It doesn't seem like the question should be walking vs climbing- climbing is so useful (and we can still do it to an extent today) that it would have stuck around for as long as possible even as walking evolved. The tradeoff to me seems to be between climbing vs throwing (ie hunting), carrying children and supplies, and using tools dexterously.
Most primate young cling to the mothers, part of a climbing/grabbing response so carrying children is not a cause for movement to walking upright. Supplies are not something most animals & therefore early hominids are likely to need to carry as food is in relative abundance and eaten when found. Throwing as a technique for hunting also does not require upright locomotion or abandonment of tree climbing (chimps can throw as can other primates). Some primates use tools to crack open nuts, chimps very dexterously use two different kinds of sticks to extract termites, climbing skilfully involves manual dexterity. None of your arguments standard up to basic comparison with non upright primates.
The speaker asks whether Lucy's children climbed trees .... I don't know .. .lets look at modern 8 and 10 year old boys and girls. Do they climb trees? Are they Home Sapiens, or chimps?
But he is referring to survival behavior related to food-getting, nest-building, and safety from ground predators, and doing these things on a daily basis and not as recreation.
The lack of arm strength to body weight (in comparison to other primates) is very obvious in humans, we lost it somewhere along the way. And we don't have a mobile big toe which allows good climbing.
Lucy lived in a mosaic woodland? That would be an environment that has some sort of elephant as a keystone species - we should be nice to the elephants because without them we wouldn't have evolved.
![BRASIL vs. PERÚ [4-0] | RESUMEN | ELIMINATORIAS SUDAMERICANAS | FECHA 10](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/tbyOJKXfQnI/mqdefault.jpg)
It doesn't seem like the question should be walking vs climbing- climbing is so useful (and we can still do it to an extent today) that it would have stuck around for as long as possible even as walking evolved. The tradeoff to me seems to be between climbing vs throwing (ie hunting), carrying children and supplies, and using tools dexterously.
Most primate young cling to the mothers, part of a climbing/grabbing response so carrying children is not a cause for movement to walking upright. Supplies are not something most animals & therefore early hominids are likely to need to carry as food is in relative abundance and eaten when found. Throwing as a technique for hunting also does not require upright locomotion or abandonment of tree climbing (chimps can throw as can other primates).
Some primates use tools to crack open nuts, chimps very dexterously use two different kinds of sticks to extract termites, climbing skilfully involves manual dexterity.
None of your arguments standard up to basic comparison with non upright primates.
What is CARTA? I'm getting mixed results on Google, but I'm trying to do my own research. Can anyone break the acronym down for me?
CARTA - Center for Academic Research and Training in Anthropogeny
The answer, and much more, is in the video description....
Dikika the ancestors of Lucy.
The speaker asks whether Lucy's children climbed trees .... I don't know .. .lets look at modern 8 and 10 year old boys and girls. Do they climb trees? Are they Home Sapiens, or chimps?
But he is referring to survival behavior related to food-getting, nest-building, and safety from ground predators, and doing these things on a daily basis and not as recreation.
The lack of arm strength to body weight (in comparison to other primates) is very obvious in humans, we lost it somewhere along the way. And we don't have a mobile big toe which allows good climbing.
Dezi jr. 🙈
Lucy lived in a mosaic woodland? That would be an environment that has some sort of elephant as a keystone species - we should be nice to the elephants because without them we wouldn't have evolved.
They gave us meat to eat too