View Full Version : Video on kudu runners
Welcome to the Active Low-Carber Forums
Support for Atkins diet, Protein Power, Neanderthin (Paleo Diet), CAD/CALP, Dr. Bernstein Diabetes Solution and any other healthy low-carb diet or plan, all are welcome in our lowcarb community. Forget starvation and fad diets -- join the healthy eating crowd! You may register by clicking here, it's free!
Marc Verha
Wed, Jul-11-07, 06:15
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VFsgtLxALac
Rich Travs
Wed, Jul-11-07, 17:16
Marc Verhaegen wrote:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VFsgtLxALac
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9qNJRhMrmZA 52 Marathons
in 52 Weeks
Lee Olsen
Wed, Jul-11-07, 17:16
On Jul 11, 11:51 am, Marc Verhaegen
<m_verhae...@skynet.be> wrote:
> The point, my boy, is that Mr.X running after kudus doesn't
> imply that human ancestors were kudu runners.
The point, doughboy, is that making up coconuts, algae, and
oysters where there isn't any doesn't imply that human
ancestors were littorial.
AAT spritual-evidence believers lack logic.
>
> Op 11-07-2007 15:58, in artikel
> 4694E223.98F30...@hotmMOVEail.com, Rich Travsky
> <traRvE...@hotmMOVEail.com> schreef:
>
>
>
> > Marc Verhaegen wrote:
>
> >>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VFsgtLxALac
>
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9qNJRhMrmZA
> > 52 Marathons in 52 Weeks- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Marc Verha
Wed, Jul-11-07, 17:16
The point, my boy, is that Mr.X running after kudus doesn't
imply that human ancestors were kudu runners. Savanna
believers lack logic.
Op 11-07-2007 15:58, in artikel
4694E223.98F308A6@hotmMOVEail.com, Rich Travsky
<traRvEsky@hotmMOVEail.com> schreef:
> Marc Verhaegen wrote:
>>
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VFsgtLxALac
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9qNJRhMrmZA 52 Marathons in
> 52 Weeks
Rich Travs
Thu, Jul-26-07, 06:22
Marc Verhaegen wrote:
>
> The point, my boy, is that Mr.X running after kudus doesn't
> imply that human ancestors were kudu runners. Savanna
> believers lack logic.
AATers lack logic.
How do you think humans got to be runners? Not isolated
populations, but all humans.
Even little kids run.
> Op 11-07-2007 15:58, in artikel
> 4694E223.98F308A6@hotmMOVEail.com, Rich Travsky
> <traRvEsky@hotmMOVEail.com> schreef:
>
> > Marc Verhaegen wrote:
> >>
> >> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VFsgtLxALac
> >
> > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9qNJRhMrmZA 52 Marathons in
> > 52 Weeks
Marc Verha
Thu, Jul-26-07, 06:22
Op 21-07-2007 05:20, in artikel
46A17B83.DA04C21A@hotmMOVEail.com, Rich Travsky
<traRvEsky@hotmMOVEail.com> schreef:
> Marc Verhaegen wrote:
>>
>> The point, my boy, is that Mr.X running after kudus doesn't
>> imply that human ancestors were kudu runners. Savanna
>> believers lack logic.
>
> AATers lack logic.
No, my boy:
Tobias 1995 ³We were all profoundly and unutterably wrong!
All the former savannah supporters (including myself) must
now swallow our earlier words ² Wood 1996 ³the savannah¹
hypothesis of human origins, in which the cooling begat the
savannah and the savannah begat humanity, is now
discredited² Stringer 1997 ³One of the strong points about
the aquatic theory is in explaining the origin of
bipedality. If our ancestors did go into the water, that
would forced them to walk upright ² Tobias 1998 ³Bamford
identified fossil vines or lianas of Dichapetalum in the
same Member 4: such vines hang from forest trees and would
not be expected in open savannah. The team at Makapansgat
found floral and faunal evidence that the layers containing
Australopithecus reflected forest or forest margin
conditions. From Hadar, in Ethiopia, where Lucy¹ was found,
and from Aramis in Ethiopia, where Tim White¹s team found
Ardipithecus ramidus well-wooded and even forested
conditions were inferred from the fauna accompanying the
hominid fossils. All the fossil evidence adds up to the
small-brained, bipedal hominids of four to 2.5 Ma having
lived in a woodland or forest niche, not savannah.² ³ if
ever our earliest ancestors were savannah dwellers, we must
have been the worst, the most profligate urinators there²
Stringer 2001 ³In the past I have agreed that we lack
plausible models for the origins of bipedalism and have
agreed that wading in water can facilitate bipedal
locomotion (as observed in other normally quadrupedal
primates). I have never said that this must have been the
forcing mechanism in hominids, but I do consider it
plausible. As for coastal colonisation, I argued in my
Nature News & Views last year that this was an event in the
late Pleistocene that may have facilitated the spread of
modern humans.² Wrangham 2005 ³Here I follow the
conventional assumption that hominins began in the savanna.²
³ the composition of the Okavango as a network of islands
could favor the evolution of bipedalism. For those who
envisage bipedalism as facilitated by the need to traverse
or exploit aquatic environments, an inland delta that
generates low islands termitogenically or hydrodynamically
offers rich scenarios.² Alemseged 2006 ³I believe we should
just put the savannah theory aside. I think they basically
became biped while they were living in a wooded, covered
environment ²
Paul Crowl
Fri, Jul-27-07, 17:18
"Rich Travsky" <traRvEsky@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
news:46A17B83.DA04C21A@hotmMOVEail.com...
> Marc Verhaegen wrote:
>>
>> The point, my boy, is that Mr.X running after kudus doesn't
>> imply that human ancestors were kudu runners. Savanna
>> believers lack logic.
>
> AATers lack logic.
>
> How do you think humans got to be runners? Not isolated
> populations, but all humans.
>
> Even little kids run.
This must be the ultimate in Political Correctness.
Humans have been known to kill each other, especially in wars,
and civil conflicts. Likewise chimps (and other primates) have
been known to kill each other.
It is reasonable to assume that ancestral hominids were
similar.
Those individuals who were slower at getting away from their
murderous con- specifics left fewer descendants.
Tough? Eh?
Paul.
Rich Travs
Tue, Aug-14-07, 06:17
Marc Verhaegen wrote:
>
> Op 21-07-2007 05:20, in artikel
> 46A17B83.DA04C21A@hotmMOVEail.com, Rich Travsky
> <traRvEsky@hotmMOVEail.com> schreef:
>
> > Marc Verhaegen wrote:
> >>
> >> The point, my boy, is that Mr.X running after kudus
> >> doesn't imply that human ancestors were kudu runners.
> >> Savanna believers lack logic.
> >
> > AATers lack logic.
>
> No, my boy:
AAT logic: why not go on all fours
Nickname
Tue, Aug-14-07, 17:17
On Aug 13, 9:48 pm, Rich Travsky
<traRvE...@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote:
> Marc Verhaegen wrote:
>
> > Op 21-07-2007 05:20, in artikel
> > 46A17B83.DA04C...@hotmMOVEail.com, Rich Travsky
> > <traRvE...@hotmMOVEail.com> schreef:
>
> > > Marc Verhaegen wrote:
>
> > >> The point, my boy, is that Mr.X running after kudus
> > >> doesn't imply that human ancestors were kudu runners.
> > >> Savanna believers lack logic.
>
> > > AATers lack logic.
>
> > No, my boy:
>
> AAT logic: why not go on all fours
my logic: Hs does go on all fours, kneecrawling (and often
during sexual reproduction with knees supporting), unlike
other primates or other bipeds. Knucklewalking is found
nowhere in modern human behavior, not even a vestige of it.
Kneecrawling is seen in most babies, at beaches and on other
soft substrates, but not in thorny areas or areas with sharp
rocks or in trees, nor in inland waterholes where predators
abound. Sharks and crocs and lion prides avoid sundried sandy
beaches at seashores, humans spend billions to go there.
Nickname
Wed, Aug-15-07, 06:16
On Aug 14, 3:11 pm, Lee Olsen <paleoc...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Aug 14, 11:58 am, nickname
> <alas_my_lo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > my logic: Kneecrawling is seen in most babies, at beaches
> > and on other soft substrates, but not in thorny areas or
> > areas with sharp rocks or in trees, nor in inland
> > waterholes where predators abound. Sharks and crocs and
> > lion prides avoid sundried sandy beaches at seashores,
> > humans spend billions to go there.
>
> http://tinyurl.com/2glt3f
>
> http://tinyurl.com/yv3hbd
>
> http://images.jupiterimages.com/common/detail/05/81/2346-
> 8105.jpg
>
> http://www.predatorconservation.com/images/brownhyena4.jpg
>
> http://home.att.net/~crinaustin/Croc_files/image003.jpg
Pretty pics, but only the hyena on dry sand seeking dead seal
pups is at all relevant to my above statement. The others are
on wet sand. I would expect a few scraggly hyenas and perhaps
an old toothless lion to live in the vicinity of coldwater
seashores during the massive seal & penguin seasons and fish
migrations, at the same time as the sharks and dolphins
congregate offshore. Human ancestors generally stayed at
seashores with warm (equatoreal) surface waters (seacow
style), unlike most marine carnivores. Infants kneecrawl on
dry sand, mothers watching closely while peeling various
foods, fathers seeking shore foods and patrolling etc.
Humans spend billions to go to sunny beaches, even when the
water isn't very warm, simply to wade a bit. Only where the
water is warm do they swim and dive much unless they have
wetsuits. But infants always like to crawl around on dry sand
beaches. I've yet to see a single one knuclewalk or run after
kudus though. :)
ps. my lil sis took her first baby steps on the sunny dry
sand beach at cape cod, in between swimming sessions and
knee crawling.
Lee Olsen
Wed, Aug-15-07, 06:16
On Aug 14, 4:59 pm, nickname <alas_my_lo...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Aug 14, 3:11 pm, Lee Olsen <paleoc...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Aug 14, 11:58 am, nickname <alas_my_lo...@yahoo.com>
> > wrote:
>
> > > my logic: Kneecrawling is seen in most babies, at
> > > beaches and on other soft substrates, but not in thorny
> > > areas or areas with sharp rocks or in trees, nor in
> > > inland waterholes where predators abound. Sharks and
> > > crocs and lion prides avoid sundried sandy beaches at
> > > seashores, humans spend billions to go there.
>
> >http://tinyurl.com/2glt3f
>
> >http://tinyurl.com/yv3hbd
>
> >http://images.jupiterimages.com/common/detail/05/81/23468-
> >105.jpg
>
> >http://www.predatorconservation.com/images/brownhyena4.jpg
>
> >http://home.att.net/~crinaustin/Croc_files/image003.jpg
>
> Pretty pics, but only the hyena on dry sand seeking dead
> seal pups is at all relevant to my above statement. The
> others are on wet sand.
How do you think they got to the wet sand, by dugout? Thanks
for the keeper.
> I would expect a few scraggly hyenas and perhaps an old
> toothless lion to live in the vicinity of coldwater
> seashores during the massive seal & penguin seasons and fish
> migrations, at the same time as the sharks and dolphins
> congregate offshore.
Says your delusional imagination.
> Human ancestors generally stayed at seashores with warm
> (equatoreal) surface waters (seacow style), unlike most
> marine carnivores. Infants kneecrawl on dry sand, mothers
> watching closely while peeling various foods, fathers
> seeking shore foods and patrolling etc.
Human ancestors generally stayed on the savannas, where 100%
of the hard evidence is located. The burden is on the
imagination, no evidence, science fiction writers to
demonstrate otherwise.
>
> Humans spend billions to go to sunny beaches, even when the
> water isn't very warm, simply to wade a bit.
That's why Nike makes billions of running shoes and no
swim fins?
> Only where the water is warm do they swim and dive much
> unless they have wetsuits.
That's why people plant more savanna grass than dig
swimming pools?
> But infants always like to crawl around on dry sand beaches.
Infants always like to crawl period. Cite your source
that they prefer dry sand beaches over the inland
playground sand pit.
> I've yet to see a single one knuclewalk or run after kudus
> though. :)
Me either, Mr. Karoha gets those just fine. Never seen a baby
out swim a shark or a croc yet either.
>
> ps. my lil sis took her first baby steps on the sunny dry
> sand beach at cape cod, in between swimming sessions and
> knee crawling.
Mine kids didn't, any sharks or crocs in the swimming pool
they were taking lessons in?
- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Paul Crowl
Wed, Aug-15-07, 06:16
"nickname" <alas_my_loves@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1187135979.926703.290090@q3g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
> Humans spend billions to go to sunny beaches, even when the
> water isn't very warm, simply to wade a bit.
They spend billions, but not many wade, and few wade much. The
reasons that they go to such places should certainly be
considered.
> Only where the water is warm do they swim and dive much
> unless they have wetsuits. But infants always like to crawl
> around on dry sand beaches. I've yet to see a single one
> knuclewalk or run after kudus though. :)
This is one of the silliest lines (of 'argument') that I have
seen in this forum -- and that takes some doing.
Suppose (just as a thought-experiment) that a chimp population
was put under enormous selective pressure, over many
generations, and evolved bipedality. Say that it no longer
needed those HUGE arms, and they atrophied down to something
like those of modern Homo. To see the sheer size of the arms
of chimps look at the image on this page:
http://derstandard.at/druck/?id=2961265
The new animal would be quite INCAPABLE of knuckle-walking.
Its infants would also be quite incapable. It would not do it.
It would NEVER (or very rarely) attempt it -- any more than an
ostrich would attempt to fly.
Paul.
Rich Travs
Tue, Sep-04-07, 06:17
nickname wrote:
>
> On Aug 13, 9:48 pm, Rich Travsky
> <traRvE...@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote:
> > Marc Verhaegen wrote:
> >
> > > Op 21-07-2007 05:20, in artikel
> > > 46A17B83.DA04C...@hotmMOVEail.com, Rich Travsky
> > > <traRvE...@hotmMOVEail.com> schreef:
> >
> > > > Marc Verhaegen wrote:
> >
> > > >> The point, my boy, is that Mr.X running after kudus
> > > >> doesn't imply that human ancestors were kudu runners.
> > > >> Savanna believers lack logic.
> >
> > > > AATers lack logic.
> >
> > > No, my boy:
> >
> > AAT logic: why not go on all fours
>
> my logic: Hs does go on all fours, kneecrawling (and often
> during sexual reproduction with knees supporting), unlike
> other primates or
That is not a means of locomotion.
> other bipeds. Knucklewalking is found nowhere in modern
> human behavior, not even a vestige of it. Kneecrawling is
> seen in most babies, at beaches and on other soft
> substrates, but not in thorny areas or areas with sharp
> rocks or in trees, nor in inland waterholes where
> predators abound. Sharks and crocs and lion prides avoid
> sundried sandy beaches at seashores, humans spend billions
> to go there.
Your point?
Copyright 2000-2009 Active Low-Carber Forums @ forum.lowcarber.org
vBulletin, Copyright ©2000-2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.