Re: Aquatic ape theory

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: H. M. Hubey: "Re: Neanderthals horse or mule?"
• Previous message: Gerrit Hanenburg: "Re: First Family and AAT"

ronkanen@cc.Helsinki.FI (Osmo Ronkanen) writes:

>If the aquatic life bought bipedalism, then it must have happened some
>4-5 million years ago. If it also caused the loss of body hair, then why
>did the body hair not return when the aquatic life was over? If the body

don't know. Perhaps other developments made it unnecessary.
It was hot in Africa. It would seem that they'd need to have
less fur. As for warmth, I seem to remember reading that natives
(America??) were sleeping without any cover and their body
temperatures would stay high at night, instead of dropping like
those of now when we curl up in covers. So maybe they didn't
need it because they found a way to keep warm (i.e. fire) and
didn't need fur.

-- 



				Regards, Mark

				http://www.smns.montclair.edu/~hubey

• Next message: H. M. Hubey: "Re: Neanderthals horse or mule?"
• Previous message: Gerrit Hanenburg: "Re: First Family and AAT"