the evolution of clothes?

Abshalom: On the dating and other information about H erectus fossils on Flores
Higher Education Support | McGraw Hill Higher Education"Even when the level fell to its lowest level, 19 kilometers of open water separated the eastern islands from the continental area of southeast Asia. Alfred Russell Wallace, ... noted that animal and plant life differed significantly between islands to the east and to the west of this deep water area, often referred to as Wallace's line....Archaeologists working on the island of Flores, located east of Wallace's line, have recently obtained accurate radiometric dating of archaeologist material...The strata that contain these artifacts have been dated by biostratigraphy, paleomagnetism, and, most recently by fission-track dating. The latter method provided a date of 880,000 70,000 B.P. This date is consistent with the dates given by the other techniques."Physical Anthropology Update, Fall 1998. Philip L. Stein & Bruce M. RoweLate erectus, sheleters and ritual activity, symbolic shared meaning, spatial organization at Bilzingsleben:
http://www2.uni-jena.de/philosophie/bilzingsleben/texte.htm"Camp site with dwelling structures, hearths, workshops and several activity zones as well as a paved area of a 9 m - diameter (Mania 1993 a). ... According to morphological and metrical studies (E. Vlcek 1978, 1980, 1987, 1999, Mania et al. 1994) - advanced Homo erectus. ... ca. 5 000 pebble tools (Mania 1986), some hundreds of bone tools (Mania 1986, Mania und Mania 1997), artefacts of antler and also of wood. Some bone artefacts with deliberate engravings (Mania and Mania 1988)"Late erectus or archaic sapiens: Religion 300-500 KYA
Figures from Berekhet Ram and Tan Tan
The Tan-Tan Venus"Berekhat Ram figurine, ...is a basaltic tuff pebble containing scoria clasts. It has a natural form suggestive of the head, torso, and arms of a female human and bears grooves implying that the iconic properties of the object were emphasized artificially. The argument that the Berekhat Ram pebble is a single representative of a category, thus calling its status as a figurine into question has been raised by various writers. The discovery of a second specimen is therefore of considerable significance, because it immediately reduces this concern. Not only is the second specimen presented here of very broadly the same age and certainly the same cultural provenience but its morphological similarities are such that it could easily have been modified by the same artist with similar tools. Yet it was found 4,700 km distant, in southern Morocco. The Berekhat Ram figurine was modified by precisely the same treatment as the one from Tan-Tan, the creation or emphasis of "horizontal" grooves."I find myself endlessly impressed with our ancestors.Judicious use of Google and the link I posted previously
http://home.entouch.net/dmd/chron.htm
should bring up relevant material. Of course, the nature of Google being what it is, you may have to play with the parameters.. a lot in some cases.

quote:

---

ever shaved a spotted animal? the coloration can be on the skin as well

---

I don't find that atball surprising as hair is dead matter. But I'm not aware of patterned skin without fur in mammals. Besides that its irrelvant - regardless of whether it is an optimum solution or otherwise it explains what we see. At the veryleast as a counterpoint to the dismissing of running as a factor it is perfectly valid.

No. The hypothesis in human's is that furlessness is an adaptation to long-distance running; cheatah's are sprinters.

none?a predator even. (but with that old caveat of water friction selecting for low drag skin over fur and constant temperature allowing loss of fur once sufficient body size is reached)the plain fact is that most mammals are hairy furballs.This message has been edited by RAZD, 01-10-2005 22:07 AM

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

then there are long distance runners with more body mass than humans that should also select for {less\no} hair, wildebeasts can run longer than humans.it is not our long distance running that {allows\allowed} humans to catch more fleet of foot animals, but the persistence and ability to track said animals and actually {walk\jog} them down rather than just run.attributing our {rare} loss of hair to our {unique} long-distance ability in this regard is a logical (causal) fallacy -- they are not necessarily connected.{typos}This message has been edited by RAZD, 01-11-2005 20:51 AM

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

quote:

---

a predator even. (but with that old caveat of water friction selecting for low drag skin over fur and constant temperature allowing loss of fur once sufficient body size is reached)

---

You're splitting furs RAZD. Point conceded although in fact orca's still have all their hair, it is just extremely fine an adapted to assist gliding through water.

quote:

---

it is not our long distance running that {allows\allowed} humans to catch more fleet of foot animals, but the persistence and ability to track said animals and actually {walk\jog} them down rather than just run.

---

No on the savannah. A wounded animal is often capable of running. Even if you have inflicted a fatal wound you might have a mutliple mile run to get to the point at which it actually falls over dead. And you want to be there soon becuase if the hyena's arrive at the kill first you've got more trouble than you need.What exactly is the difference between jog and run? That seems too fine a dictinction to bother drawing in this context. I knew a man who ran - or jogged if you prefer - for 3 straight days, interspersed with stretches of walking. Thats exactly how we exhibit the persistance you mentioned, and why we need to track in the first place. If we simply ran prey down there and then neither of those would be necessary.

I agree, but I also note that there is really no fully "hairless" mammal that I am aware of. Certainly human does not qualify. It is one of the defining characteristics of mammals.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

Jogging is more like a half run in speed and endurance. Boy Scouts are taught that a mix of jogging and walking is the best way to cover ground in emergency situations - that is where I first learned of it (some say from Baden-Powell himself ), but I have also run into reference of it in african and n.american pursuit of game animals. It applies in forest and jungle as much as on savannah. It is an intelligent rationing of endurance in order to achieve a future goal, if you will.And I repeat: Attributing our {rare} loss of hair to our {unique} long-distance ability in this regard is a logical (causal) fallacy -- they are not necessarily connected.It seems to me that long distance pursuit of prey animals is also tied in with wearing camouflage, and that clothes and reduction of parasites also involves sexual selection: it could easily be a number of factors all coming to together, any two of which could have been sufficient.

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

quote:

---

I agree, but I also note that there is really no fully "hairless" mammal that I am aware of. Certainly human does not qualify. It is one of the defining characteristics of mammals.

---

Agrred, in fact I seem to recall there are actually no hairless mammals at all, some just have "vestigial" hair.But this now reaches the point of absurdity in that clearly elephants are much much less hairy than bears.

quote:

---

Jogging is more like a half run in speed and endurance.

---

Yes of course but you missed the point: why are bothering to draw the distinction? I don't think you are succeeding in making a point by objecting to the statement that ahir loss is an adaptation to running by pointing out that mostly we jog. The relevant factor in hair loss, increased heat dispersion, is still relevant.

quote:

---

And I repeat: Attributing our {rare} loss of hair to our {unique} long-distance ability in this regard is a logical (causal) fallacy -- they are not necessarily connected.

---

Well I agree they are not NECESSARILY connected. However I didn't provide a full defence of the concept because the thread is about clothes. The argument about hair loss and running has to do with the rate of heat dissipation, that is that we can maintain pace over long distances because we sweat well. Now you point out that hippos and rhinos are not runners and this is true - but also they are big, massive animals. Seeing as volume increases by the cube and area increases by the square, big animals have proportionally less area with which to dissipate heat. Thus it is not suprising to me that some big savannah animals are hairless on the basis of exactly the same reason that humans are hairless. Running is merely an *application* of the facility that hairlessness allows - increased heat transmission.And furthermore, it is unsurprising that animals in arctic or cold areas both tend to have lots of hair and tend toward the large, in order to minimise heat dissipation.

quote:

---

It applies in forest and jungle as much as on savannah. It is an intelligent rationing of endurance in order to achieve a future goal, if you will.

---

The mechanics of locomotion might apply, but there is very little opportunity for sustained running in the jungle or forest. Savannahs are flat, empty and dry-hot - optimum running conditions. We are also, I point out again, 50% leg by height and a significant proportion by mass. We have all sorts of sex-related interest in legs, buttocks and feet, which makes sense if pedal locomation is a big deal in our evolutionary past. The "running ape" model seems compelling to me, of which the argument to hair loss is only a part.This message has been edited by contracycle, 01-12-2005 06:12 AM

Who said they are necessarily connected? There's no logical fallacy involved in constructing a hypothesis based on available evidence so long as one understands that it is a hypothesis.

Well, it's obvious that at least one human function is facilitated by our great reduction of body hair ... NIT PICKIN'

heh. body lice, reduced by loss of hair.This message has been edited by RAZD8, 01-12-2005 19:33 AM

---

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

agreedThis message has been edited by RAZD8, 01-12-2005 19:33 AM

---

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

heat regulation for running doesn't show up in other running animals, so to me there has to be another factor, such as running with a {camouflage\ceremonial} costume on that artificially reduces heat loss.we can total up a number of unique behaviors in this regard, and the only valid conclusion is that {some\all} had {little\some} effect.This message has been edited by RAZD8, 01-12-2005 19:32 AM

---

---

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}