It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Perhaps the missing link is out where the coast once was.

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 9 2011 @ 05:21 PM
link   
The Pliocene period was a hot spell of about 10 million years which ended about 2 million years ago. It’s no great leap of imagination to think of a smart ape with a natural ability to adapt to start poking around the shoreline of a pre historic coast in search of food in an environment where the climate is making it harder and harder to find food. And if that coast should become the main source of food well evolution is bound to give the fury little primates a bit of a hand.

A point is reached over time, this is evolution so we’re not thinking days here but might have been shorter than we’d think, that these apes start to spend more time searching for food in the water than on land. In fact as time goes by they really only use the land to breed, sleep and I suppose groom and bond.

One day the climate changes and they leave the water for the advantages now being offered on land but they’ve changed.

They’ve lost their thick fur and now they have fine hair on their body and a great mat of hair on their head. Great for infants to hang on to in the water but also good for keeping the sun of their head in the water and on land.

They no longer have the flat open nose of other apes now they have a protruding nose shield and the nasal apertures face down.

In time the mild webbing on their hands and feet will reduce further but the remnants will still be there

They weep! They’re the only primate that does. Now now, don’t confuse the moisture found in the eyes of other primates as weeping because they are not the same thing. Weeping is only found in animals which live in or off the ocean.

Now they are back on the land the hands they developed in the water when looking for food have become more sensitive than that of the other primates and nimble as well. What used to be good for getting muscles from shells in rock pools and such will be great for making tools one day. Also their fingernails grow at a faster rate than the other primates due to the nature in which they had to scratch around or prise open shellfish.

They haven’t ignored the water though and they will retain the diving reflex which is an aid to breath control underwater found in other aquatic species which causes some of its body process to slow down temporarily reducing its oxygen demands and its heartbeat speed is reduced.

It went into the water as an ape and came out well on the way to being human. True there's no fossil record if it's under water but:

Look at what we humans have in common with other ocean goers.

Chararacteristics Humans _ Apes _Savannah_ Aquatics
Habitual Bipedalism Yes - - -
Loss of body hair Yes - Yes Yes
Skin-bonded fat deposits Yes - - Yes
Ventro-ventral copulation Yes Yes - Yes
Dimunition of apocrine glands Yes - - Yes
Hymen Yes - - Yes
Enlarged sebaceous glands Yes - - Yes
Psychic tears Yes - - Yes
Loss of vibrissae Yes - - Yes
Volitional breath control Yes - - Yes
Eccrine thermoregulation Yes - - Yes
Descended larynx Yes - - Yes

The Aquatic phase took place more than 5 million years ago


Check out this link and there's heaps more on the net.

www.primitivism.com...
edit on 9-9-2011 by steveknows because: (no reason given)

edit on 9-9-2011 by steveknows because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 9 2011 @ 05:28 PM
link   
I couldn't get that chart to copy properly but its on the link.



posted on Sep, 9 2011 @ 05:36 PM
link   
maybe an ape somehow was hybridized with dolphins?

the chromosome pairs and amphibious features u mentioned would be great giveaways..



posted on Sep, 9 2011 @ 05:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by ignant
maybe an ape somehow was hybridized with dolphins?

the chromosome pairs and amphibious features u mentioned would be great giveaways..



Not likely



posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 01:18 AM
link   
I guess there was too much evidence for debate. Perhaps I should have thrown in an alien or two.
edit on 12-9-2011 by steveknows because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 2 2011 @ 03:28 PM
link   
Just saw the link in another thread....

Great info read the post and your link. I had never really heard of AAT before. Makes alot of sense to me. I guess no one posted on it. No need to if they cant argue against what you post.

Thanks S&F i'll have to do some of my own research



posted on Dec, 2 2011 @ 03:59 PM
link   

So contrary to the AAT/H claim, humans are not the only non-aquatic mammal which can hold its breath. Various monkeys, for instance, can and do hold their breath, and so do dogs. (Another common and related AAT/H claim is that non-aquatic animals have no control over their vocalizations, which should also surprise any dog owner.) Lin (1982) reported on bradycardia studies with dogs, using dogs which showed an ability to hold their breath. ("Breath-hold Diving in Terrestrial Mammals" by Yu-Chong Lin (Department of Physiology, John A. Burns School of Medicine, University of Hawaii, Honolulu, Hawaii). In Exercise and Sport Sciences Review, 1982, vol. 10, pp. 270-307.) By the way, seals and whales don't hold their breath when they dive; they store oxygen in their blood, and actually expel the air from their lungs as they dive. This system -- radically different from humans -- is used by pinnipeds and cetaceans.


www.aquaticape.org...

This site does seem to have a lot of info that goes against AAT but it still seems like a pretty cool idea.



posted on Dec, 2 2011 @ 04:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by steveknows
I guess there was too much evidence for debate. Perhaps I should have thrown in an alien or two.
edit on 12-9-2011 by steveknows because: (no reason given)


Well I tried I guess no one is interested... no aliens or secret societies means no posts... to bad i would like to see some other views on it.


Peace
Patriot



posted on Dec, 2 2011 @ 04:34 PM
link   
Good thinking.

Not sure I totally agree, but certainly early man gained a lot of food from the sea so this action could well have promoted certain developments. Shell middens being a very common feature of caves and sites used by early man.

Reduced hair may well have been because of selection, maybe early women liked to see muscles rather than hair?

It is also probable that the spread of early man was along the coast. A coast line that is now underwater.

I would be certain that there is a lot of lost evidence of early man under the coastal seas. Sea level having risen considerably over certain time periods.

Just think of the link between the UK and Europe, what is under the channel where early man walked?

Certainly something to ponder over and see what others have and will say.



posted on Dec, 2 2011 @ 04:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by DisIllusioned PatRiot
Just saw the link in another thread....

Great info read the post and your link. I had never really heard of AAT before. Makes alot of sense to me. I guess no one posted on it. No need to if they cant argue against what you post.

Thanks S&F i'll have to do some of my own research


Thanks for the S&F. I know there's points against AAT but it does answer alot of questions even right down to the reason we can't find fossils of the transition if they're out at sea where a coastline used to be.

This link has the proper chart and just looking at it is an eye opener www.primitivism.com...
I really don't know why it's not up for debate. Perhaps for the evolution on land minded it would break years of an understanding and for the creationists or pro alien lot they'd be forced to think about it every time they have a shower or go for a swim. I don't know but it is worth a debate as you said.



new topics

top topics



 
3

log in

join