Human olfactory atrophy (very poor sense of smell) shows that Pleistocene Homo were no "hunters-gatherers" (gathering OK, but systematic hunting = nonsense).

Ape+human evolution, google "GondwanaTalks Verhaegen".

Marc Verhaegen wrote:
> Human olfactory atrophy (very poor sense of smell) shows that
> Pleistocene Homo were no "hunters-gatherers" (gathering OK,
> but systematic hunting = nonsense).
>
> Ape+human evolution, google "GondwanaTalks Verhaegen".

I dunno.

There seems to me to be an inexplicable draw to the inland
environments.

Don't get me wrong, I fully agree with Aquatic Ape. Anything
else is just stupid. But our ancestors seemed to want to
give it up, push inland, and this seems to appear from the very
start -- 10 or 20 million years ago!

Look. Even if you want to claim that Ardi & Lucy were no
ancestors, the Aquatic Ape model says they at the very least
share a common ancestor. And Chimps. And Gorillas.

Etc.

So bipedalism goes back as far as we can see, and that
likely evolved as a result of Aquatic Ape. And even the
branching of Apes & Monkeys was likely related to, if not
directly caused by, Aquatic Ape. And this means groups
were peeling off, pushing inland from the very start!

And that is NOT the least bit contradictory. There's no reason
why our ancestors couldn't have preferred inland, preferred
animal meat over marine resources. It really could have been
that way. Because when we're talking about Aquatic Ape
we're not talking about all the predecessors to Homo. We're
just talking about our ancestors.

There were "Modern" humans running around 5k years ago.
This doesn't mean they were an ancestor or yours. It doesn't
even mean that they were the ancestor to any living person
today. And just like that, there were many many populations
of Homo and pre Homo species, but they don't matter. All
we care about is the one we all descend from, the one we
can all call our ancestors. And that's Aquatic Ape.

-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/733247718004277248

Ape+human evolution, very short:
-- early-Miocene Hominoidea ("apes" 25 Ma) were already "bipedal":
aquarboreal (aqua=water, arbor=tree): vertical wading+climbing in coastal forests,
-- late-Miocene hominids (HPG ancestors): aquarboreal in incipient Red Sea forests:
-> Gorilla 8 Ma via incipient N-Rift -> Afar: afarensis, aethiopicus, boisei etc.etc.
-> Pan 5 Ma via S-Rift (// Gorilla) -> Transvaal: africanus, robustus, habilis etc.etc.
-> Homo Pliocene (no Afr.retroviral DNA!) -> S.Asian coasts ->
H.erectus shellfish-diving at least early-Pleist. 2 Ma:
-brain >800 cc <- seafood DHA, taurine... dolphins, seals, sea-otters
-heavy bones (pachy-osteo-sclerosis): only & always: shallow-diving spp
-fossilisations amid edible shellfish: Mojokerto, Trinil, Sangiran...
-flat long low skull (platycephaly) = hydrodynamic
-ear exostoses = chronic water irrigations
-tooth-wear caused by shellfish, Towle cs 2022
-shell engravings, Joordens & Munro
-colonisations Flores, Luzon...
-external nose & mid-facial pro-gnathism: diving-cycle
-stone tools cf. sea-otter opening shellfish
-etc.
Pleist.dispersal of archaic Homo along coasts->rivers, still waterside:
only incredibly stupid people believe H.erectus ran after antelopes... :-DDD
The term "hunter-gatherer" is almost as ridiculous:
Pleist.Homo butchered (stone tools!) waterside carcasses they found,
but hunting is only very recent: dogs, weapons, poison...

Very very short:
- 25 Ma: aquarboreal=bipedal apes-apiths
- 2.5 Ma: shellfish-diving H.erectus s.s.
Google
- aquarboreal
- GondwanaTalks Verhaegen

All publications with terms like "Out of Africa", "hominin", "hunter-gatherer" are prejudiced!

______

Op dinsdag 7 november 2023 om 06:25:41 UTC+1 schreef JTEM is so reasonable:
> Marc Verhaegen wrote:
> > Human olfactory atrophy (very poor sense of smell) shows that
> > Pleistocene Homo were no "hunters-gatherers" (gathering OK,
> > but systematic hunting = nonsense).
> >
> > Ape+human evolution, google "GondwanaTalks Verhaegen".
> I dunno.
>
> There seems to me to be an inexplicable draw to the inland
> environments.
>
> Don't get me wrong, I fully agree with Aquatic Ape. Anything
> else is just stupid. But our ancestors seemed to want to
> give it up, push inland, and this seems to appear from the very
> start -- 10 or 20 million years ago!
>
> Look. Even if you want to claim that Ardi & Lucy were no
> ancestors, the Aquatic Ape model says they at the very least
> share a common ancestor. And Chimps. And Gorillas.
>
> Etc.
>
> So bipedalism goes back as far as we can see, and that
> likely evolved as a result of Aquatic Ape. And even the
> branching of Apes & Monkeys was likely related to, if not
> directly caused by, Aquatic Ape. And this means groups
> were peeling off, pushing inland from the very start!
>
> And that is NOT the least bit contradictory. There's no reason
> why our ancestors couldn't have preferred inland, preferred
> animal meat over marine resources. It really could have been
> that way. Because when we're talking about Aquatic Ape
> we're not talking about all the predecessors to Homo. We're
> just talking about our ancestors.
>
> There were "Modern" humans running around 5k years ago.
> This doesn't mean they were an ancestor or yours. It doesn't
> even mean that they were the ancestor to any living person
> today. And just like that, there were many many populations
> of Homo and pre Homo species, but they don't matter. All
> we care about is the one we all descend from, the one we
> can all call our ancestors. And that's Aquatic Ape.

On Mon, 6 Nov 2023 05:56:23 -0800 (PST), Marc Verhaegen
<m_verhaegen@skynet.be> wrote:

>Human olfactory atrophy (very poor sense of smell) shows that Pleistocene Homo
>were no "hunters-gatherers" (gathering OK, but systematic hunting = nonsense).

We're not dogs. Humans, like chimpanzees, are visual hunters.

Anyway, a (semi)aquatic lifestyle would not explain those megafauna
extinctions in the wake of hominin range expansion:
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S221330542300036X

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2021.107316

With subsistence on fish and shellfish we would not be in competition
with the megafauna.

On 12.11.2023. 13:00, Pandora wrote:
> On Mon, 6 Nov 2023 05:56:23 -0800 (PST), Marc Verhaegen
> <m_verhaegen@skynet.be> wrote:
>
>> Human olfactory atrophy (very poor sense of smell) shows that Pleistocene Homo
>> were no "hunters-gatherers" (gathering OK, but systematic hunting = nonsense).
>
> We're not dogs. Humans, like chimpanzees, are visual hunters.
>
> Anyway, a (semi)aquatic lifestyle would not explain those megafauna
> extinctions in the wake of hominin range expansion:
> https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S221330542300036X
>
> https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2021.107316
>
> With subsistence on fish and shellfish we would not be in competition
> with the megafauna.

The second link is wrong, it is very well known that megafauna got
extinct lately. Nobody ever mentions fire, and it is already proved that
human fires extincted megafauna. Those who wrote those papers don't know
their job, they are uninformed.

Pandora wrote:

> Anyway, a (semi)aquatic lifestyle would not explain those megafauna
> extinctions in the wake of hominin range expansion:
> https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S221330542300036X

Typical of you small minded twits: Selection bias.

You're cherry picking!

The North African elephant lived on well into historic times. It was
eventually driven extinct by humans, during the Roman period.

The Syrian elephant existed well into historic times.

African elephants still exist today, as do more than one species (or
sub species) of Asian elephants...

Funny how humans hunted Mammoths & Mastodons into extinction
if a fairy short time, but the people of the middle east couldn't
accomplish the same.

Say, even African bears clung on deep into historic times!

How could FEWER people, in places like the Americas, achieve the
extinction of the mega fauna when MORE people, like in North Africa,
the middle east & Asia, could not?

It's dumb. There was something else going on.

Maybe rabies? You know, humans brought dogs with them, the dogs
brought in rabies and, *Bam!*

If you look at automobile accidents, speed is the most common factor.
But it's virtually never the only factor. There's always something else.

Like weather. Or someone switched lanes without looking, and the speed
cut down on reaction time...

So humans were probably a factor but hardly the only factor. They may
not have even been the most important factor.

> With subsistence on fish and shellfish we would not be in competition
> with the megafauna.

Again, the mega fauna did not go extinct. What went extinct were mega
fauna isolated in the Americas that were suddenly not isolated.

Hunters. Disease. The climate change that allowed people to arrive in
great numbers...

-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/733754887680196608

Pandora wrote:
> On Mon, 6 Nov 2023 05:56:23 -0800 (PST), Marc Verhaegen
> <m_verhaegen@skynet.be> wrote:
>
>> Human olfactory atrophy (very poor sense of smell) shows that Pleistocene Homo
>> were no "hunters-gatherers" (gathering OK, but systematic hunting = nonsense).
>
> We're not dogs. Humans, like chimpanzees, are visual hunters.

Humans have a good sense of smell, it's just not used in
hunting. Look how many products there are for covering up
smells, either on oneself or room odors.

> Anyway, a (semi)aquatic lifestyle would not explain those megafauna
> extinctions in the wake of hominin range expansion:
> https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S221330542300036X
>
> https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2021.107316
>
> With subsistence on fish and shellfish we would not be in competition
> with the megafauna.

AAers think that one can keep warm in cold weather by wearing
fish skins.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-023-45554-w.pdf

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-023-45554-w
Published: 25 October 2023

Terminal ballistic analysis of impact fractures reveals
the use of spearthrower 31 ky ago at Maisières‑Canal, Belgium

Abstract
The emergence of hunting technology in the deep past
fundamentally shaped the subsistence strategies of
early human populations. Hence knowing when different
weapons were first introduced is important for
understanding our evolutionary trajectory. The timing
of the adoption of long-range weaponry remains heavily
debated because preserved organic weapon components
are extremely rare in the Paleolithic record and stone
points are difficult to attribute reliably to weapon
delivery methods without supporting organic evidence.
Here, we use a refined use-wear approach to demonstrate
that spearthrower was used for launching projectiles
armed with tanged flint points at Maisières-Canal
(Belgium) 31,000 years ago. The novelty of our approach
lies in the combination of impact fracture data with
terminal ballistic analysis of the mechanical stress
suffered by a stone armature on impact. This stress is
distinct for each weapon and visible archaeologically
as fracture proportions on assemblage scale. Our
reference dataset derives from a sequential experimental
program that addressed individually each key parameter
affecting fracture formation and successfully reproduced
the archaeological fracture signal. The close match
between the archaeological sample and the experimental
spearthrower set extends the timeline of spearthrower
use by over 10,000 years and represents the earliest
reliable trace-based evidence for the utilization of
long-distance weaponry in prehistoric hunting.

kudu runner:
> Humans have a good sense of smell, it's just not used in hunting.

:-DDD

On Mon, 13 Nov 2023 05:26:28 -0800 (PST), Marc Verhaegen
<m_verhaegen@skynet.be> wrote:

>> Humans have a good sense of smell, it's just not used in hunting.
>
>:-DDD

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC406401/

On Sun, 12 Nov 2023 14:59:21 +0100, Mario Petrinovic
<mario.petrinovic1@zg.htnet.hr> wrote:

>On 12.11.2023. 13:00, Pandora wrote:
>> On Mon, 6 Nov 2023 05:56:23 -0800 (PST), Marc Verhaegen
>> <m_verhaegen@skynet.be> wrote:
>>
>>> Human olfactory atrophy (very poor sense of smell) shows that Pleistocene Homo
>>> were no "hunters-gatherers" (gathering OK, but systematic hunting = nonsense).
>>
>> We're not dogs. Humans, like chimpanzees, are visual hunters.
>>
>> Anyway, a (semi)aquatic lifestyle would not explain those megafauna
>> extinctions in the wake of hominin range expansion:
>> https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S221330542300036X
>>
>> https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2021.107316
>>
>> With subsistence on fish and shellfish we would not be in competition
>> with the megafauna.
>
> The second link is wrong, it is very well known that megafauna got
>extinct lately. Nobody ever mentions fire, and it is already proved that
>human fires extincted megafauna. Those who wrote those papers don't know
>their job, they are uninformed.

Extinct is not a verb.

On 13.11.2023. 15:34, Pandora wrote:
> On Sun, 12 Nov 2023 14:59:21 +0100, Mario Petrinovic
> <mario.petrinovic1@zg.htnet.hr> wrote:
>> On 12.11.2023. 13:00, Pandora wrote:
>>> On Mon, 6 Nov 2023 05:56:23 -0800 (PST), Marc Verhaegen
>>> <m_verhaegen@skynet.be> wrote:
>>>> Human olfactory atrophy (very poor sense of smell) shows that Pleistocene Homo
>>>> were no "hunters-gatherers" (gathering OK, but systematic hunting = nonsense).
>>>
>>> We're not dogs. Humans, like chimpanzees, are visual hunters.
>>>
>>> Anyway, a (semi)aquatic lifestyle would not explain those megafauna
>>> extinctions in the wake of hominin range expansion:
>>> https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S221330542300036X
>>>
>>> https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2021.107316
>>>
>>> With subsistence on fish and shellfish we would not be in competition
>>> with the megafauna.
>>
>> The second link is wrong, it is very well known that megafauna got
>> extinct lately. Nobody ever mentions fire, and it is already proved that
>> human fires extincted megafauna. Those who wrote those papers don't know
>> their job, they are uninformed.
>
> Extinct is not a verb.

Ah, thanks. Although I really don't know how to write what I wrote,
some other way.

On 13.11.2023. 17:10, Mario Petrinovic wrote:
> On 13.11.2023. 15:34, Pandora wrote:
>> On Sun, 12 Nov 2023 14:59:21 +0100, Mario Petrinovic
>> <mario.petrinovic1@zg.htnet.hr> wrote:
>>> On 12.11.2023. 13:00, Pandora wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 6 Nov 2023 05:56:23 -0800 (PST), Marc Verhaegen
>>>> <m_verhaegen@skynet.be> wrote:
>>>>> Human olfactory atrophy (very poor sense of smell) shows that
>>>>> Pleistocene Homo
>>>>> were no "hunters-gatherers" (gathering OK, but systematic hunting =
>>>>> nonsense).
>>>>
>>>> We're not dogs. Humans, like chimpanzees, are visual hunters.
>>>>
>>>> Anyway, a (semi)aquatic lifestyle would not explain those megafauna
>>>> extinctions in the wake of hominin range expansion:
>>>> https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S221330542300036X
>>>>
>>>> https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2021.107316
>>>>
>>>> With subsistence on fish and shellfish we would not be in competition
>>>> with the megafauna.
>>>
>>>         The second link is wrong, it is very well known that
>>> megafauna got
>>> extinct lately. Nobody ever mentions fire, and it is already proved that
>>> human fires extincted megafauna. Those who wrote those papers don't know
>>> their job, they are uninformed.
>>
>> Extinct is not a verb.
>
>         Ah, thanks. Although I really don't know how to write what I
> wrote, some other way.

https://youtu.be/j0m4rcx0of4?si=taI1PvraXugTHAhF

:) .

Primum Sapienti wrote:

> AAers think that one can keep warm in cold weather by wearing
> fish skins.

You're so pathetic, so far away from anything rational that you
are literally making shit up...

Straw man.

> https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-023-45554-w.pdf

https://groups.google.com/g/talk.origins/c/9_2jGRry3_Q/m/kK726uklAQAJ

It's funny how your cite says the words "Terminal Velocity" but
it stealthily avoid any mention of what it means.. what this
"Terminal Velocity" even is, for example.

Click on the Youtube video. The .50 bullet struck it with more
energy than 10 spears. Look how long it takes to drop.

IT'S NOT A WILD ANIMAL!

The psychopath is at a farm/ranch that raises exotic animals
for the sheer joy of killing them. People pay for the privilege of
killing helpless animals.

Still, even with more energy than any 10 spears, the animal
doesn't drop right away...

If you were a thinking man, and we both know that you're not,
you'd know that distance weapons aren't very effective. They
still had to track the animal, which might travel for miles
before dropping.

AND NOT THAT IT MATTERS but evidence for throwing spears
stretches back 400,000 years in Europe. Some evidence is only
300,000 years but even you should grasp that this is a lot older
than 31k years ago...

I've often pondered the disappearance of throwing spears and have
suggested that they came up with something better: Ambush
hunting.

It's very likely that the glacial/interglacial cycle factors in here.
You're going to have a lot less forested areas during the
glacial periods, right? Maybe they had to throw weapons during
some phases, while the ambush hunting was available during other
periods...

-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/733754887680196608

Pandora wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Nov 2023 05:26:28 -0800 (PST), Marc Verhaegen
> <m_verhaegen@skynet.be> wrote:
>
>>> Humans have a good sense of smell, it's just not used in hunting.
>>
>> :-DDD
>
> https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC406401/
>

:=DDD