|
Re: Aquatic ape theoryThomas Clarke (clarke@acme.ist.ucf.edu)5 Oct 1995 12:45:31 GMT
In article <44ajv5$9m@newsbf02.news.aol.com> uropiate@aol.com (UrOpiate)
Another prime example of the literary/scientific style clash.
> This Aquatic Ape Theory..is anyone of its proponenets or originators
Then you don't understand creationism and what it is trying to accomplish.
> What is it attempoting to
The transition of common ancestor to human-like hominid.
>..And where lies the evidence. There is physical evidence for
This is also evidence for the AAT. Where are the half-bipedal bones?
> There is geological evidence for a Savannah
There is geological evidence for isolated islands as a result of
> And the insistance on refering to early primates as apes is
No, just literary style.
>just as it would be to them human. All primates share common
Perhaps a course in English literature would be useful :-)
Tom Clarke
|