Register | Sign In

Understanding through Discussion

EvC Forum active members: 52 (9179 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: Jorge Parker
Post Volume: Total: 918,164 Year: 5,421/9,624 Month: 446/323 Week: 86/204 Day: 2/26 Hour: 0/0

Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Author Topic:   Why Did Homo Erectus Not Retain a Tail?
Posts: 2103
From: Pretoria, SA
Joined: 06-18-2010

Message 13 of 68 (734311)
07-28-2014 1:30 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by mram10
07-26-2014 11:45 AM

mram10 writes:
A tail would be incredibly helpful for balance (tripod example), productivity, etc.
Having four legs and a tail would be more advantageous for balance than just having a tail (calfs for example; they can stand up on all fours an hour after birth, but their productivity in building a shelter is quite dismal). Actually, the ideal would be for humans to have four legs and a tail (for balance) and two arms with hands, fingers and opposable thumbs at the end of the arms (for productivity).
mram10 writes:
I read that it could have been the climate change from forest to desert that could have been the reasoning.
From the evidence it seems as if the great apes never had all those legs to improve balance. What a pity. It seems as if the great apes were badly designed.
mram10 writes:
What is the best current explanation? (other than natural selection/god just did it)
We have empirical evidence for the existence of natural selection. The evidence is also verifiable.
We still have none for the existence of a supernatural designer. Not empirical, neither verifiable.
Edited by Pressie, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by mram10, posted 07-26-2014 11:45 AM mram10 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by Diomedes, posted 07-28-2014 11:03 AM Pressie has not replied
 Message 15 by subbie, posted 07-29-2014 11:23 PM Pressie has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:

Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024