Re: Giant denisovans


alandarwinvanarsdale
 

Denisovans known as fossils with the possible exception of the new one from SE Asia (single tooth) were very robust. The one skull fragment is twice as thick as an extant human. Their teeth were very large compared to neanderthals and extant humans. This does not suggest they were tall (limb bones are not known except one juvenile finger bone). It does reveal they were heavy bodied. Paranthropus also had large teeth, probably for eating coarse vegetation in times of drought, and they were not particularly large bodied. ______________________________________________________________________________________________________Known denisovan fossils with one exception lived in cold places (Far North and high elevation). There is no reason to think their aquatic abilities were high. Penghu (Homo tsaichangensis) was found in what was beach areas of Taiwan, and appears to have heavy tooth wear from eating sandy clams. So was likely marine adapted. 


On Sun, Aug 28, 2022 at 10:44 AM Jack D.Barnes <needininfo@...> wrote:
Cool stuff Francesca,
So Denisovan, early Neanderthal and Heidlebergensis (specifically Maurer Jaw) all had teeth larger than modern humans.  Heavier brow and keel.  Heavy bones from high trabecular bone density. 

Our ancestor was Bigger, Stronger, Sturdier and Faster than the modern (domesticated) human.  Our Gracile bones are also seen in domesticated animals.

There are a number of other apes in Asia that became huge, (G. blacki, Meganthropus) so to think our ancestors were also huge, maybe 8’ tall bipedal human shaped apes makes senses. 

 1/2 of the human population is from this small geographic circle.


-Jack


> On Aug 28, 2022, at 9:29 AM, fceska_gr via groups.io <f-ceska=odysseysailing.gr@groups.io> wrote:
>
> I've been looking for a while for confirmation that Denisovans were giants, but the scientific community has not been vocal about that. I wondered why. Now it seems they just can't handle it, so they downplay it.
>
> Denisovans, as is also known from genome comparisons with living Tibetans, seemed to have low oxygen requirements. This, their large size, and evidence of them in Siberia, China, Oceania/Polynesia, would likely indicate that they were far more aquatic than our own ancestors. They may have been oceanic swimmers and deep water divers maybe with seafaring /boat building knowhow.
>
> https://megalithicmarvels.com/2022/08/21/giant-tooth-discovered-in-siberian-cave-vindicates-ancient-tradition-of-giants/?blogsub=confirming#subscribe-blog
>
>
>
>
>


--
Welcome to the Aquatic Ape Theory Discussion Group





Join AAT@groups.io to automatically receive all group messages.