Water Babies..Aquatic Ape

I've always thought this theory was very interesting...In 1968 Dual Congress on Paleontology and Human Biology a lady named Elaine Morgan presented this theory she maybe be really stretching the point and the the scientific community vehemently objects to this the theory because its full of non-scientific ideas..Plus its a very old theory but i have to wonder only about 1% of fossil evidence has ever discovered and maybe there is something that we have missed..To me this theory makes as much sense as any other I've heard..I'm not saying i believe in this theory im just saying its interesting and something to chat about ..peace,sugarcookie1

A short video explaining the Aquatic Ape Theory

Elaine Morgan is a tenacious proponent of the aquatic ape hypothesis: the idea that humans evolved from primate ancestors who dwelt in watery habitats. Hear her spirited defense of the idea -- and her theory on why mainstream science doesn't take it seriously.

No one even has a thought on this? I thought it was interisting..sugarcookie1

A friend of mine who was really educated on evolution once told me we have some sort of blood vessel that wraps around in a totally pointless manner but it is similar to those found in fish that supply oxygen to the blood through the gills. Implying humans had gills at one point but they went away and this strange artery remained.

ETA: I think I found what he was talking about, I was somewhat close in my paraphrasing. Basically there are arteries that form during fetal development that simply wither away for no reason without connecting anywhere, and the pictures look quite similar to those found in fish.

biologos.org...

reply to post by sugarcookie1


I've always liked the Aquatic Ape Theory. I'm personally rather dubious about a fully aquatic stage; however, I certainly think that an ancestor that was considerably more aquatic and physiologically, and morphologically more adapted to such an existence is possible.

Point of note countering the vid:

Horses sweat. Cows sweat. In fact, many ungulates (even and odd toed) sweat. Interestingly, animals that sweat don't pant.

i've watched both video segments. the theory is quite interesting. and may even be more valid than the current theory. that being said, she is absolutely right. the powers that be, academia, won't allow this aquatic theory to come into any prominence. not because this theory is wrong or of the "lunatic fringe of science", but because it sets a precedent that a long standing, generally accepted, theory of human evolution can be wrong. modern science has built upon darwin's theory and requires it to be a bedrock of stability. if current science accepts aquatic theory or even considers it to be a valid argument requiring research, it brings into question darwin's evolutionary theory. and that cannot be allowed. it opens doors to possibilities that mainstream won't allow and cannot allow.

reply to post by sugarcookie1


I have a site examining the idea and it doesn't add up when you look at the evidence honestly and carefully. It covers the info presented in the video as well as having, for instance, a page on Morgan's TED Talk. The site is Aquatic Ape: Sink or Swim

reply to post by martianmallow


martianmallow,Thank you for the interesting article i found it very interesting i had no idea about this ..I love reading about this kind of thing..peace,sugarcookie1

reply to post by redhorse


I've always liked the Aquatic Ape Theory also even though its a huge stretch the fully aquatic stage is a bit over the top but hey its something to think about since we really don't know the answer to all this..peace,sugarcookie1

reply to post by Lawgiver


Your right as along as modern science says its not valid then its written in stone i don't think mainstream science will ever go along with this theory plus they say they have enough evidence to prove the Aquatic Ape Theory just could never have happened..peace,sugarcookie1

reply to post by anthrosciguy


anthrosciguy,Thank you for the link ive read Jim Moore's idea on all this and alot of it makes sense also but i dont think Elaine was being deliberately misleading i think she just feels her theroy is the true one ..But Jim did point out alot that makes what she says to be a huge streach ..Maybe someday we will know the truth..peace,sugarcookie1

reply to post by sugarcookie1

I read one of Elaine Morgan's books as an undergraduate after a friend recommended it to me. I foolishly thought that the Savannah Theory/Descent of Man would descend and the The Scars of Evolution with associated Aquatic Ape Theory ascend. To me it looked like a no-brainer....

Nearly twenty years later and hardly a thing seems to have changed. The savannah theory appears to have been revised but the Aquatic Ape theory is still absent from course syllabuses (syllabi?) below degree level.

reply to post by Pimander


Pimander, thank you for posting..I just ordered the book The Scars of Evolution it looks like a good read thanks for the link ..I always wondered why us as humans have so much back pain and other problems i think Elaine even though the scientific community thinks she is wrong may be on to something..peace,sugarcookie1

reply to post by sugarcookie1

Thanks for giving Elaine Morgan a bit of "air time" on ATS. I hope you enjoy the book, I certainly did.

David Attenborough was mentioned by Elaine in the talk above. He actually taught and had a massive influence over on of my tutors so you could say he influenced me too. Attenborough has made a 2 part BBC Radio series about the Aquatic Ape Theory. Here is the link if anyone is interested.

The Scars of Evolution: Sir David Attenborough looks at the 'aquatic ape hypothesis'

reply to post by Pimander


Thanks again Pimander..I will listen to the link as soon as i have the time to sit down and soak it in..Elaine Morgan has been laughed out of the scientific community along with others but i do like her out of the box thinking on this subject ..peace,sugarcookie1

reply to post by sugarcookie1

It is worth noting that David Attenborough hasn't. He is still highly respected.

reply to post by Pimander


Thanks for posting peace,sugarcookie1

I've often heard of it described as widely discredited, debunked. Never researched it though.

RationalWiki is great for things like this. Just a bit of Skepticism and Criticism. Surely will help you decide however you want to view the idea.