ROBERT SEPEHR
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G7sykmrNCMs
Francesca Mansfield:
“It’s a big shame that you’re throwing out the baby with the bath water here. I don’t know anything about Robert Sepehr, and haven’t watched his video so cannot fairly comment, but it does seem to me he’s more interested in promoting click-
baity videos than putting forward good science. Elaine Morgan, OTOH, was on to something, and while she may have got a few things wrong, due to there being less evidence at the time she wrote, there is certainly enough scientific evidence available now
to give the basic tenets of AAT a fair hearing. Nobody is actually arguing that an ape went into the water, went through a fully aquatic mermaid stage and then emerged as Homo sapiens. That is just part of the ignorance that has dogged the hypothesis for
so long. What most serious researchers and scientists who support aspects of AAT are really saying is that “water has played a morphological role in the evolution of our species” and there is plenty of evidence to support this. For instance, Prof.
Michael Crawford has written about the essentialness of LC-PUFAs/DHA/Omega 3/AA/iodine, etc. for brain development – something that can only be found in the marine food chain, and the biggest brains are aquatic too. There has even been a recent paper
showing that “a variant improving the synthesis of long-chain omega-3 fatty acids in the absence of a fish-rich diet originated in Africa around 84,000 years ago” [M.Gross, Current Biology, 2017), which suggests that until that time, our ancestors
must have been dependent on those fatty acids, and therefore, a seafood diet. Only after that time must H. sapiens have started becoming more terrestrial and moving away from the coasts. Professor Stephen Cunnane from the University of Toronto has
written about the importance of fat for buoyancy and insulation; Marcel F. Williams, a science writer and manager of a forum on primatology and human evolution, has studied the unique - among primates - phenomenon of human multi-pyramidal kidneys, a
feature only shared by aquatic mammals. Michel Odent, obstetrician, and birthing pioneer has written about how an aquatic evolution has played a role in the development of the foetus and implications for childbirth. Belgian pathologist/medical doctor and
anthropological researcher, Marc Verhaegen, has contributed a great deal concerning the comparative similarities between aquatic / semi-aquatic mammals and human ancestors, and has been a strong proponent of the multiphase aquatic evolution of apes
through to hominins. Prof. Mario Vaneechoutte, (Ghent University, Belgium), has written about the connections between swimming/diving and song/speech in humans. The late Peter Rhys Evans, with fifty years of experience as an Ear, Nose and Throat surgeon,
was one of the first people to notice a high incidence of ear exostoses (surfer’s ear) in his swimming patients and predicted that if humans had had an aquatic past, evidence would appear in the fossil record. Not long afterwards, scientists began
writing about the high incidence of ear exostoses in Neanderthal and Homo erectus fossils (as addressed in his book ‘The Waterside Ape’). Dr Algis Kuliukas researched and wrote about wading as a component in the evolution of hominid bipedality for
his doctoral thesis and now some filmmakers and article writers are beginning to propose that maybe wading in water is what made apes stand up on two legs – it’s not such an outlandish idea after all… chimps, bonobos and gorillas all do it. Swedish
scientist and zoology professor Erika Schagatay and her students have spent many years studying modern semi-aquatic nomads, such as the Moken and the Bajut Laut. She has published dozens of research papers detailing her studies into various aspects of
their lifestyles, such as how they can to focus their eyes underwater or swim before they can walk; their superior breath holding abilities, as well as several physiological indications (such as spleen enlargement) demonstrating that the human body
allows for enhanced free-diving capabilities, placing us somewhere in the shallow-diving range of semi-aquatic mammals, such as seals and otters. Professor Phillip Tobias (University of Witwatersrand, South-Africa, successor of the chair of Raymond Dart,
and custodian of the largest collection of A. africanus specimens) retracted his claims on the Savannah Theory and advocated more research into how an aquatic environment might have influenced human evolution. Even renowned naturalist, Sir David
Attenborough has not been afraid to offer his voice and support to many aspects of the aquatic ape theory, despite vehement rebukes from his peers. This is just a short mention of some of the many scientists and researchers who support an aquatic period
or periods in human evolution, but it’s no exaggeration to point out that since the time of Hardy’s first Eureka moment in the late 1920s, any scientist seeming to support an alternative paradigm of human evolution is effectively committing
professional suicide, due to the overwhelming bias that surrounds the established paradigm. And the established paradigm continues to put forward so many unproven assumptions – such as that Homo erectus ran across the savannah hunting large prey, or
that we evolved our eccrine sweating capability on the savannah to cool down – which make absolutely no sense when you begin to look at it more closely. For a start, H. erectus had very heavy bones, something only found in shallow diving animals, and
there’s no evidence they could run, or hunt, or even eat meat, but plenty of evidence they could dive and swim and had the perfect tools for opening shells. Losing copious amounts of water and salt in the desert which cannot be replaced immediately is
extremely dangerous and quickly leads to death. Why on earth would nature come up with such a solution? No other terrestrial desert animal has done so. Our ancestors would have need to replace a litre of water for every hour in the sun - you can only do
that if you live permanently close to water. Every single H. erectus fossil and pretty much every other African hominin fossil has been found next to ancient bodies of water and the fauna that inhabited it. You also dismiss things like loss of pelage
with erroneous arguments. Yes, some seals have fur, but they live in arctic zones. The general rule in comparative biology for losing fur is for large animals in tropical zones, where the payoff for better streamlining and less waterlogging, combined
with a thermally buoyant subcutaneous fat layer is worth the loss. It's generally accepted that elephants and pigs descend from semi-aquatic ancestors. You made many more incorrect statements, too many to mention here, but you were correct about one
thing: AAT or any aspect of it, is not taught in universities, but this doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be. It took a long time for Darwin’s theory of natural selection to be accepted after all, and dismissing any idea because it’s not widely supported
is, simply, unscientific.
http://aquatic-human-ancestor.org/”
Francesca
From:
AAT@groups.io <
AAT@groups.io> On Behalf Of terry turner
Sent: Monday, November 28, 2022 10:21 PM
To:
AAT@groups.io
Cc: DDeden <
daud.deden@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [AAT] AAH review video by bioanthropologist gutsick gibbon.
Some may have missed the site address and want to see for themselves.
The Aquatic Ape Hypothesis (Is Silly)
Erika AKA Gutsick Gibbon
https://youtu.be/tU1hmygPdYY
Perhaps her other videos do a more balanced job, but she has an obvious dislike for Robert Sepehr. In the accompanying text she describes Robert as a 'local goober'.
And the video she is reviewing is:
Aquatic Ape Theory - ROBERT SEPEHR
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G7sykmrNCMs
I think that Robert Sepehr searches for YouTube videos that attract some steady views over time and does his own video on that subject. He does no more research than necessary and blends in topics from his other videos hoping to get clicks on those.
He is after YouTube revenue sharing. A click-monger.
Terry
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)