Paleo Diet: Raw Paleo Diet and Lifestyle Forum
Raw Paleo Diet Forums => Hot Topics => Topic started by: kurite on March 30, 2010, 06:49:08 am
-
Hey just wondering how many of you believe in this theory. I personally don't believe, it simply doesn't make sense to me.
-
I read that the most current version says that early humans would have spent a lot of time in and around rivers and lakes. The "next-to-the-sea" version of the theory doesn't fit the fossil record, but the rivers-and-lakes theory might, for all I know.
-
I read that the most current version says that early humans would have spent a lot of time in and around rivers and lakes. The "next-to-the-sea" version of the theory doesn't fit the fossil record, but the rivers-and-lakes theory might, for all I know.
What's the difference between that latest version of the aquatic ape hypothesis and the savannah hypothesis, which also said that humans spent a lot of time near rivers and lakes (for both a source of water and an attractant for game to hunt)? Do you have any links on it? I need a statement of the theory before I can determine whether I think it's plausible or not.
-
I think The Life Aquatic was poorly written.
-
I think(?) that the newest version of the aquatic ape theory re ancestors living near lakes/rivers, is now called the "shoreline hypothesis". The idea is that they ate lots of seafood but also hunted wild game on land. The wikipedia article is quite interesting re its criticisms of the theory:-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aquatic_ape_hypothesis#Criticisms