Re: A critique of the BBC aquatic ape programme and the transcript.



JAE wrote:
> Algis Kuliukas wrote:
> > JAE wrote:
> > > Algis Kuliukas wrote:
> > >
> > > > Can't you see? The longer this goes on, the more one can only conclude
> > > > that the hypothesis must be, basically, correct: Since the LCA with the
> > > > chimps moving through water *has* affected our evolution more than it
> > > > has the chimps. As you said yourself, it's rather boring and
> > > > unremarkable really. For the life of me I cannot understand why it can
> > > > generate so much angst and bad feeling.
> > >
> > > It is the poor scientific grasp of the proponents that causes me angst.
> >
> > So is that *all* the proponents? That's a bit of a broad tar brush.
> > Does membership of the class 'AAH proponent' by definition attribute
> > that generalisation? Speaking for myself, I can only apologise that my
> > scientific grasp is not as good as it could be or as good as you seem
> > to require. I'm trying but, honestly, I'm not *that* bothered if I
> > fail.
>
> I have not seen any good science by the proponents. This is not
> something that has to be true. It is not an a priori evalutation but
> rather an evaluation of what I have seen.

Rather than ask: Why haven't proponents of this idea done any good
science?, perhaps we should be asking: Why haven't good scientists
being enquiring into this idea? It's not like these 'proponents' are
from a different planet, Jason. They are people interested in human
evolution, like you are. My counter point to this is that I have not
seen much open minded, objective enquiry into this idea by good
scientists - they all seem to have some kind of peer-induced phobia to
even discuss it.

> While you shouldn't have a fear of failing, you do need to be honest
> when you fail.

I've been honest when I've failed in the past and I will be honest when
I fail in the future.

Algis Kuliukas

.

Relevant Pages