 |
|
Current group: sci.anthropology.
Proving that a human is only able to throw overarm, not monkeys nor apes
| Archimedes Plutonium | | Archimedes Plutonium | | operator jay | | Philip Deitiker |
|
|
| | From: | Archimedes Plutonium | | Subject: | Proving that a human is only able to throw overarm, not monkeys nor apes | | Date: | Wed, 19 Jan 2005 11:07:55 -0600 |
|
|
 |
Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> Tue, 16 Mar 2004 01:24:42 GMT EdJohnson98012@earthlink.net wrote:
>
> > Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> >
>
> (most snipped)
>
> >
> >
> > I think you have to rethink how we throw. Throwing overhand is a
> misnomer. Something
> > babies do. It is really much more of a sidearm motion. It merely
> looks like its overhand
> > because the torso is nearly horizontal with the ground upon release.
> What is really
> > happening is a balancing act that is one of the most graceful in the
> animal kingdom.
> > Obviously you have to start with bipedalism. That is probably the
> beginning and end of
> > what we call overhand throwing. Go through the motion yourself and
> you will notice on
> > release that your opposite shoulder is pointing down relative to
> your throwing shoulder.
> > As they say in baseball it's all in the legs
> > >
> > > Morphology is Behaviour. So if Oreopithecus had these unique
> > > stonethrowing bones then Oreopithecus was a Stonethrower and also
> was
> > > biped. Did Orrorin have these unique stonethrowing bones? If so,
> then
> > > Orrorin was probably a descendent of Oreopithecus and that
> humanity
> > > cradle was not Africa but southern Europe.
> > >
> >
> > Yes if he had the ability to balance and bend his body in such a
> fashion then he was an
> > "overhand" stone thrower. It doesn't take much a leap of imagination
> to think that a
> > bipedal descendent of agile acrobatic primates could perform this
> feat.
> >
> > > So, Ed, can you be lifted up to stage or step two wherein you
> discuss
> > > or find out what unique body morphology bones does a Stonethrower
> > > possess? And step three or stage three is to then inspect all the
> > > ancient hominid fossils ever found to see who or who was not a
> > > Stonethrower. The owners of Oreopithecus and Orrorin bones have
> not
> > > given permission to research their bones for Stonethrowing
> signatures.
> > > And the science of Anthropology will go nowhere until
> Stonethrowing
> > > questions are answered.
> > >
> > Yes it is interesting that these fossils have not been scanned so
> that anyone with can
> > interest can make stereo lithography facsimiles for study. Does seem
> a waste doesn't it?
> >
> > In any case I think you would need to look at the leg structure
> first and foremost in
> > order to understand throwing mechanics. Secondly look at the torso
> and see if can be
> > manipulated into a posture that allows for "overhand throwing".
> Lastly amd very much
> > lastly its the structure of the shoulder. Afterall a man in a wheel
> chair is not a good
> > candidate to be a nominal thrower.
> >
> > > It is a shame that the owners of anthropological bones can stop
> the
> > > investigation of those bones for Stonethrowing behaviour.
> > >
> > > Archimedes Plutonium
> > > whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots
> > > of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies
> >
> > We have always marveled at how such a small, slow, weak and
> seemingly defenseless ground
> > creature such as the ancestor of man could survive in a terrestrial
> environment. The
> > answer is stone throwing.
>
> Ed's post was in March of 2004 and I am just getting around to
> answering it. I suppose my
> attention was diverted. But here in January of 2005 I have alot more
> on the Stonethrowing
> theory that I did not have in March of 2004.
>
> For one, I have to include Dropping rocks and stones from trees of the
> pre-Oreopithecus.
> Dropping preceded bipedalism. Throwing came first and it evolved into
> quadrapeds hauling
> rocks and stones up into trees to ambush animals on the ground. And
> even the collection of
> stones and rocks on the ground spurred the evolution or hastened the
> evolution of getting
> the backbone to upright walking. So that the collecting of rocks on
> the ground to store into
> trees aided in the forming of a backbone for bipedalism but also aided
> in the performance of
> throwing itself, as the expression goes "putting your backbone into
> the throw".
>
> But I do need to come up with a scientific definition of the
> distinction between overarm and
> underarm throwing. It would be easy for me to just say that in
> baseball, men throw overarm
> and in women's softball they throw underarm and leave it at that. But
> that is unscientific.
> Somehow the fastest throws involve mens baseball which is overarm
> throwing. So I need to
> know why men overarm pitch delivers the fastest speeds? Are there
> extra muscles called into
> action when a man's baseball pitcher throws overarm? And are there
> fewer muscles called into
> action when a man pitches underarm for the speed of the ball is less?
> So I need to know what
> those muscles are and then make the definition based on the total
> muscles used.
>
> When pitching underarm the motion reminds me of a pendulum sort of
> pitch. Where the lower
> arm seems almost straight with the upper arm.
> A stiff arm pendulum sort of motion in underarm. In overarm it seems
> as though the lower arm
> adds additional thrust to the ball, lacking in underarm where it is
> stiff.
>
> Also I need to include the concept of a heavy short distance lob of a
> rock using both arms.
> That is a overarm pitch. But humans cannot make a underarm pitch of a
> heavy rock simply
> because both arms cannot be in play. So a heavy rock requires two arms
> lifting the rock over
> the head and then pommelling the target. So this action is another
> form of overarm throwing.
>
> I need to run a scientific analysis of the proportionate length of
> lower arm to upper arm of
> all monkeys and apes and humans and I expect that data to tell me
> which monkeys and apes can
> throw at all and if they can throw whether they can only throw
> underarm or overarm or both.
> Because the lower arm is disproportionate to upper arm in monkeys and
> apes signifies that if
> they can throw at all it is only underarm.
>
> So defining underarm as a pendulum type motion where the hand never
> exceeds the height level
> of the shoulder. And overarm is where it is shoulder height and above.
> So sidearm is mostly
> underarm unless it reaches the level of the should itself.
>
> I suspect spider monkeys and chimpanzees throw only underarm because
> there lower arm length
> to upper arm length causes them pain to through overarm. And that
> their bone structure is
> such that they can only throw underarm without pain.
>
> Ed seems to think that bipedalism came before Stonethrowing. I counter
> that by saying that
> the Stonethrowing theory created bipedalism. So some 10 million years
> ago was a quadraped
> ape call it preOreopithecus who started to throw in earnest and would
> come down out of the
> trees collect rocks and stones, carry them up into the trees and
> ambush animals on the
> ground. This behaviour conferred advantage and with time the rock
> collecting on the ground
> evolved into getting more and more bipedal instead of quadraped to get
> the rocks faster and
> to free the hands to throw in case some predator was on the ground
> stalking the
> preOreopithecus. By the time of Oreopithecus, he was a full fledged
> rock thrower and the
> throwing had created full bipedalism.
>
The way to prove this is to take the data of the Rotator Cuff maximum
potential to throw. And take the data of the length of lower arm to
upper arm.
Then with the numbers we show that a fastball overarm possible in the
human anatomy but not in monkeys or apes without pain because of the
arrangement of the lengths of lower arm to upper arm and the Rotator
Cuff kinetics.
Please understand what I am saying. It is not impossible for a ape or
monkey to throw overarm. They can throw overarm but with a degree of
pain, and thus they throw underarm if they ever throw at all.
The reason the human bone anatomy of the disproportionate length of
lower arm to upper arm is so different from humans to any ape or monkey
is because in humans Throwing has been maximized to overarm throwing.
Chimpanzees throw underarm and the state of condition of the chimpanzee
is comparable to that of preOreopithecus who was quadraped and throwing
underarm. By the time of Oreopithecus, he was throwing overarm which
thence transformed his quadrapedalism into bipedalism.
So if we today were to change the bones of the chimpanzee of its Rotator
Cuff and length of lower arm to upper arm, this chimpanzee would start
throwing overarm and the throwing would quickly transform the chimp into
a biped.
So I shall get the numbers of lower arm length to upper arm length which
is a unique signature for humans because it implies Overarm throwing.
Archimedes Plutonium
www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots
of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies
|
|
| | From: | Archimedes Plutonium | | Subject: | Re: Proving that a human is only able to throw overarm, not monkeys nor | | Date: | Thu, 20 Jan 2005 01:36:55 -0600 |
|
|
| Wed, 19 Jan 2005 11:07:55 -0600 Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
(all snipped except this sentence)
>
> So I shall get the numbers of lower arm length to upper arm length which
> is a unique signature for humans because it implies Overarm throwing.
>
Not much luck using the Internet. Did find a Univ Texas website which calls
this ratio the Brachial Index
Brachial Index = (radius x 100)/humerus
male human B.I. = 77.9
male chimpanzee B.I. = 91.9
Thanks to Univ. Texas website.
But I need the brachial index for all apes and all monkeys.
I need to show that if a primate throws overarm that the B.I. is going to
be about 77 and that no primate except humans has that low of a B.I. I need
to see the B.I. of baboons, gorillas and orangutans.
Archimedes Plutonium
www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots
of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies
|
|
| | From: | operator jay | | Subject: | Re: Proving that a human is only able to throw overarm, not monkeys nor apes | | Date: | Thu, 20 Jan 2005 21:07:44 -0600 |
|
|
|
"Archimedes Plutonium" wrote in message
news:41EF5F97.189BA1A0@iw.net...
> Wed, 19 Jan 2005 11:07:55 -0600 Archimedes Plutonium wrote:
> (all snipped except this sentence)
>
> >
> > So I shall get the numbers of lower arm length to upper arm length which
> > is a unique signature for humans because it implies Overarm throwing.
> >
>
> Not much luck using the Internet. Did find a Univ Texas website which
calls
> this ratio the Brachial Index
>
> Brachial Index = (radius x 100)/humerus
>
> male human B.I. = 77.9
>
> male chimpanzee B.I. = 91.9
>
> Thanks to Univ. Texas website.
>
> But I need the brachial index for all apes and all monkeys.
>
> I need to show that if a primate throws overarm that the B.I. is going to
> be about 77 and that no primate except humans has that low of a B.I. I
need
> to see the B.I. of baboons, gorillas and orangutans.
>
Take a ruler to your next family reunion. Just kidding, someone had to say
it.
|
|
| | From: | Philip Deitiker | | Subject: | Re: Proving that a human is only able to throw overarm, not monkeys nor apes | | Date: | Fri, 21 Jan 2005 07:02:28 GMT |
|
|
| "operator jay" says in
news:do_Hd.13976$Ka6.96233@news1.mts.net:
> Take a ruler to your next family reunion. Just kidding, someone
> had to say it.
Kidding, I should say so, you can't measure the Brachial index of
snakes.
--
Philip
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
____Groups_____
Mol Anthro http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DNAanthro/
Pal Anthro http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Paleoanthro/
Arch. Aux http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sciarchauxilliary/
Gliadin Sci http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/GliadinScience/
____Sites_____
Mol. Evol. Hominids http://home.att.net/~DNAPaleoAnth/
Evol. of Xchrom. http://home.att.net/~DNAPaleoAnth/xlinked.htm
|
|
|
| | |
|
 |