There is no RationalWiki without you. We are a small non-profit with no staff—we are hundreds of volunteers who document pseudoscience and crankery around the world every day. We will never allow ads because we must remain independent. We cannot rely on big donors with corresponding big agendas. We are not the largest website around, but we believe we play an important role in defending truth and objectivity. |
Fighting pseudoscience isn't free. We are 100% user-supported! Help and donate $5, $10, $20 or whatever you can today with ![]() ![]() |
Talk:Endurance running hypothesis
Two cents[edit]
A good argument for is that two legs use less energy than four.
However, I can see problems with this. Most humans are not marathon runners - I suggest marathon runners are exceptional. Anyone who has tried to chase down an animal will know how hard it is. Especially when it changes direction suddenly.
Rather I think early humans probably stalked up to their prey and surprised it. A wounded/injured animal could be chased perhaps. I suggest humans are walkers who occasionally run.
Regarding hairlessness... many of the other runners of the animal world - horses, antelopes, cattle, ostriches, wolves, kangaroos (if you will) have significant fur/feathers over much of their body.
Also another significant issue is our feet. While they do harden, some of the foot is very vulnerable to injury by rocks and thorns, unlike ungulates etc. -Albannach (talk) 08:24, 11 April 2014 (UTC)