was bipedal

Hi razd.Great information.Actually i got this info from a book i just finished reading by Marvin L. Lubenow (Bones Of Contention P.52).He is a well respected paleoanthropoligst and isnt known to be a liar or to make up nonsense.Here is a quote from Howells"The humeral fragment from kanapoi,with a date of about 4.4 million,could not be distinguished from Homo sapiens Morphologically or by multivariate analysis by patterson and myself in 1967(or by much more searching analysis by others since then).We suggested that it might represent Australopithicus because at that time allocation to Homo seemed preposterous,although it would be the correct one without the time element.P.57".Basicaly their saying its human and certainly not apelike.The theory of evolution is what decided what it is assigned to.Thank you for sharing info and if you have any cites to check out any actual A.africanus fossils please share.Have a great day.

Hi razd.I may be wrong,but all of those A.anamensis fossils are all comprised of upper and lower jaws,cranial fragments,and the upper and lower parts of a single leg.Your source says KP-271 is a good match for A.anamensis,yet they dont have a complete A.anamensis(correct me if im wrong)fossil to compare it to.I recently found out Marvin L. Lubenow has a revised and updated version out(2004).I may keep an eye on ebay to see if i can pick up a cheap copy(HaHaHa).Anyway have a great weekend.