[extropy-chat] HISTORY: Solved & Unsolved Riddles

[kevinfreels at hotmail.com]

----- Original Message -----
From: "John K Clark" <jonkc at att.net>
To: "ExI chat list" <extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org>
Sent: Wednesday, November 12, 2003 12:44 PM
Subject: Re: [extropy-chat] HISTORY: Solved & Unsolved Riddles


> <kevinfreels at hotmail.com> Wrote:
>
> > Yes, they may be able to see you better, but it is a question of who is
> >the  top predator.
>
> Lucy could walk upright as well as you or I can but her brain was no
larger.

As far as walking upright as well as we can, I'm not so sure. There appears
to be some debate as to just how well she could walk upright. Her hips are
lined up appropriately for upright walking, but her 1 foot bone that was
found was sightly curved leading some to think that they still had some tree
climbing abilties as well.

Chimps, particularly Bonobos are really smart compared to most other animals
and they have the capacity of sign language, they recognize themselves in a
mirror, and show evidence of being able to intuitively understand what
others can see from their point of view. This was my crucial point and I
apologize if I made it seem otherwise.

Brain sizes in primates tend to overlap, such as they do in humans with no
obvious distinction shown in intelligence. H. Nandertalensis had a brain
roughly 17% larger than ours, but there I have seen no one claim that they
were smarter than H. Sapiens. Although Lucy's brain size was only slightly
larger than that of a chimps (about 15 ml I think) the one thing we don;t
know is how it was wired. She may have been a bit smarter than the average
chimp.

One thing I need to add here is that we have very few skeletons from from
this period. Lucy herself was only 70% complete. It could be that she is
normal of her species. Or it could be as if someone from the future found a
skeleton of a midget and used that to determine that we all had the same
build. (Midgets pose another topic entirely.....no doubt they are human, but
if we found midget pre-hominid skeletons, would we call them a seperate
species?) I don;t find this as liklely, but it is possible.

> than that of a chimp and it would be more than a million years before even
> the simplest tools show up in the fossil record,

When I was speaking of tools, I wasn't referring to constructed and altered
tools such as stone tools. Chimps use twigs as simple tools to retrieve
termites from nests and some in the region of Liberia use stones to break
open nuts. With just a slight turn of the usage, sticks and rocks could
become sufficient weapons, even if it was a matter of throwing rocks to run
a potential predator off. None of these would show as tools in the fossil
record.

 >nor is there any evidence
> that she engaged in hunting, if she did it must have been for something
like
> mice. I think Lucy was a very long way from being top predator, when she
> stood up she was just telling those who were what's on the menu.

I will agree that Lucy was most likely vegetarian, and I was wrong to put
emphasis on the predator aspect. To be honest, I was trying to do three
things at once and was a bit distracted. My overall point, which I think was
missed once I read my own post, was that given some simple naturally
existing rock or wood tools, primitive communication, and/or an awareness of
the environment that even chimps today have, the group would have been able
to protect and or escape easier if they could see trouble coming and
communicate that to the rest of the group. It is simply my opinion that Lucy
and her bunch were probably smarter than many researchers give them credit
for, and that this increased intelligence was what turned bipedalism into an
asset instead of an expense.

n K Clark     jonkc at att.net
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> extropy-chat mailing list
> extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org
> http://lists.extropy.org/mailman/listinfo/extropy-chat
>