KAYNAK, Oktay
Independent Researcher, Turkey oktaykaynak@hotmail.com
If we look at Au. sediba with the point of views that are accepted until today, either the point of view has to be changed or the interpretation of organs that are required to be in conjuntion with changes
FOOT AND ANKLE
They are semi-arboreal and semi-aquatic. What implies them to be arboreal is the long arms and the ankles. Being aquatic is related to the heels. The heel looks like a primate but it is bipedal.It survives on sea food. It gets down the tree, where it climbs up to sleep, walks on two feet in shallow waters picking up or hunting for seafood that is how it survives. For this reason, its heel bone, like a terrestrial bipedal heel, did not start looking like human heel. Its heel will look like human heel after deserting the waters. (Kaynak, O.2007) Other than that, human being’s foot is suggested to take its last shape 200.000 years ago.(Meldrum D.J.2004)
To explain its primate like heel, it is said that it had Achilles tendon like modern human being. The heel, being exactly like a primate heel, (that is to say four legged living being), while walking on two feet, the weight of the body would be carried directly by the heels, and the reason for that is, this heel structure would not be able to carry this weight, they concluded that, it should have type of Achilles tendon (tendo calcenos) similar to human being. (1), (Zipfel B. et al 2011)
IF IT HAS THE MATURE TENDON LIKE MODERN HUMAN, AND IF THIS TENDON SUSTAINS BIPEDALITY WITH PRIMATE HEEL, WHY DID THE HEEL EVOLVE AND CHANGE LIKE MODERN HUMAN’S IN HOMO TYPES LATER?
It is because modern human has Achille tendon as well as his heel is very different than a primate. Why did the realization of standing up that started 5-6 million years ago, changed the pelvis to this degree, but not change the heel bone as well? It should change that too. Because the heel bones of the homo fossils of Au. sediba found so far are human like. The basic reason why the heel bone is like modern human is the fact of walking on two feet.
However if the fact that Au. sediba was surviving in shallow waters, hunting and foraging sea food was kept in mind, because of the buoyancy of water during its walk on two feet, while stepping, the weight on one heel would be getting less and the weight perhaps was absorbed from one tendon could be kept in mind. (Kaynak,O.2007, 2010) Other than that the bedrocks of lakes, rivers and seas are generally soft, and the weight on one foot could be absorbed by advanced Achille tendon. Soft grounds would spread the weight over the sole of the foot and lessen the weight on heel.If this living being, who is on two feet for 3-4 million years and still having primate heels, then it is not terrestrial. This living being is semi-aquatic and semi-arboreal. (Kaynak, O.2010).
In other words, it was climbing up the trees that do not have any fruit on them, only to sleep safely at nights and surviving on hunting and foraging sea food in shallow waters during day time.
PELVIS
The reason of the pelvis shaping like a bowl and correspondingly the rib cage becoming cylindrical and getting narrower, is the fact of being two footed and having a perpendicular body trunk. According to the obstetric hypothesis that is known until today, the pelvis took its shape so it could give birth to big skulled (brained) babies. (2), (3)
This hypothesis was ruled out when they found out that Au. sediba’s skull was small, which was a real concrete fact. (Kibii J.M. et al. 2011) Because its pelvis is like a bowl and very close to human pelvis, despite the fact that its skull volume is 420 cc.Infact the reason that its pelvis changed, looking like human pelvis, is not to give birth to big skulled babies but because of its bipedality. The main part that carries the body vertically on two feet is the pelvis. A pelvis like a chimpanzee's pelvis cannot carry the vertical body on two feet. (Kaynak, O. 2010, 2011, 2012) Prof Lee Berger and his team tell that Au. sediba is arboreal as well as terrestrial.(2) Their base is the characteristics that it has long arms like tree primates, shin bones like primates and the ankle and wrist joints close to primates.
If Au sediba could adapt to an arboreal and terrestrial life, its heel bone would be humanlike. It could be claimed that it went down to ground recently, but then one should ask when did its pelvis became like human? Because, for the pelvis to get the shape like a bowl, the being should have walked on two feet for so long and the trunk of the body should become upright in great proportion. Besides, this change process has started in Rift Valley 5-6 million years ago. The shape of the pelvis is a definite result of long time bipedality.
BRAIN
The cause of human brain growing bigger, is exactly around the same time, when Au sediba’s body trunk has reached enough erectness, thus the position of the embryo in the womb changed. After this moment the embryo adapted itself to vertical body trunk. At certain stage of vertical body, the position of the baby in womb has changed. The head turned towards birth channel as in all mammals, as supposed, the embryo of Australopithecus overturning180 degrees, changed the position of its head towards diaphragm and its body close to the birth channel. I call this MENTAL OVERTURNİNG (MENTİS EVERSİONİS). (Kaynak O.1983, 1998, 2007, 2008, 2010, 2011, 2012) What has happened all of a sudden? Has there been extraordinary environmental changes? (Carlson K.J. et al 2011) The answer to those questions is the mental overturning. The mental overturning triggered and started the growing of the skull and the changes in the jaw. After this mental overturning, each Australopithecus started giving birth to babies with skull volume bigger than hers. For this reason, when the Australopithecus fossils are examined, the erection of body trunk, cylindrical and narrower ribs are not understood, but only the skull enlargement has been observed. (Kaynak O. 2007, 2008)
TO DATE
The reason of meticulousness of dating is Au. sediba’s living 70-80 thousand years before Homo habilis and having the volume of 420cc skull whereas Homo habilis’s skull is of volume of 680-750 cc. (Pickering R.et al 2011)
The question should be, “How could the skull volume reach from 420 cc to 680-750 cc, whereas in 3-4 million years the skull volume reaches from 350 cc to 420 cc? The reason for this extraordinary and fast change is mental overturning.
HANDS
As a result of the enforcement of environmental conditions, the change in hands of a living being, taking this shape, due to walking on two feet in shallow waters, hunting and foraging seafood is not surprising. When living on the tree, this living being is foraging the fruit and putting it in its mouth. This does not require sophisticated hand manipulation. But when it was forced to feed on sea food, to forage shelled foods, carrying them, opening up the shell and eating it needs sophisticated hand manipulation. Moreover, the most important seafood, fish, has to be caught and carrying it requires the grabbing feature of the thumb to be improved (as in modern man). This “catching the fish by hand” should not be surprising, as it is known that bears catch fish with their mouths, eagles with their claws and in Sumatra, long tailed macaques catch with their long hands. (Steward et al 2008).Animals use their body parts and their bodies with higher skills and more functionally than human beings. Perhaps Au. sediba was exploring the fish nests underneath plant roots in shallow waters and catching fish with its hands. The teeth being this small and human like has to be considered as a result of eating all those sea food and fish.
Prof. Mark Maslin says that the Rift Valley was once covered with humongous lakes; still there are many lakes there, and those places where there are no lakes anymore, are the deposition of those humongous lake bottoms. He associates lakes with human’s evolution. In those 5-6 million years, he says that the lakes got smaller and widened, and the time when the lakes were wide and spacious was two million years ago from now, at the time of Homo breed started. (4)
The main fact that the fingers other than the thumb getting shorter is that the arboreal life style is no longer a decisive life style. (Kivell T.L. et al 2011) In other words, the living being climbs the tree for only to spend the night safely. We figure this out from the shape of its feet and pelvis anyway. So to speak, most of its day is spent on ground, in shallow waters walking on two feet. In short, to be able to feed from water, the thumb has to have an ability to grab and other fingers has to get shorter in order to grab comfortably. In other words, THESE HANDS ARE THE HANDS OF A FISHER-MAN.
In Au. sediba, the brain that is required together with the hand, in reality is the same as the big brain that is required with pelvis. But, what found is that, there is no big skull and brain in Au. sediba fossil. And this is a concrete case. Then, expected advanced skills of a required brain which should be present together with advanced hands, were endeavored to be loaded in this small brain. The data accepted until now that an advanced hand exists together with fully developed brain is wrong. Starting with this wrong info, caused looking for a functional or cognitive maturity in small brain.
Finds of Au. sediba fossils in past, under a water filled caves, should make one think that these were once caves at lake bottoms. The thought that the 13 individuals of Au sediba family found in Afar region of Ethiopia could have been drowned, was contributed from this fact. (4)
Starting from those wrong informations so far, there is a search for appropriate, sophisticated, manipulative, advanced brain. And with a new idea, defining that brain as “small but reorganized”, advanced brain for advanced hand point of view was put forth.
At this point we must ask, IF IT IS SMALL BUT REORGANIZED, IN OTHER WORDS, ALTHOUGH IT IS NOT EXACTLY LIKE THE MODERN HUMAN BRAIN AS WE KNOW, BUT WITH SOPHISTICATED FEATURES AND FUNCTIONS CLOSE TO HUMAN, AND CREATED AN ADVANCED HAND THAT IT CAN COMMAND, THEN WHY DID THE VOLUME OF ITS SKULL INCREASED LATER? Being concrete and perceptible, not having a big skull that is appropriate for pelvis was accepted and obstetric hypothesis was abandoned. Same attitude should be shown on Achille tendon subject, the reality should be accepted as is and that situation should be explained analytically. The same thing is valid for hand-brain relation. That has to be explained by analytic reason-result association.
Au sediba is the Rosetta Stone of human evolution. It is a fortune for human history and human science. It has to be studied correctly.
REFERENCES:
- Bernhard Zipfel, Jeremy M. DeSilva, Robert S. Kidd, Kristian J. Carlson, Steven E. Churchill, Lee R. Berger. The Foot and Ankle of Australopithecus sediba. Science 9 September 2011: 1417-1420. DOI:10.1126/science.1202703
- Job M. Kibii, Steven E. Churchill, Peter Schmid, Kristian J. Carlson, Nichelle D. Reed, Darryl J. de Ruiter, Lee R. Berger. A Partial Pelvis of Australopithecus sediba. Science 9 September 2011: 1407-1411. DOI:10.1126/science.1202521
- Kaynak O.1983 If a Mammalian Embryo is Implanted in Another Mammalian Uterus and is Given Birth to this Embryo What will Happen? Evcil Journal 5
- Kaynak O. 1998 Aktüel Journal 344: 50-53
- Kaynak O. 2007 How did Human Become Human? A New Suggestion. Cumhuriyet Bilim Teknoloji Journal 1058: 12-14
- Kaynak O. 2008 How did We Evolve in Our Current Situation? Cumhuriyet Bilim Teknoloji Journal 1129:2
- Kaynak O. 2010 IV. Symposium of Biological Anthropology, abstracts booklet 2
- Kaynak O. 2011 XI. International Symposium on ‘’Disorder Systems: Theory and Its Applications’’ : 15
- Kaynak O. 2012 XI. International Symposium on ‘’Disorder Systems: Theory and Its Applications’’ : 11
- Kristian J. Carlson, Dietrich Stout, Tea Jashashvili, Darryl J. de Ruiter, Paul Tafforeau, Keely Carlson, Lee R. Berger. The Endocast of MH1, Australopithecus sediba. Science 9 September 2011: 1402-1407. DOI:10.1126/science.1203922
- Manipulative Abilities. Science 9 September 2011: 1411-1417DOI:10.1126/science.1202625
- Meldrum D. Jeffrey . Journal of Scientific Exploration, Vol. 18, No. 1, pp. 65–79, 2004
- Robyn Pickering, Paul H. G. M. Dirks, Zubair Jinnah, Darryl J. de Ruiter, Steven E. Churchil, Andy I. R. Herries, Jon D. Woodhead, John C. Hellstrom, Lee R. Berger.Australopithecus sediba at 1.977 Ma and Implications for the Origins of the GenusHomo. Science 9 September 2011: 1421-1423. DOI:10.1126/science.1203697
No comments:
Post a Comment