Guide for anti-AATers
14 Oct 1995 10:13:18 GMT
If you guys are really fed up with talking about AAT here, I'll agree to
shut up about it if you can convince me that the following three points
are irrelevant or can be better explained.
1) Humans and elephants are the only land animals that weep when they are
upset. This feature is shared with examples of marine birds, marine
reptiles and seals, and elephants and sea-cows are thought to share a
marine ancestor. Chimpanzess get just as upset as humans do, and have
complicated social relations which would benefit from having suching a
signal as crying, but they don't do it. Human stress-related hormones
aren't any more toxic or harder to excrete than chimpanzee ones, so why
should we have evolved this excretion route for their break-down
products? Is it just coincidence that so many marine species cry? I'll
give up on this if someone finds an animal with no signs of an aquatic
past that sheds tears when upset.
2) Where did our ancesters get the extra Omega 3 fatty acids needed in
the diet for brain growth? From the marine food chain, perhaps? I'll give
up on this if you manage to find one human being with a normal,
functioning brain who has never eaten any seafood.
3) This one I know will not be accepted by you guys, but I don't believe
that all of the modifications needed for language could have happened
overnight. A descended larynx, Broca's area and Wernicke's area are all
needed for speech, and only one or two of the three is not enough.
Something must have caused the development of at least one of these
features before speech was possible. A nice explanation of this is that
the larynx descended and Broca's area gave us greater breath-control for
diving purposes. Provide a nicer one and I'll give in.
I think that these are the three most convincing points of AAT and if
you're going to falsify it here is where you should aim.