Re: Polar Bear Challenge for AAH opponents

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: Gerold Firl: "Re: The Anthroplogy of the New World"
• Previous message: Rod Hagen: "Re: AAH: humans long-distance runners?"
• Maybe in reply to: Sir CPU: "Polar Bear Challenge for AAH opponents"
• Next in thread: Eric S.: "Re: Polar Bear Challenge for AAH opponents"

In article <3c2g5q$7l6@newsbf01.news.aol.com>, sircpu@aol.com (Sir CPU) wrote:

>
> Therfore, it is virtually impossible to prove, beyond a shadow of a doubt,
> that humans have never been aquatic, because it really only takes a
> relatively SMALL number of adaptations to be aquatic. In this case, the
> burden of proof is really on the AAH opponents.
>

Why? What you are saying effectively is that the question is not at
present genuinely answerable. This, I would have thought, would move the
status of the theory out of the realm of science and closer to that of
theology!

-- 

Rod Hagen

rodhagen@insanity.apana.org.au

Rod_Hagen@maccontent.apana.org.au

• Next message: Gerold Firl: "Re: The Anthroplogy of the New World"
• Previous message: Rod Hagen: "Re: AAH: humans long-distance runners?"
• Maybe in reply to: Sir CPU: "Polar Bear Challenge for AAH opponents"
• Next in thread: Eric S.: "Re: Polar Bear Challenge for AAH opponents"