Re: Ok, so you want AAH. ..

5121 Student 09 (
29 Apr 1994 01:29:16 -0400

>Morgan's and Hardy's version of the aquatic ape make use of sea
>shore environments. None of the earliest hominid fossils are found
>in association with ocean deposits.

Actually the entire Rift Vally was either underwater or a salt water
marsh at least 7 time during the period of interest.

>A theory is, by definition, an explanation that has been extensively
>tested and has not been disproven. Clearly the AA stuff is not a
>theory, which is why I usually change it to AAH. The point is that
>we have evidence for a transition from arboreal, forest dwelling ape
>to bipedal savannah hominid. We KNOW that transition took place.

Clearly, by the same argument, the savannah theory is not a theory.

>Lacking fossil evidence, AAH proponents
>must go to secondary evidence

Lacking fossil evidence, savannah proponents must go to
secondary evidence - finding fossils near water on the savannah.

>If you are going
>to argue that a suite of traits emerged in association with a
>particular adaptation you have to show that they evolved together.
>The aquatic ape supporters do not do this.

If you are going to argue that a suite of traits emerged in
association with a particular adaptation you have to show that
they evolved together. The savannah ape supporters do not do this.

>As to heat absorption, the point that Wheeler makes is that bipedal
>posture reduces the amount of body surface exposed to the sun. He
>has built models and measured this.

He also has a well built model to explain that water cools much
faster than sweat. But, of course man was only hot enough to become
the only biped mammal. He wasn't hot enough to get in the water
like millions of mammals before him.

>All primates make babies, yet all female primates do not undergo this
>change in fat distribution at puberty. There is not biological
>reason for a woman to store fat for reproduction until she becomes

No, but it sure helps her and the baby float better.

>>>Floating infants
>>Infants tend to drown easily.
>True, if you leave a baby face down in a puddle of water they'll
>drown. If you throw an inexperienced infant in a pool, panic and
>drowning will likely occur. However! It _is_ possible for babies to
>float easily in the water.

Not only possible - its impossible for a healthy baby *not* to float
placed any which way in water over it's head.

>I don't think that this is a really good argument for the AAH, but it
>isn't incorrect.

Well, if you think it's no good, that's good enough for me.
I know floating babies would really be a big advantage on that savannah.
Yes sir, those babies could float all day in the dirt.

Let's also conveniently ignore the disadvantage of hairlessness.
Fat sweaty hairless babies are slippery. In the water a dropped
baby floats - on the savannah a dropped baby is lunch.

>Our nostrils point down because compared to apes our face is not
>prognathic -- it doesn't stick out. Take a look at a mandrill's
>nose some time. Mandrill's are a good chose because they have very
>long snouts and the nose is set off by coloration on the snout.

What is your point again?

>>>enlarged complex brain
>>The fossil record clearly shows that the brain did not enlarge,
>>relative to body size, or become significantly more complex until
>>Homo habilis. Australopithecus afarensis has a very small brain.

Please explain to me why this is significant.

>I have posted specific reasons WHY I don't accept AAH arguments.

Yes, but you have never posted a specific theory that you do accept.
Come on buddy, let's hear this scientifically sound theory of yours.

>Aquatic life doesn't explain bipedalism. It's not my world view. If
>you are going to argue convergent evolution, which is essentially
>what the aquatic ape stuff is, you need an animal that shows a
>convergent morphology.

I have argued for three weeks that man spent time in the water and
I never once mentioned convergent evolution. Why do you keep
repeating it?

>Show me a semi-aquatic mammal that has
>evolved bipedalism.

Show me any mammal that has evolved bipedalism. This is not an

> Why is it that when japanese macaques or
>proboscus monkeys enter the water they are not bipeds, even though
>the are hindlimb dominant?

Likewise baboons?

> Show me evidence that bipedalism improves
>stablility in the water?

Why? No one ever claimed it did. You seemed to be setting up
a straw man here. Bipedalism does not improve stability in water,
water improves the ability to stand bipedaly.

>Why didn't the aquatic ape undergo
>reduction in the thickness of the pelvic bone or limb reduction?

Because he wasn't swimming, he was cooling off.

>> I get the feeling that you're just trying to bully the AAH
>> discussers away like you did last time.
>Yeah, right. I'm bad to the bone.
>So tell me, Bryce, what about the AAH do you find so convincing?

So tell me, Bryce, what about P.Nicolls theory do you find so
convincing? Oh, right, we still don't know what it is.

My [patiently waiting] 2 cents.
David Greene