[_ Old Earth _] New footprints found

[brother Paul]

The latest Laetoli footprints are another fine example of of assumption based conclusionism which I say is bad science. No rear thumb or separated big toe suggests this could be evidence for early Sapiens (which we have other evidence for) and not evolving Apes, but we must interpret the data via the accepted hypothesis right? Not! That's actually bad science. There are other indicators Sapiens were much earlier but the theory says "no humans at this time" so these must be interpreted as if they were evolving Apes or you get ZERO cred...or ridicule...never question the controlling pedagogues or you will be discredited.

 

[Eugene]

.
Good morning brother Paul, that science might fall right in line with reports David Letterman was attempting to follow up on in the following video. Of course I receive that same quality of science on a regular basis with weather reports.

 

[brother Paul]

Dint ya'z sea it two? Let me run it agiin and agin tillin ya'z doo (or doo doo)!!!!!

 

[Barbarian]

It's no surprise that recently-found foot bones of Australopithecines confirms the Laetoli data, showing that Australopithecine feet were much more like those of modern humans than like other apes:

Fossil foot bones from A. afarensis add detail to what we’ve learned from the Laetoli footprint trails. For example, Carol Ward, Bill Kimbel and Don Johanson Ward:metatarsal:2011 described one of the bones of the midfoot from Hadar, Ethiopia, that represents A. afarensis. This bone, the fourth metatarsal, is the one that connects the fourth toe to the bones of the ankle. In humans, these ankle bones are higher, and transfer the body’s weight downward into the arching midfoot. So the fourth metatarsal has to be slightly twisted as it arches down toward the lateral (outside) side of the foot. A chimpanzee’s foot is much flatter, so the bone doesn’t twist. Ward and colleagues found that the A. afarensis bone was twisted in a humanlike way.


Hadar is the place where one of the most famous skeletons in the world was found: the “Lucy” skeleton, discovered by Don Johanson in 1974. Lucy presents evidence across much of her skeleton for a humanlike manner of walking. Jeremy DeSilva and Zach Throckmorton DeSilva:Throckmorton:2011 looked at the tibia (shin bone) of this skeleton, along with other fossil tibiae of A. afarensis, to try to determine whether their ankle bones were structured to create a rearfoot arch like humans. What they found was interesting: Most A. afarensis tibiae met the ankle in a humanlike orientation, but they varied. Lucy’s ankle in particular looked like her feet were relatively flatter. Just as human feet vary in their shape, this early species of hominins varied as well.


Ape feet are made for climbing. Their flexibility allows the sole of the foot to conform to a tree trunk or branch, giving them more friction and a stronger grip. Ape ankle joints allow them to walk up a trunk while holding it with their arms, which means their feet need to carry weight while they are flexed upward and tilted to the side. Humans who are good climbers tend to shimmy up a tree by gripping the trunk tightly between their legs. Our feet just don’t work very well when climbing a truly vertical surface. Rock climbers look for footholds where they can place their feet; loggers can use metal spikes clamped to their boots.


What about A. afarensis? Jeremy DeSilva DeSilva:ankle:2009 examined the ankle joints preserved for this species and found that they did not have the orientation that chimpanzee ankles do. Where chimpanzees can bear weight effectively with their feet tilted to the side, for A. afarensis this orientation just wouldn’t have worked. If these early hominins needed to climb trees — which might explain the powerful arm bones of some individuals — they must have done it in a different way than chimpanzees and other apes.


Yet, the feet of A. afarensis were not entirely like ours. One major difference is that their toe bones were curved more than ours (Stern and Susman 1983). This curvature is less than the great curvature of the foot bones in chimpanzees, and may be correlated to the relatively long length of australopithecine toes compared to body size. Or, curved bones may just be a retention from their ape ancestry that hadn’t been eliminated because it didn’t impede walking. The curvature of the bones and a few other apelike features of the A. afarensis foot show that human feet did not instantly evolve in one moment of our evolution. Instead, human feet represent a long evolutionary history with different steps at different times.
http://johnhawks.net/explainer/early-hominins/feet-australopithecus-afarensis/

 

[brother Paul]

So they are very similar to a person who has walked barefoot all their lives...

 

[Roro1972]

It's no surprise that recently-found foot bones of Australopithecines confirms the Laetoli data, showing that Australopithecine feet were much more like those of modern humans than like other apes:

Fossil foot bones from A. afarensis add detail to what we’ve learned from the Laetoli footprint trails. For example, Carol Ward, Bill Kimbel and Don Johanson Ward:metatarsal:2011 described one of the bones of the midfoot from Hadar, Ethiopia, that represents A. afarensis. This bone, the fourth metatarsal, is the one that connects the fourth toe to the bones of the ankle. In humans, these ankle bones are higher, and transfer the body’s weight downward into the arching midfoot. So the fourth metatarsal has to be slightly twisted as it arches down toward the lateral (outside) side of the foot. A chimpanzee’s foot is much flatter, so the bone doesn’t twist. Ward and colleagues found that the A. afarensis bone was twisted in a humanlike way.


Hadar is the place where one of the most famous skeletons in the world was found: the “Lucy” skeleton, discovered by Don Johanson in 1974. Lucy presents evidence across much of her skeleton for a humanlike manner of walking. Jeremy DeSilva and Zach Throckmorton DeSilva:Throckmorton:2011 looked at the tibia (shin bone) of this skeleton, along with other fossil tibiae of A. afarensis, to try to determine whether their ankle bones were structured to create a rearfoot arch like humans. What they found was interesting: Most A. afarensis tibiae met the ankle in a humanlike orientation, but they varied. Lucy’s ankle in particular looked like her feet were relatively flatter. Just as human feet vary in their shape, this early species of hominins varied as well.


Ape feet are made for climbing. Their flexibility allows the sole of the foot to conform to a tree trunk or branch, giving them more friction and a stronger grip. Ape ankle joints allow them to walk up a trunk while holding it with their arms, which means their feet need to carry weight while they are flexed upward and tilted to the side. Humans who are good climbers tend to shimmy up a tree by gripping the trunk tightly between their legs. Our feet just don’t work very well when climbing a truly vertical surface. Rock climbers look for footholds where they can place their feet; loggers can use metal spikes clamped to their boots.


What about A. afarensis? Jeremy DeSilva DeSilva:ankle:2009 examined the ankle joints preserved for this species and found that they did not have the orientation that chimpanzee ankles do. Where chimpanzees can bear weight effectively with their feet tilted to the side, for A. afarensis this orientation just wouldn’t have worked. If these early hominins needed to climb trees — which might explain the powerful arm bones of some individuals — they must have done it in a different way than chimpanzees and other apes.


Yet, the feet of A. afarensis were not entirely like ours. One major difference is that their toe bones were curved more than ours (Stern and Susman 1983). This curvature is less than the great curvature of the foot bones in chimpanzees, and may be correlated to the relatively long length of australopithecine toes compared to body size. Or, curved bones may just be a retention from their ape ancestry that hadn’t been eliminated because it didn’t impede walking. The curvature of the bones and a few other apelike features of the A. afarensis foot show that human feet did not instantly evolve in one moment of our evolution. Instead, human feet represent a long evolutionary history with different steps at different times.
http://johnhawks.net/explainer/early-hominins/feet-australopithecus-afarensis/

these guys are so good they could look at a petrified fish and predict its human features a millions later if it had lived

 

[Barbarian]

these guys are so good they could look at a petrified fish and predict its human features a millions later if it had lived

If you think so, you've been indoctrinated by creationists. As you saw, if you read the article, it's not hard to understand how the structure of a foot shows how it's owner walked. If you like we could do some illustrations and show you. Would you like to see that?

 

[Barbarian]

So they are very similar to a person who has walked barefoot all their lives...

Very much so. One big difference is that the toes of Australopithecines were slightly bowed, much less so than arboreal apes, but more than found in most humans.

Lucy is a little more primitive than later Australopithecines, like the ones at Laetoli. So the differences here are larger than they likely were for the later members of the group. The trend in hominin evolution has been for rapid evolution of the skull, and less rapid change for the postcranial skeleton.

 

[brother Paul]

a) Cases of osteomalacia, scurvy, and rickets all show varying degrees of bowing of the bones.

b) Also in cases of Tailor’s bunions there can be a bowing of the 4th and more commonly 5th metatarsal.

c) Plus whether a variety of Ape or Human, it is totally plausible that there could be some differences without assuming one came from the other.

All else is mere speculation and assumption based conclusions. However we were not talking about the A. Aferensis foot fossil you referred to but while on that what they found was a group of separated foot bones that may not even look like the fictional reconstructions. In that case the Ape skull found nearby is the clue.

 

[brother Paul]

"Ape feet are made for climbing. Their flexibility allows the sole of the foot to conform to a tree trunk or branch, giving them more friction and a stronger grip. Ape ankle joints allow them to walk up a trunk while holding it with their arms, which means their feet need to carry weight while they are flexed upward and tilted to the side."

Ever see Filipino (totally Sapien) tree climbers? This is exactly what they do. No leg wrap shimmying whatsoever....