Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

Elaine Morgan's Aquatic Ape Theory


  • Please log in to reply
71 replies to this topic

#1    :PsYKoTiC:BeHAvIoR:

:PsYKoTiC:BeHAvIoR:

    Deadliest of the Species

  • Member
  • 3,798 posts
  • Joined:11 Jul 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New Brunswick

Posted 13 March 2009 - 04:54 PM

Here's a little something I stumbled on a few days ago. I searched in UM's site and I haven't found any topic about this subject. Elaine Morgan's theory states a possible aquatic phase may have occured during the evolution chain between apes and humans, more specifically, a possible reason why we became bipedal. She's not an Archeologist nor a scientist either. That's what makes the idea so skeptic worthy. It does sound off the path, but I have to admit, many of her observations does stand up.

She also wrote several books about it. Here's an excerpt from Wikipedia:

"Elaine Morgan (born Elaine Floyd 1920) is a Welsh feminist writer, best known for her television work, including screenwriting most of the episodes of Dr. Finlay's Casebook. She is also the author of several books about the aquatic ape hypothesis, among them The Descent of Woman, The Aquatic Ape, The Scars of Evolution, The Descent of the Child, The Aquatic Ape Hypothesis and her latest The Naked Darwinist which discussed the reasons why there is so little discussion of aquatic scenarios in the academic literature. She also authored Falling Apart and Pinker's List."

Source: http://en.wikipedia...._Morgan_(writer)

I've also found a Discovery Channel documentary dated in 1998 about the subject on Youtube.

Aquatic Ape - Part 1: Here..
Aquatic Ape - Part 2: Here.
Aquatic Ape - Part 3: Here.
Aquatic Ape - Part 4: Here.
Aquatic Ape - Part 5: And here.

It's an interesting watch. Anyone ever hear about it?

Posted Image
"I'd long heard rumors of an alien species that hunted men for sport. I'd always thought they were nothing but campfire tales."


#2    Mattshark

Mattshark

    stuff

  • Member
  • 16,985 posts
  • Joined:29 Dec 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Liverpool, UK

  • Sea Shepherd, making conservation harder.

    If you care about wildlife, do not support these pirates.......

Posted 13 March 2009 - 04:56 PM

Her hypothesis has been dismissed because it relys on what amounts to blatantly wrong information. There are already numerous threads showing all this.

Algae : Protists not Plants!

YNWA

#3    :PsYKoTiC:BeHAvIoR:

:PsYKoTiC:BeHAvIoR:

    Deadliest of the Species

  • Member
  • 3,798 posts
  • Joined:11 Jul 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New Brunswick

Posted 13 March 2009 - 04:59 PM

Mattshark on Mar 13 2009, 12:56 PM, said:

Her hypothesis has been dismissed because it relys on what amounts to blatantly wrong information. There are already numerous threads showing all this.


UM's search engine didn't provide any existing threads. Can you provide links?

Posted Image
"I'd long heard rumors of an alien species that hunted men for sport. I'd always thought they were nothing but campfire tales."


#4    Mattshark

Mattshark

    stuff

  • Member
  • 16,985 posts
  • Joined:29 Dec 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Liverpool, UK

  • Sea Shepherd, making conservation harder.

    If you care about wildlife, do not support these pirates.......

Posted 13 March 2009 - 05:03 PM

:PsYKoTiC:BeHAvIoR: on Mar 13 2009, 04:59 PM, said:

UM's search engine didn't provide any existing threads. Can you provide links?

http://www.unexplained-mysteries.com/forum...=143302&hl=
Here you go.

Algae : Protists not Plants!

YNWA

#5    :PsYKoTiC:BeHAvIoR:

:PsYKoTiC:BeHAvIoR:

    Deadliest of the Species

  • Member
  • 3,798 posts
  • Joined:11 Jul 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New Brunswick

Posted 13 March 2009 - 05:42 PM

Thanks, much appreciated.

Posted Image
"I'd long heard rumors of an alien species that hunted men for sport. I'd always thought they were nothing but campfire tales."


#6    jaylemurph

jaylemurph

    "If we would know, then we would be more wisdomed."

  • Member
  • 9,554 posts
  • Joined:02 Nov 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Seattle, WA

  • "You can lead a whore to culture, but you can't make him think." Dorothy Parker

Posted 13 March 2009 - 05:44 PM

Interesting comparison: Henry Lincoln, one of the chief perpetrators of the "Holy Blood, Holy Grail" non-sense was also a script-writer for the BBC in the 1960s*.

Not sure how being a scriptwriter leads to any expertise in "documentary" writing, but these two give strong examples it doesn't.

--Jaylemurph


*He wrote the dullest episode ever, actually.

"... amongst the most obstinate of our opinions may be classed those which derive from discussions in which we affect to search for the truth, while in reality we are only fortifying prejudice."     -- James Fenimore Cooper, The Pathfinder

Posted Image

Deeply venial

#7    :PsYKoTiC:BeHAvIoR:

:PsYKoTiC:BeHAvIoR:

    Deadliest of the Species

  • Member
  • 3,798 posts
  • Joined:11 Jul 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:New Brunswick

Posted 13 March 2009 - 05:54 PM

jaylemurph on Mar 13 2009, 01:44 PM, said:

Not sure how being a scriptwriter leads to any expertise in "documentary" writing, but these two give strong examples it doesn't.


*Shrugs* I couldn't say either. I'm neighter for or against the idea. just thought that certain explanations made sense. Any hypothesises always sound crazy at first.

Posted Image
"I'd long heard rumors of an alien species that hunted men for sport. I'd always thought they were nothing but campfire tales."


#8    jaylemurph

jaylemurph

    "If we would know, then we would be more wisdomed."

  • Member
  • 9,554 posts
  • Joined:02 Nov 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Seattle, WA

  • "You can lead a whore to culture, but you can't make him think." Dorothy Parker

Posted 13 March 2009 - 06:14 PM

:PsYKoTiC:BeHAvIoR: on Mar 13 2009, 12:54 PM, said:

*Shrugs* I couldn't say either. I'm neighter for or against the idea. just thought that certain explanations made sense. Any hypothesises always sound crazy at first.


I'm right there with you. I think it's interesting, but I just don't know enough to evaluate it personally, and everyone I know who can dismisses it.

I mean, as someone who's involved with both dramatic writing and critical writing about gender issues, I *know* I have no business writing articles about comparative and evolutionary biology. so I'm fascinated this person /did/. Her chutzpah alone makes me curious.

--Jaylemurph

"... amongst the most obstinate of our opinions may be classed those which derive from discussions in which we affect to search for the truth, while in reality we are only fortifying prejudice."     -- James Fenimore Cooper, The Pathfinder

Posted Image

Deeply venial

#9    AncientTheory

AncientTheory

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 30 posts
  • Joined:21 Feb 2009

Posted 13 March 2009 - 08:45 PM

This is still up for debate and has not been fully disproven in any standard. So please dont close your minds to something with such evidence. Even if a couple of fancy degree's tell you other wise

Edited by AncientTheory, 13 March 2009 - 08:55 PM.


#10    jaylemurph

jaylemurph

    "If we would know, then we would be more wisdomed."

  • Member
  • 9,554 posts
  • Joined:02 Nov 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Seattle, WA

  • "You can lead a whore to culture, but you can't make him think." Dorothy Parker

Posted 13 March 2009 - 08:50 PM

AncientTheory on Mar 13 2009, 03:45 PM, said:

i believe disproved or not that it should not just be thrown away nothing else has every thing completely there and no other theory can explain every thing perfectly! But the evidence is there so don't act as if it is dumb or unjustified to question what the population believes. I know for a fact that science is not all so perfect and dandy as every one wishes it to be knowing this would let you know that even the most controversial theories have meaning but this is to much to ignore. The only reason it has been ignored is because the people that put there sweat and blood into the research of evolution as we know it would not just give up what they put there whole worthless lives into so they throw down every thing that comes along and tries to prove what they think same goes for every one but dont disregard every thing because some silly archealogist say so.


The point is (as I'm sure mattshark can tell better than I) the evidence /isn't/ there. That's why scientific theories fall out of use or (as in this case) never catch on.

And I'm quite sure going around believing things because most of the population does is a mistake.

--Jaylemurph


edit: Matt, I don't know how you do it; it strikes me that so few people on this forum actually understand what science /is/ and how it works that if I were a scientician, I'd just be reduced to shouting a lot.

Edited by jaylemurph, 13 March 2009 - 08:51 PM.

"... amongst the most obstinate of our opinions may be classed those which derive from discussions in which we affect to search for the truth, while in reality we are only fortifying prejudice."     -- James Fenimore Cooper, The Pathfinder

Posted Image

Deeply venial

#11    AncientTheory

AncientTheory

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 30 posts
  • Joined:21 Feb 2009

Posted 13 March 2009 - 08:57 PM

Ahhh. yes the evidence isn't is it well is there solid proof evidence for any thing. name something that i cant disprove with less then 3 sentences. Can you please i'll even add in some evidence that says its not true k is this a deal?


#12    AncientTheory

AncientTheory

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 30 posts
  • Joined:21 Feb 2009

Posted 13 March 2009 - 09:01 PM

jaylemurph on Mar 13 2009, 09:50 PM, said:

The point is (as I'm sure mattshark can tell better than I) the evidence /isn't/ there. That's why scientific theories fall out of use or (as in this case) never catch on.

And I'm quite sure going around believing things because most of the population does is a mistake.

--Jaylemurph


edit: Matt, I don't know how you do it; it strikes me that so few people on this forum actually understand what science /is/ and how it works that if I were a scientician, I'd just be reduced to shouting a lot.


Hmm yes it is a mistake and thats where the flaws of what every one around you dont know. Even the smartest minds are tamed by the sheer will of the majority and not wanting to look like a baboon. But is there full proof evidence for any thing, and is there full proof evidence disregarding everything that someone else has theorized experimented and concluded on? Also I believe what you Bolded is what you dont know about i was referring to what you and matt most willingly throw around, where do you get your info from , how about this

(And I'm quite sure going around believing things because most of the population does is a mistake.

--Jaylemurph)? jaylemurph I believe thats exactly what you are doing, there is no doubt that plains evolution has just as many or more holes in it than aquatic ape but yet you believe what the majority says.

Dear jaylemurph,

With all respect intended you are not a Scientist are you? How would you for absolute positivity know that something is and is not true in the field of science or evolution?

I am no scientist and i am no evolutionist but if i do say so plains evolution is as unlikely as aquatic ape.

PS: What is a (scientician)? because i do believe its not a word. I've ever heard of.


Also not to leave out matt,

Are you in fact a scientist with a degree or other source of false knowledge in a certificate form? Because i would love to hear about every bit of knowledge you possess on this field of archealogy and evolution, Please if you would share!

Edited by AncientTheory, 13 March 2009 - 09:20 PM.


#13    AncientTheory

AncientTheory

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 30 posts
  • Joined:21 Feb 2009

Posted 13 March 2009 - 09:40 PM

Also one thing in natural selection standards as dumb human beings walking around eating, drinking and sleeping predators should have picked us off by the first 10 thousand years of our existance. So how did we survive could, and i dare say it water have provided or defencless asses with protection from predators. Oh an damn has any one ever thought of possible not being a predatory animal at all we would have been smart enough to know we couldn't take on a pack of lions that would have enterupted our hunting on there animals of prey even with spears, and numbers.


#14    jaylemurph

jaylemurph

    "If we would know, then we would be more wisdomed."

  • Member
  • 9,554 posts
  • Joined:02 Nov 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Seattle, WA

  • "You can lead a whore to culture, but you can't make him think." Dorothy Parker

Posted 13 March 2009 - 09:48 PM

AncientTheory on Mar 13 2009, 04:01 PM, said:

Hmm yes it is a mistake and thats where the flaws of what every one around you dont know.


I'm sorry I don't understand what you mean.

Quote

Even the smartest minds are tamed by the sheer will of the majority and not wanting to look like a baboon.


Well, that's patently not true. There wouldn't be any advancement, full stop, if that were true. Copernicus, Darwin and Einstein all taught things that went against the "will of the majority" and didn't let "looking like a baboon" stop them.

Quote

But is there full proof evidence for any thing, and is there full proof evidence disregarding everything that someone else has theorized experimented and concluded on?


Again, I'm struggling against your language to understand what you mean here. Is there "full proof evidence for any thing": do you mean "is there fool-proof evidence for anything" or "is there full proof, evidence for any thing"? The answer is both is yes. There are plenty of scientific processes and laws that are completely understood. Uhh, chemical reactions come to mind.

"Is there fool-proof evidence against everything someone else has concluded?" I think this was the second half of what you were trying to ask. If so, then you don't quite understand how logic works and how it is applied to science. You can't prove a negative; you can't prove something is false.

Quote

Also I believe what you Bolded is what you dont know about i was referring to what you and matt most willingly throw around, where do you get your info from


Again, I just can't grasp what you're trying to say. Just too many run-on clauses on top of each other. If it comes to proof against this aquatic ape theory, I'm again going to point out my above statement. It isn't a question of proving it's false as much as is it proving something else --here, standard models of hominid evolution -- is true. I can point you to any number of evolution sites for that.

If it /is/ about proving your theory true, then the onus is on you to come up with proof for that in this discussion.


Quote

jaylemurph I believe thats exactly what you are doing, there is no doubt that plains evolution has just as many or more holes in it than aquatic ape but yet you believe what the majority says.


Six of ten people in America don't believe in evolution. I'm not advocating a popular belief in my country. You're right, in some respects, that ultimately it does come down to trusting other people, and in this case I'm going to trust not only people better educated and better trained in this specific field than I am, but people who's opinion coincides with what I've already learned and who also conform to standard scientific model... a model that was designed and functions outside of mere belief. It works by reproducing facts.

From your posting, I think it's clear you don't understand what that is or how it works exactly, or there wouldn't be -- ipso facto -- this sort of debate on "proof" and how it works.

QUOTE
With all respect intended you are not a Scientist are you? How would you for absolute positivity know that something is and is not true in the field of science or evolution?


I may not be a scientist, but I am an academic. I've taken multiple science classes and understood them. I have friends and colleagues who are scientists and I talk things over with them. I read a variety of scientific journals, just to keep a toe in the latest developments, esp. in subjects like archaeology and anthropology that are  tangential to my own field.

QUOTE
I am no scientist and i am no evolutionist but if i do say so plains evolution is as unlikely as aquatic ape.


But if you don't understand the science and the facts behind it, how much is that opinion worth? I mean, I know what I know, as it were, and how much it's worth -- and I would remind you that rather than pontificating as if I were the only source of knowledge, I started out this discussion deferring to people I know could better handle it. And I still do. If matt or copascetic or anyone else with a superior knowledge of the subject wants to refute or correct anything here, I invite them to.

QUOTE
PS: What is a (scientician)? because i do believe its not a word. I've ever heard of.


It's a joke. The word doesn't really exist in English except as a piece of satire.

--Jaylemurph


"... amongst the most obstinate of our opinions may be classed those which derive from discussions in which we affect to search for the truth, while in reality we are only fortifying prejudice."     -- James Fenimore Cooper, The Pathfinder

Posted Image

Deeply venial

#15    HerNibs

HerNibs

    Grand Duchess Anaesthesia

  • Member
  • 12,546 posts
  • Joined:03 Jan 2007
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Colorado

  • Endless repetition does not make something true.

Posted 13 March 2009 - 10:02 PM

Interesting.  I read the Wiki and will go "in seach of" other information but I am confused.

I am gathering that she is stating that we/humans were aquatic at one time in our evolution, correct?

When were we aquatic?  At what stage?  The article/Wiki mentions one of her reasons being that us walking upright would be better suited in the deep.

Wouldn't that have put us/humans in the water AFTER we had begun using tools and such?

Just need some clarification on her hypothesis.  How is she justifying this?

original.gif

HN

*off to review thread Mattshark linked.

Just because it is a mystery to YOU doesn't make it unexplained.

STORM - a must watch - caution, some profanity and may cause you to experience reason.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users