First humans walked upright because it was so

[Still Waters]

The first humans may have started walking upright because the place where they lived was so hot, new research suggests.

Scientists discovered that the Turkana Basin of Kenya, long held as the cradle of human evolution, was even hotter millions of years ago than it is now.

Daytime temperatures would have been well into the late 90s every single day.

The discovery lends weight to the so-called ‘thermal hypothesis’ of human evolution, which states that mankind first started standing upright because of the intense heat.

According to this theory, our early ancestors gained an evolutionary advantage by walking upright because it is relatively cooler away from the earth’s surface when it is extremely sunny.

They would also expose less of their bodies to the sun’s rays than if they were on all-fours.

The loss of body hair would also help when living in a hot climate.

Read more...

[:PsYKoTiC:BeHAvIoR:]

I wouldn't go as far to say thermal hypothesis is credible, but the idea itself is plausible. Only problem is, I doubt Turkana Basin of Kenya only had our ancestral human being as an exclusive creature living there. So, with that in mind, wouldn't other animals have adapted this type of evolution as well?

[Abramelin]

"We have reason to believe that man first walked upright to free his hands for m********ion."

~~ Lily Tomlin

[danielost]

the best reason for standing up and walking was to carry things. chimps walk upright when they carry large things. as for the op i agree if that is the reason how come no one else did it.

[+OverSword]

I wonder how much the hairless walking monkeys that research this type of useless and unprovable trivia (the nicest of the words I had come up with to describe thier work) get paid?

[Mattshark]

Is this really new? We already know about the thermoregulatory advantages in an exposed tropical climate and we have done for some time.

[Mattshark]

the best reason for standing up and walking was to carry things. chimps walk upright when they carry large things. as for the op i agree if that is the reason how come no one else did it.

It may be the a good reason, but it isn't something likely to drive evolutionary change like thermoregulation would.

[Paranormalcy]

Astute One, attempt to live up to your name and phrase your posts in the form of thoughtful discourse instead of hyper-dramatic facetiousness. I wouldn't continue this manner of behavior, given your Warning history, which you're very close to increasing again.

[Darkcore]

Plausible explanation. I still tend to believe the initial upright position is more related to seeing the surrounding area better.

A common behaviour you can see in nature with different mammal.

[danielost]

Plausible explanation. I still tend to believe the initial upright position is more related to seeing the surrounding area better.

A common behaviour you can see in nature with different mammal.

this might be true but, if you can see them they can see you.

also just because mammals are the largest animals today doesnt mean that they always were.

[Psycho78]

I still prefer the aquatic theory.

A tectonic event could have caused a new ocean to form, trapping a group of primates on high ground with limited food sources.

This forced them to venture into the water for food, they began walking upright to keep their heads above water.

Or, the earth may have been so hot, as the OP's article states, that the water temperature might have been more comfortable during the day time than spending time on land.

Their brains grew bigger due to the new diet, high in Omega 3 fatty acids, the stuff brains are mostly made of besides water.

The fur and bulky muscles gave way to a more streamlined, hairless and fatty form, much better adapted to swimming.

The upright walking feet doubled as swimming paddles, providing double incentive for the gripping fingers to fade away.

Babies were born with the instinct to swim.

The long hair from the head gave the swimming babies something to cling to that would, for the most part, always be above water.

I never understood why its considered such a controversial theory, when we have so many aquatic mammals, all of which started off as land walkers. If a bear up to its neck in water can turn into a whale in a few million years, why can't a primate up to its neck in water turn into a proto-human in a few hundred thousand?

The fossil record may still be underwater, which explains why we have this huge gap of missing links.

Furthermore, it is clear that early humans primarily existed along the shore line, taking much of their nutrition from the sea, which is why they spread around the globe so quickly. If you connected all the coastline on earth and walked along it for 30 miles a day (something even grandma's could do before the age of the combustion engine), it would only take you 20 years to get to the end.

Thanks for reading.

Edit: I thought of one more thing. Fish oil. Now it seems its the wonder vitamin of the age. It doesn't just feed the brain, but it also stimulates virtually every system in the human body, promoting the ability to regenerate damaged tissues. Combine this with the most drastic environment change possible and now you have the explanation for jump starting extreme evolution.

Edited June 11, 2010 by Psycho78

[Mattshark]

I still prefer the aquatic theory.

A tectonic event could have caused a new ocean to form, trapping a group of primates on high ground with limited food sources.

This forced them to venture into the water for food, they began walking upright to keep their heads above water.

Or, the earth may have been so hot, as the OP's article states, that the water temperature might have been more comfortable during the day time than spending time on land.

Their brains grew bigger due to the new diet, high in Omega 3 fatty acids, the stuff brains are mostly made of besides water.

The fur and bulky muscles gave way to a more streamlined, hairless and fatty form, much better adapted to swimming.

The upright walking feet doubled as swimming paddles, providing double incentive for the gripping fingers to fade away.

Babies were born with the instinct to swim.

The long hair from the head gave the swimming babies something to cling to that would, for the most part, always be above water.

I never understood why its considered such a controversial theory, when we have so many aquatic mammals, all of which started off as land walkers. If a bear up to its neck in water can turn into a whale in a few million years, why can't a primate up to its neck in water turn into a proto-human in a few hundred thousand?

The fossil record may still be underwater, which explains why we have this huge gap of missing links.

Furthermore, it is clear that early humans primarily existed along the shore line, taking much of their nutrition from the sea, which is why they spread around the globe so quickly. If you connected all the coastline on earth and walked along it for 30 miles a day (something even grandma's could do before the age of the combustion engine), it would only take you 20 years to get to the end.

Thanks for reading.

Edit: I thought of one more thing. Fish oil. Now it seems its the wonder vitamin of the age. It doesn't just feed the brain, but it also stimulates virtually every system in the human body, promoting the ability to regenerate damaged tissues. Combine this with the most drastic environment change possible and now you have the explanation for jump starting extreme evolution.

Sorry mate, but aquatic ape is not a theory, it is a badly constructed hypothesis based on serious misconceptions about primate biology and fails to fit with evidence.

We don't have huge gaps and missing links, that is a media misunderstanding of the issue.

[+OverSword]

Don't you suppose that if it was an evolutionary change driven by some of the above reasons, that more than one species would walk upright?

[lost_shaman]

Don't you suppose that if it was an evolutionary change driven by some of the above reasons, that more than one species would walk upright?

Right now we know of at least half a dozen species that were obligatory bipeds. It wasn't just one species.

[nognome]

i thought heat was supposed to rise,i thought we were always supposed to consider the floor temperature as it can get cold for dogs on the floor.

and astute one?i cant see anybody by that name paranomralcy?

[Copasetic]

i thought heat was supposed to rise,i thought we were always supposed to consider the floor temperature as it can get cold for dogs on the floor.

and astute one?i cant see anybody by that name paranomralcy?

The post was probably removed by the moderators. Which is why you don't see it

To answer your first question, the answer is yes, heat rises. But to anyone who's ever been to the desert will tell you the difference in air temperature standing up or laying down is insignificant.

What's more significant is the total area of body exposed to direct sunlight. In quadrupeds there is more direct exposure than in tall skinny bipeds.

[Mr.United_Nations]

Well the planet was getting cooler around that time. Forests were shrinking and grasslands opened up. So the apes needed to travel accross the plains to get to a new eating ground. You wouldn't need to walk in a forest, you would have to climb.

[Halfwolf]

They started standing on 2 legs just because they could and liked it so they kept doing it.

[danielost]

humans are amongst the worse swimmers on the planet.

humans are amongst the worse walkers and runners on the planet.

humans cannot detect when a predator is in the area except by sight.

humans have some of the worse hearing on the planet.

the only thing walking up right gives humans is the ability to walk forever.

that isn't a big advantage of that lion can sneak up on you through the tall grass your trying to look over.

as i stated if your standing tall to see over the grass, that lion can see you too,

the only other animal that stands upright is the meerkat and his cousins, and they walk on all four.

humans didnt swim for a living, we cant swim now with out learning. yes i know one of the water mammals has to learn to swim. but they are much better swimmers than we are.

if humans were a natural part of a nature we should be extinct,

[Copasetic]

humans are amongst the worse swimmers on the planet.

Irrelevant to the context in which we evolved.

humans are amongst the worse walkers and runners on the planet.

Not at all, our bauplan allows efficient cooling and movement over long distances, especially in hot arid climates. More importantly, it allows us to do this with our hands full.

humans cannot detect when a predator is in the area except by sight.

And?

humans have some of the worse hearing on the planet.

And?

the only other animal that stands upright is the meerkat and his cousins, and they walk on all four.

......

When Daniel, did you see a Meerkat last carrying tools? Babies? Being nomadic?

if humans were a natural part of a nature we should be extinct,

Some of us certainly should, that's for sure. Thankfully we've adopted the "get by on others" approach....

[danielost]

Irrelevant to the context in which we evolved.

Not at all, our bauplan allows efficient cooling and movement over long distances, especially in hot arid climates. More importantly, it allows us to do this with our hands full.

And?

And?

......

When Daniel, did you see a Meerkat last carrying tools? Babies? Being nomadic?

Some of us certainly should, that's for sure. Thankfully we've adopted the "get by on others" approach....

i see you left out the part where i stated that the only advantage that we have is the ability to walk forever.

the rest you didn't really have a contour to.

[Mattshark]

i see you left out the part where i stated that the only advantage that we have is the ability to walk forever.

the rest you didn't really have a contour to.

Because it is obviously not true, as Copa shows.

Do you no consider thermoregulation and being able to carry, along with good acceleration advantages? Not mention the other advantages of being a social animal and the advantage in spotting predators that walking upright gives, and yes it is a big advantage when you look how most animals hunt.

[danielost]

Because it is obviously not true, as Copa shows.

Do you no consider thermoregulation and being able to carry, along with good acceleration advantages? Not mention the other advantages of being a social animal and the advantage in spotting predators that walking upright gives, and yes it is a big advantage when you look how most animals hunt.

wrong again. he stated the samething i did except he added carrying tools. problem is chimps carry tools with them too.

[Mattshark]

wrong again. he stated the samething i did except he added carrying tools. problem is chimps carry tools with them too.

I'm not wrong daniel, you just made a completely inaccurate statement.

the only advantage that we have is the ability to walk forever

See, this statement is simply wrong.

They can't do it as easily or efficiently as we can.

[danielost]

I'm not wrong daniel, you just made a completely inaccurate statement.

See, this statement is simply wrong.

They can't do it as easily or efficiently as we can.

i think you misread that post at least twice. read it again, in the place of the word we put the word human.