Perhaps like some of you, the first thing I wondered about was what their diet consisted of. And sure enough, they were mainly meat-eaters. But this is merely mentioned. Concerning their size, scientists think they got so small because they had limited food (like maybe fruit?) and fewer predators. And that makes sense, but...what else?
I automatically had to compare them to Homo ergaster, who--as most of you know--lived in Africa and were the first real nomads in history (which I like to keep in mind when I'm happily out walking every day
). They were slender, had long legs, about 6 ft tall, intelligent, and ate fruit all year round. (And this is from National Geographic, y'all, so obviously it's readily-available knowledge).But no one except RRM and Wai (at least not that I'm aware of) ever really seem to question how they evolved into such an impressive breed. When I search on the internet, all I read is that fire was invented 1.5 million years ago after which, oops, Homo ergaster disappeared. And (infuriatingly enough) these facts are not usually stated together. Why not?!
And scientists even acknowledge that the smaller forms of Homo erectus existing at the same time of 1.8-1.5 million years ago--like those found in Dmanisi, who were 4 ft tall and had small brains-- were big meat-eaters. How could a connection to fruit-based diet vs. protein diet not be totally obvious?
Could anyone shed some light on this? Or just want to vent with me?
Again, a case of scientists hiding the truth from us by not stating the obvious!
