Continued - Aquatic ape hypothesis and other waterside hypotheses of human evolution

Discussion in 'The Cesspool' started by CEngelbrecht, Sep 21, 2014.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. CEngelbrecht

    CEngelbrecht Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    360
    I'm not gonna let you go back to sleep on this.

    User Bells wrote

    Yes, it is pretty simple, really:

    http://www.aidainternational.org/competitive/worlds-records
    [video=youtube;PUcpzf0rbAw]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUcpzf0rbAw[/video]
    [video=youtube;MgRpwESWPLM]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MgRpwESWPLM[/video]

    I'm not one to peddle humans ever having been specialized deep divers (I don't see that as making sense), but the above would at least show a tremendous aquatic potential in this alledgedly fully terrestrial ape, which I have yet to see chimps or gorillas match even a fraction of:

    [video=youtube;ZSgSN8WyO_4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZSgSN8WyO_4[/video]

    You have to agree, that at the very least, the waterside ideas offers a likely scenario in which we could have evolved the traits that set us so profoundly apart from the other apes, this based on the principle of convergent evolution. AAH and other waterside concepts only exist because of observations of possible convergences with other species, for instance furlessness in a wide range of aquatic, semiaquatic and even past semiaquatic mammals. Mammalian species, where some of them also sport a large brain, e.g. cetaceans, elephants and the like. What other cause ideas about human origin can point to convergences elsewhere in the tree of life? There are no analogies to be found in fully grassland or even woodland species, where as they are to be found in aquatic ones. Even spine-vertical bipedalism can be observed in other simian species, when they wade through shallow water:

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    How can you not consider wading as the origin of human bipedalism, when observing other, otherwise terrestrially quadrupedal, apes and monkeys employ that exact locomotion in shallow water?

    And in terms of the predator argument, I'd say we're equally as poor escaping predators (and also lethal microbes, diseases, etc.) on land, especially in grasslands. There's no predator or disease argument either for or against either having lived at water's edge or fully on land, we would have gotten killed in numbers in either habitat, and we have to have existed somewhere. At the water's edge, at least we can rush to the shore to flee from aquatic predators. (I know, it sounds like "Jaws".)

    And I'd say that streamlining is in the eye of the beholder:

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    CEngelbrecht, Sep 21, 2014
    #1

  2. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. origin

    origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,890
    Did you know that overriding moderation is a bannable offence?

    I think you are going to be taking a little vacation....
     
    origin, Sep 21, 2014
    #2

  4. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. CEngelbrecht

    CEngelbrecht Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    360
    Then let me post this as my last:

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23272598

    Then keep on wonder in the dark, if you wish, thinking this concept is talking about mermaids or some similar rubbish. A great contemporary contribution to the understanding of the human past is still going unsung because of absurd human sociology. Please excuse me for hammering down on pseudoskepticism.
     
    CEngelbrecht, Sep 21, 2014
    #3

  6. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Bells

    Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    24,270
    Mod Note

    I had an interesting time today, CEngelbrecht.

    I googled you. And not surprising, I find that you have been peddling this drivel across many many forums.

    What was disgusting, however was the fact that I also found that you have been altering the wikipedia to support your personal beliefs. Yes, that's right, this theory borders on creationism and trying to pass it off as science is obscene.

    Whatever the case may be, on this site at the very least, attempting to override a moderator's actions is a bannable offense. Normally with a new member, we tend to give some leeway, issue a warning. But seeing how you have been a virtual plague across numerous forums with the exact same posts, routine, arguments and so much so, that you took to spamming wikipedia with your inane stupidity, you won't get that leeway here.

    Enjoy your 3 day ban. One would hope that you would learn from your mistake and stop. But seeing just how many forums you have been doing this to, I won't be holding my breath.

     
    Bells, Sep 21, 2014
    #4
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page