tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1812431336777691886.post136004485873757049..comments2024-02-29T03:57:00.088-05:00Comments on The Mermaid's Tale: Ignoring the Aquatic Ape HypothesisAnne Buchananhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09212151396672651221noreply@blogger.comBlogger24125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1812431336777691886.post-34843879832815194022020-08-07T20:00:51.332-04:002020-08-07T20:00:51.332-04:00If you are judging her behavior - a lot of people ...<br /><br />If you are judging her behavior - a lot of people need to loosen up. she seemed to be saying - AAH is not a new idea and it has yet to be properly investigated. In any case, that's all I heard. <br /><br />The older you get the easier it is to fall into the habit of shaming people into thinking in a different way - It works in RL, with children and it does get harder and harder not to see children all over the place. I know I am guilty of that way too often - and it never fails that people of an opposing prospective or just never thought about a given idea themselves, to resent being shamed. Here's where I would normally something like "suck it up sunshine until you have some facts you are just whining" which is meant to be funny but no one ever gets the joke.Delrayhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16920252274466555344noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1812431336777691886.post-51479473225083836322013-03-06T06:45:22.394-05:002013-03-06T06:45:22.394-05:00... and to measure the distance from Earth to moon...... and to measure the distance from Earth to moon by reflecting light off a tiny implant on the moon...Holly Dunsworthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05260104967932801186noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1812431336777691886.post-26905338669659502962012-05-29T09:01:48.839-04:002012-05-29T09:01:48.839-04:00Thanks Marc!Thanks Marc!Holly Dunsworthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05260104967932801186noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1812431336777691886.post-92044277774137785672012-05-28T15:54:11.491-04:002012-05-28T15:54:11.491-04:00There are some recent publications on the Littoral...There are some recent publications on the Littoral Theory (commonly known as AAT) that Pleistocene Homo populations colonised different continents & islands (even Flores >19 km oversea >800 ka) along the coasts & from there inland along the rivers, where they collected aquatic & waterside foods, including shellfish, seaweeds, ungulates drowned or caught in mud or shallow water, stranded whales, cattails, cane etc., eg,<br />- M Vaneechoutte, A Kuliukas & M Verhaegen eds 2011 ebook Bentham Sci Publ (with contributions of prof.Tobias & Elaine Morgan etc.) “Was Man More Aquatic in the Past? Fifty Years after Alister Hardy: Waterside Hypotheses of Human Evolution”<br />- M Verhaegen & S Munro 2011 HOMO, J compar hum Biol 62:237-247 “Pachyosteosclerosis suggests archaic Homo frequently collected sessile littoral foods”<br />For more info, please google “econiche homo”, “aquarboreal”, “pachyosteosclerosis”, or send me an email.marc verhaegennoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1812431336777691886.post-70988830952573150132010-03-10T06:35:23.191-05:002010-03-10T06:35:23.191-05:00@Holly. Hey I'm not upset. Not personally, any...@Holly. Hey I'm not upset. Not personally, anyway. See, when you have the audacity to actually expect some science to be done before ideas get rejected, it's usually laudible. Except when the idea is the damned "aquatic ape" then, apparently, you're supposed to just accept the wise words of older anthropologists and accept it's bullshit pseudoscience. I've never done that. I've always thought "hey, what's wrong with this idea?" So I thought if none of you guys are going to do any science (scared of being laughed at when submitting the proposal, no doubt) maybe I should. After all, I have no precious reputation to worry about. So I returned to academia, got a Master's from UCL and started a PhD. Despite all this, I get sneered at all the time from you guys. But, hey, what did I expect?<br /><br />I am upset only by the astonishing self-righteousness of a field of supposed scientists in dismissing a really good idea on the basis of gossip. <br /><br />Tell me, Holly, is Nancy Tanner's "phallic display hypothesis" falsifiable in any way? Because you may know it's in the literature as another respected idea (out of around 40). What about Wheeler's thermoreg idea, or Lovejoy's Provisioning hypothesis or Jablonski/Chapman's "Threat display" idea. Please be honest: the wading hypothesis is no more, or less falsifiable than any such idea.<br /><br />In addition, however, it has a number of overwhelming feactors in it's favour. <br /><br />Place a group of chimps in waist deep water and they WILL ALL move (and not just pose monetarily) bipedally for as long as the condiitons prevail. This is the only model that would actually kill a would-be quadruped.<br /><br />I have no personal investment in this idea. I just expect professional scientists to do their job and use science, not gossip, to dismiss things. <br /><br />The thankfully dead comment, actually, was from your recent book review of Jablonski's "Skin".<br /><br />“Although warranted, some of Jablonski’s arguments against aquatic ape theory are odd (p. 40). If per chance ancient hominins were adept swimmers, surely their “long gangly arms” would have been useful, not harmful. Just because aquatic ape theory is (thankfully) dead we should not overlook the possibility that ancient hominins dipped, waded, and wallowed to stay cool like we and many other mammals do.” Dunsworth (2007:34)<br /><br />Dunsworth, H. Skin: A Natural History Nina G. Jablonski. Paleoanthropology :24-25, (2007).<br /><br />It's great in that review that you aimed to correct Jablonski for her oberly harsh dismisaal of "all things aquatic". I think the problem's been in the label - "aquatic ape" and that it hasn't ever been defined very carefully.<br /><br />I define them (plural) like this: <br /><br />Waterside Hypotheses of human evolution: A set of related idea that propose that the lineage leading to humans has been exposed to greater selection from wading, swimming and diving than the lineage leading to our great ape cousins and that this slight shift in selection may explain the remarkable phenotypical differences between us.<br /><br />No need for "mermaids" as a simple fact from population genetics shows us that even very slight selection can make profound differences in relatively short evolutionary timescales.<br /><br />Algis KuliukasAlgis Kuliukashttp://www.riverapes.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1812431336777691886.post-19066300467266767232010-03-09T21:47:47.933-05:002010-03-09T21:47:47.933-05:00The "thankfully dead" that Algis quotes ...The "thankfully dead" that Algis quotes is from a naive comment that I made as a graduate student. <br /><br />http://www.paleoanthro.org/journal/content/PA20070024.pdfHolly Dunsworthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05260104967932801186noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1812431336777691886.post-34816164376589734362010-03-09T21:16:34.307-05:002010-03-09T21:16:34.307-05:00@Algis, I'm sorry that what I wrote upset you....@Algis, I'm sorry that what I wrote upset you. I left your name off to avoid embarrassment. Most people who read this blog had no idea that I was describing you until you posted. I stand by my critique of your presentation. I thought it made a really good blog considering what we try to do here. I'm sorry that the subsequent critique of the AAH also upset you personally. It is hard for me to understand someone getting so emotional about a hypothesis that in my eyes can never be falsified. I realize now that the way that I discuss the AAH is offensive to those that do seem to have a personal investment in it. I hope you noticed that I supported your research in my post. The beauty of science is not only that it's fun but that, "Maybe someone clever could come along and change the fate of the AAH" and maybe that someone is you! Cheers.Holly Dunsworthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05260104967932801186noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1812431336777691886.post-20463880010414930022010-03-09T18:56:53.262-05:002010-03-09T18:56:53.262-05:00@Holly, I thought the "aquatic ape" was ...@Holly, I thought the "aquatic ape" was "thankfully dead"? It might make you feel happy to be sneering at an idea that you clearly have never made the slightest effort to understand but I don't think it will do your reputation any good.<br /><br />@Jason My web site www.RiverApes.com has some links. <br /><br />You might also try this...<br /><br />http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=wading+bipedalism&btnG=Search&as_sdt=400000&as_ylo=&as_vis=0<br /><br />Roede et al (1991) is still the one balanced (if polarised) account in the literature. We're publishing an update of that later this year for the 50th anniversary of Hardy's idea which is TODAY.<br /><br />50 years of potentially the best idea about human evolution since Darwin and anthropologists have done NOTHING but sneer/ignore at it. Doesn't it make you proud?<br /><br />@Ken... Yes, very silly. They (for there are more than one) should have been labelled "Waterside Hypotheses of Human Evolution".Algis Kuliukashttp://www.riverapes.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1812431336777691886.post-88897369324727398772010-03-09T13:50:57.302-05:002010-03-09T13:50:57.302-05:00Listen, this is all very silly. Unbeknownst to ev...Listen, this is all very silly. Unbeknownst to everyone (including, strangely, Elaine, this is a huge misunderstanding due to a typographical error that still hasn't been resolved.<br /><br />It's either the Naked Apothecary, the Naked Alchemist, the Naked Astrologer, or (most lurid of all!), the Naked Aperture.<br /><br />Now, I'm sure our anthropoid ancestors had various apertures, and this must be the truth behind what is otherwise a very suspect Just-So story.Ken Weisshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02049713123559138421noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1812431336777691886.post-50058980219380420182010-03-09T12:59:06.917-05:002010-03-09T12:59:06.917-05:00http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=aquatic+ape&am...http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=aquatic+ape&hl=en&btnG=Search&as_sdt=400001&as_sdtp=onHolly Dunsworthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05260104967932801186noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1812431336777691886.post-48016901402824402472010-03-09T09:34:20.584-05:002010-03-09T09:34:20.584-05:00Are there any peer reviewed publications addressin...Are there any peer reviewed publications addressing the AAH at all?Jason Hodgsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13760911130118410282noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1812431336777691886.post-44244875623499186662010-03-09T08:21:56.068-05:002010-03-09T08:21:56.068-05:00"Pool sound quality" was quite the perfe..."Pool sound quality" was quite the perfect typo.Holly Dunsworthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05260104967932801186noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1812431336777691886.post-3489036103067870222010-03-08T20:52:36.909-05:002010-03-08T20:52:36.909-05:00First a correction. The actual words I used about ...First a correction. The actual words I used about Hardy's idea was "most carefully thought out idea in science" based on the fact that he'd sat on it for 30 years. I accept that this is a bit of a stretch. I should have qualified it with " about human evolution since Darwin." <br /><br />Now, the first ppart of this "critique" is bent on discrediting me simply because I admit to taking the idea seriously unlike the sneering community of anthropologists who seem to have decided it's bullshit pseudoscience purely through gossip in the corridors (but through almost nothing in the published literature.)<br /><br />If this is the worst you can throw at me, I'll take that gladly.<br /><br />If aanyone wants to hear the talk itself (albeit in very pool sound quality) they can find it on You Tube.<br /><br />http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4HNuSquvJXU<br /><br />http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y031ipmXYH8<br /><br />John Langdon's critique is itself a straw man portrayal of the AAH. Claiming the savannah theory was an invention of Elaine Morgan is simply incredible. Putting it under the same umbrella as Von Daniken betrays an apalling lack of discrimination. Listing 26 "aquatic" ideas equally and dismissing them in a sentence does not do justice to Elaine Morgans books. The wading model of bipedalism, for example, was rejected in a couple of sentences simply by arguing that a brachiationist model was better for small primates. Not one argument against wading was offered. This was typical.<br /><br />Talkingg of "straw man" your critique of Elaaine's TED talk is exactly that. You pick the bits you think you can find holes in but ignore the elephant in the room - humans are by far the best swimmers/divers of all the apes and the one place you can guarrantee apes will move bipedally is in waist deep water.<br /><br />Algis KuliukasAlgis Kuliukashttp://www.riverapes.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1812431336777691886.post-43816332793224340442009-11-01T06:54:01.573-05:002009-11-01T06:54:01.573-05:00First of all, is there any evidence of semiaquatic...First of all, is there any evidence of semiaquatic hominins or hominoids in the fossil record? <br /><br />Yes. <br /><br />The aquatic plant eating swamp ape, Oreopithecus bambolii, frequented wetland environments on the late Miocene island of Tuscany-Sardinia probably for nearly two million years. <br /><br />Secondly, is there any evidence of a semiaquatic marine phase in human evolution?<br /><br />Yes. <br /><br />Humans are the only catarrhine primate (old world monkeys and apes) that have kidneys with multipyramidal medullas. Medullary pyramids are nearly universal in marine mammals but are also found in freshwater mammals who appear to have had marine ancestors and in some terrestrial mammals who also appear to have had semiaquatic marine ancestors. <br /><br />But most terrestrial mammals and all other catarrhine primates have kidneys with unipyramidal medullas.<br /><br />Multipyramidal kidneys are an adaptation to foods with extremely high salt content in environments where there are no isotonic or hypotonic sources of fresh water.Marcel F. Williamshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16245086958213100840noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1812431336777691886.post-74250364697723373772009-10-22T13:30:14.251-04:002009-10-22T13:30:14.251-04:00I can't swim worth a damn and don't float ...I can't swim worth a damn and don't float very well. But, apparently, my ancestors were 'fit' or I wouldn't be here. Ironically, unless it's a myth, Africans are said not to be as good in the water as other 'races' because (I think this is the reason) they have higher bone density and hence don't float as high.<br /><br />The next hypothesis will be the 'fallen angel' hypothesis: We are--or were--so noble that we were angelic and had wings. But then we (well, it was Eve, actually) sinned. Our wings fell off, and we tumbled east of Eden. The embryological evidence is a ruse: it seems to suggest that we are of quadruped stock. But look at the little bumps on our scapulae (shoulder blades); they are the vestigial wing connectors.<br /><br />More proof of the fallen angel hypothesis is that we like feathered animals (birds, to the uninitiated). Indeed, I just had a chicken burrito for lunch!Ken Weisshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02049713123559138421noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1812431336777691886.post-87791020854870483202009-10-22T12:11:39.658-04:002009-10-22T12:11:39.658-04:00...and I'm not familiar with the rhino aquatic......and I'm not familiar with the rhino aquatic ancestor she mentioned.Holly Dunsworthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05260104967932801186noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1812431336777691886.post-1603863695475630322009-10-22T12:10:13.516-04:002009-10-22T12:10:13.516-04:00Sam: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/734...Sam: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7347284.stmHolly Dunsworthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05260104967932801186noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1812431336777691886.post-21719159306135773742009-10-22T12:08:07.052-04:002009-10-22T12:08:07.052-04:00Furry swimmers:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9O...Furry swimmers:<br /><br />http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ObDgBLFo9w (great soundtrack!)<br /><br />http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lPCFFJI0Gwc&NR=1<br /><br />http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EnuG8DRnUaMHolly Dunsworthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05260104967932801186noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1812431336777691886.post-8220165177282321212009-10-22T12:03:39.362-04:002009-10-22T12:03:39.362-04:00I'm not familiar with the aquatic pachyderm hy...I'm not familiar with the aquatic pachyderm hypothesis (and too lazy to look at the moment) but is the story that elephants, rhinos, etc. went through an aquatic phase after they split from their whooly relatives that lived until a few thousand years ago? And each separately?anthrobrewhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11123542292465758479noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1812431336777691886.post-22624837372549860572009-10-22T12:00:52.105-04:002009-10-22T12:00:52.105-04:00http://www.pittasworld.com/Site/Jewelthrush_Diarie...http://www.pittasworld.com/Site/Jewelthrush_Diaries_Blog/Entries/2009/7/14_SABAH_ROUND-UP_files/PROBOSCIS_MONKEY_KINABATANGAN_JUL09_LR_EDIT_4062.jpgHolly Dunsworthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05260104967932801186noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1812431336777691886.post-33779886353315781762009-10-22T11:44:23.946-04:002009-10-22T11:44:23.946-04:00Up, see, I'm joking about it like she said.Up, see, I'm joking about it like she said.Holly Dunsworthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05260104967932801186noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1812431336777691886.post-67411973724488679122009-10-22T11:41:45.103-04:002009-10-22T11:41:45.103-04:00It probably explains the evolution of their big sn...It probably explains the evolution of their big snorkely noses.Holly Dunsworthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05260104967932801186noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1812431336777691886.post-19439931608533775682009-10-22T11:40:51.029-04:002009-10-22T11:40:51.029-04:00This comment has been removed by the author.Holly Dunsworthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05260104967932801186noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1812431336777691886.post-21763722697625491102009-10-22T11:36:19.395-04:002009-10-22T11:36:19.395-04:00Also, proboscis monkeys are swimming fools and are...Also, proboscis monkeys are swimming fools and are neither habitually bipedal nor naked, and there's no obvious indication that they're evolutionarily "moving" in that direction...Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08626364516299864507noreply@blogger.com