Infant Carrying Ruled Out As Reason Why Early Humans Walked

[CShark]

Something that may interest a few here...

Carrying babies that could no longer use their feet to cling to their parents in the way that young apes can has long been thought to be at least one explanation as to why humans became bipedal. But University of Manchester researchers investigating the energy involved in carrying a child say the physical expense to the mother does not support the idea that walking upright was an evolutionary response to child transportation

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 093254.htm

[Beagle]

Wow Shark - I hope my tax dollars were not used in that study.

All,
Why would an infant human foot not be able to grasp it's mother? Probably because it has it's parents feet! That should tell anyone I think that we began to walk long before the infants foot grasping ability was lost.

The grasping reflex in an infant's hands is still present, although vestigial. They can grab your finger and be lifted completly off the bed. Pretty strong.

Thanks for finding that one Shark.

[Minimalist]

I hope my tax dollars were not used in that study.

I'd prefer that to another no-bid contract for Halliburton.

[Beagle]

I can't respond to that in this forum Min.

I've seen a lot of studies like this though, that do draw on Federal funding, that most people respond to with a "You had to study that?" attitude.

[Minimalist]

It's not "news" that the government wastes money.

[Beagle]

Extremely true!

[CShark]

It's not "news" that the government wastes money.

Off-topic, but I can't help it: I work for our government...it's not much better up here, believe me! The things I've seen, may as well take a stack of bills and burn them for all the good some 'studies' or projects have contributed....then, there's taxes...but I won't go there.

[Minimalist]

I'm an ex-civil servant, cshark, and with all the rank stupidity I witnessed in a 33 year career I'm amazed that I'm not sitting in a corner drooling on my shirt.