Re: AAT: I just rediscovered my news filter

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: Phil Nicholls: "Re: fossil foot bones"
• Previous message: Phil Nicholls: "Re: Body Hair Loss in Aquatic Mammals"
• Maybe in reply to: Domingo Martinez-Castilla: "AAT: I just rediscovered my news filter"
• Next in thread: David L Burkhead : "Re: AAT: I just rediscovered my news filter"

In article <45lna6$a2s@scotsman.ed.ac.uk> jamesb@hgu.mrc.ac.uk writes:
>agdndmc@mizzou1.missouri.edu (Domingo Martinez-Castilla) wrote:

>>this AAT thing is getting incredible proportions, well beyond the relevance of
>>the topic. Why is it so important? Because some interested people are pushing
>>it where apparently there are less resistance, namely this news group. They may
>>be right or not,

>Well when someone comes up with a vaild objection to the theory that
>rings true, then I guess people will shut up about AAT. Noone has done
>this yet.

The primary objection to the aquatic ape theory is that there is no
evidence to support it. If that is not a valid objection, if that
does not "ring true" then I rather doubt that anything will.

Phil Nicholls pnich@globalone.net
"To ask a question you must first know most of the answer"
-Robert Sheckley

• Next message: Phil Nicholls: "Re: fossil foot bones"
• Previous message: Phil Nicholls: "Re: Body Hair Loss in Aquatic Mammals"
• Maybe in reply to: Domingo Martinez-Castilla: "AAT: I just rediscovered my news filter"
• Next in thread: David L Burkhead : "Re: AAT: I just rediscovered my news filter"