[img]http://www.willisms.com/archives/orangutan.gif[/img]
Now I'm not one to believe in Darwin's Theory, but I did find this hypothesis intrieging. To me, it makes more sense than Darwin's Theory. (I have taken college level biology and I intend to make it my major)
The hypothesis goes like so: our ape ancestors adapted to an aquatic enviornment, then to dry land.
Here are some points:
* Most aquatic mamals have lost their body hair (whales, seals, dophins, etc.).
* All land mamals who where once aquatic mamals are naked (elephants, rhinos, homosapiens, etc.).
* Humans have a layer of fat underneath their skin, primates do not. Fat began layering under skin once ancestors became aquatic.
* Whenever apes walk through water, they do so with only two feet.
* The only mamals who have developed some sort of language are aquatic mamals (dolphins, whales).
There is a wonderful presentation of this on TED by Elaine Morgan.
[url]http://www.ted.com/talks/elaine_morgan_says_we_evolved_from_aquatic_apes.html[/url]
[QUOTE=Wakka V2;16447361]Now I'm not one to believe in Darwan's Theory, but I did find this hypothesis intrieging. To me, it makes more sense than Darwan's Theory. (I have taken college level biology and I intend to make it my major)
The hypothesis goes like so: our ape ancestors adapted to an aquatic enviornment, then to dry land.
Here are some points:
* Most aquatic mamals have lost their body hair (whales, seals, dophins, etc.).
* All land mamals who where once aquatic mamals are naked (elephants, rhinos, homosapiens, etc.).
* Humans have a layer of fat underneath their skin, primates do not. Fat began layering under skin once ancestors became aquatic.
* Whenever apes walk through water, they do so with only two feet.
* The only mamals who have developed some sort of language are aquatic mamals (dolphins, whales).
There is a wonderful presentation of this on TED by Elaine Morgan.
[url]http://www.ted.com/talks/elaine_morgan_says_we_evolved_from_aquatic_apes.html[/url][/QUOTE]
Who is this Darwan you speak of?
[highlight](User was banned for this post ("Snipe." - ventilated))[/highlight]
what the fuck is a darwin
[highlight](User was banned for this post ("Snipe." - ventilated))[/highlight]
While I suppose it kinda makes sense, as far as a few features, there's nothing in the fossil evidence or in our or apes' DNA to suggest it happened.
[QUOTE=Detective P;16447388]While I suppose it kinda makes sense, as far as a few features, there's nothing in the fossil evidence or in our or apes' DNA to suggest it happened.[/QUOTE]
Fossil evidence isn't that strong of evidence.
Retard frog squirrel.
Are humans going to lose all body hair in the future? Considering with the advent of highly insulated winter coats and air conditioners, we wouldn't need hair anymore. For it's heat preserving purposes anyway.
[QUOTE=Neckbeard;16447415]Are humans going to lose all body hair in the future? Considering with the advent of highly insulated winter coats and air conditioners, we wouldn't need hair anymore. For it's heat preserving purposes anyway.[/QUOTE]
We'd lose our neckbeards as well.
It would be an interesting hypothesis if there was any DNA or fossil evidence to support it.
[QUOTE=Figgis Fiddis;16447438]It would be an interesting hypothesis if there was any DNA or fossil evidence to support it.[/QUOTE]
DNA evidence only suggests that apes are closely related to us. Fossil evidence is completely interpreted (ie facts are made up of what appears to be so).
[QUOTE=Neckbeard;16447415]Are humans going to lose all body hair in the future? Considering with the advent of highly insulated winter coats and air conditioners, we wouldn't need hair anymore. For it's heat preserving purposes anyway.[/QUOTE]
It's for attraction purposes as well apparently.
Sure it is.
I have a bad feeling about this thread...
None of your reasons make sense.
Uh, this is still Darwinian evolution.
what the... evolved? you mean i'm not meant to look like that?
[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;16447534]Uh, this is still Darwinian evolution.[/QUOTE]
You're right. Actually, Darwin only thought up natural selection, not evolution. So it's still evolution by natural selection. Darwin has nothing to do with this theory.
How the fuck do you get to college level biology and not believe in darwin?
* The only mamals who have developed some sort of language are aquatic mamals (dolphins, whales).
I lol'd.
Very interesting theory, sir.
[QUOTE=ken18;16447617]* The only mamals who have developed some sort of language are aquatic mamals (dolphins, whales).
I lol'd.[/QUOTE]
Breeeeeegh Barrrrrrrrrraaaaaaaaaggh bruuuuugh?
* Humans have a layer of fat underneath their skin, primates do not. Fat began layering under skin once ancestors became aquatic.
Humans are primates k?
And primates DO have fat under their skin, just look at the pic of that orangutan and its fatass belly.
* Whenever apes walk through water, they do so with only two feet.
What does this have to do with anything?
[QUOTE=JohnnyMo1;16447534]Uh, this is still Darwinian evolution.[/QUOTE]
You're right, but it's different from the mainstream Darwinian theory that's taught to the general population.
[QUOTE=Wakka V2;16447361][img]http://www.willisms.com/archives/orangutan.gif[/img]
Now I'm not one to believe in Darwin's Theory, but I did find this hypothesis intrieging. To me, it makes more sense than Darwin's Theory. (I have taken college level biology and I intend to make it my major)
The hypothesis goes like so: our ape ancestors adapted to an aquatic enviornment, then to dry land.
Here are some points:
* Most aquatic mamals have lost their body hair (whales, seals, dophins, etc.).
* All land mamals who where once aquatic mamals are naked (elephants, rhinos, homosapiens, etc.).
* Humans have a layer of fat underneath their skin, primates do not. Fat began layering under skin once ancestors became aquatic.
* Whenever apes walk through water, they do so with only two feet.
* The only mamals who have developed some sort of language are aquatic mamals (dolphins, whales).
There is a wonderful presentation of this on TED by Elaine Morgan.
[url]http://www.ted.com/talks/elaine_morgan_says_we_evolved_from_aquatic_apes.html[/url][/QUOTE]
You have taken college level biology and you intend to make it your major, and you cannot even spell Darwins name correctly? I am sorry, but if you have taken biology at college level then you should know how to spell his name since he is the Big guy when it comes to biology. And what kind of college did you study in? I find it intriguing since you seem not to believ in Darwins evolution theory and it might be connected to the teachings on your college, I don't know.
And no, I do not believ that our ape ancestors adapted to an aquatic enviornment, then to dry land. This because in the points you showed:
Here are some points:
* Most aquatic mamals have lost their body hair (whales, seals, dophins, etc.).
[b]Uhm, seals do have body hair, whales (dolphins included lol) had ancestors that had bodyhair, and they lost it while going aquatic because it was an unnecessary trait since it took energy to grow and slowed down the movement in the water.[/b]
* All land mamals who where once aquatic mamals are naked (elephants, rhinos, homosapiens, etc.).
[b]This is flawed, you automaticly assume that they come from the water just like that and that's your point? Elephants and rhinos don't have bodyhair because they evolved in Africa, a hot place, and snce they're so big, bodyhair would mean extra unnecessary heat. If you look at the wolly rhino or mamuth then what? Humans don't have bodyhair because we went from the cool shaded forests out on the savannah where body hair was unnecessary (extra heat). [/b]
* Humans have a layer of fat underneath their skin, primates do not. Fat began layering under skin once ancestors became aquatic.
[b]Fat can be used as both reserves of energy and as isolation to the cold night. Notice how the bears have a huge fatlayer and aren't aquatic? Many mamals have fatlayers. Maybe this is a trait that evolved when we went out on the savannah to protect us from the cold nights?[/b]
* Whenever apes walk through water, they do so with only two feet.
[b]Apes can walk on two legs on land aswell, they just usually use arms aswell to support them. In water they aren't as affected by gravity as on land, because water is a visquos fluid and can support them a bit. ANd maybe they don't think it's so nice to get their hands wet.[/b]
* The only mamals who have developed some sort of language are aquatic mamals (dolphins, whales).
[b]Whales (dolphins included lol) use sonar, which can travel far in water, this evolved forth because whales live in a large medium (the sea) and sonar is a great way to tell others where you are so you can easier find eachother. Whales are intelligent and that's probably why they got this "language". But what is really a language? Monkeys and rodents and other mamals have different distinct sounds they use at certain situations, is this language or is it just squeeks? I beleiv that the more intelligent an animal get the more complex the "language" get.[/b]
[QUOTE=!LORD M!;16447694]You have taken college level biology and you intend to make it your major, and you cannot even spell Darwins name correctly? I am sorry, but if you have taken biology at college level then you should know how to spell his name since he is the Big guy when it comes to biology. And what kind of college did you study in? I find it intriguing since you seem not to believ in Darwins evolution theory and it might be connected to the teachings on your college, I don't know.
And no, I do not believ that our ape ancestors adapted to an aquatic enviornment, then to dry land. This because in the points you showed:
Here are some points:
* Most aquatic mamals have lost their body hair (whales, seals, dophins, etc.).
[b]Uhm, seals do have body hair, whales (dolphins included lol) had ancestors that had bodyhair, and they lost it while going aquatic because it was an unnecessary trait since it took energy to grow and slowed down the movement in the water.[/b]
* All land mamals who where once aquatic mamals are naked (elephants, rhinos, homosapiens, etc.).
[b]This is flawed, you automaticly assume that they come from the water just like that and that's your point? Elephants and rhinos don't have bodyhair because they evolved in Africa, a hot place, and snce they're so big, bodyhair would mean extra unnecessary heat. If you look at the wolly rhino or mamuth then what? Humans don't have bodyhair because we went from the cool shaded forests out on the savannah where body hair was unnecessary (extra heat). [/b]
* Humans have a layer of fat underneath their skin, primates do not. Fat began layering under skin once ancestors became aquatic.
[b]Fat can be used as both reserves of energy and as isolation to the cold night. Notice how the bears have a huge fatlayer and aren't aquatic? Many mamals have fatlayers. Maybe this is a trait that evolved when we went out on the savannah to protect us from the cold nights?[/b]
* Whenever apes walk through water, they do so with only two feet.
[b]Apes can walk on two legs on land aswell, they just usually use arms aswell to support them. In water they aren't as affected by gravity as on land, because water is a visquos fluid and can support them a bit. ANd maybe they don't think it's so nice to get their hands wet.[/b]
* The only mamals who have developed some sort of language are aquatic mamals (dolphins, whales).
[b]Whales (dolphins included lol) use sonar, which can travel far in water, this evolved forth because whales live in a large medium (the sea) and sonar is a great way to tell others where you are so you can easier find eachother. Whales are intelligent and that's probably why they got this "language". But what is really a language? Monkeys and rodents and other mamals have different distinct sounds they use at certain situations, is this language or is it just squeeks? I beleiv that the more intelligent an animal get the more complex the "language" get.[/b][/QUOTE]
I appreciate that you took time to write an adequate response. I brought up this topic to stir up discussion and perhaps new ideas. Please watch the video I have posted because there is a credited individual presenting the hypothesis, and they explain it much better than I do.
[QUOTE=Wakka V2;16447693]You're right, but it's different from the mainstream Darwinian theory that's taught to the general population.[/QUOTE]
How?
How does this aquatic apes theory NOT fit into the mainstream version of evolution? [B]I'm not saying the water apes theory is true or false[/B], I don't care enough to research it... But what about the mainstream theory says that "Humans did [B][U][I]NOT[/I][/U][/B] evolve from aquatic apes"?
Seems to make sense, although I will not devote myself to this untill they find some fishmonkey bones.
Elephants have a language.
[QUOTE=Wakka V2;16447361]
Now I'm not one to believe in Darwin's Theory[/QUOTE]
Are you one to believe in this "gravity" theory?
I find your theory quite interesting.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
