Talk:Bipedalism

message: RPG Hamaca  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 123.243.10.202 (talk) 11:19, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tool Use 

message: Can mention of Persistence hunting be made in this article?  It seems like a good way to compare the advantages of bipedal motion, particularly in relation to the disadvantages of quadripedal running and it's effect on thermoregulation in animals that must pant. Roidroid (talk) 13:08, 13 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Persistence hunting 

message: The section needs a simple statement informing readers about the absence of scientific standing for this "theory". If we remove that statement, then we need to remove Morgan's "theory" altogether, as per WP:UNDUE: "Generally, the views of tiny minorities should not be included at all, except perhaps in a "see also" to an article about those specific views. For example, the article on the Earth does not directly mention modern support for the Flat Earth concept, the view of a distinct minority; to do so would give undue weight to it." Morgan's "theory" is as credible as a flat earth "theory".
The problem here is one that has arisen in other articles, that the fringe belief has become popularised despite being held by no credible scientists. As a result it really should addressed in the article since it is clearly notable. But it can’t be simply added without comment because it is a fringe theory.Mark Marathon (talk) 02:33, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Morgan’s promotion of the influence of wading on human bipedalism is the issue in this article, not her general theory the status of which is discussed in the AAH article.  There is no consensus for removing reference to it, see above under "Aquatic ape hypothesis" changed to "Wading models". The claim sourced to  Meier that ("It is not accepted by or considered a serious theory within the anthropological scholarly community") belongs in that article not this one  though I note it is out of date with respect to her later work which has attracted renewed interest since the demise of the savannah hypothesis.  Your personal opinion of her work, which has been published , eg, in the New Scientist, or of its status in the scientific community as on a level with flat earth theory is uniformed prejudice. Almanacer (talk) 11:06, 11 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Morgan's Aquatic Ape 

message: All quoted hypotheses do not address the issue of the appropriate control of the newly emerging posture. They take for granted the ability to control upright bipedal locomotion with additional trunk rotations and head, eye and forelimb movements. To perform locomotion and assume a certain posture, the basic condition (conditio sine qua non) is to ensure the stability of the body. In a recently published article: Significance of adequate postural control in the appearance of habitual upright bipedal locomotion, Sekulic et al. Medical Hypotheses 2012; 79: 564-71 new hypothesis was published. Analysis of qualitative indicators of stability of the body during different types of locomotion in primates suggests that bipedal locomotion is not variation of some other type of locomotion. Transition from quadrupedal to bipedal locomotion is accompanied by a qualitative difference in body stability. Because of assuming an upright bipedal posture, the center of mass is lifted, the surface of the base of support is reduced, and the body structure does not provide passive stability in relation to moments of force of the body around Y-axis (quadrupedal mammals already loosed stability provided by body construction around X and Z axis) . Additional head movements, trunk rotations, forelimb manipulations with objects and surveying the surroundings are necessary for survival, but they increase the degree of freedom of movement and further complicate the task of maintaining balance in the case of a postural change from erect quadrupedal to erect bipedal. This article presents a hypothesis that the transition from quadrupedal to habitual upright bipedal locomotion was caused by qualitative changes in the nervous system that allowed controlling the more demanding type of locomotion. The ability to control a more demanding posture increases possibilities of interactions between the organism and the complex environment and consequently increases the survival rate, breeding possibilities, and chances for occupying a new environmental niche. Existing data show that ability to execute the more demanding type of locomotion was made possible because of changes in the frontal lobe and pyramidal system. Only after the more demanding posture was enabled by changes in the nervous system, could advantages of bipedal over quadrupedal locomotion be utilized, including better scanning of the environment, carrying food and infants, simultaneous upper extremity movements and observation of the environment, limitless manipulation of objects with upper extremities above the individual, and less space for rotating around the Z-axis. The aforementioned advantages of habitual bipedal over quadrupedal locomotion are present in physically complex environments, such as the forest, which is associated with the appearance of habitual bipedal locomotion.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sekulic1965 (talk • contribs) 08:07, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Regardless of the merits or flaws of this idea, until there is evidence (not just a hypothesis), it cannot be included. HCA (talk) 18:28, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Increased capabilities of postural/locomotor neural control - new hypothesis

message: I think that in the Savannah Based Theory section it would be worth mentioning something about how bipedalism in the savannah would have helped regulated body temperature by reducing the surface area of the body exposed to the hot savannah sun.
The section of the Savannah theory that talks about the fossils having curved fingers suggesting bipedalism adapted to arboreal life could be its own section.  In that section it could be mentioned that the arboreal bipedalism could have evolved from upright running in the trees aided by using the arms to grasp braches for balance.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pallotta.8 (talk • contribs) 23:05, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm not sure it should be phrased that way - as you point out, the human foot as a lot of roles, but the same could be said for the foot of a turkey or lizard, and you could easily say those those roles are required for any effective locomotory limb in any species.  The referenced article, in contrast, is more about elastic energy storage and recovery as a specific adaptation in human feet. HCA (talk) 14:12, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Savannah Based Theory  

message: I had a couple of suggestions for this article. First, while this is over the evolution of bipedalism in general, I think this article could talk more in depth about the specific lineages and evolutions leading up to bipedalism in humans as well as after. Also, the evolution of sexual dimorphism/lumbar spine that accompanied bipedalism could be made into its own paragraph in this article. It is only briefly mentioned. Lastly, the theories as to why amphibians and reptiles never developed bipedalism could be added to the respective sections within this page. -Sam Stephensen
:Agreed, though the last point is only correct of amphibians - the page already lists many examples of bipedal reptiles, including lizards, parareptiles, and *tons* of archosaurs (including dinosaurs, birds, and non-dinosaurian archosaurs).  HCA (talk) 14:20, 1 October 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Be extremely careful about #1.  "Efficiency" has a very specific definition, namely the fraction of input energy converted to useful output energy, and within biomechanics that usually means the ratio of external work to muscle chemical energy consumed.  Two organisms can have different Net Cost of Transport (as measured by either respirometry or isotope methods), but the same muscular efficiency. HCA (talk) 14:15, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: Good to know,thank you for the advice!  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ondrejech.1 (talk • contribs) 00:47, 28 October 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Suggestions

message: This article could also include the evolutionary concepts that this subject relates to. 
#To begin with, the development of the human foot has happened over millions of years which coincides with Darwin’s theory of gradualism. Our foot is the result of many years of change that occurred at a very slow rate. 
#The development of the foot also had to be evolutionary advantageous or else it would not have been naturally selected for. Hominids who started walking most likely were able to give themselves and their offspring more resources to better survive because they developed new behaviors from traveling terrestrially such as hunting. 
#The need to run was most likely naturally selected for as well; the stronger more propulsive foot was proven beneficial. Whether it was being able to run away from predators or chase after prey, the ability to run must have been very important because we can see it in the way the foot is designed. It most likely gave the organisms a better chance of survival, in which they were then able to reproduce and pass off their beneficial traits to their offspring. 
#Another concept that this evolutionary adaptation goes along with is that of common descent. Even though it is a controversial topic, scientific research has proven that we have a shared ancestry with apes. The Hominidae include orangutans, gorillas, chimpanzees, bonobos and humans; our most recent ancestor are chimpanzees. This group which includes humans are referred to as the great apes. The divergence between humans and the last common ancestor is now estimated to be eight to ten million years ago. 
As Francois Jacob wrote, “evolution is a tinker not an engineer”. Evolution did not suddenly produce organisms, organisms emerged from the genetic variation that was present in the already existing gene pool (National Academy of Sciences). 
*Evolution tinkered with the genetic information it already had available and over time new organisms and adaptations emerge from preexisting ones. You can see this with the present day human foot. 
*You have five toes which are all in line with each other. Evolution took what used to be a diverged big toe used for grasping or manipulation and eventually after “tinkering” that toe was better placed when in line with the other toes in order for the organism to walk better. Also, the toes are shorter. The decreased need for grasping objects with the feet over time selected for toes that were not used for that. Keeping in mind though we still possess some flexibility, which is important for the mechanism of walking; you can flex your toes up and down. The hands however are used for the same original purpose, so tinkering with them was not as necessary as they were and are still used today for grasping and manipulation of objects. Also, one can deduce why the need for the foot to evolve to the way it is today by watching someone walk on their hands. It proves to us that the design is not as efficient. You can still walk on your hands and move forward and backward, but supporting your body weight for an extended period of time and balance proves to be more difficult.
National Academy of Sciences. Teaching about Evolution and the Nature of Science. Washington, DC: National Academy, 1998. Print.
Koporc.3 (talk) 20:37, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggestions-CK 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Bipedalism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20140425104733/http://scienceblogs.com/tetrapodzoology/2008/04/functional_anatomy_part_i.php to http://scienceblogs.com/tetrapodzoology/2008/04/functional_anatomy_part_i.php#more
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 15:45, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Bipedalism. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130923184429/http://lemur.duke.edu/category/diurnal-lemurs/coquerels-sifaka/ to http://lemur.duke.edu/category/diurnal-lemurs/coquerels-sifaka/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071030202619/http://www.wildlifetimes.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=601 to http://www.wildlifetimes.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=601
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:17, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Bij most bipedal animals, including humans the knee bends forward. However by birds the knee bends backward. I see no mention of this.Smiley.toerist (talk) 11:01, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry. birds have 'normal' knees but they are invisible and wat we see bend the wrong way are the ancles. Smiley.toerist (talk) 11:13, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Knee bending 

message: Bipedalism 70.70.230.22 (talk) 14:30, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bipedalism 

message: Definition incorrect: the Ostrich is not a tetrapod, though considered a biped. Gil_mo (talk) 07:24, 19 October 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  “where a tetrapod moves” 

message: About the Limited bipedalism in mammals section.
Raccoons also rarely walk on their forelimbs:
https://twitter.com/CameraTrapSue/status/1772329198645809482?s=19
https://twitter.com/CameraTrapSue/status/1772278606640644351?s=19
I'm not sure how to incorporate this into the article, but I'd appreciate it if anyone that feels qualified would take a shot. Aveaoz (talk) 22:06, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Raccoon ability of walking on forelimbs