jillery wrote:
Whatever date for the LCA you want to fling around like poo in
a monkey cage, it comes AFTER the appearance of bipedalism.
Speaking of which, the above shows how *you* failed to address
anything I or the cited video or the cited article said.
: Chimpanzees living in analogous habitats to early hominins offer a
: unique opportunity to investigate the ecological drivers of bipedalism
: that cannot be addressed via the fossil record alone.
Chimpanzees aren't a model at all, because they WERE bipedal and
then LOST IT. They evolved knuckle walking AFTER the LCA.
Non-sequitur. Chimps were never habitually bipedal.
Given that the oldest Chimp remains are supposedly half a million
years old, you have no clue what so ever. But what we do know is that
the foramen magnum had to have moved considerably towards the
back of the skull, since divergence.
Nope, it's called evidence; no belief required.
There's no such evidence in existence.
Go on. Cite the very oldest Chimp fossil.
Pro Plyd wrote:
Can you provide an estimate of the amount of time wading that
would result in obligate bipedalism? No?
Who told you it was all a matter of time, and how did you miss
their sarcasm?
Switch this around. Apply it to your precious savanna: How much
time did it take there? Why THAT much time? Why not more? Why
not less?
You don't appear to grasp the issues at all, quite frankly.
JTEM is my hero wrote:
Pro Plyd wrote:
Can you provide an estimate of the amount of time wading that
would result in obligate bipedalism? No?
Who told you it was all a matter of time, and how did you miss
their sarcasm?
Switch this around. Apply it to your precious savanna: How much
time did it take there? Why THAT much time? Why not more? Why
not less?
You don't appear to grasp the issues at all, quite frankly.
I was asking marc verhaegen. It appears the question was too
hard.
It's the one you're using to state that they were bipedal and
lost it.
Pro Plyd wrote:
It's the one you're using to state that they were bipedal and
lost it.
Not me.
The peanut gallery says Chimps & humans split around
6 million years ago and bipedalism was already going strong
at least 7 million years ago.
By the "Arguments" of the savanna idiots, Chimps evolved
knuckle walking from a bipedal ancestor.
The peanut gallery says Chimps & humans split around
6 million years ago and bipedalism was already going strong
at least 7 million years ago.
By the "Arguments" of the savanna idiots, Chimps evolved
knuckle walking from a bipedal ancestor.
To apply Sahelanthropus tchadensis evidence coherently, distinguish
between arboreal bipedalism and terrestrial bipedalism. Arboreal
bipedalism is a plausible precursor to both terrestrial bipedalism and knuckle walking, to both Australopith and Pan.
There's no such thing as "Arboreal Bipedalism
Stanford CB. Arboreal bipedalism in wild chimpanzees:
jillery wrote:
There's no such thing as "Arboreal Bipedalism"
Stanford CB. Arboreal bipedalism in wild chimpanzees: implications for
the evolution of hominid posture and locomotion. Am J Phys Anthropol.
2006 Feb;129(2):225-31. doi: 10.1002/ajpa.20284. PMID: 16288480.
<https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ajpa.20284>
Chimpanzees evolved AWAY from bipedalism and to knuckle walking.
The
are not a model for the origins of bipedalism. It's just plain stupid.
No, not merely "Wrong" but *Stupid*.
Bipedalism, a defining feature of the human lineage, is thought to
have evolved as forests retreated in the late Miocene-Pliocene.
BPism is NOT a defining feature of the "human" (hominoid? hominid? Homo?) lineage, of course.
Retreating forests had 0 to do with this.
Early-Miocene Hominoidea were already BP, not for running of course, but simply for wading upright in forest swamps (probably coastal forests):
- keeping the head above the water,
Four legged animals wade too and keep their head above
water.
In order to evolve AWAY from bipedalism, chimpanzee WERE arboreally
bipedal.
jillery wrote:
In order to evolve AWAY from bipedalism, chimpanzee WERE arboreally
bipedal.
No, that's circular. It's circle-jerk thinking. Use your Autism, grasshopper:
If living in the trees made them bipedal, unlike any other ape, then why
did living in the trees make them knuckle walkers?
No, that's circular. It's circle-jerk thinking. Use your Autism, grasshopper:
Lose your autism, pismire.
If living in the trees made them bipedal, unlike any other ape, then why >did living in the trees make them knuckle walkers?
Since you asked, orangutans and gibbons
jillery wrote:
No, that's circular. It's circle-jerk thinking. Use your Autism, grasshopper:
Lose your autism, pismire.
Lol! You're hilarious! You're a small child, mentally, parroting the grownups!
If living in the trees made them bipedal, unlike any other ape, then why >> >did living in the trees make them knuckle walkers?
Since you asked, orangutans and gibbons are extant arboreal bipeds.
Knuckle-walking in trees is maladaptive. You're welcome.
Nobody knows. "Molecular Dating" is a fraud. Everything else is guess work.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gigantopithecus
It's younger than habilis! Read all the DIFFERENT classifications. None of >them are fact. Of course idiots like you hear the latest OPINION and fool >yourself into believing that you're hearing fact...
Truth is, we're talking about Chimps and Chimps share a common ancestor
with humans, and that common ancestor lived AFTER bipedalism was on
the scene.
So have your religious faith in whatever your authority figures
want to leave behind in your mouth after they pull out. It doesn't matter. The >problem is you: You can't follow a conversation, not even your own half.
Best advice I heard all day and you need to hear it:
"Never be more stupid than you have to be."
Sez
Emotionally crippled & Autistic, jillery wrote:
Sez
Chimps still aren't a model for a Chimp ancestor, let alone any
human ancestor. The LCA was bipedal. Chimps LOST their
bipedalism, gained knuckle walking in the forest.
To apply Sahelanthropus tchadensis evidence coherently, distinguish******************************
between arboreal bipedalism and terrestrial bipedalism. Arboreal
bipedalism is a plausible precursor to both terrestrial bipedalism and >knuckle walking, to both Australopith and Pan.
******************************
To apply Sahelanthropus tchadensis evidence coherently, distinguish
between arboreal bipedalism and terrestrial bipedalism.
There's no such thing as "Arboreal Bipedalism." It's like claiming "Blind >sight" or "Crippled running."
You're attributing power to your language, insisting that because you
chose a word it makes it that word.
jillery wrote:
******************************
To apply Sahelanthropus tchadensis evidence coherently, distinguish
between arboreal bipedalism and terrestrial bipedalism.
There's no such thing as "Arboreal Bipedalism." It's like claiming "Blind sight" or "Crippled running."
Actually, blindsight is a real thing.
People who
Yeah, so once again you refuse to Google "Fallacious Arguments"
and "Appeal to Authority" in particular.
Chimps are not bipedal. They LOST bipedalism when their ancestors
took to the forest.
They are NOT a model for bipedalism, the human ancestor nor even
their own goddamn Chimp ancestor.
Repeating
THEIR ANCESTOR WAS BIPEDAL!
Read your subject line. You typed it. Read your initial post.
: Bipedalism, a defining feature of the human lineage, is thought to
: have evolved as forests retreated in the late Miocene-Pliocene.
I do not believe this. it's dumb. They came up with a conclusion --
"Dis is how it happened & stuff" and the rest is idiocy to rationalize
their mistake.
: Bipedalism, a defining feature of the human lineage, is thought to
: have evolved as forests retreated in the late Miocene-Pliocene.
The above are not my words, but from a cited article, as stated in my
initial post.
Op donderdag 16 maart 2023 om 03:50:28 UTC+1 schreef jillery continued to troll:
: Bipedalism, a defining feature of the human lineage, is thought to
: have evolved as forests retreated in the late Miocene-Pliocene.
The above are not my words, but from a cited article, as stated in my
initial post.
Yes, but you repeated this anatomically & physiologically impossible fantasy.
When forests retreat in Africa, you'll find more savanna baboons, which are more quadrupedal than forest baboons.
Miocene Hominoidea were already frequently bipedal in swamp forests, for: >-wading upright in the shallow water &
-climbing arms overhead in the branches above the water.
Hylobatids (siamangs, gibbons) are still upright=vertical brachiators in trees.
Pongids (orangutans) still occasionally wade bipedally in forest swamps, in spite of Pleist.coolings.
Lowland gorillas still wade bipedally for sedges in forests swamps, and bonobos for waterlilies etc.
Pleistocene Homo frequently dived for shellfish, cf.
--stone tools for opening shells + handiness,
--human-made shell engravings, google "Joordens Munro",
--brain enlargement++, cf. DHA & other brain-specific nutirents in shellfish etc.,
--island colonizations, as far as Java & even Flores:
that explains why we lost our fur, got SC fat-layers, sebaceous glands, smaller mouth & tongue-bone descent (suction), ext.nose & voluntary breathing (shallow diving) etc.,
and only this can explain why H.erectus evolved pachy-osteo-sclerosis (very thick & dense skeletons, which are only seen in slow+shallow-diving animals).
Google:
-aquarboreal,
-GondwanaTalks verhaegen. :-)
Written by the good Doctor... :-)
On Thu, 9 Mar 2023 21:10:34 -0800 (PST), JTEM continued to troll:
THEIR ANCESTOR WAS BIPEDAL!
Only one ancestor? So you're a Creationist.
Quelle surprise.
You have a bad habit of counting your chickens before they are hatched.
On Fri, 24 Mar 2023 09:42:05 -0700 (PDT), "peter2...@gmail.com" <peter2...@gmail.com> wrote:
You have a bad habit of counting your chickens before they are hatched.You have a Bad Habit(c) of jumping into topics without even trying to comprehend context, a habit several other posters aped during your
absence.
More accurately, I quoted a recognized authority in the field, who in
turn
On Tue, 14 Mar 2023 22:19:11 -0700 (PDT), JTEM continued to truthl:
Read your subject line. You typed it. Read your initial post.
: Bipedalism, a defining feature of the human lineage, is thought to
: have evolved as forests retreated in the late Miocene-Pliocene.
The above are not my words
I do not believe this. it's dumb. They came up with a conclusion --
"Dis is how it happened & stuff" and the rest is idiocy to rationalize >their mistake.
You disagree without basis with
...: Bipedalism, a defining feature of the human lineage, is thought to
: have evolved as forests retreated in the late Miocene-Pliocene.
jillery wrote:
More accurately, I quoted a recognized authority in the field, who in
turn
Who cares?
The LCA was NOT a knuckle walker!
: Bipedalism, a defining feature of the human lineage, is thought to
: have evolved as forests retreated in the late Miocene-Pliocene.
Yes, "thought" by some retarded savanna believers...
Google "Nasalis wading".
Mio-Pliocene Hominoidea frequently waded bipedally in swamp forests + climbed arms overhead in the branches above the water.
Today, only humans & hylobatids still walk frequently bipedally.
Retarded. No questiion about it. Retarded. jillery wrote...
[...]
Again, name what fact you want to dispute.
It is understood that your mental disorder requires you to "Disagree,"
and nobody cares anyway. But you're pretending to not be able to
verify facts so spell out what facts specifically.
I tried to help, I asked if the problem was Coastal Dispersal. I asked if >that was the subject you found nothing on.
Have you done the Google on the human brain & DHA yet?
You haven't retracted any of your stupid remarks yet so does that mean
you're a pussy or that you still can't find any cites?
This is not an outpatient clinic. I am not here to be understanding and >helpful. STOP waving your disorders around and I won't treat you like
a disordered spazz.
Be specific: WHAT facts are you feeling like you want to dispute?
... nothing below. Quelle surprise.
GondwanaTalks verhaegen. :-)
Op dinsdag 3 januari 2023 om 07:05:38 UTC+1 schreef Pro Plyd:
...
Bipedalism, a defining feature of the human lineage, is thought to
have evolved as forests retreated in the late Miocene-Pliocene.
...
BPism is NOT a defining feature of the "human" (hominoid? hominid? Homo?) lineage, of course.
Retreating forests had 0 to do with this.
Early-Miocene Hominoidea were already BP, not for running of course, but simply for wading upright in forest swamps (probably coastal forests):
- keeping the head above the water,
Four legged animals wade too and keep their head above
water.
Yes, but they're no primates: google e.g.
- "bonobo wading" or "gorilla wading" &
- "aquarboreal".
On Fri, 20 Jan 2023 23:05:21 -0800 (PST), JTEM trolled:
Pro Plyd wrote:
It's the one you're using to state that they were bipedal and
lost it.
Not me.
Yes you.
The peanut gallery says Chimps & humans split around
6 million years ago and bipedalism was already going strong
at least 7 million years ago.
By the "Arguments" of the savanna idiots, Chimps evolved
knuckle walking from a bipedal ancestor.
To apply Sahelanthropus tchadensis evidence coherently, distinguish
between arboreal bipedalism and terrestrial bipedalism. Arboreal
bipedalism is a plausible precursor to both terrestrial bipedalism and knuckle walking, to both Australopith and Pan.
Op donderdag 6 april 2023 om 21:35:13 UTC+2 schreef marc verhaegen:
savanna believer:
: Bipedalism, a defining feature of the human lineage, is thought to >>>>> : have evolved as forests retreated in the late Miocene-Pliocene.
Yes, "thought" by some retarded savanna believers...
Google "Nasalis wading".
Mio-Pliocene Hominoidea frequently waded bipedally in swamp forests + climbed arms overhead in the branches above the water.
Today, only humans & hylobatids still walk frequently bipedally.
& great apes still wade bipedally, google "bonobo wading", "gorilla wading", "orangutan wading".
Wading = origin of bipedalism!
Gisulat ni GondwanaTalks Verhaegen:
GondwanaTalks verhaegen. :-)
Stop boring the people in this serious newsgroup with
your silly Water Ape Gospel, GondwanaTalks!
To apply Sahelanthropus tchadensis evidence coherently, distinguish
between arboreal bipedalism and terrestrial bipedalism.
Arboreal bipedalism is a plausible precursor
They show far more bipedal behavior in trees and on land than
they ever do.
Pro Plyd wrote:-------------------------------
They show far more bipedal behavior in trees and on land than
they ever do.
Gisulat ni GondwanaTalks Verhaegen:
If Google Translate is to be believed that is in Ilocano, a language I
hadn't heard of before, but apparently spoken in the northern
Philippines. Is that where you are?
athel -- biochemist, not a physicist, but detector of crackpots
Pro Plyd wrote...
To apply Sahelanthropus tchadensis evidence coherently, distinguish
between arboreal bipedalism and terrestrial bipedalism.
So between something that isn't bipedal from something that is. Wow.
That's a stumper.
Arboreal bipedalism is a plausible precursor
This is idiocy. "Chimps became bipedal by living in trees, and then became >knuckle walkers the same way!"
There's no distinction. You're claiming that it's a dice roll: "Maybe it's >bipedalism this time, maybe it isn't."
Chimps were bipedal, their ancestors anyway. And now they're not. They
lost their bipedalism by adapting to the forest.
jillery wrote:
On Fri, 20 Jan 2023 23:05:21 -0800 (PST), JTEM trolled:
Pro Plyd wrote:
It's the one you're using to state that they were bipedal and
lost it.
Not me.
Yes you.
Correct.
The peanut gallery says Chimps & humans split around
6 million years ago and bipedalism was already going strong
at least 7 million years ago.
By the "Arguments" of the savanna idiots, Chimps evolved
knuckle walking from a bipedal ancestor.
To apply Sahelanthropus tchadensis evidence coherently, distinguish
between arboreal bipedalism and terrestrial bipedalism. Arboreal
bipedalism is a plausible precursor to both terrestrial bipedalism and
knuckle walking, to both Australopith and Pan.
Bipedal behavior in trees has been rather well observed
Gisulat ni Athel Cornish-Bowden:
Gisulat ni GondwanaTalks Verhaegen:
If Google Translate is to be believed that is in Ilocano, a language I
hadn't heard of before, but apparently spoken in the northern
Philippines. Is that where you are?
Yeah, right up north. Quite cold here, actually!
athel -- biochemist, not a physicist, but detector of crackpots
I sniffed out GondwanaTalks Verhaegen as a crackpot instantly after his
first post to a Dutch newsgroup (nl.wetenschap). How long did it take
you?
I sniffed out GondwanaTalks Verhaegen as a crackpot instantly after his >>first post to a Dutch newsgroup (nl.wetenschap). How long did it take
you?
Longer than that. I think I only became certain of it during the
current flood of crackpottery.
Constantly repeating the same dross time after time after time is a tell
tale sign of an original village idiot unwittingly betraying himself.
Only to those who can't comprehend written English.
Constantly repeating the same dross time after time after time is a tell
tale sign of an original village idiot unwittingly betraying himself.
I sniffed out GondwanaTalks Verhaegen as a crackpot instantly after his
first post to a Dutch newsgroup (nl.wetenschap). How long did it take
you?
JTEM is my hero wrote:
Pro Plyd wrote:
-------------------------------They show far more bipedal behavior in trees and on land than
they ever do.
“There are more things in Heaven and Earth, Horatio,
than are dreamt of in your philosophy.” /Hamlet/
Btw, which one do you like best: GondwanaTalks Verhaegen or Nando
Ronteltap?
I sniffed out GondwanaTalks Verhaegen as a crackpot instantly after his >>first post to a Dutch newsgroup (nl.wetenschap).
Which, considering that you're attacking him [blah blah] well.. you're >retarded. You're a paste eating, hockey helmet wearing retard.
Constantly repeating the same dross time after time after time is a tell >>tale sign of an original village idiot unwittingly betraying himself.
Inventing ever more sock puppets to cower behind and hurl insults at
people you couldn't hop [blah blah]
Yep. Scored again!
[Blah blah] this pathetic sock puppet to engage in ad hominem,
[blah blah] you're too mentally ill to refrain from responding,
again!
israel socratus wrote:-----------------
JTEM is my hero wrote:
Pro Plyd wrote:
Given the context that should read: "There are more things and less things in Heaven and Earth but not in those places than are and not dreamt in your philosophy."-------------------------------They show far more bipedal behavior in trees and on land than
they ever do.
“There are more things in Heaven and Earth, Horatio,
than are dreamt of in your philosophy.” /Hamlet/
Chimps aren't bipedal.
My beloved JTEM truthed:
Chimps aren't bipedal.
YOU are the one who claims "chimps" were once bipedal.
Pro Plyd wrote:
To apply Sahelanthropus tchadensis evidence coherently, distinguish
between arboreal bipedalism and terrestrial bipedalism.
So between something that isn't bipedal from something that is. Wow.
That's a stumper.
Arboreal bipedalism is a plausible precursor
This is idiocy. "Chimps became bipedal by living in trees, and then became knuckle walkers the same way!"
There's no distinction. You're claiming that it's a dice roll: "Maybe it's bipedalism this time, maybe it isn't."
Chimps were bipedal, their ancestors anyway. And now they're not. They
lost their bipedalism by adapting to the forest.
On Mon, 10 Apr 2023 23:53:58 -0700 (PDT), JTEM trolled:
Chimps were bipedal, their ancestors anyway. And now they're not. They
lost their bipedalism by adapting to the forest.
Cite evidence that "chimp" ancestors were bipedal, assuming you know
how to cite.
Pro Plyd wrote:
They show far more bipedal behavior in trees and on land than
they ever do.
"There's your problem right there, lady."
Genuinely retarded and desperate for negative attention, jillery wrote:
My beloved JTEM truthed:
Chimps aren't bipedal.
YOU are the one who claims "chimps" were once bipedal.
The LCA was bipedal. Present day Chimps evolved from a bipedal ancestor.
jillery wrote:
On Mon, 10 Apr 2023 23:53:58 -0700 (PDT), JTEM trolled:
Chimps were bipedal, their ancestors anyway. And now they're not. They
lost their bipedalism by adapting to the forest.
Cite evidence that "chimp" ancestors were bipedal, assuming you know
how to cite.
None posted so far.
On 2023-04-15 04:16:46 +0000, Pro Plyd said:
jillery wrote:
On Mon, 10 Apr 2023 23:53:58 -0700 (PDT), JTEM trolled:
Chimps were bipedal, their ancestors anyway. And now they're not. They >>>> lost their bipedalism by adapting to the forest.
Cite evidence that "chimp" ancestors were bipedal, assuming you know
how to cite.
None posted so far.
It's been a long time since I read it, and I may be misremembering, but
I have the idea that The First Chimpanzee (Gribbin and Cherfas, 2003) >contains such evidence.
JTEM has rejected the concept of arboreal bipedalism.
Do you
Sock puppet, Pro Plyd wrote:
Do you
What's the topic? What do you feel you want to disagree with,
and why?
Chimps evolved AWAY from bipedalism. They lost bipedalism
in the forest. It's not where it arose it's where it died.
JTEM has rejected the concept of arboreal bipedalism.
Has he?
There's no such thing as "Arboreal Bipedalism." It's like claiming "Blind >sight" or "Crippled running."*******************************
Somebody > JTEM has rejected the concept of arboreal bipedalism. Has
he? Aquarborealism is where BPism began: aqua+arbor (swamp forest): 4 >frequent paleo-anthropological prejudices: Human ancestors 1) became >bipedal (BP) when we left the trees for the ground?? 2) evolved in >Africa: Out-of-Africa (OoA)?? 3) lived in savannas??? 4) had >australopithecine ancestors?? These are ridiculous anthropo- & afro- >centric just-so pre-assumptions: 1) “we are the only BP primates” >implies BP = “hominin” = closer to us than to apes, 2) Darwin thought >“Out of Africa” because Pan & Gorilla are African, 3) in Africa, when >you leave the jungle, you come in savanna, 4) apiths lived in Africa,
they were BP, and had some humanlike anatomical traits: therefore, many >(most?) PAs still assume, with 0 evidence: 1) we became BP after/when
we split from Pan, and left the forest, 2) “hominins” & Homo originated >in Africa (OoA), 3) we walked/ran bipedally in savannas (e.g. >“endurance-running”), 4) BP fossils in Africa incl. apiths are “hominin”
(anthropocentric belief: Pan & Gorilla have 0 fossils?!?). These afro >+anthropo-centric prejudices are completely wrong, of course: 1) early- >Miocene Hominoidea were already BP=vertical waders-climbers in swamp >forests (humans & gibbons still are BP), 2) Mio-Pliocene Hominoidea >lived along N-Tethys Ocean coasts (hylobatids & pongids still live in >SE.Asia), 3) human ancestors have always been waterside, cf. physiology, >anatomy, diet+DHA, island colonizations, intercontin.dispersals >etc.etc., 4) E.Afr.apiths resemble Gorilla > Pan > Homo, S.Afr.apiths >resemble Pan > Homo or Gorilla (e.g. my Hum.Evol.papers). Google >AQUARBOREAL, >https://www.gondwanatalks.com/l/the-waterside-hypothesis-wading-led-to-u >pright-walking-in-early-humans/ Aquarboreality explains hominoid=ape >anatomy: large size, tail loss, broad sternum-thorax-pelvis, lateral >arm+leg movements, central (not dorsal) vertical spine etc. Possible >partial aquarboreal convergence: Nasalis? proboscis-monkeys (largest >colobines, upright body, rel.long legs…) in mangrove forests climb, sit, >wade bipedally, often arms overhead. Plate Tectonics & Hominoid >Splittings IMO: ~30 Ma India approached S-Asia, forming island >archipels: coastal forests++. ~25 Ma Catarrhini reaching these islands >became wading bipedally + climbing arms overhead in swamp forests -> >aquarboreal Hominoidea. ~20 Ma India further underneath Asia split >hylobatids (E) & other=great apes (W), both following N-Tethys coastal >forests (E vs W). ~15 Ma the Mesopotamian Seaway Closure split pongids- >sivapiths (E) & hominids-dryopiths (W: Medit.Sea + incipient Red Sea >swamp forests. ~8 Ma in Red Sea: N-Rift fm, followed by Gorilla -> Afar
Praeanthropus afarensis Lucy...-> boisei -> today G.gorilla & >G.beringei (Hum.Evol.papers). ~5 Ma the Red Sea opening into the Gulf >(Francesca Mansfield thinks caused by Zanclean mega-flood 5.33 Ma) splitHomo & Pan: – Pan went right: E.Afr.coastal forests -> S-Rift -> >Transvaal -> Australopith.africanus -> robustus (// Gorilla) -> today >P.troglodytes & P.paniscus (id.), – Homo went left: S.Asian coasts -> >Java early-Pleist.H.erectus -> shallow-diving: pachy-osteo-sclerosis,
DHA, brain++, stone tools, shell engravings... mid--> late-Pleist.: >diving -> wading -> walking H.sapiens (my book p.299-300). Simple, no?
:-) Early-Pleistocene archaic Homo ate a lot of shellfish, but what did >Mio-Pliocene hominoids eat mostly? fruits? mangrove oysters? rice? ...?
obsession is with God or with bipedal monkeys wading upright in coastal mangrove swamps.
antelope runners
don't even know the difference between "ape" & "monkey":
apparently they're only obsessed with God:
obsession is with God or with bipedal monkeys wading upright in coastal >>mangrove swamps.
FYI: "Bipedal monkey" = Nasalis:
Plate Tectonics & Hominoid Splittings (my 2022 book "De evolutie van de mens" p.299-300):
... ― Joseph Goebbels
kudu runners'
"arguments":
... ― Joseph Goebbels
kudu runners' "arguments":
... ? Joseph Goebbels
kangroo believers' "arguments":
Still no cite.
jillery wrote:
Still no cite.
Which cite are you pretending to have not seen?
kudu runners'
That's why modern Kenyans and Ethiopians are such great long distance marathon athletes. Evolved from millions of years chasing after kudus
That's why modern Kenyans and Ethiopians are such great long distance marathon athletes. Evolved from millions of years chasing after kudus
on baking hot East African savannas. Even more proof mankind originated
in Africa!
Since you asked
The cowering laughing stock, jillery obfuscated:
Since you asked
i mentioned a number of cites and asked you which one you are
pretending to have not seen. You pussied out. Again.
jillery wrote:
Still no cite.
Which cite are you pretending to have not seen?
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 546 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 48:20:03 |
| Calls: | 10,397 |
| Calls today: | 5 |
| Files: | 14,066 |
| Messages: | 6,417,283 |
| Posted today: | 1 |