This is a prediction of Aquatic Ape and a
condemnation of fake science:

Right now paleo anthropology looks at a "Range" of brain volume and
assumes it's all just happenstance. They don't consider that habitat
AND DIET can be a huge influence here. That, it not only can be but it
had to be. And we can test this.

Look. The "Molecular Clock" folks say we acquired the mutation that
allows us to synthesize DHA (from ALA) as well as we do, which
isn't very well, about 80 thousand years ago. So prior to that if we
wanted big brains we needed the DHA in our diets. And if we didn't
have the DHA in our diets brains had to shrink.

This had to be the case.

A population that was exploiting marine resources HAD TO have
larger brains than a population that was not exploiting marine
resources.

CAVEAT: Genetics are at play here. The Aquatic Ape population
was always going to have brains just as large as genetics would
allow. A group that split off, pushed inland & adapted would not.
But this doesn't mean there had to be a huge difference.

So if we stop assuming that any "Range" in brain size is mere
happenstance, that it's effectively random, and seek to apply
samples to an environmental context, we should be able to
find an "Aquatic Ape" group.

NOTE: Does anyone seriously believe that brain size is purely
random? That, diet isn't a factor even though we all know it is?

-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/716346368172654592/what-is-your-favorite-tv-show-and-why

Op donderdag 4 mei 2023 om 07:12:42 UTC+2 schreef JTEM is so reasonable:
> This is a prediction of Aquatic Ape and a
> condemnation of fake science:
>
> Right now paleo anthropology looks at a "Range" of brain volume and
> assumes it's all just happenstance. They don't consider that habitat
> AND DIET can be a huge influence here. That, it not only can be but it
> had to be. And we can test this.
>
> Look. The "Molecular Clock" folks say we acquired the mutation that
> allows us to synthesize DHA (from ALA) as well as we do, which
> isn't very well, about 80 thousand years ago. So prior to that if we
> wanted big brains we needed the DHA in our diets. And if we didn't
> have the DHA in our diets brains had to shrink.
>
> This had to be the case.
>
> A population that was exploiting marine resources HAD TO have
> larger brains than a population that was not exploiting marine
> resources.
>
> CAVEAT: Genetics are at play here. The Aquatic Ape population
> was always going to have brains just as large as genetics would
> allow. A group that split off, pushed inland & adapted would not.
> But this doesn't mean there had to be a huge difference.
>
> So if we stop assuming that any "Range" in brain size is mere
> happenstance, that it's effectively random, and seek to apply
> samples to an environmental context, we should be able to
> find an "Aquatic Ape" group.
>
> NOTE: Does anyone seriously believe that brain size is purely
> random? That, diet isn't a factor even though we all know it is?

:-) Thanks, JTEM.
Large brain, no fur, SC fat-layer, voluntary breathing, fl...
Only incredible imbeciles believe their ancestors ran after antelopes... :-DDD

Op donderdag 4 mei 2023 om 09:37:37 UTC+2 schreef littor...@gmail.com:
> Op donderdag 4 mei 2023 om 07:12:42 UTC+2 schreef JTEM is so reasonable:

> > This is a prediction of Aquatic Ape and a
> > condemnation of fake science:
> > Right now paleo anthropology looks at a "Range" of brain volume and
> > assumes it's all just happenstance. They don't consider that habitat
> > AND DIET can be a huge influence here. That, it not only can be but it
> > had to be. And we can test this.
> > Look. The "Molecular Clock" folks say we acquired the mutation that
> > allows us to synthesize DHA (from ALA) as well as we do, which
> > isn't very well, about 80 thousand years ago. So prior to that if we
> > wanted big brains we needed the DHA in our diets. And if we didn't
> > have the DHA in our diets brains had to shrink.
> > This had to be the case.
> > A population that was exploiting marine resources HAD TO have
> > larger brains than a population that was not exploiting marine
> > resources.
> > CAVEAT: Genetics are at play here. The Aquatic Ape population
> > was always going to have brains just as large as genetics would
> > allow. A group that split off, pushed inland & adapted would not.
> > But this doesn't mean there had to be a huge difference.
> > So if we stop assuming that any "Range" in brain size is mere
> > happenstance, that it's effectively random, and seek to apply
> > samples to an environmental context, we should be able to
> > find an "Aquatic Ape" group.
> > NOTE: Does anyone seriously believe that brain size is purely
> > random? That, diet isn't a factor even though we all know it is?

Sorry, wrong button, here's the correct text:
:-) Thanks, JTEM.
Large brain, no fur, SC fat-layer, voluntary breathing, flat feet, low running speed...
Babies can only walk +- after 1 year!
Only *incredible* imbeciles believe their ancestors ran after antelopes... :-DDD

littor...@gmail.com wrote:

> > schreef JTEM is so reasonable:

> > > NOTE: Does anyone seriously believe that brain size is purely
> > > random? That, diet isn't a factor even though we all know it is?

> Sorry, wrong button, here's the correct text:
> :-) Thanks, JTEM.
> Large brain, no fur, SC fat-layer, voluntary breathing, flat feet, low running speed...
> Babies can only walk +- after 1 year!
> Only *incredible* imbeciles believe their ancestors ran after antelopes... :-DDD

I guess I'm so excited about brain size is because it's preserved
as well as anything can be in the fossil record.

What would be difficult is mapping the finds -- not just location
but environment, potential diet -- and we...

Oops!

Actually, we need to start by exploring unambiguously Aquatic
Ape/Littoral/Waterside environments. Like, what's under the
water.

-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/719879056031612929

Op woensdag 14 juni 2023 om 03:06:51 UTC+2 schreef JTEM is so reasonable:

> > > > NOTE: Does anyone seriously believe that brain size is purely
> > > > random? That, diet isn't a factor even though we all know it is?

> > :-) Thanks, JTEM.
> > Large brain, no fur, SC fat-layer, voluntary breathing, flat feet, low running speed...
> > Babies can only walk +- after 1 year!
> > Only *incredible* imbeciles believe their ancestors ran after antelopes.... :-DDD

> I guess I'm so excited about brain size is because it's preserved
> as well as anything can be in the fossil record.
> What would be difficult is mapping the finds -- not just location
> but environment, potential diet -- and we...
> Oops!
> Actually, we need to start by exploring unambiguously Aquatic
> Ape/Littoral/Waterside environments. Like, what's under the
> water.

Fossil hominid environments were all plenty of water, Homo always + shellfish:
from my 2000 Hum.Evol.paper:
The following list confirms the comparative evidence that it is rather improbable that the hominids ever lived in a savanna milieu, and provides a more shaded picture.
 Lukeino KNM-LU 335 “pre-australopithecine”: ‘The red beds seems to contain marginal lacustrine deposits as indicated by the presence of algal mats and lacustrine bivalves (including complete specimens with valves in the closed position)’ (Pickford, 1975).
 Tabarin KNM-TH 13150 “pre-australopithecine”: ‘The fauna includes aquatic animals such as molluscs, fish, turtles, crocodiles, and hippotami, along with others that might be found in the vicinity of a lake of river’ (Ward & Hill, 1987).
 Ardipithecus ramidus: ‘Sedimentological, botanical and faunal evidence suggests a wooded habitat for the Aramis hominids […] Aquatic elements (turtle, fish, crocodile) are rare. Large mammals (hippopotamus, proboscideans, rhinos, equids, giraffids, bovines) are rare. Primates are very abundant’ (WoldeGabriel et al., 1994); ‘[…] interpreted to have been a closed woodland. At Aramis, aquatic species and large mammals are rare, and colobines make up over 30% of all vertebrate specimens collected’ (Leakey et al., 1995).
 Kanapoi KNM-KP 29281 Australopithecus anamensis: Fish, aquatic reptiles, kudus and monkeys are prevalent. ‘A wide gallery forest would have almost certainly been present on the large river that brought in the sediments’ (Leakey et al., 1995).
 Chad KT 12 A. cf. afarensis: ‘The non-hominid fauna contains aquatic taxa (such as Siluridae, Trionyx, cf. Tomistoma), taxa adapted to wooded habitats (such as Loxodonta, Kobus, Kolpochoerus) and to more open areas (such as Ceratotherium, Hipparion) […] compatible with a lakeside environment’ (Brunet et al., 1995).
 Garusi-Laetoli L.H. A. anamensis or afarensis: Teeth and mandible fragments, the hardest skeletal parts which are frequently left over by carnivores (Morden, 1988), come from wind-blown and air-fall tuffs (Leakey et al., 1976). Cercopithecine and colobine monkeys are present (Protsch, 1981; Leakey et al., 1976).
 Hadar, Afar Locality: ‘Generally, the sediments represent lacustrine, lake margin, and associated fluvial deposits related to an extensive lake that periodically filled the entire basin’ (Johanson et al., 1982)
 Hadar AL.333 A. afarensis: ‘The bones were found in swale-like features […] it is very likely that they died and partially rotted at or very near this site […] this group of hominids was buried in streamside gallery woodland’ (Radosevich et al., 1992).
 Hadar AL.288 gracile A. afarensis: Lucy lay in a small, slow moving stream. ‘Fossil preservation at this locality is excellent, remains of delicate items such as crocodile and turtle eggs and crab claws being found’ (Johanson & Taieb, 1976).
 Makapan A. africanus: ‘[…] very different conditions from those prevailing today. Higher rainfall, fertile, alkaline soils and moderate relief supported significant patches of sub-tropical forest and thick bush, rather than savannah. Taphonomic considerations […] suggest that sub-tropical forest was the hominins’ preferred habitat rather than grassland or bushveld, and the adaptations of these animals was therefore fitted to a forest habitat’ (Rayner et al., 1993; see also Reed, 1993; and Wood, 1993).
 Taung australopithecine: ‘the clayey matrix from which the Taung cranium was extracted, and the frequent occurrence of calcite veins and void fillings within it (Butzer, 1974, 1980) do suggest a more humid environment during its accumulation’ (Partridge, 1985).
 Sterkfontein A. africanus and Swartkrans A. robustus: Many South African australopithecines are discovered in riverside caves, presumably often filled with the remainders of the consumption process of large felids (Brain, 1981).
 Kromdraai: A. robustus was found near grassveld and streamside or marsh vegetation, in the vicinity of quail, pipits, starlings, swallows, and parrots, lovebirds and similar psittacine birds (T. N. Pocock in Brain, 1981).
 Turkana KNM-ER 17000 and 16005: A. aethiopicus was discovered near the boundary between overbank deposits of large perennial river and alluvial fan deposits, amid water- and reedbucks (Walker et al., 1986).
 Lake Turkana: ‘The lake margins were generally swampy, with extensive areas of mudflats […] Australopithecus boisei was more abundant in fluvial environments, whereas Homo habilis was rare in such environments […] Australopithecus fossils are more common than Homo both in channel and floodplain deposits. The gracile hominids […] seem to be more restricted ecologically to the lake margin than are the robust forms’ (Conroy, 1990).
 Ileret A. boisei: ‘the fossil sample reflects climatic and ecological environmental conditions differing significantly from those of the present day. At Ilerat, 1.5 Myr ago, climatic conditions must have been cooler and more humid than today, and more favourable to extensive forests […] The prominence of montane forest is particularly striking […] dominated by Gramineae and Chenopodiaceae appropriate to the margins of a slightly saline or alkaline lake’ (Bonnefille, 1976).
 Konso A. boisei: ‘The highly fossiliferous sands at the mid-section of KGA10 are interpreted to be the middle to distal portions of an alluvial fan, deposited adjacent to, and extending into, a lake. Fossils and artefacts deriving from horizons of sands and silts are not abraded and show evidence of minimal transport. A large mammalian assemblage has been collected from the deposits, showing a striking dominance of Alcelaphini […] to indicate the presence of extensive dry grasslands at KGA10’ (Suwa et al., 1997).
 Chesowanja A. boisei: ‘The fossiliferous sediments were deposited in a lagoon […] Abundant root casts […] suggest that the embayment was flanked by reeds and the presence of calcareous algae indicates that the lagoon was warm and shallow. Bellamya and catfish are animals tolerant of relatively stagnant water, and such situation would also be suitable for turtles and crocodiles’ (Carney et al., 1971).
 Olduvai middle Bed I: A. boisei O.H.5 as well as habilis O.H.7 and O.H.62 were found in the most densely vegetated, wettest condition, with the highest lake levels (Walter et al., 1991), near ostracods, freshwater snails, fish, and aquatic birds (Conroy, 1990); ‘[…] the middle Bed-I faunas indicate a very rich closed woodland environment, richer than any part of the present-day savanna biome in Africa […]’ (Fernández-Jalvo et al., 1998). ‘Fossilized leaves and pollen are rare in the sediments of Beds I and II, but swamp vegetation is indicated by abundant vertical roots channels and casts possibly made by some kind of reed. Fossil rhizomes of papyrus also suggest the presence of marshland and/or shallow water’ (Conroy, 1990). ‘[…] Cyperaceae fruits were common in H. habilis habitat (Bonnefille, 1984). Ancient Egyptians ate Cyperus papyrus root which was also present at Olduvai in swamp-margins and river banks’ (Puech, 1992).
 Olduvai O.H.24 habilis: ‘Crocodile remains predominate among the faunal material from this site and more than 2,000 teeth were found.. Tortoise plates, shells of Urocyclid slugs, fish vertebrae and scales, bird bones and pieces of ostrich eggshell were also relatively common (Leakey et al., 1971).
 Malawi UR 501 early Homo: ‘The Plio-Pleistocene Chiwondo Beds of Northern Malawi have yielded molluscs and fragmented remains of fish, turtles, crocodiles and large mammals […] Microvertebrates and carnivores are virtually unrepresented in the assemblage […] The general ecological setting of the Malawi Rift during the Late Pliocene was a mosaic environment including open and closed, dry and wet habitats, and which harbored a small and ecologically unstable paleolake Malawi’ (Schrenk et al., 1995).
 Chemeron KNM-BC1 early Homo: ‘The Fish Beds […] seem to be almost entirely lacustrine and fluviatile; fish remains are abundant […] Molluscs also lived in the lake, and locally their remains accumulate to form shelly limestones’ (Martyn & Tobias, 1967).
 Turkana Boy KNM-WT 15000 H. erectus: ‘Mammalian fossils are rare at this locality, the most abundant vertebrate fossils being parts of small and large fish. The depositional environment was evidently an alluvial plain of low relief […] Typical lacustrine forms (for example, ostracods, molluscs) could invade the area […] The only other fauna found so far in the fossiliferous bed are many opercula of the swamp snail Pila, a few bones of the catfish Synodontis and two fragments of indeterminate large mammal bone […]’ (Brown et al., 1985).
 Mojokerto H. erectus: ‘The basal part of the Putjangan Beds is composed of volcanic breccias containing marine and freshwater molluscs. The rest of the Putjangan Beds is composed of black clays of lacustrine origin’ (Ninkovich & Burckle, 1987).
 Peking H. erectus: ‘A big river and possibly a lake were located to the east and contained various water species; along the shorelines grew reeds and plants, which were home for buffalo, deer, otters, beavers and other animals’ (Poirier, 1978); ‘[…] accumulation in quiet water. The cave at this time was probably the locus of ponded water and was probably more open to the atmosphere’ (Weiner et al., 1998).
 Hopefield, Rabat & Terra Amata: H. erectus fossils came from sandstone made up from dune sand resting upon a former sea beach (De Lumley, 1990). In Terra Amata, ‘there are also indications that the inhabitants ate oysters, mussels and limpets – shells of which are present. The presence of fish bones and fish vertebrae indicate that the population also fished’ (Poirier, 1987).