Evolution and natural selection, two of the most influential scientific discoveries in biology to date, capable of unlocking our past and answering questions of how we became the way we are. However, our understanding of human evolution is hindered when pseudoscientific ideas refuses to yield to legitimate theories. One such idea is the aquatic ape hypothesis (AAH) which attempts to explain a number of human adaptations with the single explanation of a semi-aquatic ancestor. Proponents use incorrect “facts” and logical fallacies such as straw men, appeals to authority, and false comparison in their arguments. The idea appears intuitive and is easily communicated, allowing it to be picked up by a general public and survive for fifty years, making noise and begging to be let into the big kids pool.
On March 5th 1960, respected marine biologist Sir Alister Hardy presented his idea that mankind may have evolved from a “more aquatic ape-like ancestor” (Hardy 1960:642) to the British Sub-Aqua Club, a non-scientific audience. His idea was picked up by the public press and generated immediate controversy in the paleoanthropology community. Hardy was surprised by the attention and sought to correct misleading reports by publishing an explanation of his speech, and thus the aquatic ape hypothesis (AAH) took its' first strokes out into the world (Ellis 2011). Elaine Morgan picked up the reigns in 1972 and championed the theory until her death in July 2013 (Williamson 2013). Morgan's publications updated Hardy's idea and brought the AAH greater recognition from the public but failed to earn the respect of academia.
The AHH suggests that food shortages and predators forced a branch of our primitive ancestors out of the trees ...
... middle of paper ...
...man bipedal
locomotion. Nature 369:645-648.
Tobias, Phillip V.
2011 Revisiting Water and Hominun Evolution. In Was Man More Aquatic in the Past? Fifty
Years After Alister Hardy - Waterside Hypotheses of Human Evolution, edited by
Mario Vaneechoutte, Algis Kuliukas, and Marc Verhaegen, pp. 190-98. Bentham
Science Publishers.
Williamson, David.
2013 Columnist Elaine Morgan dies at the age of 92. Electronic document,
http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/western-mail-columnist-feminist-
author-5075054, accessed November 16, 2013.
Wong, Kate.
2013 Space Ape Parody Shows Why Aquatic Ape Theory is All Wet. Scientific American,
electronic document,http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/2013/04/30/space-
ape-parody-shows-why-aquatic-ape-theory-is-all-wet/, accessed November 24, 2013.
Over the last few hundred years, more and more has been added to the world’s fossil collection, fossils from all over the world. New theories have been created and old theories have almost been proven about the evolution of man. For example, we have proof that different species of man existed with certain types of DNA sequences and instincts, some we may not have anymore, or some that other species did not have back then. Even though it is subjected to much debate, one of the most widely accepted theories however, is that Homo sapiens interbred with the slightly more primitive species of man, the Neanderthal.
Web. The Web. The Web. 11 February 2014 “Biology: Evolution”. The New York Public Library Science Desk Reference.
The evolution of man is constantly in question. While we are reasonably sure that modern humans and primates are both related to the same common ancestor, there is constant debate over what initially caused the two species to split into early hominids and apes. According to some, our longest and most popular theory on the division of man and ape is profoundly wrong. However, those same individuals usually offer an equally controversial theory as a substitute, one that is almost impossible to scientifically test or prove. Both the Savanna Theory and the Aquatic Ape Theory offer solutions to how and why humans evolved into bipedal toolmakers. But with enough questioning, each loses its accountability to rhetorical science.
After millions of years that humans separated from their relative primate how is that humans became bipedal. So many changes have happened to the human body to decide to stay on the ground and abandoned their lives in the trees. Primates evolved different body structures according to their lifestyle and the ecosystem in which they lived. As Charles Darwin natural selection stays; it could be as a result of new environments, the need for food and shelter, which forced humans to adapt and survive. Although, most of primates’ anatomy reflects habits of movement, it could be easy to see the external differences but there are many differences that have been intensely studied and researched.
Myers, provider of source material for Edie Heydt's notes from "Human Origins," fall 1997, Alfred. Much of the material in the notes is paraphrased, and the original information sources are unknown.
Wong first discusses the possibility that harsh climate killed the last Neandertals. Analysis of isotopes in ocean sediments, ice, and in pollen from the time of the Neandertals reveals that during a period known as oxygen isotope stage 3 (OIS-3), which occurred about 65,000 to 25,000 years ago, there was a climate shift, from moderate to glacial. However, this was probably not what killed the Neandertals, due to the fact that Neandertal anatomy was even better suited for colder climates, with their shorter limbs, barrel chest, and short stature better at conserving body heat (lecture). It is more likely that the severe and rapid environmental shift resulted in the demise of the Neandertals, which could have resulted in a change from forests to grasslands and a change in plants and animals in a short period of time, even over the lifetime of one individual, and just as quickly it could have changed back. The Neandertals, therefore, would have had to adjust to the new environment quickly in order to survive.
The species A. afarensis is one of the better known australopithecines, with regards to the number of samples attributed to the species. From speculations about their close relatives, the gorilla and chimpanzee, A. afarensis’ probable social structure can be presumed. The species was named by Johanson and Taieb in 1973. This discovery of a skeleton lead to a heated debate over the validity of the species. The species eventually was accepted by most researchers as a new species of australopithecine and a likely candidate for a human ancestor.
Anyone with even a moderate background in science has heard of Charles Darwin and his theory of evolution. Since the publishing of his book On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection in 1859, Darwin’s ideas have been debated by everyone from scientists to theologians to ordinary lay-people. Today, though there is still severe opposition, evolution is regarded as fact by most of the scientific community and Darwin’s book remains one of the most influential ever written.
The origin of modern day whales, a mystery that has puzzled paleontologists for years, may have just been solved with the discovery of an ankle bone. This discovery might sound simple and unimportant, but the bones of these ancient animals hold many unanswered questions and provide solid proof of origin and behavior. The relationship between whales and other animals has proven to be difficult because whales are warm-blooded, like humans, yet they live in the sea. The fact that they are warm-blooded suggests that they are related to some type of land animal. However, the questions of exactly which animal, and how whales evolved from land to water, have remained unanswered until now.
Humanity became fascinated with the idea of evolution with the work of Charles Darwin and the Scientific Revolution. People began hunting for fossils that would prove that man had an ape derived ancestry (Weiner, 1955). After various years of searching, a piece of physical evidence was found in England that was said to confirm the theory of evolution (Weiner, 1955).This confirmation came from Charles Dawson’s discoveries from 1908, that were announced publicly in 1912 (Thackeray, 2011). Dawson was believed to have found the fossil remains of the “missing link” between ape and human evolution, the reconstructed skull of Piltdown man (Augustine, 2006). The material was found in stratigraphical evidence and animal remains that were, at the time, adequate enough to confirm the antiquity of the remains (Weiner, 1955). In 1915, another specimen, Piltdown man II, was found further proving this theory (Augustine, 2006). However, this was merely a hoax proven by fluorine relative dating in 1953; the artifacts and bone fragments discovered turned out to be altered to fit the proposed scenario (Augustine, 2006). The skull found was actually composed of a human braincase that was younger than the complimentary orangutan lower jaw (Falk, 2011). Both sections of the skull had been stained to appear to be from the same person of the same age (Falk, 2011).The perpetrator of this act was never caught and there are many theories proposed for the motive of this hoax (Augustine, 2006). Many people have been taken into consideration for this crime, such as Chardin, Woodward, Hinton, and Dawson (Augustine, 2006). Nevertheless, the evidence that proves that Dawson is guilty of this crime against anthropology is quite substantial compared to the evidence...
Paleoanthropology: Pliocene and Pleistocene Human Evolution. Paleobiology, 7:3:298-305. Frayer, David W. and Milford Walpoff 1985 Sexual Dimorphism. Annual Review of Anthropology, 14:429-473 Key, Catherine A. 2000 The Evolution of Human Life History.
The argument of whether or not humans evolved from monkeys is constantly tossed around in our society with the emergence of more and more scientific discoveries. Evolution across such a broad spectrum is known as macroevolution, or changes that happen at or above the species level. Both popular and academic discourses debate the religious and moral issues associated with macroevolution and its propositions. The main person behind the idea of evolution was Charles Darwin who theorized that everything comes from a common ancestor. In the magazine article “Was Darwin Wrong?” featured in a 2004 issue of National Geographic, David Quammen discusses whether or not Darwin’s findings in evolution theory were correct. This article was targeted for
“The scientific study of how humans developed did not begin until the 1800s in Europe. Until that time, people relied on religious explanations of how humans came into existence. Starting in the 1500s a scientific revolution began to sweep Europe. Thinkers started using scientific methods and experiments to try to better understand the world and the creatures living in it. Eventually these methods were turned to the question of human origins” (The Nature Of Human Origins, 1). Earth made it possible for species to change over time because Ancient Earth provides ability to plenty of time.The Homo Sapien a is very complex creature. The species started off very simple by living in caves and surviving with little food and then later evolved into a species that were able to do many more complex things. The first species was Sahelanthropus tchadensis They were one of the most simple humans in that time period and on. They had very small skulls compared to Homo Sapiens today and their motor skills were just the same. We have evolved and changed for the better both mentally and physically. The Evolution of Homo Sapiens started off simple, such as the Neanderthals, and now we are the most advanced species to ever walk the planet so far.
Teaford, Mark F. "Diet and the Evolution of the Earliest Human Ancestors." Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 5 Oct. 2000. Web. 19 Nov. 2015. .