Moving target? NO target... was re:Aquatic elephants.

Bill Burnett (
Thu, 19 Oct 1995 15:34:21

In article <465k8i$> writes:

> (Bill Burnett) wrote:

>>However, I think I've demonstrated that the APT (Aquatic Pachyderm Theory)
>>is far from settled either, which is all I set out to achieve.

>Good call! I accept that sea-cows and elephants don't share a marine

>But I don't accept that elephants don't have a marine ancestor. It doen't
>have to share one with sea-cows for this to be true.

>James Borrett.

Right, that's it, I quit. I refuted the only pro-marine elephant hypothesis I
could find but it wasn't enough. I refuse to waste my time further until you
show me some evidence and give me something to shoot at. And give me
something GOOD. Something other than the anecdotal ramblings of Messrs.
Lockley et al. and their tragic weeping seals. We don't do science like that
any more. I -personally- can give you better anecdotal evidence than that.
And I indicate when my evidence is anecdotal, and I don't present it as
-science-, merely observation. I sincerely hope. How about something in a
refereed journal?

--Ironic mode on-- (just to make absolutely sure... :-))

Clearly the evidence indicates elephants have some other marine ancestor, how
else did mammoths lose their hair after all. Hey, so did everything else,
even the ones that didn't lose their hair. But not the ones that don't
cry when they're upset. They came from space. How did they find the earth
you ask? The hairy proto-dugongs waved their little hands.

--Ironic mode off--