|
|
Part-time waders
(no name) ((no email))
8 Jul 1995 15:37:05 GMT
Like many controversial theories, the AAT seems to have made a clean split
between proponents and opponents. I don't think it's unreasonable to consider
that perhaps a swampy, or seasonally swampy, environment could have
contributed to bipedalism. I think the opposition to the AAT results from the
AAT claiming that an aquatic environment was *the* factor in the development
of bipedalism. Could it not have been *a* factor? Perhaps the apes lived in a
very wet environment, but there was enough dry ground that they weren't
forced to go into the water a lot. *But* maybe the ones who did go in the
water gained access to resources that the others didn't. Eventually, the best
waders would be the best survivors. Maybe I'm ignorant of some key
information, but this sounds plausible to me.
So we could have a sifaka-like ape who's enticed into wading in water. This
would modify the nature of its bipedalism over time. Well, OK, maybe they
weren't like sifakas, but the wading part sounds good. If this sifaka theory
ever gains support, though, I want you to remember where you heard it first!
Dave B.
|