Re: Polar Bear Challenge for AAH opponents

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: Pat Dooley: "Re: AAH: humans long-distance runners?"
• Previous message: Pat Dooley: "Re: Polar Bear Challenge for AAH opponents"
• Maybe in reply to: Sir CPU: "Polar Bear Challenge for AAH opponents"
• Next in thread: Rod Hagen: "Re: Polar Bear Challenge for AAH opponents"

In article <3c2vbe$ans@uqcspe.cs.uq.oz.au>, gwat@cs.uq.oz.au (Geoffrey
Watson) writes:

They are arguing that certain identifiable featrures in modern human
anataomy and behaviour can be best be explained by an aquatic stage in
human evolution. However the ecological niche usually suggested for this
phase does not seem to me to be much more ``aquatic'' than the polar
bear's. This being so, it would NOT give rise to permanent and
identifiable traces in the ancestral populations.

-----
Your missing the point. First, the polar bear does show some equatic
adaptations, but very few. So your statement " This being so, it would NOT
give rise to permanent and identifiable traces in the ancestral
populations." is wrong.

Secondly, the point is, if a polar bear can be aquatic, with very few
aquatic adaptations, then why can't hominids?

• Next message: Pat Dooley: "Re: AAH: humans long-distance runners?"
• Previous message: Pat Dooley: "Re: Polar Bear Challenge for AAH opponents"
• Maybe in reply to: Sir CPU: "Polar Bear Challenge for AAH opponents"
• Next in thread: Rod Hagen: "Re: Polar Bear Challenge for AAH opponents"