evcthreadredwolf had
quote:
One could as easily start off assuming that humans originally were created with the adaptations she describes.
What if Homo floresiensis(see evc thread above)
swam the Bay of Bengal from the reclamied mangrove aquatic shore around Eithiopia's past but did NOT cross Wallace's line as perhaps "erectUs" did? It would no longer be a case of a lizard's trait split between Korea and Japan through the Himilayaes be the speed of crab swimming a priori but mans not finding a geodesic is good enough for an adaptation not that antiadpatationism is a zealous thinking(as Gould Had it).That would sure make c/e talk more interesting.
I can see now how to do more with Croizat without biasing the time line either way to end with. I thought of this on reading in Dennet's "Darwin's Dangerous Idea",especially about an 83 paper. Although I intend on disagreeing with Dennent on just about everything to begin with, DD's taking Gould and Lewontin to task on Drs and Mrs Pangloss I heartly laugh along with without being as candid.
additionally
1.61803 @mess 31
had in a link
AAT/H Leaflet List Annotated"forces an adaptation to"... perhaps it so forced the crossing of Wallaces line into Australia and the Americas?
perhaps the "toliet" was only the direction the water spins in it??
SO WE could seperate GOING into water and COMING out of it by traits in the fossils??
™ Version 4.2
