Re: Polar Bear Challenge for AAH opponents
Mon, 12 Dec 1994 18:19:58 EST
In article <1994Dec12.email@example.com>,
firstname.lastname@example.org (Phillip Bigelow) says:
>I would buy this argument, except for one glaring persistent problem:
>The proponents of the Aquatic Ape Theory have said, (time and time again),
>that there very well may be _no_ structural differences between
>"semi-aquaticness" and terrestrialism in hominids. If this is so, exactly
>what was it you propose to look for in the fossil record that will prove
>aquaticness in hominids? Hairlessness, sweat glands, and webbed appendages
>don't fossilize. If the Aquatic Ape proponents don't follow the scientific
>method and _tell_ us what , structurally, we should expect in our aquatic
>ancestors, then they are practicing psuedo-science; or tabloid science.
Well, I can suggest a find that would be pretty compelling evidence
for the AAH. Suppose that an australopithecus afarensis or similar
skeleton is found in the Danakil Alps, and dated to the period when
those mountains were an island or islands, a period for which there's
a gap in the hominid fossil record. If the skeleton is found in
what used to be the seashore, that's icing on the cake.
AAH opponents: Would you accept that as strong evidence for the AAH?
If not, why not?
Everyone: Is anyone digging for fossils in Eritrea?Is anyone
planning to do so?
Standard disclaimers apply.