![]() ![]() There is great incentive to interpret primate fossils to be possible human ancestors.Īn example is the recently unveiled fossil “Little Foot” with its gorilla-like skull. Most of the primate fossils that have been found are only fragments, and any interpretation must involve speculation. No fossil of a gorilla has ever been reported, and only three fossil teeth have ever been attributed to aĬhimpanzee. Humans are primates, and fossils of primates are exceedingly rare. Paleoanthropology has unique challenges and scientific practices Such errors? In paleoanthropology, exceptions are routinely made to some of those scientific rules. But don’t sciences operate under rules that quickly catch and correct Such a science would be like a religion that is based on wishful thinking and a long history of misunderstanding. This science would insist that a hypothesis of a recent dachshund speciation from the wolf need not be discussed, because the earlier dachshund ancestors were not wolf-like. This science might accept that fossil fragments of foxes, and young wolves, young jackals, and young hyenas, all showed various stages in the evolution of the dachshund. In “paleodachshundology” there would be great incentive to find and accept fossil evidence of dachshund ancestors. Now imagine if there were a century-old branch of science entirely dedicated to dachshund evolution, with all attention being given to fossils. Wolf and dachshund can be shown by methods such as genetics and breeding tests. There are no fossils that can show the evolution of the dachshund, and there never will be. ![]() Photo: Martin Olsson and Wikimedia Commons Dachshunds and all domestic dogs have only recently evolved from wolves,īecause of selection pressures applied by humans.ĭachshunds and all domestic dogs have only recently evolved from wolves, because of selection pressures applied by humans. You might also like: Human evolution in the Sea at Biokoįor a more familiar example of evolution without fossils, consider the dachshund, a small breed of dog.The hypothesis isīeing blocked because of a scientific belief that old fossil fragments are from early human ancestors. Is because any serious discussion of this theory would cast doubt on the fossils that are the mainstay of paleoanthropology, the science of human evolution. But for the past 57 years, scientists have avoided testing it or treating it as a scientific hypothesis. The aquatic ape theory can be demonstrated in many scientific ways. Earlier fossils, those more than about 300,000 years old, are paltry, and do not really show evolution toward the modern human features. Modern humans such as Homo sapiens and Homo neanderthalensis then begin appearing in the fossil record. No fossils would have formed along the coast of Bioko, because it was an erosional geologic environment without deposition of sediments.Īfter this speciation event, sea level dropped during the next ice age, and the newly evolved humans could escape to mainland Africa. The extreme selection pressures of their semiaquatic environment can explain why our species evolved the striking features that distinguish us from chimpanzees and other apes, such as our large brain, naked skin, external nose, long legs, long scalp hair,Īnd newborns with weak neck and baby blubber-fat. They lived mostly in the sea, on a marine diet with high levels of essential fatty acids for brain Humans may have originated from a group ofĬhimpanzees that were isolated for up to 30,000 years on the island of Bioko, Africa. I explained my version of the aquatic ape theory in a previous article ( Gemini July 13, 2017) and only summarize it here. SHOW MORE Bioko hypothesis, briefly stated ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |