The aquatic ape hypothesis was never crazy

Yep, there are only so many ways one can say, "this has been dismissed by the scientific community."

No, it really hasn't. Ask them. They just don't have the kill argument. Poor John Langdon's umbrellas was supposed to be it. And it just can't be it without tearing up everything since Copernicus. How much are you willing to sacrifice, because this voice from the wilderness terrifies your ape subconsciousness too?
 
None of you have taken apart seeing water in human loss of fur coupled with blubberesque skinfat. Fully from all those annoying analogies seen in other mammal species in the tree of life who evolved exactly the same traits for that exact wet reason, or all those that didn't for dry reasons. Without all those analogies straight from the ever dwindling natural world, the aquatic ape theory would not exist. And that lack of fur + skinfat is just Hardy's very first observation from 1929.

How am I to see the error of my ways? You keep claiming this one is so damn easy to pick apart, without any of you actually doing it. While you also keep demanding that I take their word for it. That's not science as I learned it.

1729637885480-png.6231
 
Yeah it’s psychiatric, basically. You can tell by some of the randomness. No chance of a rational discussion. Just wild shouting.

Yeah, keep with the Winnie Mandela defense instead of actually answering. That'll sure make me drop this forever. There is no chance of a rational discussion with any of you.
 
Back
Top