The Controversial Aquatic Ape Hypothesis

DigitalSoldier

Honorary Master
Joined
Jul 27, 2003
Messages
10,180
Reaction score
11
Location
South Africa.
I do not believe in this theory only really read up on it today. I am just curious what other people on here think about the theory. Sorry if this is in the wrong section of this forum .

Some of the arguments by supporters of the theory:

Over the years supporters of the Aquatic Ape Hypothesis have compiled a long list of characteristics they observed that man has in common with aquatic animals, but not apes. Probably the most obvious of these is the lack of body hair. With the exception of the head, most humans have very little body hair as do whales, dolphins, walruses and manatees. The thinking is that if these animals found it advantageous to shed their body hair as they spent more and more time in the water, it might be the same for mankind.

Another characteristic is breath control. While people can take conscious control over their breathing, apes cannot. Of course without this capability swimming underwater is nearly impossible. Proponents of the Aquatic Ape Hypothesis argue that humans developed this ability to take over the control of their breathing because of their extended time in the water. They also note that the human ability to control breathing, which would have evolved from a diving skill, may have been pivotal in his later developing the ability to speak.

Supporters of the theory also think that bi-pedalism, the ability to walk on two legs, might have evolved because our ancestors were forced to deal with lands that were continually flooded. A tall, upright gait would have assisted them with keeping their heads out of water. The buoyancy of the hominid's body in liquid would also have helped to support the animal in this unnatural position until evolution made the necessary adaptations.

The Sea of Afar once occupied a large portion of East Africa. (From an image by Allison Thurmond licenced though the Creative Commons Attribution 2.0 License.)

Proponents of the Aquatic Ape Hypothesis think they can even pinpoint a possible location where this all occurred. The Afar Triangle, a low-lying area near the Red Sea, contains some of the oldest human fossils ever found on the planet. This area was flooded 7 million years ago and became the Sea of Afar. Theory supporters envision some of our ancestors trapped on offshore islands during this time while others lived in forests that became swamps, salt marshes or lagoons. The primitive hominids there would have to have adapted to the changes, moved or died out.

Finally, believers argue that our ancestors would have found the open grasslands of the savannah, where competing theories say man evolved, too exposed to predators such as leopards or other large cats. By retreating into the sea, they could avoid this danger.

Science vs. Aquatic Ape

Believers in the Aquatic Ape Hypothesis claim that the scientific establishment has unfairly ignored their theory because one of its main champions, Morgan, was an outsider. Opponents of the theory, however, argue that the problem with the hypothesis is that it sorely lacks the real evidence needed to support it. They claim that many of the characteristics listed as connecting man with aquatic creatures are misinterpretations or simply based on incorrect information.

Opponents of the theory admit that both man and some aquatic mammals are hairless, but point out that so are some land mammals like the elephant, some rhinos and hippos. While hippos do spend a lot of time in the water, elephants and rhinos don't, except for the occasional wallow. (Their hairlessness seems more related to their need because of their large size to shed excess heat). What's more, opponents point out, semi-aquatic mammals - the category the theory places man in - includes otters, sea lions and beavers, who retain their hair. The only aquatic mammals that have lost their hair are those who have spent large amounts of time in the sea for millions of years such as whales and dolphins. However, these animals (which are some of the fastest in the ocean) have lost their hair in order to reduce drag and give them a higher top speed. Man, however, would get no appreciable gain in speed from this change as he is simply too slow a swimmer in the first place. It would be as effective as streamlining a riding mower. The top speed of the mower is simply not fast enough for the aerodynamic shape to help.

Skeptics also point out that while man has perhaps the best breath control of all land creatures, other animals, like dogs and even some apes, can control breathing in a limited way. The standard theory that man's control over his breathing is the result of developing a very advanced vocal language explains why he is so good at it without needing to speculate about man's ancestors being aquatic.

According to Aquatic Ape Hypothesis supporters, man is the only land mammal that is bi-pedal. However, opponents to the theory point out that there are also no aquatic mammals that walk on two legs either. In addition birds (like storks) that use their long legs to wade through deep water have lower legs substantially longer than upper legs, something that people don't.

Interest in the theory was probably at its zenith in 1987 when a conference, organized by the European Sociobiological Society and the Dutch Association of Physical Anthropology, was held in Valkenburg, Netherlands on the subject. Twenty-two papers were presented. Twelve for the idea, ten against and two neutral. The discussion as the meeting was animated, but in the end no consensus on the topic was reached.

However, it was discovered recently that elephants have an aquatic ancestor from 37 million years ago, the Moeritherium. The existence of this tapir-like animal that probably had a lifestyle not unlike modern hippos seems to have added some credence to the Aquatic Ape Hypothesis as far as its supporters are concerned. 'If the elephants did it, why not humans?' is their thinking.
 
Doesn't sound plausible to me. We don't have any other adaptions(other than a small gill phase as embryos, which is observable in all land animals anyway) that would indicate this to be a possibility.
Although, I've met some fishy people. Scaly bastards.
 
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X