From: rokimoto557@gmail.com   
      
   On 12/15/2025 8:14 PM, MarkE wrote:   
   > On 16/12/2025 3:24 am, RonO wrote:   
   >> On 12/15/2025 6:12 AM, MarkE wrote:   
   >>> Q2. You say "Major innovations are rare", but these are the driver of   
   >>> macroevolution. But how do these "major innovations" occur via many   
   >>> small steps?   
   >>>   
   >>> A. This is the right pressure point. If major innovations are both   
   >>> rare and essential for macroevolution, then a purely verbal appeal to   
   >>> “many small steps” is insufficient. The question becomes:   
   >>>   
   >>> What is the mechanism by which qualitatively new biological   
   >>> capacities arise via quantitatively small genetic changes, without   
   >>> collapsing fitness along the way?   
   >>>   
   >>> Below is the modern evolutionary answer, stated mechanistically, not   
   >>> rhetorically...   
   >>>   
   >>> https://chatgpt.com/s/t_693ffb26a698819184d0d92224b045b0   
   >>>   
   >>   
   >> What macro "major innovations" needed to occur between chimps and humans?   
   >>   
   >> We have all the same tissues and organs.  We have the same brain   
   >> parts, just brain size has changed.  We have all the same bones, but   
   >> they have changed their shape and size.  We are bipedal with a bent   
   >> and shortened hip, but that deformity may have initally been due to a   
   >> single gene defect with later modifications selected over time.  We   
   >> are still brachiating apes with shorter arms and longer legs (check   
   >> out gymnasts).   
   >>   
   >   
   > No. That assessment grossly understates the differences.   
   >   
   > For details, see my post "Chimp to human evolution - Sandwalk perspective".   
   >   
      
   Been there done that, and found nothing.  Why can't you state what macro   
   evolutionary changes had to occur?  No new bones, no new tissues or   
   organs, no new brain parts.  The hip was deformed, but how macro was   
   that?  It was just a survivable hip deformation that may have had a   
   selective advantage in climbing narrow enough tree trunks like you see   
   humans climbing coconut palms.  We can't find any major brain changes   
   except for the size of some brain parts.  Humans remain brachiating apes   
   with big brains.  The original apes that walked upright and had the hip   
   deformation still had ape feet and were likely mostly arboreal.   
   Australopithicine had more human like feet, but they were just upright   
   walking apes for the rest of their anatomy and still had arboreal limb   
   proportions (long arms and short legs).  Homo habilis had a larger brain   
   and the Homo parabolic jaw instead of the ape jaw, but still had   
   arboreal limb proportions.  The parabolic jaw likely evolved with the   
   reduction in the canine teeth because Homo no longer needed an extended   
   face to bite with to get their canines into play.  Homo erectus had a   
   larger brain, and during the evolution of that type eventually evolved a   
   brain size that was within the range of extant modern humans, and from   
   the neck down were essentially the same as modern humans except for   
   their ribs.  Their ribs still flared out over the hips like an ape   
   instead of tapering to the waste giving humans the hourglass figure   
   instead of the fire hydrant physique of Homo erectus and Neanderthal.   
   Where are the macro evolutionary changes, and why did they evolve by   
   smaller changes over time?   
      
   Ron Okimoto   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)