"In the African savanna, animals that preferentially forage in
recently burned areas include savanna chimpanzees (a variety of Pan
troglodytes verus), vervet monkeys (Cercopithecus aethiops)..."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Control_of_fire_by_early_humans#Control_of_fire

Mario Petrinovic wrote:

> "In the African savanna, animals that preferentially forage in
> recently burned areas include savanna chimpanzees (a variety of Pan
> troglodytes verus), vervet monkeys (Cercopithecus aethiops)..."
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Control_of_fire_by_early_humans#Control_of_fire

So does that mean Chimps only ever evolved AFTER Homo mastered
the use of fire?

Ground foraging could be a source of selective pressure on knuckle
walking.

One defining characteristic of dinosaurs, for example, is that their
legs are under their body, like a horse of cow. But there are a few,
such as the triceratops, whose front legs are splayed out lizard like.
This is believed to be an adaptation to ground foraging.

You make an interesting argument: Humans didn't force the
evolution of Chimps & Gorillas by driving them extinct everywhere
but the forest, we invented them by setting fires...

Talk about this idea of yours more, thank you.

-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/727701377221083136

On 8.9.2023. 2:06, JTEM is so reasonable wrote:
> Mario Petrinovic wrote:
>
>> "In the African savanna, animals that preferentially forage in
>> recently burned areas include savanna chimpanzees (a variety of Pan
>> troglodytes verus), vervet monkeys (Cercopithecus aethiops)..."
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Control_of_fire_by_early_humans#Control_of_fire
>
> So does that mean Chimps only ever evolved AFTER Homo mastered
> the use of fire?
>
> Ground foraging could be a source of selective pressure on knuckle
> walking.
>
> One defining characteristic of dinosaurs, for example, is that their
> legs are under their body, like a horse of cow. But there are a few,
> such as the triceratops, whose front legs are splayed out lizard like.
> This is believed to be an adaptation to ground foraging.
>
> You make an interesting argument: Humans didn't force the
> evolution of Chimps & Gorillas by driving them extinct everywhere
> but the forest, we invented them by setting fires...
>
> Talk about this idea of yours more, thank you.

Congratulations, you got it right.
10 mya apes were like orangutans. The whole world was forest, most of
the life existed up there, in the canopy, and there the main animals
were apes. There was some life down there, on the ground, with great
sense of smell, like pigs, who ate whatever drops from above (like, ape
eats some fruit, but fruit drops from his hand, and pigs eat this), or
scavengers with who ate corpses of animals that died in canopy, and some
browsing ungulates, who browsed tree barks, dogs who chased ungulates,
and cats who climbed the trees and ate primates (like clouded leopard).
There were also elephants, who probably evolved in mangroves, but later
they moved inland by making "elephant highways". Elephant highways are
"roads" through jungle made by elephants by cutting trees, and thus
allowed sunshine to reach the ground, the next time elephants pass on
this road it would be a lot of young vegetation on it, so they would eat
those, and thus maintain the highway. Other than that there wasn't
vegetation on the ground, because sunshine couldn't reach it. Except, of
course, when some tree dies. Then starts a race for another tree seed to
take its place.
Then came humans, who started to burn pig nests, and trees on which
apes were. For example, orangutan cannot easily cross from tree to tree.
He has to climb all the way to the top, swing the top until reaching
another tree, this is the only way for orangutan to cross from one tree
to another. This is why, when loggers come to cut the tree, if orangutan
is on that tree he falls down along with the tree and dies.
So, we were burning those trees that orangutans were on, and ate all
the apes around, except, of course, in areas where you have so huge
precipitation that you cannot burn trees (this is why orangutans are
still alive). Possibly some lesser apes, who could move from tree to
tree, developed their brachiation then (like gibbons).
Well, it looks like we did better job in Africa than in SE Asia,
because in Africa we actually forced some apes to adapt to ground
living. Those apes were forced to run on all fours, so they used hand
knuckles for it. Because their fingers were like hooks, stiff hooks, so
they couldn't extend them anymore (plantigradly, like baboons), they
remained hooked.

Mario Petrinovic wrote:

> 10 mya apes were like orangutans.

Wrong. But interesting.

> Then came humans

Magicked right into existence, did we?

> who started to burn pig nests, and trees on which
> apes were.

Was this 10 million years ago or slightly more recent?
This running around, setting things on fire...

And Pigs are domesticated animals. I'm guessing you mean
Wild Boars but for all I know you meant to say that humans
domesticated the pig, set them loose, let them go ferrel, just
so they could use their new fire-making skills to burn their
little nests...

Again, interesting. Very wrong but interesting.

> Well, it looks like we did better job in Africa than in SE Asia

Got rid of all those ferrel pigs, did they?

> because in Africa we actually forced some apes to adapt to ground
> living. Those apes were forced to run on all fours

Which is weird because now you're describing orangutans, with
that "All fours."

Must've been the pigs, huh?

-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/727915015121829888

On 8.9.2023. 19:28, JTEM is so reasonable wrote:
> Mario Petrinovic wrote:
>> 10 mya apes were like orangutans.
>
> Wrong. But interesting.
>
>> Then came humans
>
> Magicked right into existence, did we?
>
>> who started to burn pig nests, and trees on which
>> apes were.
>
> Was this 10 million years ago or slightly more recent?
> This running around, setting things on fire...

This is called Vallesian crisis, 9.7 mya. North Mediterranean. By 8
mya this practice moved to Africa.

> And Pigs are domesticated animals. I'm guessing you mean
> Wild Boars but for all I know you meant to say that humans
> domesticated the pig, set them loose, let them go ferrel, just
> so they could use their new fire-making skills to burn their
> little nests...
>
> Again, interesting. Very wrong but interesting.
>
>> Well, it looks like we did better job in Africa than in SE Asia
>
> Got rid of all those ferrel pigs, did they?
>
>> because in Africa we actually forced some apes to adapt to ground
>> living. Those apes were forced to run on all fours
>
> Which is weird because now you're describing orangutans, with
> that "All fours."
>
> Must've been the pigs, huh?

Wild pigs, boars. Must you insist on technicalities? This is idiotic.

Mario Petrinovic wrote:

> JTEM is so reasonable wrote:

> > Was this 10 million years ago or slightly more recent?
> > This running around, setting things on fire...

> This is called Vallesian crisis, 9.7 mya. North Mediterranean. By 8
> mya this practice moved to Africa.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proofs, of which you
have zero..extraordinary or not.

-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/727915015121829888

On 10.9.2023. 22:37, JTEM is so reasonable wrote:
> Mario Petrinovic wrote:
>> JTEM is so reasonable wrote:
>>> Was this 10 million years ago or slightly more recent?
>>> This running around, setting things on fire...
>
>> This is called Vallesian crisis, 9.7 mya. North Mediterranean. By 8
>> mya this practice moved to Africa.
>
> Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proofs, of which you
> have zero..extraordinary or not.

How do you think, I "have zero proofs"? I don't keep proofs in bank.
Discussing paleoanthropology requires to have some knowledge, of which
you have zero.

....
Mario:
> 10 mya apes were like orangutans.

:-D

10 Ma (after the Mesopotamian Seaway closure c 14 Ma):
there were
- hominids-dryopiths in swamp forests around the Tethys-sea (now +-Med.Sea) + rivers + islands + incipient Red Sea (Gorilla-Homo-Pan LCAs),
- pongids-sivapiths in swamp forests along northern Ind.Ocean coasts + rivers, now orangutans,
e.g.
- https://www.gondwanatalks.com/l/the-waterside-hypothesis-wading-led-to-upright-walking-in-early-humans/
- David Attenborough https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/b07v2ysg
- google "aquarboreal"

On 11.9.2023. 12:21, littor...@gmail.com wrote:
> ...
> Mario:
>> 10 mya apes were like orangutans.
>
> :-D
>
> 10 Ma (after the Mesopotamian Seaway closure c 14 Ma):
> there were
> - hominids-dryopiths in swamp forests around the Tethys-sea (now +-Med.Sea) + rivers + islands + incipient Red Sea (Gorilla-Homo-Pan LCAs),
> - pongids-sivapiths in swamp forests along northern Ind.Ocean coasts + rivers, now orangutans,
> e.g.
> - https://www.gondwanatalks.com/l/the-waterside-hypothesis-wading-led-to-upright-walking-in-early-humans/
> - David Attenborough https://www.bbc.co.uk/sounds/play/b07v2ysg
> - google "aquarboreal"

And there were thick enameled human ancestors living on sea coast,
adducted big toe bipedal humans on a rocky coast, and abducted big toe
bipedals on shallow sandy coasts. Then, 10 mya those started to burn
around, and all your apes disappeared (except orangutans, chimps,
gorillas and gibbons/siamangs), and only my bipedal apes remained. So,
my bipedal apes got rid of your quadrupedal apes 10 mya, :) . And then
those bipedal fought among themselves, :) .

Mario Petrinovic wrote:

> How do you think, I "have zero proofs"?

You're spewing ideas for things which don't exist. Take your
use of fire, for example, some 10 million years ago?

-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/728166607418949632

On 11.9.2023. 14:57, JTEM is so reasonable wrote:
> Mario Petrinovic wrote:
>> How do you think, I "have zero proofs"?
>
> You're spewing ideas for things which don't exist. Take your
> use of fire, for example, some 10 million years ago?

- fire changed the environment on mass scale, starting at 9.7 mya. This
is called 'Vallesian crisis'.
- this extincted all the Miocene hominoids except our ancestors. This
would say that our ancestors thrived by this development.
- wherever humans first time emerged, the same thing happened,
Australia, Siberia, Americas, always the same pattern, directly linked
to us.
- the only other source of fire can be climate, but climate cannot be
because:
- the change is too patchy for it, climate works on the whole area, it
doesn't work in a patchy way
- much more important, in the middle of the affected area (the whole
Mediterranean coast) it was Tusco-Sardinian island, completely
unaffected by this. Only when this island touched mainland it
immediately became affected. This means that the change goes on foot,
not by air.
- humans eat meat, but they cannot eat meat if it isn't prepared on fire
- humans live in symbiosis with fire in every way
- the technique called fire-stick farming is extremely beneficial for humans
- eating food prepared on fire is inefficient, if an animal can eat that
food any other way, it will do it. Also, it is dangerous, because it
relieves your position. If an animal *can* eat any other way, it will do
it. So, we always lived that way.
Now, it all depends on how smart you are. Everything points that this
is the work of humans. Of course, depends on your view, it also may seem
to you that this is the work of God, or NLO.

On 11.9.2023. 15:56, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
> On 11.9.2023. 14:57, JTEM is so reasonable wrote:
>>   Mario Petrinovic wrote:
>>> How do you think, I "have zero proofs"?
>>
>> You're spewing ideas for things which don't exist. Take your
>> use of fire, for example, some 10 million years ago?
>
> - fire changed the environment on mass scale, starting at 9.7 mya. This
> is called 'Vallesian crisis'.
> - this extincted all the Miocene hominoids except our ancestors. This
> would say that our ancestors thrived by this development.
> - wherever humans first time emerged, the same thing happened,
> Australia, Siberia, Americas, always the same pattern, directly linked
> to us.
> - the only other source of fire can be climate, but climate cannot be
> because:
>         - the change is too patchy for it, climate works on the whole
> area, it doesn't work in a patchy way
>         - much more important, in the middle of the affected area (the
> whole Mediterranean coast) it was Tusco-Sardinian island, completely
> unaffected by this. Only when this island touched mainland it
> immediately became affected. This means that the change goes on foot,
> not by air.
> - humans eat meat, but they cannot eat meat if it isn't prepared on fire
> - humans live in symbiosis with fire in every way
> - the technique called fire-stick farming is extremely beneficial for
> humans
> - eating food prepared on fire is inefficient, if an animal can eat that
> food any other way, it will do it. Also, it is dangerous, because it
> relieves your position. If an animal *can* eat any other way, it will do
> it. So, we always lived that way.
>         Now, it all depends on how smart you are. Everything points
> that this is the work of humans. Of course, depends on your view, it
> also may seem to you that this is the work of God, or NLO.

Oops, 'NLO' is Croatian for 'UFO', :) .

Mario Petrinovic wrote:

> - fire changed the environment on mass scale, starting at 9.7 mya.

I'm pretty sure that fire wasn't invented before 9.6 million years
ago. Before that they had to use warm toast. Very warm. "Hot"
even. Like, wicked hot & stuff.

>This is called 'Vallesian crisis'.

It was cooler and thus drier, which might explain your magical
fires quite adequately... especially in comparison to your ideas.

It seems to be associated with the extinction of any potential
ancestors in Europe.

The Late Miocene is when Yellowstone exploded, by the by,
which would have been a global catastrophe, with long term
cooling in the northern hemisphere.

The Younger Dryas cooling, for example, lasted over a
thousand years.

> - this extincted all the Miocene hominoids except our
> ancestors.

I've already talked about this quite extensively.

The coast is far more desirable than is inland, after
such a catastrophe, and the closer to the equator the
better. The southern hemisphere recovers a lot quicker
than the northern.

Europe was not where you wanted to be.

-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/728166607418949632

On 12.9.2023. 7:42, JTEM is so reasonable wrote:
> Mario Petrinovic wrote:
>> - fire changed the environment on mass scale, starting at 9.7 mya.
>
> I'm pretty sure that fire wasn't invented before 9.6 million years
> ago. Before that they had to use warm toast. Very warm. "Hot"
> even. Like, wicked hot & stuff.
>
>> This is called 'Vallesian crisis'.
>
> It was cooler and thus drier, which might explain your magical
> fires quite adequately... especially in comparison to your ideas.
>
> It seems to be associated with the extinction of any potential
> ancestors in Europe.
>
> The Late Miocene is when Yellowstone exploded, by the by,
> which would have been a global catastrophe, with long term
> cooling in the northern hemisphere.
>
> The Younger Dryas cooling, for example, lasted over a
> thousand years.
>
>> - this extincted all the Miocene hominoids except our
>> ancestors.
>
> I've already talked about this quite extensively.
>
> The coast is far more desirable than is inland, after
> such a catastrophe, and the closer to the equator the
> better. The southern hemisphere recovers a lot quicker
> than the northern.
>
> Europe was not where you wanted to be.

I will not respond to this garbage. How would it be for you to stop
dreaming and start actually reading something. My pension is only 850
euros ($ 900), so I cannot afford books anymore, but you should have
enough money.

On 12.9.2023. 11:13, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
> On 12.9.2023. 7:42, JTEM is so reasonable wrote:
>>   Mario Petrinovic wrote:
>>> - fire changed the environment on mass scale, starting at 9.7 mya.
>>
>> I'm pretty sure that fire wasn't invented before 9.6 million years
>> ago. Before that they had to use warm toast. Very warm. "Hot"
>> even. Like, wicked hot & stuff.
>>
>>> This is called 'Vallesian crisis'.
>>
>> It was cooler and thus drier, which might explain your magical
>> fires quite adequately... especially in comparison to your ideas.
>>
>> It seems to be associated with the extinction of any potential
>> ancestors in Europe.
>>
>> The Late Miocene is when Yellowstone exploded, by the by,
>> which would have been a global catastrophe, with long term
>> cooling in the northern hemisphere.
>>
>> The Younger Dryas cooling, for example, lasted over a
>> thousand years.
>>
>>> - this extincted all the Miocene hominoids except our
>>> ancestors.
>>
>> I've already talked about this quite extensively.
>>
>> The coast is far more desirable than is inland, after
>> such a catastrophe, and the closer to the equator the
>> better. The southern hemisphere recovers a lot quicker
>> than the northern.
>>
>> Europe was not where you wanted to be.
>
>         I will not respond to this garbage. How would it be for you to
> stop dreaming and start actually reading something. My pension is only
> 850 euros ($ 900), so I cannot afford books anymore, but you should have
> enough money.

To be a bit clearer. When somebody talks about Vallesian crisis (or
absolutely anything else, any bloody subject), don't enter the
discussion if you don't know ABSOLUTELY ANYTHING about it, for god's
sake. What's wrong with you, do you really think things work that way?
That you can dream absolutely anything you like? You have internet,
don't you? USE IT.

Mario's first sensible talk in years:

> Oops, 'NLO' is Croatian for 'UFO', :) .

:-)

Mario Petrinovic wrote:

> To be a bit clearer. When somebody talks about Vallesian crisis (or
> absolutely anything else, any bloody subject), don't enter the
> discussion if you don't know ABSOLUTELY ANYTHING about it

This, says the guy who believes it was started by humanoids
domesticating pigs just so they could run around setting their
nests on fire...

Oh, the irony...

-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/728024793991069696

JTEM is so reasonable wrote:
> Mario Petrinovic wrote:
>
>> "In the African savanna, animals that preferentially forage in
>> recently burned areas include savanna chimpanzees (a variety of Pan
>> troglodytes verus), vervet monkeys (Cercopithecus aethiops)..."
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Control_of_fire_by_early_humans#Control_of_fire
>
> So does that mean Chimps only ever evolved AFTER Homo mastered
> the use of fire?
>
> Ground foraging could be a source of selective pressure on knuckle
> walking.
>
> One defining characteristic of dinosaurs, for example, is that their
> legs are under their body, like a horse of cow. But there are a few,
> such as the triceratops, whose front legs are splayed out lizard like.
> This is believed to be an adaptation to ground foraging.

Wrong, and this has been known for a couple decades. This stance
would have practically having the beast scrapping its chest on the
ground.

The wiki page

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_ceratopsian_research

has a decent summary of the research on the stance. For example,
the section for the year 2000 has

"Paul and Christiansen studied ceratopsid forelimbs and
concluded that in life the animal probably stood with
its elbows slightly everted but with its forelimbs
otherwise erect. They also concluded that ceratopsians
had faster running speeds than modern elephants and
were able to gallop."

And from 2012

https://scitechdaily.com/researchers-believe-triceratops-had-upright-forelimbs/

"Dr. Shin-ichi Fujiwara from the University of Tokyo and
Professor John Hutchinson from the Royal Veterinary College
have developed a new, advanced method that provides insight
into the kinds of forelimb postures animals might use,
derived from simple measurements on bones.

"Findings using the new method show that, contrary to popular
belief, Triceratops had quite upright forelimbs like larger
mammals, not splayed out to the sides like most reptiles and
amphibians. "

See
https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rspb.2012.0190

Mario Petrinovic wrote:
>         "In the African savanna, animals that preferentially forage in
> recently burned areas include savanna chimpanzees (a variety of Pan
> troglodytes verus), vervet monkeys (Cercopithecus aethiops)..."
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Control_of_fire_by_early_humans#Control_of_fire
>

Nice summary, thanks, they reference the following (from 2017)

https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/full/10.1086/692112
Savanna Chimpanzees at Fongoli, Senegal, Navigate a Fire Landscape

Interesting stat:
"more than 75% of these apes’ home range may be burned annually"

Also worth reading

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/12/091222105312.htm
Wild chimps have near human understanding of fire

Primum Sapienti wrote:

> > One defining characteristic of dinosaurs, for example, is that their
> > legs are under their body, like a horse of cow. But there are a few,
> > such as the triceratops, whose front legs are splayed out lizard like.
> > This is believed to be an adaptation to ground foraging.

> Wrong

It's not wrong at all, you spazz.

From your own cite:

https://scitechdaily.com/images/Triceratops-Had-Upright-Forelimbs.jpg?ezimgfmt=ng:webp/ngcb2

Compare the legs to that of an elephant or a hippo. No, they
are not in similar positions at all.

Oo! What about a rhino?

https://www.alexflemingart.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/Photo_1624454402979.jpg

No. You struck out there, too. Nobody is surprised.

-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/728166607418949632

It won't help, you're a lost cause but, the savanna is the worst
at supporting Chimps. They have the lowest population
density of any Chimps.

-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/728166607418949632

On 14.9.2023. 10:28, JTEM is so reasonable wrote:
> It won't help, you're a lost cause but, the savanna is the worst
> at supporting Chimps. They have the lowest population
> density of any Chimps.

I am talking about humans, not chimps. The scenario is possible, and
the mosaic environment has the highest population density of humans. So,
what's wrong? If even chimps can and do forage that way, are you
claiming that humans didn't? Hm, this is the opposite of logical.

Mario Petrinovic wrote:

> I am talking about humans, not chimps.

You were talking about 10 million years ago. If you think
that means humans then perhaps thinking isn't your thing.

Try something else.

-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/728166607418949632

On 14.9.2023. 14:39, JTEM is so reasonable wrote:
> Mario Petrinovic wrote:
>> I am talking about humans, not chimps.
>
> You were talking about 10 million years ago. If you think
> that means humans then perhaps thinking isn't your thing.
>
> Try something else.

First thing, we have a bipedal creature that pretty much resembles
humans, 11.6 mya (Danuvius).
The second thing, we *don't* have chimps 10 mya, chimps are the new
development, the original ape was more like humans than like chimps.
So, again, you should have at least the basic knowledge if you want to
discuss things.

Mario Petrinovic wrote:

> First thing, we have a bipedal creature that pretty much resembles
> humans, 11.6 mya (Danuvius).

Wiki calls them an Ape, which is simply not true.

> The second thing, we *don't* have chimps 10 mya, chimps are the new
> development, the original ape was more like humans than like chimps.

No. Apes are secondarily knuckle walkers.

I am fully aware of the ideas circulating on Europe being the origins of
bipedalism. There's some good arguments, but our ancestors didn't
come from any inland group.

-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/728480911625240576