Posted on 02/28/2006 11:27:44 AM PST by blam
Early Humans Walked Peculiarly?
By Jennifer Viegas
Discovery News
Evidence In The Bones
Feb. 27, 2006 — At least two species of early humans were knock-kneed and walked rather uniquely, according to a new study on seven anklebones that belonged to various early human ancestors from eastern and southern Africa.
The study, which will be published in the April issue of the American Journal of Physical Anthropology, suggests that although the early humans walked on two feet, they did not always do so with our relatively smooth stride.
"This is hard to explain, but easy to demonstrate," said Dan Gebo, who co-authored the paper with Gary Schwartz, an Arizona State University anthropologist.
Gebo told Discovery News that modern humans, and our more recent ancestors, possess a walking technique that first involves the heel hitting the ground. As the body moves over the foot, the person stands on one foot while the other foot is starting to swing forward. We then "toe off as we go through a normal stride."
Gebo, a Northern Illinois University anthropologist, then explained that muscular early humans, called robust australopithecines, who lived between 2 and 1.4 million years ago, had a different gait.
"The robust australopithecines have modified their upper ankle joint so that when the lower leg moves forward to stance phase, it must follow the track of the joint and this joint curves inward," he said. "It then must backtrack as the leg and foot push off at toe off."
Gebo added, "In short, the knee of robust australopithecines must move in and out during each stride. It would look like the knee is slightly bent, where ours is straight. The gait is less efficient, especially over long distance walkings or runnings."
The shape of the anklebones suggests that at least two early human species, Australopithecus robustus and Australopithecus boisei, walked in this unique manner. Both looked very apelike and furry.
While the researchers think such early human relatives "had some gait peculiarities," they believe the ability to walk on two feet (bipedality) evolved only once because it requires so many anatomical changes in the pelvis, knees, lower legs and feet.
"We find it difficult to believe that all of these changes could occur more than once," Gebo said.
The scientists think bipedality must have occurred very quickly in human evolution, particularly since there was no three-limbed transitional phase.
During the period of evolution, our ancestors lost their grasping big toe muscles. This "toe" in African apes, such as chimpanzees, helps in climbing trees. Gebo said we also developed platform-like, weight-bearing bodies, short toes, stocky foot bones and joints that can lock up so we do not need muscle power to remain erect.
Bruce Latimer, executive director of The Cleveland Museum of Natural History, told Discovery News that he agrees bipedality evolved no more than once within the human lineage, but he does not believe "that any non-pathological hominid ever walked with tibiae that inclined medially (knock-kneed)."
Latimer added, "Moreover, it is quite impossible to reconstruct such behavior from isolated bones. The authors have taken on the ambitious task of trying to make sense out of isolated anklebones. They have done a nice job but have, perhaps, pushed the functional analysis a little too far."
Gebo and Schwartz, however, plan to continue with their research to determine if their theorized knock-kneed gait might have conferred some unknown advantages.
Schwartz told Discovery News, "Paleoanthropologists have long been fascinated with the robust australopith phase of human evolution as they are one of the most highly specialized and derived group of fossil humans.
They have massive teeth, large, heavily constructed jawbones, and enormous chewing muscles, but they have always been thought of as fairly ‘standard-brand’ (for a hominin) from the neck down."
Schwartz added, "We know now, based on our work, that they were as interesting from the knee down as they are from the neck up."
Were they rappers?
Ha! You beat me to it!!
Maybe early man in Africa had portable boom boxes sooner than we think.
Does that not imply that Amerindians are more highly evolved than their more primitive Asian forebears?
If you are a good looking female, I bet your chances of getting picked up are much better.
You are probably correct, because as we evolved, we got smarter.
I agree, I saw, "The Creature From the Black Lagoon".
Of course.
Somebody's been raiding my wedding album...
"In regards to dna, I think we are similar to apes, but our differences are staggering...wouldn't you agree?"
Our differences may be "staggering", but considering the similarity(95%+), the differences in terms of genetic makeup looks less significant.
How are creationists going to explain 95%+ (or any %) of similarity between humans and chimps? Why do humans have body hair like animals, and tail bone? Why is that? Is that because god has tail bone too?
My PBS channel is running some of the old Monty Python shows episodes. Anyone remember the Ministry of Funny Walking?
"How are creationists going to explain 95%+ (or any %) of similarity between humans and chimps? Why do humans have body hair like animals, and tail bone? Why is that? Is that because god has tail bone too?"
We are all carbon based forms, so based on the above question, God created every living thing with some basic characteristics...why, I don't know, it is not my way, it's God's way. We may have 10% to 98% commonalities, but why we were created similar to apes and not, say, giraffes is not up to us.
As for God having a tail bone, I have no idea.
Welcome to Freerepublic, by the way.
Scott
Evidently, the clever by half idea, that has been explained to us dumbies 500 or more times on these threads, is that one set of monkeys went to one side of a mountain where it (the set) evolved, while the other (set) stayed behind and didn't evolve! That'll learn 'em, I say. And that'll learn us, the evofascists,(just itching to flame us, as we speak) will say!
I generally try to welcome newbies within the first year...
LOL. The welcome is from one newbie to another. :D
Archaeologists call folks who do that... Well, it isn't pretty.
Lots of the area was pretty picked over, though, so I studied a topo map of the area and identified areas where the water's edges would have been in times of higher ocean levels. Immediately, I began finding new places to locate artifacts.
The ocean was always lower than at present during the time that area was occupied. You must have been finding items at old lake stands?
The Chumash were there at least 6000 years, maybe more. I found signs of encampments in places nobody had even looked before. Very interesting. All near water, or where water used to be.
The area appears to have been continuously occupied for some 13,400 years. We know very little about the earliest inhabitants, but the last ten or so years have been pretty productive. I'm sure there is more to come.
"Oh, what manner of men are these, who wear their legs in parentheses?"
I have wanted to say that on FR for YEARS.
This way: ()
Or this way: )(
Or maybe even this way: ((
???
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.