Re: Bipedalism

[zenlizard@juno.com]

On Tue, 31 Mar 1998 21:09:10 -0600 Rob Meyerson writes:
>I was thinking about this last night and had another idea.  Virtually
all  extant arboreal >animals are "forced quadrepeds" (for lack of a
better term).  Whether it is a sloth, an >iguana, or a spider monkey,
these critters have all their limbs grasping the branches >(tails
included for the monkey).  This makes a great deal of sense; every limb
that >has contact with the tree reduces the animals chances of falling. 
I wonder if  >bipedalism would be a detriment, and possibly fatal, for an
arboreal animal
While there is some intuivite reasoning about the above quote, I dispute 
the phrasing  "virtually all".  Give me a species count on how many
arboreal animals are quadrupedal vs how many are bipedal or totally
limbless (remember, there are numerous arboreal snakes, some of which
glide), and I'll accept this.  The  conclusion, that bipedalism would be
a detriment to an arboreal lifestyle, however, remains in serious doubt.
-zenlizard

Is it better to be half-assed or biased?
n=4