H. erectus is one of the early humans that looked a lot like we do now, with shorter arms than legs and a body that likely had an easier time walking upright than scampering up trees. This predecessor of ours died out just over 100,000 years ago. Archaeologists had previously found some of their remains, like pelvis bones, in Afar, Ethiopia, at a dig project that’s been operating for over 20 years.

Two excavations, each at slightly different parts of the same study area, recently revealed a skull each. The smaller set of skull fragments dates back to about 1.5 million years ago, while the larger cranial pieces are a little younger, about 1.25 million years old. Side by side, it’s obvious how different the two skulls are in size, Rogers says. Based on the size of the fragments, the archaeologists think the smaller skull held about 36 cubic inches in volume — whereas the larger version held about 50 to 55 cubic inches.

If both skulls are H. erectus — which the researchers think they are — that size difference could be similar to the discrepancy between male and female chimp or gorilla skulls, Rogers says. Most primates with significant size differences between the sexes are also polygamous, he adds, meaning they have more than one mate at a time.

Who Do These Belong To?
The authors also acknowledge that it might be possible that the smaller skull belongs to a different species of early humans altogether. It’s also possible that, because there’s a quarter of a million years separating the two specimens, the younger, larger brain is a more evolved version of the smaller one.

However, hints of size differences between the sexes appear in other pre-human primates, says paper co-author Sileshi Semaw, an archaeologist with the Centro Nacional de Investigacion sober la Evolucion Humana. Recent findings of similarly small skulls also reinforce the team’s belief that the find fits a pattern of sexual differences in body size between male and female H. erectus.

Discover mag.

Yet these conclusions about our ancient ancestors are based on only a few skulls. The best way to gain confidence is to find more skulls, Semaw says, which requires more fieldwork. And as archaeologists recover more and more braincases, “there’s still a good chance that a new discovery will tell us something we didn’t know before,” Rogers adds.

anthropologyarchaeologyhuman origins
1

https://groups.google.com/g/sci.anthropology.paleo/c/HvgajEwVNAQ/m/6PiCoCsfAwAJ

As you can plainly see, the assumptions are wrong.

Science exists to eliminate the human element, the a-priori
assumptions if you will, and instead paleo anthropology is
based on such medieval thinking.

I'm not saying that any of their guesses -- their flailing away
in the dark -- is wrong. I'm just saying that they don't have
enough evidence for a sound inference.

-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/652812244575469568

On Tuesday, June 1, 2021 at 3:51:13 PM UTC-4, littor...@gmail.com wrote:
> Op dinsdag 1 juni 2021 om 18:26:00 UTC+2 schreef DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves:
> > H. erectus is one of the early humans that looked a lot like we do now, with shorter arms than legs and a body that likely had an easier time walking upright than scampering up trees.
> ...
>
> What is this for nonsense? ear exostoses by walking upright?? :-DDD
> Biologically, erectus was a littoral animal: pachyosteosclerosis, full plantigrady, large lungs, brain enlargement, platycephaly, platymeria, platypelloidy...
> Google "coastal dispersal Pleistocene Homo PPT".

Mermaids are not my ancestors.
There are no obligate upright littoral mammals except Homo (occasionally).

On Tuesday, June 1, 2021 at 2:50:36 PM UTC-4, I Envy JTEM wrote:
> https://groups.google.com/g/sci.anthropology.paleo/c/HvgajEwVNAQ/m/6PiCoCsfAwAJ
>
> As you can plainly see, the assumptions are wrong.
>
> Science exists to eliminate the human element, the a-priori
> assumptions if you will, and instead paleo anthropology is
> based on such medieval thinking.
>
> I'm not saying that any of their guesses -- their flailing away
> in the dark -- is wrong. I'm just saying that they don't have
> enough evidence for a sound inference.
>
>
>
>
> -- --
>
> https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/652812244575469568

Their assumption is ok, might be true. I think H.er lived in small groups, sleeping as parent-child (& aunty-child) pairs in domeshields, so both parents were tied to their future progeny stronger than to their "love" partner who might seasonally become 'cold' to him/her while remaining warmish to others. Then as Homo evolved more socially dependent (communal bonding & hierarchy) and fire more domesticated, some attached their shields together forming non-portable huts voila the nuclear family, with marital ceremony eventually becoming a social thing. I don't know if skull size would have shown that pattern.

Op woensdag 2 juni 2021 om 01:43:59 UTC+2 schreef DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves:

Some idiot wrote:

> > > H. erectus is one of the early humans that looked a lot like we do now, with shorter arms than legs and a body that likely had an easier time walking upright than scampering up trees.

> > What is this for nonsense? ear exostoses by walking upright?? :-DDD
> > Biologically, erectus was a littoral animal: pachyosteosclerosis, full plantigrady, large lungs, brain enlargement, platycephaly, platymeria, platypelloidy...
> > Google "coastal dispersal Pleistocene Homo PPT".

> Mermaids are not my ancestors.

I hope so.
Grow up, little boy!

> There are no obligate upright littoral mammals except Homo (occasionally)..

Yes, there are no elephants except elephants.
Grow up!
It's really not difficult - but inform a bit at least:
1) "Early Hominoids: orthograde aquarboreals in flooded forests?" Verhaegen, Munro, Puech & Vaneechoutte 2011 p.67-81 in Vaneechoutte, Kuliukas & Verhaegen eds 2011 eBook Bentham Sci.Publ. "Was Man More Aquatic in the Past? Fifty Years after Alister Hardy: Waterside Hypotheses of Human Evolution"
2) early-Pleistocene "archaic" Homo became littoral: "The aquatic ape evolves: common misconceptions and unproven assumptions about the so-called Aquatic Ape Hypothesis" Verhaegen 2013 Hum.Evol.28:237-266
3) late-Pleist.H.sapiens (// penguins) became wading-walking.

Some idiot thinks:

> ... I think H.er lived in small groups, sleeping as parent-child (& aunty-child) pairs in domeshields, so both parents were tied to their future progeny stronger than to their "love" partner who might seasonally become 'cold' to him/her while remaining warmish to others. ...

:-DDD

On Thursday, June 3, 2021 at 6:57:07 PM UTC-4, littor...@gmail.com wrote:
> Op woensdag 2 juni 2021 om 01:43:59 UTC+2 schreef DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves:
> Some idiot wrote:
>
> > > > H. erectus is one of the early humans that looked a lot like we do now, with shorter arms than legs and a body that likely had an easier time walking upright than scampering up trees.
> > > What is this for nonsense? ear exostoses by walking upright?? :-DDD
> > > Biologically, erectus was a littoral animal: pachyosteosclerosis, full plantigrady, large lungs, brain enlargement, platycephaly, platymeria, platypelloidy...
> > > Google "coastal dispersal Pleistocene Homo PPT".
>
> > Mermaids are not my ancestors.
> I hope so.
> Grow up, little boy!
> > There are no obligate upright littoral mammals except Homo (occasionally).
> Yes, there are no elephants except elephants.
> Grow up!

Elephants are upright??

> It's really not difficult - but inform a bit at least:
> 1) "Early Hominoids: orthograde aquarboreals in flooded forests?" Verhaegen, Munro, Puech & Vaneechoutte 2011 p.67-81 in Vaneechoutte, Kuliukas & Verhaegen eds 2011 eBook Bentham Sci.Publ. "Was Man More Aquatic in the Past? Fifty Years after Alister Hardy: Waterside Hypotheses of Human Evolution"
> 2) early-Pleistocene "archaic" Homo became littoral: "The aquatic ape evolves: common misconceptions and unproven assumptions about the so-called Aquatic Ape Hypothesis" Verhaegen 2013 Hum.Evol.28:237-266
> 3) late-Pleist.H.sapiens (// penguins) became wading-walking.

Penguins and mermaids are your ancestors?

On Thursday, June 3, 2021 at 6:58:38 PM UTC-4, littor...@gmail.com wrote:
> Some idiot thinks:
>
> > ... I think H.er lived in small groups, sleeping as parent-child (& aunty-child) pairs in domeshields, so both parents were tied to their future progeny stronger than to their "love" partner who might seasonally become 'cold' to him/her while remaining warmish to others. ...
>
> :-DDD

Or they slept like dolphins, sea otters and mermaids in giant clamshells....

The murky monkey's merry mermaid "theory".