On 24.8.2021. 19:12, Peter Nyikos wrote:
> On Thursday, August 19, 2021 at 6:28:59 PM UTC-4, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
>> On 19.8.2021. 19:31, Peter Nyikos wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, August 18, 2021 at 8:53:39 PM UTC-4, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
>>>> On 19.8.2021. 1:11, Peter Nyikos wrote:
>>>>> On Wednesday, August 18, 2021 at 8:34:55 AM UTC-4, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
>
>>>> I am claiming that we ate shellfish, shellfish
>>>> give you protein, but not energy.
>>>
>>> It wasn't exclusively shellfish, I'm sure. Even Inuit (formerly called Eskimos)
>>> ate vegetable material when they could get it.
>>>
>>> And even if you are right, they probably ate everything in the shellfish,
>>> and didn't clean it out with multiple rinses like they do before
>>> you are served shellfish in a restaurant, or even before you buy
>>> them in a grocery store. Otherwise, I believe they would have gotten
>>> any number of vitamin deficiency "diseases" like scurvy, or beriberi, or pellagra.
>
>> Thanks, excellent suggestion.
>> Yes, they were eating normal primate food, fruits and such, probably
>> also eggs, plus they were eating shellfish.
>
> So maybe they did have a lot more energy than you do.
>
>
>> We have thick enamel because shellfish (unrinsed) is full with sand.
>>>> So, we probably did what we are doing
>>>> on our vacation, laying down on the sun for whole day, :) .
>>>
>>> And sitting ducks for predators? No thanks.
>> Actually, no.
>> At first we were living on seaside cliffs. There, we were safe from
>> predators. Take a look at those two videos. See, scientists don't
>> understand what is going on. What is happening is that terrestrial
>> predators aren't made to hunt in water:
>> https://youtu.be/jSGikymKFlc?t=124
>> https://youtu.be/vnClAxxL1j0?t=173
>> Later we started to use fire. Cats need ambush, with fire you can burn
>> low vegetation, so cats cannot hide, and they will not attack.
>
> You are beginning to be on topic for sci.bio.paleontology, but you
> are badly in need of coming up with some plausible dating hypotheses for all this.

By "dating hypotheses", do you think that I should put it in a time frame?
Well, I wrote about this a lot, also. But, to explain it, I should
write a longer post. Here it is, and this is with some explanations of
why I do think this is so. It is, mostly, comparative biology, or whatever.
First, why apes, why not in South America? South America is, actually,
the initial state. Primates are smallish creatures, that live on trees,
climb trees, over branch locomotion. Climbing doesn't like body size,
the biggest primate can be the size of howler monkey, and he has big
problems because of its size, this is why he is the loudest animal on
Earth (because that way he doesn't have to move much). Also, branches at
the tips are narrow, they don't hold big body weight.
Apes aren't of that type, apes are big primates.
So, why Africa? Because Popigai asteroid hit 35.7 mya (some say 33
mya) in Siberia.
Per my idea, this created tinning of the Earth's crust in a line that
goes from Popigai crater, to its antipode point. The greatest tinning
was at the half way. This half way point was somewhere in Tanzania,
south of lake Victoria. This was a low land, back then, but since crust
tinned there, the pressure from below started to bulb the are. This area
started to rise and rise, like a bulb, until, finally, it didn't break
up at the edges of the bulb. This is why we have today two arms of Grate
Rift Valley, that go around "the bulb".
It isn't me who imagined this, this is how things did develop, per
what the scientists claim. The only thing is that nobody before tied the
Popigai impact to those events. Popigai happened immediately before this.
So, this bulb, along with the line (that was also thin) that goes from
the bulb towards the Popigai crater, created rifting. "Rifting" is,
actually, a myriad of completely vertical cliffs. Cliffs are safer
sleeping places for primates, than trees, so, primates start to use
those cliffs as safe sleeping places, just like baboons are using it today.
Also, this rifting allowed sunlight to reach ground above the cliffs.
So primates didn't have to climb trees anymore, now they were living on
cliffs, and they were eating plants that were on the ground, above
cliffs. Or vines that were going over cliffs.
This is what created apes.
On this video you can see the process of rifting. You will see
parallel rifts, stretching for hundreds of kilometers:
https://youtu.be/PoV4qSwg7nc?t=51
Here you can see a close up (something similar is also happening on
Iceland):
https://youtu.be/546Ov8uaLDI
Gee, I decided to put a lot of my selected videos here, these are the
best for explaining things.
Now, few videos that will explain apes using cliffs as their preferred
sleeping sites.
Here you will see baboons using cave cliffs as a sleeping site.
Although it is pitch-dark, they still prefer this over trees:
https://youtu.be/9letjf7ZZGA
Here you can see Hamadryas baboons using cliffs for sleeping. Also,
you can see how a primate climbs on cliffs. They say that slow,
deliberate, overhead climbing was the mode of locomotion of early apes.
You can see exactly that on this video, but here it is the descent, not
ascent (only the first 2:50 of the video is important):
https://youtu.be/Ju7gujK8yrY
On this video you will see advanced, big body, cliff climbing. This
isn't an ape (it is a bear), but you can clearly see how human body plan
evolved (with our adduction/abduction abilities, shallow chest, flexible
wrists, big toe used for toe off). Mind you, if you climb branches
overhead, your fingers turn into hooks, and get longer. Miocene apes had
short fingers, they climbed cliffs, not branches:
https://youtu.be/xAB9-VGIkzM
Mind you, although all this cliff climbing looks so hard for those
animals, it is a piece of cake for humans. This (and only this) is where
humans are advantageous compared to other animals:
https://youtu.be/Wy3SuhEQHVg
The collision with Euroasia created triple rift system, with Red Sea
Rift, and Gulf of Aden Rift being the other two hands of this triple
rift system.
Now, it turned out that those two happen to be flooded by sea. So we
had cliffs, with apes on them, but below we had sea, with a lot of food,
accessible to somebody who has hands (like otters, or apes). This is
what is happening when baboons live by the sea:
https://youtu.be/ZMFLjx47G88
Regarding further time framing, we should look at gibbons. Gibbons
were the first who moved out of Africa to Euroasia. What were apes in
the time of gibbons? Still not going into sea, just living on cliffs.
This is how that looked like:
https://youtu.be/ZMFLjx47G88
Whether they exploited shellfish by then, we should know by the state
of their enamel. Ancient apes had thick enamel. Thick enamel you get by
the way of abrasion. Abrasion comes from food. I would suggest that sand
in shellfish would create this abrasion.
So, thick enameled apes are the ones who ate shellfish.
You can see in the last video that baboons have to wait for low tide.
Why? Why they don't reach those shark eggs at high tide? Because, in
that case they would need to go into sea with their bodies. The problem
isn't to wet your fur, the problem arises when sea vapors off, and
leaves salt crystals. Those crystals are sharp, and they damage fur. A
land otter doesn't go into sea unless there is a pool of fresh water
nearby. To wash themselves off. Polar bear rolls in snow after exiting
sea. If you soak otter five times in sea water, then otter will show
signs of hypothermia. Furred animals don't like to go into sea.
But, take a look at that, great apes all lack underfur. It looks like
they first lost fur, and then they got it back again. I presume that
great apes once went into sea to get shellfish. They didn't dive for
shellfish, though. I presume that we were still quadruped when we lost
our fur, since we have our pubic hair on the place where you would
expect hair to remain if we are quadrupeds (just like underarm hair,
between body and arms, we also have hair between legs).
So, at that stage we were all great apes, with short fingers, and we
lost body hair. But, great apes already separated onto two branches,
klinorhynchy facial morphology (African apes plus humans), and
airorhynch facial morphology (orangutans). I have a perfect place for
that to happen. Since we are talking about the angle at which face is
rolled, and since apes should expect predators to come from the
direction of sun (eagles), the two distinctive morphologies can evolve
if their position in relation to sun is different. And this happens at
the shores of Red Sea. There you can have spatially separated seaside
cliffs living apes, one on Arabian side (orangutan, gigantopithecus,
sivapithecus), and one on African side (European and African Miocene apes).
So, this separation should be in the time before Great Apes moved into
Euroasia (so, before 17 mya).
Later one of the apes started to use marine resources more (I also
have a detailed scenario which explains this line of events), humans. We
started to dive, so we evolved external nose, and we evolved
subcutaneous fat thermal protection. We conquered shores, and expelled
other apes inland.
OK, enough for now, :) .

>> Cowboys in pampas had problems with jaguars, jaguars were attacking
>> their cattle. Then they figured out how to solve the problem. It is
>> enough to move your cattle 200 meters away from jungle, and jaguars will
>> not attack.
>
>
> <huge snip here of things I will talk about in a later post, perhaps only tomorrow>
>
>
>>>>>> I even don't follow paleoanthropology, lately.
>>>>>
>>>>> I can relate to that. When Trump was impeached, I was really bothered by the wildly conflicting narratives
>>>>> that the majority of Republicans and practically all the Democrats in Congress were sticking to.
>>>>> When it turned out that first the House and then the Senate hardly had anyone addressing the
>>>>> allegations of the other side, and almost no witnesses were called, I knew the USA was in for a lot of trouble.
>>>>>
>>>>> Both the impeachment by the House and the trial in the Senate were mere formalities,
>>>>> and both rushed to a vote that was almost all along party lines.
>>>>>
>>>>> I didn't return to talk.origins or sci.bio.paleontology for over two months, because I wanted
>>>>> to get a good feel for how people with a wide range of outlooks thought of these
>>>>> events and of many other issues. The pandemic was a major source of conflicting
>>>>> narratives. There were some really toxic, pseudoscientific stories about what the mRNA vaccines
>>>>> could do to you, and I persisted until I found out the truth about them. As a result,
>>>>> I gladly took the Pfizer vaccine: first dose February 1, second February 22.
>>>
>>>> Thanks, Peter, for the encouraging words. I am strongly against
>>>> vaccination, for sure I will never do it, :) .
>
> I wonder whether Harshman thought your smiley meant you were kidding, with
> his one word response "Seriously?" in response to what I wrote next:

I presume that Harshman doesn't take seriously anybody who doesn't
think in a way that isn't broadly accepted.

>>> I'm not 100% sure you are wrong, but I do hope you are not avoiding it for the wrong reasons.
>
>> The reason is exactly the same why you are running. You are running
>> not to atrophy. If vaccination is fighting viruses, our defense
>> mechanism will atrophy.
>
> Correction: those of our descendants will atrophy, because we weren't
> weeded out for our lack of immunity to this or that potentially deadly disease.
>
> This is so elementary, so much in line with Darwin's theory,
> that I grasped it at the age of 14. I figured we were
> creating a biological time bomb for us, to explode maybe ten centuries later,
> by our compassionate attitude towards people with all kinds of "unfit"
> defense mechanisms.
>
> Just look at how "compassionate" governments all over the world are
> in response to the pandemic. Among the most extreme are Victoria, Australia, where
> Covid-19 deaths are still among the lowest in the world, but where the
> leaders are so "compassionate" that the state has been in lockdown
> more often than not this year. The government seemingly cannot bear the thought
> of a tiny percentage of their population dying because they aren't vaccinated.
>
>
> Meanwhile, ordinary citizens have suffered so much that about 4,000
> defied lockdown just the other day, and demonstrated against the mess
> the government has made of their everyday lives. Over 200 were arrested,
> and some face fines up to US$3000 for "resisting arrest".
>
>
>> Our defense mechanism is the only thing that
>> keeps us alive.
>
> AND, for untold millions of us, the vaccinations that are mandatory for infants. Diphtheria
> was a great killer before a vaccine was developed. And so was polio,
> which maimed millions that it didn't kill outright. Covid may evolve to be like that.
>
> Face it, Mario: we have been thwarting natural selection for centuries,
> and we seem to be stuck in a downward spiral from which there is no escape.
>
>
>> Of course, it doesn't matter in my case, because I am old, I will not
>> have descendants. But never the less, I want to give a support to anyone
>> who wants to keep our defense mechanism in shape.
>> A lot of people say that jab saves lives. It is true, without jab 50 %
>> of people would die. With jab, 100 % of people will die, but not
>> tomorrow, maybe in 500 years, maybe in 1,000 years, maybe in 2,000
>> years, but *for sure* we all will die.
>
> I would *love* it if I could live for 2000 or even 200 years, but even the
> latter seems out of reach in this century and the next for anyone.
> And I do hate the thought that I might not make it to be 100:
> there is so much that I want to know and see and do before I die.
>
>
>> Of course, science doesn't see this, science looks only in front of
>> its nose, 2,000 years from now is too far for science to see what will
>> happen.
>
> Anyway, it's nice to see that you are broaching a topic which I consider to be on-topic
> for sci.bio.paleontology. The reason is that sci.bio.evolution, which is the
> natural place for this kind of talk, has been extinct for over half a dozen years.
> It was a moderated newsgroup, and it died of boredom before I discovered
> a way it might have been revived.
>
> These last few years I have treated sci.bio.paleontology as a "sci.bio.evolution in exile",
> just as I treat it as a "talk.origins in exile" on the occasions where "Beagle," the
> robo-moderator of talk.origins, is down.
>
>
> And now, for the first time on this thread, I feel we are sufficiently on topic for me
> to do one of my four-line virtual .sigs that let anyone know that there is some
> good on-topic material that I've added to the post.
>
>
> Peter Nyikos
> Professor, Dept. of Mathematics -- standard disclaimer--
> University of South Carolina
> http://people.math.sc.edu/nyikos

Well, I enjoyed reading this. But, I want to point you to one thing
that everybody already forgot, regarding Covid-19.
When Covid-19 started to emerge the reports were like this, Covid-19
*shouldn't be* a serious threat, it is just a *mild* virus. The problem
*this time*, is in our defense mechanism, which is not responding
accordingly to this *mild* virus. In the case of Covid-19, it is not the
virus that kills us, it is, actually, our defense mechanism that is
killing us, because it already doesn't work like it should, it doesn't
respond, anymore, like it should. I mean, we are vaccinating our babies
for, maybe, 60 years, and this already screwed our defense mechanism so
much.
Imagine if you are driving your car. Then turn comes, and you start to
turn your wheel. And you know by how much, exactly. But then your
passenger starts to help you with turning the wheel. Well, OK. The only
problem is, this passenger doesn't know what he is doing. But, OK, every
turn it comes, you get a help from passenger. But now, the turn comes,
and passenger doesn't respond to this turn. And now you are all
confused, you cannot determine, anymore, how much input you will do. If
you do like you are used to do so far (when your passenger helped you),
it'll be too little. Now, when you realize that, it is already too late,
now you have to put a lot more. But, this "lot more" can be too much.
This is what we are doing to our dense mechanism.

--
https://groups.google.com/g/human-evolution
human-evolution@googlegroups.com