Did humans come from the seas instead of the trees ?

[dipsydoodle]

Full headline : Did humans come from the seas instead of the trees? Much-derided theory of evolution about aquatic apes is debated in London.



Scientists, academics and medics gather this week in a London hotel to discuss a topic that has been virtually unmentionable in academic circles for decades: are humans descended from “aquatic apes” that spent more time swimming than dragging their knuckles on the ground?

The last time this question was asked, at a conference in 1992, there was much scoffing and ridicule. Other academics sneered and Bernard Levin wrote a full-page article lampooning the idea in a national newspaper.

This week’s conference, Human Evolution Past, Present and Future – Anthropological, Medical and Nutritional Considerations, at the Grange St Paul’s Hotel, has also already been the subject of much derision. Followers of the conventional and overwhelmingly accepted belief that our ancestors were very much land-based are launching a parody campaign online to argue we evolved from “space monkeys”. Most scientists will openly scoff at the idea of us deriving from water-bound primates.

But, perhaps emboldened by the presence of Sir David Attenborough – who was booked to attend the conference for one session but asked at the last minute if he could attend both days – the aquatic ape theorists are back.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/did-humans-come-from-the-seas-instead-of-the-trees-muchderided-theory-of-evolution-about-aquatic-apes-is-debated-in-london-8608288.html

[Ichingcarpenter]

1. I remember this debate years ago

Last edited Thu May 9, 2013, 06:52 AM - Edit history (1)

I never thought there was enough marshland for this evolutionary development.

I thought this argument was drown in the swamp of stupidity years ago.

I think I even read the book that came out with this years ago and wondered how it got published and promoted.




Reading
Desmond Morris, 'the naked ape' got me started with my anthropological interests in high school




So I started reading everything related ever since.

[dipsydoodle]

2. I recall reading that whales did the opposite

Oldest whale fossil confirms amphibious origins .

The fossilised jawbone of the oldest whale yet discovered has confirmed the theory that the giant sea mammals' ancestors were amphibians. They rested and reproduced on land but dived into rivers and the ocean to fish for food.

The jawbone, complete with teeth, is 53.5m years old - 3.5m years older than previous record holder - and was found in the Simla Hills of northern India.

>

Scientists believed that whales evolved from land-living animals which were tempted to return to the ocean by the plentiful supply of fish in the now-disappeared Tethys ocean.

The researchers, from the University of Roorke, India and the University of Michigan, USA, analysed the newly discovered teeth and found the chemical composition was halfway between values expected for fresh and marine water.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/239966.stm

[zazen]

3. why do anthropologists have such paradigm anxiety?

They're even more vicious than linguists about their grand theories.

People who proposed Neanderthal/Homo Sapiens Sapiens inbreeding were mocked for decades too.

I get scholarly disagreeing, if people are respectful about it. But the vociferousness of these attacks on other theoretical positions strikes me as odd in a field where by definition entire theories hinge on a particular (and random) discovery of a fossil (and can change with a new finding.) It seems like if one's theoretical position could be that quickly discredited, one might be a little more humble about it.

That said, I remember reading The Aquatic Ape and parts were intriguing and parts seemed oversold, but it did always raise some questions that didn't seem adequately addressed by other theories.

But I'm a layperson, so I'll refrain from judgment.

[darkangel218]

6. Ill still go with the alien theory.

I think whatever primitive species was here, they were genetically modified by aliens and we're the progenies

That's cuz i have a big head and skinny arms

I have to be an alien :p

[Posteritatis]

8. Anthropology's particularly sensitive because of all the pseudoscience flying around

I've got a couple friends in archaeology who try not to mention what they actually do around strangers much, because they start getting inundated with questions that you'd have to be a von Daniken fan to ask in the first place, stuff like that.

[darkangel218]

4. So we are fishies? :p

First I tought we came from monkeys. Then the guy with the crazy hair convienced me we came from aliens. Now they're saying we come from fishes? :/

Weeeeeee!,



Don't get mad at me for I am dorkly.

[greiner3]

5. The Aquatic Ape Hypothesis (AAH);

Asks if Homo sapiens' forebears' diet and behavior was, at least in part, caused by the evolution of Australopithecus' moving away from being a hunter gather, which the diet contains few proteins and necessitates much of the waking hours in search of food.

There are so many negative aspects as to the validity of this line of inquiry;

There are NO fossils that have been found at or very near the ocean;

Does not apply Occam's razor; (&quot Occam's) Razor states that one should proceed to simpler theories until simplicity can be traded for greater explanatory power. The simplest available theory need not be most accurate. Philosophers also point out that the exact meaning of simplest may be nuanced.";

AAH claims that bipedelism is the result of being bouyed by the salt water yet there is evidence of a 7 million year old fossil that shows the beginnings of this trait: If this theory is correct, why leave the proximity of the ocean (it would take a million years for Homo sapiens to grow enough of a civilization to have the ability to grow and maintain settlements/towns/cities that would allow for the AAH to prove true;

And so many more.

(AAH) relies on MANY assumptions while the accepted model of human evolution is straight forward and contains relatively few twists of logic.

AAH is another example of an answer in search of questions (cue Alec Trabec).

Is this pseudo-science or, as the OP asks, a theory so far out there that it just MIGHT have enough merit to warrant a lot of money and research devoted to finding the questions?

BTW, my niece's Phd thesis was AAH.

She got all the way to the writing part when something happened: my conjecture is her advisor and possibly other professors in Anthropology got on her about the wastefulness of her research and she got burned out and quit academia.

She now owns a yarn shop and is actually doing very well, thank you very much.

[darkangel218]

7. Life is too short to stress over things we may never understand.

I too like to have thousand of hypothesis but i will leave it to that.

Humanity in this Universe, is like a small group of ants on the corner of a house.

Yeps...

[BlueJazz]

9. Hmmmp! I (for one) did not come from some damn trout. My ancestor was a god-fearing ape.