hair as, according to the savannah hypothesis, they would be looking after the children.

Who's to say we didn't lose the hair from the women chasing after the kids.  That can be fairly sweaty work, and so is digging up tubers and gathering fruit and such.  She also assumed that only males would be hunting---this is a big assumption.

This is what happens when English majors don't get to go to law school.

/I personally think we dropped the bulk of the body hair because it makes adult pubes and pit hair stand out really well.  That way we can broadcast how very very sexy we are to each other.


Not to mention that body hair growth is only weakly sex-dependent.
 
2013-05-27 09:51:17 PM
What do you mean, "chimpanzees can't use tools"?

img.youtube.com

J/k...I subscribe to the school that notes early humans were bipedal-capable before moving out into the savanna, and that tool preparation, carrying and using reinforced the exclusively bipedal mode.
 
2013-05-27 10:40:09 PM
Because the Gods engineered us to do so.
 
2013-05-27 10:52:15 PM

Bonzo_1116: FrancoFile: Here you go.  Elaine Morgan.  She was 'irritated' that the savannah hypothesis was male centered, so she latched onto the aquatic thing as a counterweight.

LOL.

Morgan first became drawn into scientific writing when reading popularizers of the savannah hypothesis of human evolution such as Desmond Morris. She described her reaction as one of irritation because the explanations were largely male-centered. For instance, she thought that if humans lost their hair because they needed to sweat while chasing game on the savannah that did not explain why women should also lose their hair as, according to the savannah hypothesis, they would be looking after the children.

Who's to say we didn't lose the hair from the women chasing after the kids.  That can be fairly sweaty work, and so is digging up tubers and gathering fruit and such.  She also assumed that only males would be hunting---this is a big assumption.

This is what happens when English majors don't get to go to law school.

/I personally think we dropped the bulk of the body hair because it makes adult pubes and pit hair stand out really well.  That way we can broadcast how very very sexy we are to each other.


. The 1970's Playboy Theory of Evolution.
 
2013-05-28 05:26:26 AM

Bonzo_1116: Ishkur: One that wants to throw a baseball. Or a rock. Or a spear.

Seriously, man is the only animal that can throw things really far (and accurate). Do you have any idea what kind of crazy ridiculous advantage that is? ...we kill at a distance. Evolutionarily speaking, having a monopoly of that that ability is fricken' god mode.

Can a chimp be taught to accurately throw?  I've seen apes tossing things about their enclosures at the zoo, but you're right--no actual throwing, just underhand tossing and flinging.   Remember, even humans need to be taught how to throw well, and we need to practice for years before we are any good at it.

There's got to be some circus chimp out there throwing baseballs.


I've seen a zoo gorilla nail a guy in the face with a thrown piece of turf it had just torn off the ground, in retaliation to being taunted. And the targeted guy was in a fairly big group, so I thought the gorilla was very accurate, and the guy was lucky it wasn't a rock.
 
2013-05-28 06:17:21 AM
What's special about humans are our buttocks. Here is an example of a highly-evolved primate:

www.latinohealthzone.com
 
2013-05-28 08:55:35 AM

Bonzo_1116: Ishkur: One that wants to throw a baseball. Or a rock. Or a spear.

Seriously, man is the only animal that can throw things really far (and accurate). Do you have any idea what kind of crazy ridiculous advantage that is? ...we kill at a distance. Evolutionarily speaking, having a monopoly of that that ability is fricken' god mode.

Can a chimp be taught to accurately throw?  I've seen apes tossing things about their enclosures at the zoo, but you're right--no actual throwing, just underhand tossing and flinging.   Remember, even humans need to be taught how to throw well, and we need to practice for years before we are any good at it.

There's got to be some circus chimp out there throwing baseballs.


2.bp.blogspot.com

but as state earlier... chimps throwing things just haven't been succesful.
 
2013-05-28 09:05:31 AM
You know who I miss?

"An evolutionary approach can unite and explain the many avenues of cancer research by allowing us to see cancer as an ecosystem," concluded Dr Aktipis. "Just as a forest depends on the individual characteristics of trees as well as the interactions of each tree with its environment; similarly tumors can be [composed of] genetically distinct cells, which depend on both cell-to-cell interactions within the tumor, as well as on the interactions of tumor itself with the body."

( link )

www.mdmorse.com
 
Displayed 38 of 38 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report