Early Homonid Fossil Finally Analyzed

[Dr. Cheese]

First discovered in 1992, there is finally a detailed report on this fossil:http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/02/sc...ml?ref=science

[coreyfyfe]

This one gets a little more in depth for those interested: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/n...s-ramidus.html

Pretty cool find. The life-style analysis in the NG article was interesting. It's amazing all the information that can be gleaned by examining bone structure in relation to co-inhabitant/ancestral species and environmental conditions.

[Steveaux]

Very cool.

A little closer to the roots on the evolutionary lilac bush.

Thanks for posting this.

[IconBasser]

awesome!

although I must say that the "sex for food" hypothesis sounds completely ridiculous to me. to infer that sort of scenario from a big toe and small canine teeth is IMO nothing more than fanciful conjecture:

One provocative answer to that question—originally proposed by Lovejoy in the early 1980s and refined now in light of the Ardipithecus discoveries—attributes the origin of bipedality to another trademark of humankind: monogamous sex.

Virtually all apes and monkeys, especially males, have long upper canine teeth—formidable weapons in fights for mating opportunities.

But Ardipithecus appears to have already embarked on a uniquely human evolutionary path, with canines reduced in size and dramatically "feminized" to a stubby, diamond shape, according to the researchers. Males and female specimens are also close to each other in body size.

Lovejoy sees these changes as part of an epochal shift in social behavior: Instead of fighting for access to females, a male Ardipithecus would supply a "targeted female" and her offspring with gathered foods and gain her sexual loyalty in return.

To keep up his end of the deal, a male needed to have his hands free to carry home the food. Bipedalism may have been a poor way for Ardipithecus to get around, but through its contribution to the "sex for food" contract, it would have been an excellent way to bear more offspring. And in evolution, of course, more offspring is the name of the game

[T-Bird]

Hi.

WOW. So that's why I like to cook for females. Something new on the education front every day I guess .

Regards
Sam

[JMX]

Pah, there's no such thing as a transitional fossil.

[NJL]

'

[Bocete]

Originally Posted by JMX

Pah, there's no such thing as a transitional fossil.

+1. It doesn't matter if we find one / how many do we find, they just don't exist

[JMX]

It's even worse than taht!

Whenever one finds a fossil that fills the gap between two other fossils, no there are TWO gaps - with no transitional fossils to account for!

Oh, teh humanity!

[Gard]

Originally Posted by JMX

It's even worse than taht!

Whenever one finds a fossil that fills the gap between two other fossils, no there are TWO gaps - with no transitional fossils to account for!

Oh, teh humanity!

I've got a slight gap between my two front teeth, does that mean that there are really no transitional teeth???








(I love sarcasm, it's a beautiful thing! )

[Kosko]

Not that I want the scenario to play out on these boards (because of the rules) but the comments on these articles are amazing.

[john turner]

Originally Posted by IconBasser

awesome!

although I must say that the "sex for food" hypothesis sounds completely ridiculous to me. to infer that sort of scenario from a big toe and small canine teeth is IMO nothing more than fanciful conjecture:

yeah, that theory is pretty ... creative, to say the least.

that's cool, though. science has room for creative theories, as long as they aren't misrepresented as somehow being fact before they have earned that right through proof.

[Gard]

Originally Posted by john turner

yeah, that theory is pretty ... creative, to say the least.

that's cool, though. science has room for creative theories, as long as they aren't misrepresented as somehow being fact before they have earned that right through proof.

Agreed, that's stretching pretty far based on the available evidence.

However, again agreed, the beauty of science is that it is ok to "throw spaghetti at the wall and see what sticks". Sometimes pretty crazy ideas turn out to be right...

[CrispyDelicious]

Originally Posted by Gard

Agreed, that's stretching pretty far based on the available evidence.

However, again agreed, the beauty of science is that it is ok to "throw spaghetti at the wall and see what sticks". Sometimes pretty crazy ideas turn out to be right...

Right. Next you're going to tell me the earth is ROUND.

[Gard]

Originally Posted by CrispyDelicious

Right. Next you're going to tell me the earth is ROUND.

Actually, no, it's more pear-shaped.

[Bryan R. Tyler]

Originally Posted by Gard

Actually, no, it's more pear-shaped.

When did you start calling yourself "the earth"?

[Gard]

Originally Posted by Bryan R. Tyler

When did you start calling yourself "the earth"?

Hey now, I'm not THAT big...

[Bryan R. Tyler]

Don't worry, it's just part of your evolutionary role- you've developed wide hips to trick women into thinking you have a lot of food you can trade for some lovin'.

[Gard]

Originally Posted by Bryan R. Tyler

Don't worry, it's just part of your evolutionary role- you've developed wide hips to trick women into thinking you have a lot of food you can trade for some lovin'.

Excellent bit of deductive reasoning.

I didn't even know I had done it, it's just instinctual!

[Fishheadjoe]

Based on the pic in the link, it looks like a guitarist I used to play with....




Ok, this one's better lookin!
Fishheadjoe