link between skull bones, stonethrowing and bipedalism; Orrorin

[email hidden] (Archimedes Plutonium) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

Tonight I saw again a repeat of the TV show of Orrorin with anthropologists Pickford and Senut who
have discovered 6 million year old Orrorin who is bipedal as proved by the bone anatomy of the
groove region of the femur.

What I am trying to prove is that Orrorin not only was biped but also a stonethrower and that
stonethrowing created bipedalism. So I need a signature of the fossil bones that can definetively
prove that the individual was a stonethrower. I poise the question of what bone structure proves
the individual had the innate behaviour of stonethrowing.

Senut found a humerus of Orrorin and fingers. The fingers were curved and the humerus was splined,
both of which helped Orrorin to live in trees. But curved fingers and splined humerus does not
rule out that Orrorin was or was not a Stonethrower.

It was mentioned in this repeat program that balance and control of body via balance was crucial
in going from 4-ped to 2-ped. Things like this make it worthwhile for me to see repeat of this
show in that snippets may lead to new avenues of insight that was previously overlooked. So
perhaps a signature of stonethrowing is not only to be found and proved in the arm and finger
bones but also perhaps in the bones that give balance to the body. I am not only talking about the
inner ear bones which would rarely survive fossil preservation but perhaps skull structures may
provide key to whether the individual could stonethrow. Do eyebrow ridges which Neanderthal had,
do they help or hinder balance when throwing?

The inner ear is the main center for balance, but is not the shape of the skull also modified as
stonethrowing increases? Perhaps the shape of the bones near the ear have to be modified in order
to Stonethrow overarm.

So, has anyone researched the bones crucial or peripherial to Stonethrowing between living apes
and humans? A chimp can throw underarm, but does the chimp have bone differences of balance that
is distinct from that of human bones of balance. Is the skull of a human shaped because of balance
in order to throw stones proficiently and which chimps and other apes do not have that bone
advancement.

In the past years I have looked for the bone signature of Stonethrowing in the arm bones, the
finger bones and even the backbone which becomes a lever and fulcrum in Stonethrowing. But now I
am wondering if Stonethrowing signature also exists for the Balance System of the body because it
not only requires alot of balance when going from 4-ped to 2-ped for which the Stonethrowing
theory says that Stonethrowing created 2-ped but that would require a transition in the Balance
control system of the body.

Stonethrowing ---> creates bipedalism

But during that creation the Balance system of the body would alter to accomodate better throwing.
And I feel that some bodily bones would change to enable Stonethrowing.

Archimedes Plutonium whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots of the electron-dot-
cloud are galaxies

sci.anthropology.paleo vice sci.bio.paleontology

In article <[email hidden]>,

Archimedes Plutonium said:

Quoted message said:

What I am trying to prove is that Orrorin not only was biped but also a stonethrower and that
stonethrowing created bipedalism. So I need a signature of the fossil bones that can definetively
prove that the individual was a stonethrower. I poise the question of what bone structure proves
the individual had the innate behaviour of stonethrowing.

That is an old theory but, so far, nobody has been able to find enough evidence to prove or
disprove it.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The inner ear is the main center for balance, but is not the shape of the skull also modified as
stonethrowing increases? Perhaps the shape of the bones near the ear have to be modified in order
to Stonethrow overarm.

Not really. And even balance isn't critical - some people with no middle-ear balance can throw
perfectly well. It is primarily the shoulder joint that is the issue.

Regards, Nick Maclaren.

[email hidden] (Nick Maclaren) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>, Archimedes Plutonium

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

What I am trying to prove is that Orrorin not only was biped but also a stonethrower and that
stonethrowing created bipedalism. So I need a signature of the fossil bones that can
definetively prove that the individual was a stonethrower. I poise the question of what bone
structure proves the individual had the innate behaviour of stonethrowing.

That is an old theory but, so far, nobody has been able to find enough evidence to prove or
disprove it.

This is a new theory which dates to only about 2 years old! The idea of Stonethrowing dates back
hundreds of years in that scientists obviously realized that hominid species threw stones. But only
in the past 2 years has anyone said that Stonethrowing created bipedalism. It was the Savannah
theory that was tauted as creating bipedalism and then along came Pickford with Orrorin and damaged
the Savannah theory. But Pickford installed his own brand of some hybrid theory to account for
bipedalism using the example of orangutan. Pickford did not chose the obvious-- stonethrowing. If he
had seen that stonethrowing could easily explain bipedalism then he would have searched for a
signature in the upper arm. He would have then looked throughout the fossil bone record for a
signature. He did not and instead focused on his hybrid theory.

Stonethrowing idea has been around for hundreds of years. But the Stonethrowing theory that I
discovered some 2 years ago makes many specific claims:
(1) stonethrowing created bipedalism in human species
(2) stonethrowing caused the extinction of all other hominid species except the most proficient of
the stonethrowers
(3) the body anatomy of a stonethrower is genetically different from nonstonethrowers and less
proficient stonethrowers. And the bones have unique signatures for throwing ability. The
Neanderthals were a different species than Homosapiens because the Neanderthal bones phenotype
and genotype were inferior stonethrowing abilities.
(4) a careful examination of the bone anatomy of any fossil should determine whether that species
was a stonethrower and how proficient of a stonethrower.
(5) given any alien planet in the universe that has apelike creatures but not intelligent life, then
when those apelike creatures begin to throw stones overarm will directly lead to an intelligent
species much like humanity on Earth. So the difference between wild animals and intelligent life
is only the difference between stonethrowing.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The inner ear is the main center for balance, but is not the shape of the skull also modified
as stonethrowing increases? Perhaps the shape of the bones near the ear have to be modified in
order to Stonethrow overarm.

Not really. And even balance isn't critical - some people with no middle-ear balance can throw
perfectly well. It is primarily the shoulder joint that is the issue.

Regards, Nick Maclaren.

I agree that the crucial bone area that has to change from apelike bone anatomy in order to
stonethrow overarm is the shoulder, and elbow. Nick apparently has ignored the elbow. A physicist
researching the shoulder and elbow as to where the power in throwing would not leave out the elbow.
Although there is a difference between in-close fighting where you lift up a huge and heavy rock to
pommel a nearby foe or prey or predator compared to long distance overarm stonethrowing.

Instead of grooves in the femur for bipedalism as unique signatures, for Stonethrowing it would be
the opposite of crests for the muscles.

But I would not discount the balance system of the body. In that brow ridges for Neanderthal would
make Neanderthal throwing abilities less than that of non-brow-ridge human like species. So that
given hundreds of thousands of years of competition between a Neanderthal brow ridged and a
CroMagnon no brow ridge then CroMagnon would eventually extinct the Neanderthal with these rock and
stonethrowing skirmishes and competition for food. The brow ridge lessens the ability to throw rocks
and stones because of balance. So I would not discount the balance system. And I would say the
difference in the face and skull bones of humanity were shaped mostly from the need to make
stonethrowing due to balance as proficient as possible. IF we compare the shape of skulls of any
apes with that of humans, then humans have that sleek skull shape because of balance in
stonethrowing. Even the eye sockets were sculpted out of the pressure to stonethrow more
proficiently.

Archimedes Plutonium whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots of the electron-dot-cloud
are galaxies

In article <[email hidden]>,

Archimedes Plutonium said:

This is a new theory which dates to only about 2 years old! The idea of Stonethrowing dates back
hundreds of years in that scientists obviously realized that hominid species threw stones. But only
in the past 2 years has anyone said that Stonethrowing created bipedalism.

Sorry, but I saw it decades back. It is one of the variants of the "tool use created bipedalism"
theories, and I am pretty sure that it goes back at least 50 years. I wouldn't deny that it was
REINVENTED a couple of years back after having gone out of fashion ....

Regards, Nick Maclaren.

[email hidden] (Nick Maclaren) wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>, Archimedes Plutonium

Quoted message said:

This is a new theory which dates to only about 2 years old! The idea of Stonethrowing dates back
hundreds of years in that scientists obviously realized that hominid species threw stones. But
only in the past 2 years has anyone said that Stonethrowing created bipedalism.

Sorry, but I saw it decades back. It is one of the variants of the "tool use created bipedalism"
theories, and I am pretty sure that it goes back at least 50 years. I wouldn't deny that it was
REINVENTED a couple of years back after having gone out of fashion ....

Regards, Nick Maclaren.

Nick, it sort of reminds me of my AtomTotality theory in a way. For there is a author in England
around 1930 who wrote a book on the history of the Atomic theory of Democritus and who makes claim
that Democritus perhaps (emphasize the perhaps) thought the entire Universe itself could be one big
atom. Then there is the passage in Carl Sagan's book COSMOS where in a paragraph mentions the idea
that "our universe" is an electron inside a bigger universe both nested up and nested down. And
Sagan proceeds to say that this is an "ancient idea" but gives no specifics as to what he means by
ancient idea. And one can see that the Democritus Universe-Atom is different from the Electron-
Universe Nested Up and Down. Then I came along in 1990 and said essentially the same as the
Democritus Universe Atom.

But, Nick, the difference I made is that I assigned a specific atom, a specific element and a
specific isotope 231Pu. In other words, I gave it the ultimate in taking the idea Seriously.

Obviously if Democritus had the idea of a Universe-Atom he could not have given it specifics for the
Chemical elements as we know them today were unknown 2,000 or more years ago. Impossible for
Democritus to make a Atom-Universe specific.

And Sagan's idea of nesting is different and is not as specific oriented. But if Sagan had been
serious or any of the believers of the nested idea could have emerged into specifics and said
something like perhaps the observable universe is the last electron of a specific chemical element.

I do not deny that other humans have had the idea that the Universe is an elementary particle and
even an atom. But, if any of my predeccessors were serious. Actually believed in that idea. Then
they should have come forth with some specifics.

That is exactly what I did in year 1990. I believed in the AtomTotality theory and I thus said the
entire Universe is one big atom where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies and this atom is
231Pu and the night sky of galaxies is the 5f6 of 231Pu and that is the reason why most of the mass
of the universe is hidden in the nucleus and the reason that microwave background radiation is
blackbody radiation and that is the reason the Universe has two different ages (Sandage 20 billion
years and Freedman 8 billion years) etc etc I can go on and on as to how this theory agrees with
observations.

My point Nick is that I agree the Stonethrowing theory is old and hundreds of years old. But if
anyone has taken it seriously they would have understood that there exists unique bones of the human
species designed by "Stonethrowing behaviour" and which do not exist in any ape skeletons nor in any
nonhuman fossil skeletons. That Stonethrowing behaviour came into existence first and then it
created bipedalism.

Pickford became specific with bones on Orrorin when he proved Orrorin femur groove implied
bipedalism. By doing so, his Orrorin disproves the Savannah Hypothesis.

But no-one except myself is replacing the Savannah Hypothesis with the Stonethrowing theory. And I
am serious because I state the specifics that there exists unique bones of Orrorin that proves
Orrorin was a Stonethrower. Senut, Pickford's partner in discovery of Orrorin found a humerus. She
also found several finger bones. No skull of Orrorin was found. But no-one is allowed to examine all
of the Orrorin bones for the unique Stonethrowing signatures. Especially the crests on the humerus.
It would be nice to have a full elbow of Orrorin.

Nick, there have been numerous Neanderthal fossil bones found. Yet if anyone took the Stonethrowing
theory seriously before me, would have compared the bones to human and chimp bones of modern day and
found many unique signatures for Stonethrowing. They would have realized that Neanderthal genetics
did not allow Neanderthal to properly throw stones and rocks and due to this fact would have been
the prime reason for the extinction of Neanderthal species as they encountered the stonethrowing
species of their age. In fact, all of the hominid species who were less proficient in throwing would
have been extincted by the *most proficient* Stonethrower species. And the bones of the less
proficient throwers are different genetically from the bones of the most proficient.

Neanderthal could throw overarm and could throw long distance and could lob short distance of a
heavy rock, but Neanderthal could not do that throwing as proficient as Cromagnon.

So, Nick, I grant the Stonethrowing theory had existed for hundreds of years, but few, perhaps no-
one took it seriously to make the patterned detail search into the bone morphology of the fossil
record. Nor to apply physics to detail how the bones must genetically change in order to get to the
stage of modern man who can throw 100 mph fast balls in baseball. Who can pick up a rock weighing
many times his own body weight and accurately lob it onto a predator or rival standing nearby.

Stonethrowing theory existed hundreds of years in the past, but none have taken it seriously. To
take it seriously means finding the Specifics and those specifics are the unique bone signatures--
the unique genetics.

Archimedes Plutonium whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots of the electron-dot-cloud
are galaxies