posted on Sep, 30 2010 @ 10:53 AM
It's been investigated (lots) and is now dismissed by almost everyone except the woman who came up with the idea (her approach now is that it's
being dismissed because she's not a scientist.)
There are several problems with this.
* We don't have mummies of these very early ancestors, so we don't know at which stage we lost most of our body hair. Artists (it's an artistic
bias) draw early ancestors as hairy and being similar to apes, when the truth is that most of them wouldn't look THAT weird if you removed the
"chimpanzee pelt" texturing that artists are so fond of.
* It doesn't explain the divergence into many human species (Heidelbergensis, Neanderthal, etc, etc)... none of whom had any adaptations for
The Wikipedia article has a summary of the physiological details that the writer/inventor of the theory glossed over (not being an anatomist) that
really knock holes into this one.
It *is* true, however, that hominids often lived on the seashore. However, humans have been living on the seashores as well as in the interior of
continents for hundreds of thousands of years and the seashore ones don't really look different from the ones living in the mountains or on the
tundras or steppes.