Xref: utzoo sci.bio:1018 soc.men:3105
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!bbn!rochester!PT.CS.CMU.EDU!sei!sei.cmu.edu!firth
From: firth@sei.cmu.edu (Robert Firth)
Newsgroups: sci.bio,soc.men
Subject: Re: sexual selection and investment
Message-ID: <4736@aw.sei.cmu.edu>
Date: 24 Mar 88 20:43:41 GMT
References: <1988Mar13.160941.22096@utzoo.uucp> <25527@cca.CCA.COM> <2403@saturn.ucsc.edu> <25669@cca.CCA.COM> <1125@3comvax.3Com.Com>
Sender: netnews@sei.cmu.edu
Reply-To: firth@bd.sei.cmu.edu.UUCP (Robert Firth)
Organization: Carnegie-Mellon University, SEI, Pgh, Pa
Lines: 10

In article <1125@3comvax.3Com.Com> michaelm@3comvax.UUCP (Michael McNeil) writes:

>I might also add that since our closest living relatives are the
>gorillas and chimpanzees, which are much more markedly dimorphic,
>humans most probably lost much dimorphism during our evolution.  

Well, since both pongos and chimpanzees are more highly differentiated
than humans (and read that as "more evolved" if you wish), it is not
impossible that the opposite is the case - that they have gained
some dimorphism rather than that we have lost some.