Posted on 11/18/2004 7:32:47 AM PST by TigerLikesRooster
Running 'key to human evolution'
People run to keep fit today but our ancestors ran for different reasons
Long-distance running may have been a driving force behind evolution of the modern human body, scientists say. American researchers said humans began endurance running about 2 million years ago to help hunt for prey, influencing the development of the human body.
Previous studies have suggested running was purely a by-product of walking.
But the study, published in Nature, said humans evolved big buttocks, a balanced head and longer legs to help gather food.
Professor Dennis Bramble, of the University of Utah, and Professor Daniel Lieberman, of Harvard University, reported that early human beings may have needed to run long distances to help hunt prey or scavenge animal carcasses on the African savannah.
Without the development from running, humans would be much more like apes with shorter legs, smaller heads and a hunched posture, the scientists said.
While human are poor sprinters in comparison with many animals, they perform well when it comes to long-distance running.
After examining 26 human body features essential for endurance running, the pair concluded humans may have evolved as they did from their ape-like ancestors because they could run long-distances.
Important attributes for endurance running include skull structure to prevent over-heating, ligaments to give spring, long legs to increase stride length and independent head and shoulder movement to aid balance.
The scientists said because of natural selection, our ape-like ancestors known as Australophithecus, who were good at running, survived, while shorter-legged ancestors died out.
Professor Bramble said: "Today endurance running is primarily a form of exercise and recreation but its roots may be as ancient as the origin of the human genus and its demands a major contributing factor to the human body form.
"Running may have helped hunters get close enough to throw projectiles or perhaps even to run some mammals to exhaustion in the heat."
Professor Chris Stringer, head of human origins at the Natural History Museum in London, said the findings were "plausible" and provided a "valuable fresh look at our anatomy and some of its special features".
"Although it will require much more complete evidence for the evolution of the skeleton of early humans below the neck to test their ideas properly."
Ping!
It's not my fault I have a big butt, blame evolution!
More likely, those that ran away got to survive.
oh brother and this is the kind of science you get when you start from a faulty premise to begin with.
how about that human beings were perfectly designed to work...six days a week.
"Scientists"? Try "philosophers."
Other people maybe. I'm not designed for any running, walking's fine anything faster than that just doesn't happen (except maybe towards a waiting glass of gin...).
And they are absolutely certain of this, the "scientists" said.....
I am clearly devolving.
Exactly. Expanding on a shakey theory.
I am an engineer and I look at this stuff through those glasses. The premise is that evolution changes things over time and improves them yes? So why are we not covered with fur? Fur provides a natural covering so that we do not need to develop clothing, etc. Did evolution know that we could learn to make cloths?
Also, what is the basis of balding. As I see it, keeping the head warm has been proven to be instrumental since a huge amount of body heat is loss through the head. Did evolution know that we would be smart enough to make hats?
Just my 2 cents...
There's the rub.
Just how many bones are there from our so called ancestors below the neck?
How many complete skeletons are there for examination to fully understand the dynamics of evolutionary progression for this theory?
Evidence is scant or no existent!
Good point.
In my spare time I like to count the fudge words in reports on the "science" of evolution. This short article has 4 "may haves" and a "may be". Throw in a "suggested" and a "plausible" for good measure. This explains why one scientist described paleontology as "fairy tales for adults".
I don't know if I buy this at all. The average woman certainly doesn't look "designed to run" to me. Have you ever tried running with a baby on your hip? I have - it ain't pretty.
If we're design to run, why do all the runners I know have blown out knees? And why would our ancestors run after game (practically all of which is faster than we are)? Wouldn't traps and ambushes be more effective?
Funny. I still have yet to see any causality established. All I see is an observed effect being defined as its own cause.
I've been fortunate in that I've never had bad knees from running. I just hope they don't collapse this weekend when I do a 20 miler.
The first thing I thought of when reading this is the primitive societies in the Amazon rain forest and the Kalahari Desert (the latter being the !Kung people). In those societies the only "runners" are the men -- the women stay in the villages while the men hunt. Attributes in favor of running capability would be genetically favored even if the women didn't run much.
Look at how tribes like the Bushmen hunt. They chase an animal. It runs away. They follow and chase it some more. It runs away again. Do that for a few miles and it collapses from heat exhaustion because humans are among the best at getting rid of heat from the body. (of course sitting in a deer blind with some beer is a lot easier).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.