Ardi & Why We Walk Upright

slyc_willie

Captain Crash
Joined
Sep 4, 2006
Posts
17,732
3113 posted the thread a few days ago about Ardipithecus ramidus, a 4.4-million year old hominid. An even more distant ancestor than "Lucy" (Australopithecus afarensis), "Ardi" was a unique creature. Not ape, not human, not chimpanzee, this was a fully bipedal hominid with some interesting traits.

The show, "Discovering Ardi," premiered tonight, detailing a painstaking 15-year investigation that involved more than sixty scientists around the world. Their evidence is impressive, professional, and stupefying for the paleontological world. Like apes, Ardi possessed grasping feet, which was advantageous to climbing trees. But she also had small canines, which meant Ardi was less aggressive and not entirely dependent upon hunting game for food, nor for fighting others. Her hands were very much like ours, if a bit longer, but she was definitely not a knuckle-walker like chimps and apes.

Investigating fossil records from Ardi's surroundings revealed that she leaved in arboreal settings. this was a species that spent much time in the trees (to avoid predators), yet walked perfectly upright. That evidence shattered the traditional notions that primitive hominids became bipedal to be able to see over tall savanah grasslands.

So why would hominids learn to walk upright, if not to be taller? The answer is pretty simple: walking upright meant Ardi could carry more. Chimps and apes can't carry too much because the depend on using at least one hand when they walk. But a biped can load up its arms and bring back more foraging to the home.

Having to spend less time foraging or hunting meant females could spend more time with the young. And they could have more young.

Bipedal locomotion was therefore an evolutionary step toward creating more complicated social relationships, and, essentially, toward having more sex. :D

Very cool. This was an interesting program. If you have Discovery Channel, it will undoubtedly be on several more times over the following couple of weeks.
 
I'll definitely check it out. It's getting to where Discovery and History Channel and their offshoots take up 3/4ths of my TV time.

Wait... does that make me old? ;)
 
I'm a discovery junkie myself, so I'll definitely check out the special Slyc. sounds fascinating

It's a very informative program. the kind of thing that makes you stay up past bed time and look for related articles on the Web. :p

At the end of the show, it reveals a little about new fossils found belonging to a hominid more than 5 million years old, tentatively called Ardipithecus kammadan. I'll be tracking the articles and news related to that, to be sure.
 
It's a very informative program. the kind of thing that makes you stay up past bed time and look for related articles on the Web. :p

At the end of the show, it reveals a little about new fossils found belonging to a hominid more than 5 million years old, tentatively called Ardipithecus kammadan. I'll be tracking the articles and news related to that, to be sure.

Tomorrow's a holiday here, so I'll be looking for it all day to come on. I love that kind of stuff. almost makes me feel smart by the end of the show, lol.
 
Tomorrow's a holiday here, so I'll be looking for it all day to come on. I love that kind of stuff. almost makes me feel smart by the end of the show, lol.

I've been a closet Anthropologist/Paleontologist for years now. I love it when new discoveries come to light with abundant evidence that challenges traditional theories. Personally, I've always had some reservations about Darwinian evolution. Nice to see now that I've been on the right track.
 
I've been a closet Anthropologist/Paleontologist for years now. I love it when new discoveries come to light with abundant evidence that challenges traditional theories. Personally, I've always had some reservations about Darwinian evolution. Nice to see now that I've been on the right track.

I'm in the same boat. I want to know where we come from and also to know what we're going to change into later. Our lifestyle is making parts of us obsolete and redundant. I haven't seen anything on that subject yet.
 
I'm in the same boat. I want to know where we come from and also to know what we're going to change into later. Our lifestyle is making parts of us obsolete and redundant. I haven't seen anything on that subject yet.

Advances in technology and sociology always render some things obsolete. That's the design and function of evolution, regardless of what it is applied to.

I understand the animated film Wall-E was an interesting commentary on the current state of human existence and where we might be heading. ;)
 
Christ, no wonder my knees get so sore when the pressure changes. Medical miracle that I don't need Viagra yet.

Jeepers! You're aging by the second. As for Viagra. Let me see. I'll give you a clinical opinion on whether you need it or not. :D
 
Thanks Slyc, pleasing to see that you had chosen to create a thread around Ardi...

Also, which has been mentioned, interesting to find that man, Apes & Chimps are each a different branch on the evolutionary tree, but that all likely have a common, as yet undiscovered, ancestry.

The only sour note, which I mentioned on another thread, was the 'Global Warming' plug at the end of the program and how terrible and destructive man has become.

Enough already!

Ami
 
Thanks Slyc, pleasing to see that you had chosen to create a thread around Ardi...

Also, which has been mentioned, interesting to find that man, Apes & Chimps are each a different branch on the evolutionary tree, but that all likely have a common, as yet undiscovered, ancestry.

The only sour note, which I mentioned on another thread, was the 'Global Warming' plug at the end of the program and how terrible and destructive man has become.

Enough already!

Ami

It was a given, I figure (the GW plug).

I think, the further back we are able to dig, we'll eventually find that common ancestor to all apes, chimps and humans. But it seems the notion of human-chimp relation have been tossed in the Beagle's wake (ahem).

I'd like to see more information on Neanderthal evolution, and why, exactly, they died out alongside the existence of contemporary humans. They had larger brains, after all, and were more robust. One would think they would have been the ones to survive. There were obviously other factors at work, there.

But I'm rambling . . . .
 
Ah, but good 'rambling' Slyc, and right down my alley.

Jean Auel, author of Clan of the Cave Bear, may not have been a full fledged anthropologist, but knowledgeable enough to postulate that Neanderthal's did interbreed with homo sapiens. It seems I heard or read somewhere that DNA gave evidence, one way or the other, but I cannot swear to which.

...a pleasant evening to you...

ami
 
I've been a closet Anthropologist/Paleontologist for years now. I love it when new discoveries come to light with abundant evidence that challenges traditional theories. Personally, I've always had some reservations about Darwinian evolution. Nice to see now that I've been on the right track.

How does the discovery of Ardi throw any doubt on Darwinian evolution? The notion of a "missing link", or the idea that we descended from apes, has long been obsolete.
 
Ah, but good 'rambling' Slyc, and right down my alley.

Jean Auel, author of Clan of the Cave Bear, may not have been a full fledged anthropologist, but knowledgeable enough to postulate that Neanderthal's did interbreed with homo sapiens. It seems I heard or read somewhere that DNA gave evidence, one way or the other, but I cannot swear to which.

...a pleasant evening to you...

ami

I love that series Amicus, I know she put a lot of research into her stories and the ideas of how we inter-bred with neanderthal man might have weaned out certain features from them as they adopted homo-sapien features instead. The missing link theory is just that, a theory. As a quick example, look at how many different types of fish there are in the oceans, at some point each one took off from something else and adapted in size, shape, etc. to conform to a habitat. Man might have evolved much the same way from a combination of factors and not one particular off-shoot. Man-ape-chimps might have some commonalities, but it would have to go much farther back down the evolutionary scale to find a connection between us all.
 
I think the Neanderthals died out because they were all butt-ugly. They all looked at each other and thought, "Not even if he/she was the last Neanderthal on earth..."
 
I'd like to see more information on Neanderthal evolution, and why, exactly, they died out alongside the existence of contemporary humans. They had larger brains, after all, and were more robust. One would think they would have been the ones to survive. There were obviously other factors at work, there.

Check out Dance of the Tiger by (Dr.) Bjorn Kurten. It doesn't have much about their evolution, but it does present a fictionalized version of Dr Kurten's doctoral thesis on why they died out.
 
Back
Top