4 frequent paleo-anthropological prejudices without any evidence:
Many PAs still believe that human ancestors
1) became bipedal when we left the trees for the gound,
2) came Out-of-Africa (OoA),
3) were savanna-dwellers,
4) had australopithine ancestors.
These are only anthropo- & afro-centric just-so assumptions:
- Darwin thought "Out of Africa" because Pan & Gorilla were African,
- Africa (apart from sahara) is mostly forest + savanna,
- apiths lived in Africa, were BP, and had some humanlike anatomical traits..

Therefore, many (most?) PAs still assume, without evidence, that
1) we became BP after we split from Pan, and left the forest,
2) Homo originated in Africa (OoA),
3) we ran bipedally in savannas,
4) BP fossils in Africa incl. apiths are “hominin” (anthropo-centric belief: Pan & Gorilla have no fossils…??).
But
1) early-Miocene Hominoidea were already BP=vertical waders-climbers in swamp forests (humans & gibbons still are BP), google AQUARBOREAL,
2) Mio-Pliocene Hominoidea came from N-Tethys coasts (hylobatids & pongids still live in SE.Asia),
3) human ancestors have always been waterside (cf. physiology, anatomy, diet+DHA, island colonizations, intercontin.dispersals etc.etc.),
4) E.Afr.apiths resemble Gorilla > Pan > Homo, S.Afr.apiths resemble Pan > Homo or Gorilla (e.g. my Hum.Evol.papers).

https://www.gondwanatalks.com/l/the-waterside-hypothesis-wading-led-to-upright-walking-in-early-humans/
Nasalis monkeys (large & upright body, rel.long legs…) in mangrove forests also often wade bipedally & climb arms overhead.
https://www.gondwanatalks.com/l/the-waterside-hypothesis-wading-led-to-upright-walking-in-early-humans/
Likely scenario IMO:
Plate Tectonics & Hominoid Splittings:
c 30 Ma India approaching S-Asia formed island archipels: full of coastal forests.
c 25 Ma Catarrhini reaching these islands became wading bipedally + climbing arms overhead = aquarboreal Hominoidea.
c 20 Ma India further underneath Asia split hylobatids (E) & other=great apes (W) in coastal forests along N-Tethys Ocean.
c 15 Ma Mesopotamian Seaway Closure split pongid-sivapith (E) & hominid-dryopith (W: Medit.Sea + incipient Red Sea swamp forests.
c 8 Ma in Red Sea: N-Rift fm, followed by Gorilla -> Afar -> Praeanthropus afarensis -> boisei -> today G.gorilla & G.beringei.
c 5 Ma the Red Sea opens into Gulf (Francesca Mansfield thinks caused by Zanclean mega-flood 5.33 Ma):
– Pan went right: E.Afr.coastal forests -> S-Rift -> Transvaal -> Australopith.africanus -> robustus (// Gorilla) -> today P.troglodytes & P..paniscus,
– Homo went left: S.Asian coasts -> Java early-Pleist.H.erectus -> shallow-diving: pachy-osteo-sclerosis, DHA, brain+, stone tools, shell engravings...
mid- -> late-Pleist.: diving -> wading -> walking H.sapiens.

littor...@gmail.com wrote:

> 4 frequent paleo-anthropological prejudices without any evidence:
> Many PAs still believe that human ancestors

> 1) became bipedal when we left the trees for the gound,

Gorillas spend the least amount of time in trees of all the "Great apes."
By that argument, they should be closer to Homo than Chimps.

> 2) came Out-of-Africa (OoA),

Part of the problem is one of definitions.

WHAT is supposed to have come out of Africa?

The earliest monkeys are found in South America, apes appear have
evolved in Eurasia...

Homo?

"Modern" man?

> 3) were savanna-dwellers,

This is just dumb.

The savanna supports the smallest, the least population density of any
of the proposed environments.

> 4) had australopithine ancestors.

You know for the longest time they said the opposite.

I actually think that Lucy & kin were the offshoots from, the child group
of the Aquatic Ape population. They probably interbred with earlier
groups to split off, or the descendants thereof, like maybe Ardi...

> These are only anthropo- & afro-centric just-so assumptions:
> - Darwin thought "Out of Africa" because Pan & Gorilla were African

Oh, let's be honest; if Darwin "Thought" that it's because Wallace of
someone else suggested it. And it might've seemed like a reasonable
bet, after some of the idiocy that man came up with... like Pangenesis.

Which was his /Only/ theory, btw.

> Therefore, many (most?) PAs still assume, without evidence, that
> 1) we became BP after we split from Pan, and left the forest,

I've been arguing, on usenet, for a very long time, going back to when
talk.origins was an actual group, that it very well could have been the
other way around: Chimps evolved from us!

Since then, I've seen tons of evidence that says it happened that way!

> 2) Homo originated in Africa (OoA),

Out of Asia has been taught in Asia for years. I think it was a Dutch man
who first proposed it... probably has a little something to do with the
rotten-to-the-core British aristocracy promoting the Darwin idiocy...

The British/Dutch rivalry was only ever surpassed by the British/French
rivalry it seems.

India, South Africa and much of the later American colonies were all Dutch.

> 3) we ran bipedally in savannas,

Exactly like all the other animals on the savanna.

> 4) BP fossils in Africa incl. apiths are “hominin” (anthropo-centric belief: Pan & Gorilla have no fossils…??).

People can argue against your identification of Chimp ancestors but, there's
no doubt that you're thinking along the right lines. The simplest, most
conservative answer to the question of missing Chimp fossils is that we
found them, only they don't look like Chimps.

It's a situation that mirrors Denisovans!

They claim Denisovans branched off from Neanderthals like 400,000 years
ago or more. Well. there's plenty of finds younger than that attributed to
"Erectus." So doesn't that mean they've been finding Denisovans all along?

> 1) early-Miocene Hominoidea were already BP=vertical waders-climbers in
> swamp forests (humans & gibbons still are BP), google AQUARBOREAL,

It's like the further back we look, the further back we find them.

-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/714713784084791296

Op maandag 17 april 2023 om 09:29:22 UTC+2 schreef JTEM is so reasonable:

> > 4 frequent paleo-anthropological prejudices without any evidence:
> > Many PAs still believe that human ancestors
> > 1) became bipedal when we left the trees for the gound,

> Gorillas spend the least amount of time in trees of all the "Great apes."
> By that argument, they should be closer to Homo than Chimps.

> > 2) came Out-of-Africa (OoA),

> Part of the problem is one of definitions.
> WHAT is supposed to have come out of Africa?
> The earliest monkeys are found in South America, apes appear have
> evolved in Eurasia...

See my scenario: lesser & other apes split c 20 Ma, I'd think when India went further underneath Eurasia.

> Homo?

Homo & Pan split c 5 Ma, IMO not long after the Red Sea opened into the Gulf:
--Pan->E.Afr.coast->Transvaal->africanus->robustus,
--Pliocene Homo->S.Asian coast->Java, Flores etc.

> "Modern" man?

More difficult: H.sapiens came from Asia?

> > 3) were savanna-dwellers,

> This is just dumb.
> The savanna supports the smallest, the least population density of any
> of the proposed environments.

Yes, incredibly dumb. Savanna idiots... :-D Running after their antelopes... :-DDD

> > 4) had australopithecine ancestors.

> You know for the longest time they said the opposite.
> I actually think that Lucy & kin were the offshoots from, the child group
> of the Aquatic Ape population. They probably interbred with earlier
> groups to split off, or the descendants thereof, like maybe Ardi...

The HPG-LCA c 8 Ma was aquarboreal in the (then still incipient) Red Sea swamp forests.
Gorilla followed the incipient northern-Rift c 8-7 Ma,
Homo & Pan split when the Reds Sea opened into the Gulf (Francesca thinks caused by the Zanclean mega-flood 5.33 Ma):
Pan went right, Homo left. Simple, no? :-)
G // P australopiths evolved in parallel in the N- // S-Rift swamp forests:
from "gracile" late-Pliocene afarensis//africanus to "robust" early-Pleist. boisei//robustus.
Simple, no? :-)
Ardipith was probably an early offshoot of Gorilla, shortly after the HP/G split.

> > These are only anthropo- & afro-centric just-so assumptions:
> > - Darwin thought "Out of Africa" because Pan & Gorilla were African

> Oh, let's be honest; if Darwin "Thought" that it's because Wallace of
> someone else suggested it. And it might've seemed like a reasonable
> bet, after some of the idiocy that man came up with... like Pangenesis.
> Which was his /Only/ theory, btw.

> > Therefore, many (most?) PAs still assume, without evidence, that
> > 1) we became BP after we split from Pan, and left the forest,

> I've been arguing, on usenet, for a very long time, going back to when
> talk.origins was an actual group, that it very well could have been the
> other way around: Chimps evolved from us!

Neither is correct, of course:
Homo & Pan split from a HP-LCA.

> Since then, I've seen tons of evidence that says it happened that way!

Very simple: Pan went right, Homo left.

> > 2) Homo originated in Africa (OoA),

> Out of Asia has been taught in Asia for years. I think it was a Dutch man
> who first proposed it... probably has a little something to do with the
> rotten-to-the-core British aristocracy promoting the Darwin idiocy...
> The British/Dutch rivalry was only ever surpassed by the British/French
> rivalry it seems.
> India, South Africa and much of the later American colonies were all Dutch.

Yes, in S.Africa they still speak Afrikaans, which I easily understand
(I don't live in NL, but in Belgium, between Antwerp & Brussels).

> > 3) we ran bipedally in savannas,

> Exactly like all the other animals on the savanna.

:-DDD

> > 4) BP fossils in Africa incl. apiths are “hominin” (anthropo-centric belief: Pan & Gorilla have no fossils…??).

> People can argue against your identification of Chimp ancestors but, there's
> no doubt that you're thinking along the right lines. The simplest, most
> conservative answer to the question of missing Chimp fossils is that we
> found them, only they don't look like Chimps.

Detailed anatomical comparions leave no doubt:
- E.African afarensis -> boisei were fossil relatives of Gorilla,
- S.African africanus -> robustus were fossil relatives of Pan (IOW, also closer relatives of Homo than of Gorilla):
1990 Hum Evol 5:295-297 "African ape ancestry"
1994 Hum Evol 9:121-139 "Australopithecines: ancestors of the African apes?
1996 Hum Evol 11:35-41 "Morphological distance between australopithecine, human and ape skulls"
The frequency of parallel & convergent evolutions in general is strongly underestimated!

> It's a situation that mirrors Denisovans!
> They claim Denisovans branched off from Neanderthals like 400,000 years
> ago or more. Well. there's plenty of finds younger than that attributed to
> "Erectus." So doesn't that mean they've been finding Denisovans all along?

> > 1) early-Miocene Hominoidea were already BP=vertical waders-climbers in
> > swamp forests (humans & gibbons still are BP), google AQUARBOREAL,

> It's like the further back we look, the further back we find them.

No doubt, early-Miocene (already late-Oligocene?) Hominoidea were already aquarboreal:
- central=vertical lumbar spine (not dorsal as in most mammals & monkeys),
- only 5 (4) lumbar vertebrae (7 in monekys) = drastic change,
- complete tail loss (coccyx in pelvic bottom) = very drastic change,
- Hominoidea = Latisternalia: very broad breast-bone + thorax = frequent *lateral* arm movements,
- also broad pelvis = frequent lateral leg movements (vs most mammals & even monkeys),
IOW, "apes" (vertical, "bipedal") differed profoundly from "monkeys":
they lived in swamp forests, probably coastal forests (mangroves?),
they probably spent more time in the water than we think.
Google "aquarboreal" (aqua=water, arbor=tree).

(some corrections)
> 4 frequent paleo-anthropological prejudices without any evidence:
> Many PAs still believe that human ancestors
> 1) became bipedal when we left the trees for the gound??
> 2) came Out-of-Africa (OoA)??
> 3) were savanna-dwellers???
> 4) had australopithecine ancestors??
> These are only anthropo- & afro-centric just-so pre-assumptions because:
> - Darwin thought "Out of Africa" (Pan & Gorilla were African),
> - Africa (apart from sahara) is mostly jungle or savanna,
> - apiths lived in Africa, were BP, and had some humanlike anatomical traits.
>
> Therefore, many (most?) PAs still assume, without evidence, that
> 1) we became BP after we split from Pan, and left the forest,
> 2) Homo & "hominins" originated in Africa (OoA),
> 3) we ran bipedally in savannas,
> 4) BP fossils in Africa incl. apiths are “hominin” (anthropo-centric belief: Pan & Gorilla have no fossils…??).
> But
> 1) early-Miocene Hominoidea were already BP=vertical waders-climbers in swamp forests (humans & gibbons still are BP), google AQUARBOREAL,
> 2) Mio-Pliocene Hominoidea came from N-Tethys coasts (hylobatids & pongids still live in SE.Asia),
> 3) human ancestors have always been waterside (cf. physiology, anatomy, diet+DHA, island colonizations, intercontin.dispersals etc.etc.),
> 4) E.Afr.apiths resemble Gorilla > Pan > Homo, S.Afr.apiths resemble Pan > Homo or Gorilla (e.g. my Hum.Evol.papers).
>
> https://www.gondwanatalks.com/l/the-waterside-hypothesis-wading-led-to-upright-walking-in-early-humans/
> Nasalis monkeys (large & upright body, rel.long legs…) in mangrove forests also often wade bipedally & climb arms overhead.
> https://www.gondwanatalks.com/l/the-waterside-hypothesis-wading-led-to-upright-walking-in-early-humans/
> Likely scenario IMO:
> Plate Tectonics & Hominoid Splittings:
> c 30 Ma India approaching S-Asia formed island archipels: full of coastal forests.
> c 25 Ma Catarrhini reaching these islands became wading bipedally + climbing arms overhead = aquarboreal Hominoidea.
> c 20 Ma India further underneath Asia split hylobatids (E) & other=great apes (W), both following coastal forests along N-Tethys Ocean (E vs W).
> c 15 Ma Mesopotamian Seaway Closure split pongid-sivapith (E) & hominid-dryopith (W: Medit.Sea + hominids s.s. in incipient Red Sea swamp forests).
> c 8 Ma in Red Sea: N-Rift fm, followed by Gorilla -> Afar -> Praeanthropus afarensis -> boisei -> today G.gorilla & G.beringei.
> c 5 Ma the Red Sea opens into Gulf (Francesca Mansfield thinks caused by the Zanclean mega-flood 5.33 Ma):
> – Pan went right: E.Afr.coastal forests -> S-Rift -> Transvaal -> Australopith.africanus -> robustus (// Gorilla) -> today P.troglodytes & P..paniscus,
> – Homo went left: S.Asian coasts -> Java early-Pleist.H.erectus -> shallow-diving: pachy-osteo-sclerosis, DHA, brain+, stone tools, shell engravings...
> mid- -> late-Pleist.: diving -> wading -> walking H.sapiens.

Early-Pleist. H.erectus' diet was probably mostly shellfish (engravings, stone tools, DHA & larger brain etc.),
but what did Mio-Pliocene Hominoidea eat in coastal forests? fruits? mangrove oysters? sort of rice?? ...?

On Monday, April 17, 2023 at 3:11:42 AM UTC-7, littor...@gmail.com wrote:
> Op maandag 17 april 2023 om 09:29:22 UTC+2 schreef JTEM is so reasonable:
> > > 4 frequent paleo-anthropological prejudices without any evidence:
> > > Many PAs still believe that human ancestors
> > > 1) became bipedal when we left the trees for the gound,
>
> > Gorillas spend the least amount of time in trees of all the "Great apes.."
> > By that argument, they should be closer to Homo than Chimps.
>
> > > 2) came Out-of-Africa (OoA),
>
> > Part of the problem is one of definitions.
> > WHAT is supposed to have come out of Africa?
> > The earliest monkeys are found in South America, apes appear have
> > evolved in Eurasia...
> See my scenario: lesser & other apes split c 20 Ma, I'd think when India went further underneath Eurasia.
>
> > Homo?
>
> Homo & Pan split c 5 Ma, IMO not long after the Red Sea opened into the Gulf:
> --Pan->E.Afr.coast->Transvaal->africanus->robustus,
> --Pliocene Homo->S.Asian coast->Java, Flores etc.
>
> > "Modern" man?
>
> More difficult: H.sapiens came from Asia?
> > > 3) were savanna-dwellers,
>
> > This is just dumb.
> > The savanna supports the smallest, the least population density of any
> > of the proposed environments.
> Yes, incredibly dumb. Savanna idiots... :-D Running after their antelopes.... :-DDD

Swimming with crocodiles? Really?

How can you expect anybody to take you seriously?

childish kudu runner:

> Swimming with crocodiles? Really?

Ah?? Why do you believe that, my little little boy??
Some fanatics even believe their ancestors ran (30 km/hr) on savannas + lions & hunting-dogs (60 km/hr). :-D
How can they expect anybody to take them seriously??

These fanatics are so stupid to believe that of the 5 extant hominid spp, the 4 African spp have 0 African fossils,
but the one that originated in S-Asia has 100s of African fossils, they say....:
these ego+anthropocentric fools believe Pan paniscus, P.troglodytes, G.gorilla & G.beringei have no fossils,
but their own species H.sapiens has 100s of Plio-Pleistocene African fossils...
= beautiful example of afro+anthropocentric prejudice.

4 frequent paleo-anthropological prejudices (0 evidence): some self-declared "scientists"(??) believe:
1) Human ancestors became bipedal (BP) when they left the trees for the ground??
2) They evolved in Africa: "Out-of-Africa" (OoA)??
3) They lived in savannas???
4) They had australopithecine ancestors??
These just-so beliefs are exclusively based on anthropo- & afro-centric pre-assumptions:
1) “we are the only BP primates” means "BP=“hominin”=closer to us than to apes",
2) Darwin & others thought “Out of Africa” because Pan & Gorilla are African,
3) in Africa, when you leave the jungle, you come in savanna,
4) apiths lived in Africa, they were BP, and had retained some humanlike anatomical traits from the LCA.
Therefore, many self-declared "scientists"(sic!) still assume, without evidence:
1) that human ancestors became BP after/when they split from Pan, and left the forests,
2) that “hominins” & Homo originated in Africa (OoA),
3) that they walked, even ran bipedally in savannas (e.g. “endurance-running”),
4) that all "BP" fossils in Africa incl. apiths are “hominin” (implying Pan & Gorilla have no fossils?!).
But (google "aquarboreal"):
1) early-Miocene Hominoidea already were BP=vertical waders-climbers in swamp forests (humans & gibbons still are BP),
2) Mio-Pliocene Hominoidea lived along N-Tethys Ocean coasts (hylobatids & pongids & many hominids still live in SE.Asia),
3) we have always been waterside, cf. physiology, anatomy, diet+DHA, island colonizations, intercontinental dispersals etc.,
4) E.Afr.apiths resemble Gorilla > Pan > Homo, S.Afr.apiths resemble Pan > Homo or Gorilla (e.g. Hum.Evol.1994, 1996).
https://www.gondwanatalks.com/l/the-waterside-hypothesis-wading-led-to-upright-walking-in-early-humans/

What really happened is not so difficult for unbiased biologists (comparative biology): google "aquarboreal":
Miocene aquarboreality largely explains hominoid (“ape”) anatomy (why apes began to differ from OWMs):
large size, tail loss, broad sternum-thorax-pelvis + lateral arm+leg movements, centrally-placed (not dorsally) vertical spine etc.

Hominoid Splittings are best explained by Plate Tectonics (from 2022 "De evolutie van de mens" p.299-300):
~30 Ma India approaching S-Asia formed island archipels with coastal forests++.
~25 Ma Catarrhini reaching these islands became wading bipedally + climbing arms overhead -> aquarboreal Hominoidea: tail loss, wide vertical body etc..
~20 Ma India further underneath Asia split hylobatids (E) & other=great apes (W), both following N-Tethys coastal forests (E vs W).
~15 Ma the Mesopotamian Seaway Closure split pongids-sivapiths (E) & hominids-dryopiths (W: Medit.Sea + incipient Red Sea: swamp forests).
~8 Ma in Red Sea: N-Rift fm, followed by Gorilla -> Afar -> Praeanthropus afarensis Lucy etc. -> boisei -> today G.gorilla & G.beringei.
~5 Ma the Red Sea opening into the Gulf of Aden (Francesca Mansfield: caused by Zanclean mega-flood 5.33 Ma?) split Homo & Pan:
– Pan went right: E.Afr.coastal forests -> S-Rift -> Transvaal -> Australopith.africanus -> robustus (// Gorilla) -> today P.troglodytes & P..paniscus,
– Homo went left: S.Asian coasts -> Java early-Pleist.H.erectus shallow-diving for shellfish:
pachy-osteo-sclerosis, DHA & brain++, stone tools, shell engravings google "Joordens Munro", ...
mid--> late-Pleist.: shallow-diving H.erectus -> wading -> walking H.sapiens.

Simple & (bio)logical...
:-)

On Wednesday, April 19, 2023 at 11:08:46 AM UTC-7, littor...@gmail.com wrote:
> childish kudu runner:
>
> > Swimming with crocodiles? Really?
>
> Ah?? Why do you believe that,

Aha, so, you're aquatic ape realiy isn't very aquatic, is it?

littor...@gmail.com wrote:

> childish kudu runner:
>
> > Swimming with crocodiles? Really?

> Ah?? Why do you believe that, my little little boy??

I wouldn't give it the time of day. The argument amounts to claiming that the
sea shore was bristling with Homo eating crocodiles while the Rift Valley was
devoid of same...

I mean, the goddamn Nile river STILL has crocodiles! According to the nitwits,
nobody could have ever lived there, no civilization could have arose...

Doesn't matter how they dealt with crocs. They dealt with crocs. We know that
because they weren't wiped out of existence.

It's just the same stupid, Stupid, STUPID "arguments" over & over again... the
troll clearly has no clue. They are incapable of deconstructing their own
"Arguments" and testing them. If they were any more idiotic I'd conclude that
they must have a Phd in paleo anthropology...

-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/714091698115035136

Op donderdag 20 april 2023 om 08:10:43 UTC+2 schreef JTEM is so reasonable:
> littor...@gmail.com wrote:

kudu runner:
> > > Swimming with crocodiles? Really?

> > Ah?? Why do you believe that, my little little boy??

(the kudu runner could not answer, of course)

JTEM:
> I wouldn't give it the time of day. The argument amounts to claiming that the
> sea shore was bristling with Homo eating crocodiles while the Rift Valley was
> devoid of same...
> I mean, the goddamn Nile river STILL has crocodiles! According to the nitwits,
> nobody could have ever lived there, no civilization could have arose...
> Doesn't matter how they dealt with crocs. They dealt with crocs. We know that
> because they weren't wiped out of existence.

Indeed, JTEM, but some of these idiotic kudu runners will never become wiser, I'm afraid.
These idiots forget that in savannas, not only there are crocs in rivers, but on land also hunting-dogs & lions, who run incomparably better than we do.
In swamp forests, few crocs climb into trees. :-D
We're losing out time with these fanatics.

Something else, perhaps more interesting:
apparently,
-mid- or late-Miocene hominoids colonized the then *incipient* Red Sea,
-8 or 7 Ma, Gorilla-Praeanthropus colonized the *incipient* northern Rift -> Afar,
-4 or 3 Ma, Pan-Australopithecus colonized the *incipient* southern Rift -> Transvaal
(cf parallel evolution Gorilla//Pan):
Miocene Hominoidea seem to have had a preference for incipient swamp?mangrove forests?
why exactly? which foods?
(I have no idea of crocs there :-DDD)

> It's just the same stupid, Stupid, STUPID "arguments" over & over again... the
> troll clearly has no clue. They are incapable of deconstructing their own
> "Arguments" and testing them. If they were any more idiotic I'd conclude that
> they must have a Phd in paleo anthropology...

Yes. Sad we have to spend our time with such fanatics, who refuse to inform a bit.