[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

Australopithecines and Nested Taxa



David Marjanovic <David.Marjanovic@gmx.at> wrote:

<Isn't 2) the prevalent hypothesis?>

  Yes, it is. If we were to review the genetic studies, and consider
genetic disperal in hominids, we might arrive at a group that presents
the present living populations from within a securely bound extinct
one. Speculation, of course. Anatomy has backed up the statement, where
hominines like us apparently derive from the australopithecine
morphology, but still are regarded as exclusive taxa. This then does
not relate on an evolutionary perspective, but on an antiquated idea
that forms were exlcusive of one another, rather than stemming from one
another.

  Modification through descent. Also, Mutatis Mutandis.

  It's still being argued, however: austalopithecine and hominine
evolution.

  Anyway, a corrolary to a dead thread....

=====
Jaime A. Headden

  Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhr-gen-ti-na
  Where the Wind Comes Sweeping Down the Pampas!!!!

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Shopping - Thousands of Stores. Millions of Products.
http://shopping.yahoo.com/