Open acess article in Yearbook of Biological Anthropology:

Form, function and evolution of the human hand

Abstract

The modern human hand is an intriguing mix of primitive morphology and
derived function. Traditionally, its form and function are explained
as a functional “trade-off” between the requirements of locomotion and
manipulation, but recently acquired comparative, experimental and
fossil evidence suggests that this functional trade-off is more
complex than conventional wisdom suggests. Moreover, when studying
hand evolution within the hominin clade, the only morphological
evidence comes from the hard-tissues, and evidence about hand function
must be inferred indirectly from the archaeological record. We lack
information about critical aspects of hand form (e.g., soft tissues)
and function (e.g., neurology) as well as non-lithic evidence about
behavior. Thus, comparative anatomical, experimental and ethological
studies of modern humans and other primates are critical to making
more informed inferences about hand use in the past. We review the
relevant fossil and archaeological evidence within the relevant
comparative context (e.g., other extant apes and dexterous monkeys) in
an attempt to reconstruct hand evolution within the hominin clade. We
conclude by summarizing our current understanding—or lack thereof—of
the evolutionary history of the modern human hand.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/ajpa.24667

Obviously not a paddle, fin or flipper.

Op dinsdag 13 december 2022 om 16:50:03 UTC+1 schreef Pandora:

> Open acess, Yearbook of Biological Anthropology:
"Form, function and evolution of the human hand"
The modern Hs hand is an intriguing mix of primitive morphology & derived function.
Traditionally, its form & function are explained as a functional “trade-off” between the requirements of locomotion & manipulation,
but recently acquired comparative, experimental & fossil evidence suggests:
this functional trade-off is more complex than conventional wisdom suggests..
When studying hand evolution within the hominin clade, the only morphological evidence comes from the hard-tissues,
evidence about hand function must be inferred indirectly from the archaeological record.
We lack information about critical aspects of hand form (e.g. soft tissues) & function (e.g. neurology) & non-lithic evidence about behavior:
comparative anatomical, experimental & ethological studies of modern Hs & other primates are critical to making more informed inferences about hand use in the past.
We review the relevant fossil & archaeological evidence within the relevant comparative context (other extant apes & dexterous monkeys),
we attempt to reconstruct hand evolution within the hominin clade.
We conclude by summarizing our current understanding (or lack thereof) of the evolutionary history of the modern human hand.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/ajpa.24667

> Obviously not a paddle, fin or flipper.

Sigh. Grow up, kudu runner. Nobody says humans can't grasp:
how do you open your oyster, my little boy?

littor...@gmail.com wrote:

> Sigh. Grow up, kudu runner. Nobody says humans can't grasp:
> how do you open your oyster, my little boy?

https://www.science.org/content/article/humans-have-more-primitive-hands-chimpanzees

The claim is that the Chimp hand has evolved further away from the
LCA than the human hand. Which means that whatever selective
pressures were on the human hand (Aquatic Ape), they were present
prior to divergence.

Our hand is more "Primitive," so to speak.

It's another example of how "Humans are apes" and "Humans evolved
from apes" has poisoned thinking. People look at Chimps and
Gorillas and assume that's what our ancestors had to look like. But, in
truth it's not even what their ancestors looked like!

-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/703468006592905216

Op dinsdag 13 december 2022 om 21:54:07 UTC+1 schreef JTEM is so reasonable:
> littor...@gmail.com wrote:

.... (kudu runner's nonsense snipped)

> > Sigh. Grow up, kudu runner. Nobody says humans can't grasp:
> > how do you open your oyster, my little boy?

> https://www.science.org/content/article/humans-have-more-primitive-hands-chimpanzees
> The claim is that the Chimp hand has evolved further away from the
> LCA than the human hand. Which means that whatever selective
> pressures were on the human hand (Aquatic Ape), they were present
> prior to divergence.
> Our hand is more "Primitive," so to speak.
> It's another example of how "Humans are apes" and "Humans evolved
> from apes" has poisoned thinking. People look at Chimps and
> Gorillas and assume that's what our ancestors had to look like. But, in
> truth it's not even what their ancestors looked like.

Yes, in a sense, our human hand is more primitive than Afr.ape hands:
G & P evolved knuckle-walking in //.

I proposed this already some 30 years ago (e.g. my book "In den beginne was het water"),
today it's +-generally accepted. :-)

On Tue, 13 Dec 2022 09:15:34 -0800 (PST), "littor...@gmail.com"
<littoral.homo@gmail.com> wrote:

>Op dinsdag 13 december 2022 om 16:50:03 UTC+1 schreef Pandora:
>
>> Open acess, Yearbook of Biological Anthropology:
>"Form, function and evolution of the human hand"
>The modern Hs hand is an intriguing mix of primitive morphology & derived function.
>Traditionally, its form & function are explained as a functional “trade-off” between the requirements of locomotion & manipulation,
>but recently acquired comparative, experimental & fossil evidence suggests:
>this functional trade-off is more complex than conventional wisdom suggests.
>When studying hand evolution within the hominin clade, the only morphological evidence comes from the hard-tissues,
>evidence about hand function must be inferred indirectly from the archaeological record.
>We lack information about critical aspects of hand form (e.g. soft tissues) & function (e.g. neurology) & non-lithic evidence about behavior:
>comparative anatomical, experimental & ethological studies of modern Hs & other primates are critical to making more informed inferences about hand use in the past.
>We review the relevant fossil & archaeological evidence within the relevant comparative context (other extant apes & dexterous monkeys),
>we attempt to reconstruct hand evolution within the hominin clade.
>We conclude by summarizing our current understanding (or lack thereof) of the evolutionary history of the modern human hand.
>https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/ajpa.24667
>
>> Obviously not a paddle, fin or flipper.
>
>Nobody says humans can't grasp:
>how do you open your oyster?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n_YPxcF1ta4

Do you think Homo erectus had a professional quality oyster knife?

Pandora wrote:

> Do you think Homo erectus had a professional quality oyster knife?

If you really think that nobody ate an oyster before there were
"Professional quality oyster knives," or knives for that matter, then
hang it up. Unsubscribe. Shut off your computer. Give up.

You clearly have zero interest in these topics. You're reacting
emotionally, not engaging in any kind of rational discussion.

-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/703468006592905216

Op woensdag 14 december 2022 om 18:47:18 UTC+1 schreef JTEM is so reasonable:

> Pandora wrote:

> > Do you think Homo erectus had a professional quality oyster knife?

> If you really think that nobody ate an oyster before there were
> "Professional quality oyster knives," or knives for that matter, then
> hang it up. Unsubscribe. Shut off your computer. Give up.
> You clearly have zero interest in these topics. You're reacting
> emotionally, not engaging in any kind of rational discussion.

Yes, thes fanatics are dogmatically convinced they *know* the Truth:
human ancestors left the forests for the African savannas,
and the savannas made them naked, sweaty & bipedal:
"everybody" knows that...

Op woensdag 14 december 2022 om 21:14:40 UTC+1 schreef littor...@gmail.com:
> Op woensdag 14 december 2022 om 18:47:18 UTC+1 schreef JTEM is so reasonable:
> > Pandora wrote:

> > > Do you think Homo erectus had a professional quality oyster knife?
> > If you really think that nobody ate an oyster before there were
> > "Professional quality oyster knives," or knives for that matter, then
> > hang it up. Unsubscribe. Shut off your computer. Give up.
> > You clearly have zero interest in these topics. You're reacting
> > emotionally, not engaging in any kind of rational discussion.

> Yes, thes fanatics are dogmatically convinced they *know* the Truth:
> human ancestors left the forests for the African savannas,
> and the savannas made them naked, sweaty & bipedal:
> "everybody" knows that...

Their real problem is: it's impossible to imagine for them that *professional scientists* can be so terribly wrong...