Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 63 (9045 total)
337 online now:
CosmicChimp, jar, PaulK (3 members, 334 visitors)
Newest Member: Dade
Post Volume: Total: 887,360 Year: 5,006/14,102 Month: 604/707 Week: 2/157 Day: 2/22 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Aquatic Ape theory?
Denesha
Inactive Member


Message 7 of 138 (98360)
04-07-2004 5:47 AM
Reply to: Message 6 by Sylas
04-07-2004 5:18 AM


Dear Sylas,

The "savannah" approach is not really the "other" approach.

I'm unfortunately not knowledgable in primates ethology but I can't believe that aquatic was a safe place to live in the context of he is exposed. The Savannah was also under the rule of large predators but the space was wide open.
You can't reach the same conclusion near or in a pool. Never heard about crocodiles, thirsty felidae?

Denesha


This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Sylas, posted 04-07-2004 5:18 AM Sylas has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by Sylas, posted 04-07-2004 6:24 AM Denesha has responded

  
Denesha
Inactive Member


Message 11 of 138 (98372)
04-07-2004 6:43 AM
Reply to: Message 10 by SRO2
04-07-2004 6:40 AM


Re: Savannahs?
Rocket,

Savannha or forest are not aquatic in Africa. Or your meaning of forest is a mangrove?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by SRO2, posted 04-07-2004 6:40 AM SRO2 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by SRO2, posted 04-07-2004 6:51 AM Denesha has responded

  
Denesha
Inactive Member


Message 13 of 138 (98376)
04-07-2004 7:05 AM
Reply to: Message 12 by SRO2
04-07-2004 6:51 AM


Re: Savannahs?
This isn't a very hard task to study. Paleosol specialists are able to tell us if there was trees or smaller vegetation on various locations.
I still can't swallow the aquatic pill. There is too much contradictions. I guess these have never paddled in a swamp with mud above the knees. Try that once and enjoy it!

Denesha


This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by SRO2, posted 04-07-2004 6:51 AM SRO2 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by SRO2, posted 04-07-2004 7:08 AM Denesha has not yet responded

  
Denesha
Inactive Member


Message 16 of 138 (98389)
04-07-2004 8:41 AM
Reply to: Message 9 by Sylas
04-07-2004 6:24 AM


Dear Sylas,

Yes, you fully well understood my idea. Fresh water neighborhood is a very dangerous place. Inacceptable to be a cradle of some terrestrial evolutive trend. You can't coexist where an other top of the foodchain use to swim (crocs). This is also concerning sharks.

Denesha


This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by Sylas, posted 04-07-2004 6:24 AM Sylas has not yet responded

  
Denesha
Inactive Member


Message 21 of 138 (98644)
04-08-2004 7:03 AM
Reply to: Message 20 by Dr Jack
04-08-2004 6:35 AM


Dear Jack,

Yes indeed. Water spots were such scarce as in our days. It's not speculative to consider they were attractive for primitive human forms. For drinking, playing and fishing? But all these activities implicate an immediate use of them. I mean that they were unable to transport water unlikely as the food.

Denesha


This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by Dr Jack, posted 04-08-2004 6:35 AM Dr Jack has not yet responded

  
Denesha
Inactive Member


Message 24 of 138 (99254)
04-11-2004 2:08 PM
Reply to: Message 23 by TechnoCore
04-11-2004 12:15 PM


Vital dependance of water (fresh or marine), at least at one ontogenic stage.
I'm just out of the shower. I'm not aquatic.

Consider aquatic mammalia as Cetacean and other Pinnipedes.
I'm not specialist but I see a brand off-topic discussion rising soon.

Have a nice day,

Denesha


This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by TechnoCore, posted 04-11-2004 12:15 PM TechnoCore has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by TechnoCore, posted 04-12-2004 9:45 AM Denesha has not yet responded
 Message 62 by artturi, posted 06-10-2005 3:46 AM Denesha has not yet responded

  
Denesha
Inactive Member


Message 35 of 138 (102178)
04-23-2004 12:33 PM
Reply to: Message 34 by redwolf
04-23-2004 12:07 PM


I don't think marine sharks did really be a problem for primitive human. They certainly didn't spend time padling in the waves.
But some shark species are known to visit estuaries and rivers.

Conversely, crocodiles were more serious demographic regulators. Thus could speculate that the primitive human spread was to avoid crocodiles first.

Denesha


This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by redwolf, posted 04-23-2004 12:07 PM redwolf has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2021