Re: Polar Bear Challenge for AAH opponents
Rod Hagen (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Mon, 12 Dec 1994 23:28:29 +1000
In article <email@example.com>, firstname.lastname@example.org (Phil
> The problem with the "aquatic ape hypothesis" is that when you try to
> pin the proponents down it goes from "aquatic apes" to "semi-aquatic"
> apes to eventually "occasional-dip-in-the-pool apes" and eventually
> "dry-cleaned apes." Since none of the evidence is based on skeletal
> biology there is no way to disprove it so it becomes the perfect
> example of a "waterproof" (excuse the pun) hypothesis, very much
> like "intelligent design" used by the creationists on talk.origins.
Now hang on there Phillip. I'm prepared to be an
"occasional-dip-in-the-pool ape" (Its 11.30 at night and still around
30degrees celsius in Melbourne tonight). I'd even like to be a
"semi-aquatic" ape (haven't had the canoe out for far too long). But I'm
damned if I'll ever be a "dry-cleaned ape". Its the chemicals you see.
Play havock with the sinuses.
I wonder whether our allegedly aquatic ancestors went all wrinkly too if
they stayed too long in the tub?