On Mon, 23 Oct 2000 08:28:55 -0400, Amadeus Schmidt <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:

>On Sun, 22 Oct 2000 09:54:45 -0400, Philip Thrift <[log in to unmask]>
>wrote:

>Philip, you forgot to mention which *food* may have caused brain
>enlargement
>persisting "whether we eat meat or not".
>Your presumption was, that it was the challenge to hunt successfully which
>*caused* the brain enlargement.
>I would assume that increased brain capacity would be of advantage for most
>actions of humans. Planning to hunt..ok. Likewise remembering gathering
>locations, water places and properties of food items.
>Managing to not be eaten.. IMO most promising and with big selective
effect.

I don't think "cause" is the right word to use in the context of
natural selection. There was a niche to fill: animals as a potential
food source and Homo species *just happened* to fill it with brains
supporting hunting skills
-- throwing accuracy (including brain wired to compute trajectories) a
key
one, according to the theory.

>Of the article one detail did not match my experience:
>Thrown hand axes should manage to injure and/or throw down a big animal?
>Maybe a little far fetched?
>In my archeology study i had the opportunity to have such a real paleo-time
>hand axe in my hand.
>It was... nice - patinated and all.... bit *very* small and lightweight.
>I would better not thow such a thing onto any animal which could get angry.

I agree maybe some more experimentation would have helped, beyond
what he did with the discus thrower.

     Even a small hand ax might cause enough sharp pain to make a big
animal
     suddenly collapse. If
     the animal were standing alone, it might still get up in time to
run
     away from the approaching hunters -- but with
     a herd stampeding past, just being knocked down might prove
fatal.

     http://www.williamcalvin.com/throwing.html

Philip Thrift
"Paleofitness"
http://www.paleofitness.com