http://www.nature.com/news/2007/070115/full/070115-9.html

He suggests that a reason
for this increase could have been the energy saved by having longer legs.

"Rich Travsky" <traRvEsky@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
news:45BFA590.85310E6B@hotmMOVEail.com...

http://www.nature.com/news/2007/070115/full/070115-9.html

He suggests that a reason
for this increase could have been the energy saved by having longer legs.

Crap.

Does anyone ever think of applying this kind of
'reasoning' to other species?

Species X evolved feature X1 to save itself energy.

How many can you name?

It's the sheer mindlessness that gets me . . . and
the endless repetition . . . and the absence of ANY
other possible reason. It's the endless taste of
vanilla. This is the ONE 'safe' explanation to which
no one will object.

Can't they come up with something a little bit more
imaginative?

Sorry, silly question.

Species X evolved feature X1 to save itself energy.

How many can you name?

It's the sheer mindlessness that gets me . . . and
the endless repetition . . . and the absence of ANY
other possible reason. It's the endless taste of
vanilla. This is the ONE 'safe' explanation to which
no one will object.

Can't they come up with something a little bit more
imaginative?

Sorry, silly question.

Paul.

At what point, Pauly, in your long history of being
shot down

"MClark" <m...@work.com> wrote in messagenews:d76dnYpo5ZdRSlzYnZ2dnUVZ_tijnZ2d@comcast.com...
At what point, Pauly, in your long history of being
shot down

Mikey, can you tell me the last time I was 'shot down'?

Or even any time?

Paul.

http://www.nature.com/news/2007/070115/full/070115-9.html

How much energy does it take to move around? You might think it obvious that
animals with long legs would use up less energy covering a given distance than
would those with short legs.

But how much leg length determines the energetic
costs of walking or running is hotly debated by scientists.

A mathematical model developed by Herman Pontzer of Washington University in St
Louis, Missouri, sheds light on the question, and may even provide an answer to
why our ancestors evolved longer legs than their predecessors some two million
years ago.

The main cost of running or walking comes from the force needed to support the
animal's stance. Scientists know that bodyweight plays a big role in determining
this force. But what about other physical factors?

Pontzer used basic physics principles to predict how running speed and leg length
would affect the forces exerted by an animal. Longer legs, for example, reduce the
amount of up-and-down movement in a stride, and so also reduce the force needed to
push down with each step. From the total force predicted for a given animal, he
could calculate an expected energy use.

To see how well this model works, he put some people, goats and dogs on a treadmill
in his lab, and worked out their energy usage by measuring how much oxygen remained
in their exhaled air after a stint of exercise. The reality matched up very nicely
with his model, he reports in The Journal of Experimental Biology.
...
The model could also offer anthropologists a new way to study energy use in our
ancient ancestors. "The fossil record shows that two million years ago, there was a
big increase in leg length in early humans," says Pontzer. He suggests that a reason
for this increase could have been the energy saved by having longer legs.

On Feb 2, 9:01 am, "Paul Crowley"

slkwuoiutiuytciu...@slkjlskjoioue.com> wrote:
"MClark" <m...@work.com> wrote in messagenews:d76dnYpo5ZdRSlzYnZ2dnUVZ_tijnZ2d@comcast.com...
At what point, Pauly, in your long history of being
shot down

Mikey, can you tell me the last time I was 'shot down'?

Or even any time?

Paul.

Paul, no one can tell you *anything*. But if it's any consolation,
you're not as stupid as Jim...

Ross Macfarlane