[Coyoteman]

and yet here we have *scientists* looking at some sizable looking canines claming that this creature was *probably* a *fruit eater*.

Maybe they used those teeth like those juicer gadgets; poke a hole in the orange and such the juice out. Sounds good to me.

The chimpanzee's diet is mainly fruits, including bananas, pawpaws and wild figs. Note the similarity in maxillary dentition between this newly-discovered fossil (left) and a modern chimpanzee (right).

Here's another view of those "juicer gadgets:"

[From many - one.]

Your post was better and faster. ;-)

[metmom]

So if the chimps are mainly fruit eaters and have canines that size, why did we humans, who are omnivores and have much more need for canines, end up with the greatly reduced in size ones? You'd think, that the canines were more necessary for a creature that have meat as main part of it's diet.

For that matter, why on earth would we have lost the the fur that covers all the other hominids? What kind of evolutionary advantage would that afford, to be MORE exposed to the elements?

Along with the helplessness of our infants and the burden they place on the mother.

Humans are not well suited for unprotected life in the wild. It does not make sense that the genetic changes that produced a weaker creature would have allowed the creature to so successfully reproduce and flourish.

Brains alone don't ensure survival.