TITLE:
Removing the “Hermetic Seal” from the Aquatic Ape Hypothesis: Waterside Hypotheses of Human Evolution
AUTHORS:
Algis V. Kuliukas
KEYWORDS:
AAH, Aquatic Ape Hypothesis, Waterside Hypotheses, Paranasal Sinuses
JOURNAL NAME:
Advances in Anthropology,
Vol.4 No.3,
August
20,
2014
ABSTRACT:
The
current (March/April 2014) issue of Evolutionary Anthropology is rare in that
it contains two papers specifically critiquing the so-called “aquatic ape
hypothesis” (abbreviated “AAH”, but better labelled, in the plural, “waterside
hypotheses of human evolution.”). The first (Foley & Lahr, 2014) is a general assessment of the
authors’ interpretation of the AAH and the second (Rae & Koppe, 2014) is a particular rebuttal of one
specific idea—the sinuses for floatation hypothesis. This short paper is a
response to both. It is argued that the first uses a straw man’s argument to
characterize the so-called “AAH” as arguing for exclusively more aquatic
adaptations than waterside proponents have in the past. Foley & Lahr’s
paper is also unscholarly in that it does not draw upon the latest scholarly
work. One chapter of that work re-defines and re-labels the “AAH”, which was of
key importance to their paper. Rae & Koppe’s paper is harder to criticize
but still contains some problems which the authors overlook in their strict
rejection of the sinuses for floatation hypothesis. If one understands that
waterside hypotheses of human evolution are simply postulating that major
phenotypic differences between humans and chimps are the result of a (perhaps
slight) differential in the selection from wading, swimming and diving, they
cannot be ridiculed as belonging in the same “crazy box” as creationism as
Henry Gee recently argued and must take their place within mainstream physical
anthropology.