Professor Phillip Tobias (who held the chair of Raymond Dart) was initially sympathetic to the savannah model, but in 1995, he exclaimed: “We were all profoundly and unutterably wrong! ... Open the window and throw out the savannah hypothesis; it’s dead and we need a new paradigm ... All the former savannah supporters (including myself) must now swallow our earlier words in the light of the new results from the early hominid deposits.” (Tobias, 1995).

littor...@gmail.com wrote:

> Professor Phillip Tobias (who held the chair of Raymond Dart) was initially
> sympathetic to the savannah model, but in 1995, he exclaimed: “We were
> all profoundly and unutterably wrong! ... Open the window and throw out
> the savannah hypothesis; it’s dead and we need a new paradigm ... All the
> former savannah supporters (including myself) must now swallow our
> earlier words in the light of the new results from the early hominid
> deposits.” (Tobias, 1995).

The only thing more difficult than learning is unlearning. That's the curse of
savanna idiocy: We all learned it first!

We have to unlearn it before we can learn something better...

Me? That's my life. My whole life I've been presented with ideas I was FORCED
to challenge, to test. So it's nothing new to me. It was never about "Learning"
an idea like savanna idiocy, it was about modeling -- getting all the pieces to fit.

Everything fits Aquatic Ape. Everything. While savanna idiocy leaves us asking
a boat load of unanswered questions. Like...

#1.

How does savanna idiocy account for all the separate, distinct Homo populations
(Neanderthal, Denisovan, etc)?

It doesn't.

How does Aquatic Ape account for/explain them?

Easy: Periodically, groups pushed inland, settled & adapted to their new and
distinct environments, resulting in new and distinct populations of Homo.

#2.

How does savanna idiocy even get Homo to all these different far-flung points?

It doesn't. They couldn't carry a savanna around with them, to feed.

How does Aquatic Ape account for/explain get them there?

It's inescapable! They were on the coastline, waterside, consuming resources
and then moving on for proverbial "Greener Pastures" (more fertile beaches)
when pickings grew slim. Eventually they were going to cross continents, each
everywhere...

Aquatic Ape explains what we know. Savanna idiocy can't.

-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/701137037768753152

On Thursday, November 17, 2022 at 5:02:22 PM UTC-5, JTEM is so reasonable wrote:
> littor...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> > Professor Phillip Tobias (who held the chair of Raymond Dart) was initially
> > sympathetic to the savannah model, but in 1995, he exclaimed: “We were
> > all profoundly and unutterably wrong! ... Open the window and throw out
> > the savannah hypothesis; it’s dead and we need a new paradigm .... All the
> > former savannah supporters (including myself) must now swallow our
> > earlier words in the light of the new results from the early hominid
> > deposits.” (Tobias, 1995).
> The only thing more difficult than learning is unlearning. That's the curse of
> savanna idiocy: We all learned it first!
>
> We have to unlearn it before we can learn something better...
>
> Me? That's my life. My whole life I've been presented with ideas I was FORCED
> to challenge, to test. So it's nothing new to me. It was never about "Learning"
> an idea like savanna idiocy, it was about modeling -- getting all the pieces to fit.
>
> Everything fits Aquatic Ape. Everything. While savanna idiocy leaves us asking
> a boat load of unanswered questions. Like...
>
> #1.
>
> How does savanna idiocy account for all the separate, distinct Homo populations
> (Neanderthal, Denisovan, etc)?
>
> It doesn't.
>
> How does Aquatic Ape account for/explain them?
>
> Easy: Periodically, groups pushed inland, settled & adapted to their new and
> distinct environments, resulting in new and distinct populations of Homo.
>
> #2.
>
> How does savanna idiocy even get Homo to all these different far-flung points?
>
> It doesn't. They couldn't carry a savanna around with them, to feed.
>
> How does Aquatic Ape account for/explain get them there?
>
> It's inescapable! They were on the coastline, waterside, consuming resources
> and then moving on for proverbial "Greener Pastures" (more fertile beaches)
> when pickings grew slim. Eventually they were going to cross continents, each
> everywhere...
>
> Aquatic Ape explains what we know. Savanna idiocy can't.
>
>
>
>
>
> -- --
>
> https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/701137037768753152
GIGO.

DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:

[...]

Proving you have no idea what "GIGO" means and how to use it
is NOT as effective an "Argument" as you clearly believe it to be.

-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/701137037768753152

On Thursday, November 17, 2022 at 6:28:51 PM UTC-5, JTEM is so reasonable wrote:
> DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:
>
> [...]
>
>
> Proving you have no idea what "GIGO" means and how to use it
> is NOT as effective an "Argument" as you clearly believe it to be.
>
>
>
>
>
> -- --
>
> https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/701137037768753152
GIGO.

DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:

> GIGO.

If you're not going to take your meds can you at least start your own
thread, where you and your OCD can post "GIGO" 80 or 372 times
in succession, getting it out of your system, and leaving it to the
grownup to talk?

Thanks in advance.

-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/701137037768753152

On Thu, 17 Nov 2022 09:38:23 -0800 (PST), "littor...@gmail.com"
<littoral.homo@gmail.com> wrote:

>Professor Phillip Tobias (who held the chair of Raymond Dart) was initially sympathetic
>to the savannah model, but in 1995, he exclaimed: “We were all profoundly and unutterably
>wrong! ... Open the window and throw out the savannah hypothesis; it’s dead and we need
>a new paradigm ... All the former savannah supporters (including myself) must now swallow
>our earlier words in the light of the new results from the early hominid deposits.” (Tobias, 1995).

Professor Manuel Dominguez-Rodrigo in 2014: "the savanna hypothesis
not only has not been falsified but its heuristics are stronger than
ever before."
https://sci-hub.se/10.1086/674530

See also:
https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108961646

On Friday, November 18, 2022 at 5:46:19 AM UTC-5, Pandora wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Nov 2022 09:38:23 -0800 (PST), "littor...@gmail.com"
> <littor...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >Professor Phillip Tobias (who held the chair of Raymond Dart) was initially sympathetic
> >to the savannah model, but in 1995, he exclaimed: “We were all profoundly and unutterably
> >wrong! ... Open the window and throw out the savannah hypothesis; it’s dead and we need
> >a new paradigm ... All the former savannah supporters (including myself) must now swallow
> >our earlier words in the light of the new results from the early hominid deposits.” (Tobias, 1995).
> Professor Manuel Dominguez-Rodrigo in 2014: "the savanna hypothesis
> not only has not been falsified but its heuristics are stronger than
> ever before."
> https://sci-hub.se/10.1086/674530
>
> See also:
> https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108961646
Savanna(h) originally meant 'tree-less grassland', which could include seasonal sedge wetlands and/or a few shrubby trees.
These days it can mean almost anything but completely closed canopy forest, as long as some grass is present.
Doesn't matter, hominoids became bipedal while arboreal.

Op vrijdag 18 november 2022 om 18:20:49 UTC+1 schreef DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves:

> > >Professor Phillip Tobias (who held the chair of Raymond Dart) was initially sympathetic
> > >to the savannah model, but in 1995, he exclaimed: “We were all profoundly and unutterably
> > >wrong! ... Open the window and throw out the savannah hypothesis; it’s dead and we need
> > >a new paradigm ... All the former savannah supporters (including myself) must now swallow
> > >our earlier words in the light of the new results from the early hominid deposits.” (Tobias 1995).

> > Professor Manuel Dominguez-Rodrigo in 2014: "the savanna hypothesis
> > not only has not been falsified but its heuristics are stronger than
> > ever before." https://sci-hub.se/10.1086/674530
> > See also https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108961646

> Savanna(h) originally meant 'tree-less grassland', which could include seasonal sedge wetlands and/or a few shrubby trees.
> These days it can mean almost anything but completely closed canopy forest, as long as some grass is present.
> Doesn't matter, hominoids became bipedal while arboreal.

No, my boy: while aquarboreal: wading made them BP = head above the water + grasping branches overhead:
google "aquarboreal".

Hominoid evolution is not so difficult in general IMO: plate tectonics:
-India c 40 Ma approaching Eurasia formed archipelagoes + coastal forests: aqua+arbor:
Catarrhini reaching these islands of course became more aquarboreal = Hominoidea,
-India further underneath Eurasia split them into hylobatids (E) & great apes (W) along Tethys Ocean coastal forests,
-the Mesopotamian Seaway closure c 25 Ma split great apes in the Tethys Sea into dryopiths-hominids (E: along Med.Sea) & sivapiths-pongids (W: S-Asian coastal forests),
-Messinian Salinity crisis: only the Red Sea hominids survived,
-Zanclean Flood c 5 Ma opened the Red Sea into the Ind.Ocean?
-- Pan went right, along the E.Afr.coast ->africanus->robustus->bonobo-chimp,
-- Homo went left, along the S.Asian coastal ->Java etc. H.erectus etc.:
google "coastal dispersal Pleistocene Homo".

On Friday, November 18, 2022 at 5:05:52 PM UTC-5, littor...@gmail.com wrote:
> Op vrijdag 18 november 2022 om 18:20:49 UTC+1 schreef DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves:
> > > >Professor Phillip Tobias (who held the chair of Raymond Dart) was initially sympathetic
> > > >to the savannah model, but in 1995, he exclaimed: “We were all profoundly and unutterably
> > > >wrong! ... Open the window and throw out the savannah hypothesis; it’s dead and we need
> > > >a new paradigm ... All the former savannah supporters (including myself) must now swallow
> > > >our earlier words in the light of the new results from the early hominid deposits.” (Tobias 1995).
> > > Professor Manuel Dominguez-Rodrigo in 2014: "the savanna hypothesis
> > > not only has not been falsified but its heuristics are stronger than
> > > ever before." https://sci-hub.se/10.1086/674530
> > > See also https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108961646
>
> > Savanna(h) originally meant 'tree-less grassland', which could include seasonal sedge wetlands and/or a few shrubby trees.
> > These days it can mean almost anything but completely closed canopy forest, as long as some grass is present.
> > Doesn't matter, hominoids became bipedal while arboreal.
> No, my boy: while aquarboreal: wading made them BP

Didn't do that for monkeys either, not even proboscis & crab-eater monkeys.

Pandora wrote:

> Professor Manuel Dominguez-Rodrigo in 2014: "the savanna hypothesis
> not only has not been falsified

Lol!

He might as well claim that the moon being made out of green cheese has
not been falsified... Sheesh!

And when you figure out that Google thing, do that search on fallacious
arguments, try to figure out when one you just posted here, now.

I'll give you a hint: You're not posting the "Argument" from a perceived
authority, you're posting an opinion absent any facts, any reasoning.

HINT II: "So&So says this is wrong BECAUSE...."

"So&So says this is wrong BECAUSE" is an argument. "So&So says this
is wrong" is something an idiot says.

-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/701231935675121664

> > > > >Professor Phillip Tobias (who held the chair of Raymond Dart) was initially sympathetic
> > > > >to the savannah model, but in 1995, he exclaimed: “We were all profoundly and unutterably
> > > > >wrong! ... Open the window and throw out the savannah hypothesis; it’s dead and we need
> > > > >a new paradigm ... All the former savannah supporters (including myself) must now swallow
> > > > >our earlier words in the light of the new results from the early hominid deposits.” (Tobias 1995).

Some kudu runner:

> > > Doesn't matter, hominoids became bipedal while arboreal.

> > No, my boy: while aquarboreal: wading made them BP ...

> Didn't do that for monkeys either, not even proboscis & crab-eater monkeys.

Thanks, my boy: Nasalis is a nice illustration of the very first steps from arboreal to aquarboreal: more upright, flatter feet, already shorter tail etc.
Early hominoidea c 30 Ma were already further: tail loss, larger body size, more vertical & central spine, broader sternum-thorax-pelvis etc.

Google "aquarboreal".