FAQ
It is currently Fri Jul 21, 2017 4:42 pm


Author Message
marnixR
Post  Post subject: David Attenborough and the AAH  |  Posted: Fri Sep 23, 2016 9:51 pm
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 8:35 pm
Posts: 4798
Location: Cardiff, Wales

Offline
i know this has been taken by the .com's AAH proponent (CEngelbrecht ?) as the ultimate approval of his pet theory, but i must say that what puzzled me most is that David Attenborough let his name be attached to a theory that never amounted to the sum of its parts

since it's on the radio i haven't been able to follow it on the BBC iPlayer so don't know anything firsthand of the content, but saw the following article in Scientific American, and i'm aware that there's been a lot of head shaking in the blogosphere

so my question is : did David Attenborough or the BBC give any rationale for why they thought this was worth broadcasting ?

_________________
"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." (Philip K. Dick)
"Someone is WRONG on the internet" (xkcd)


Top
Falconer360
Post  Post subject: Re: David Attenborough and the AAH  |  Posted: Sat Sep 24, 2016 4:29 pm
User avatar
Original Member
Original Member

Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 10:30 pm
Posts: 985
Location: Somewhere in the Great State of Washington

Offline
marnixR wrote:
so my question is : did David Attenborough or the BBC give any rationale for why they thought this was worth broadcasting ?


For the same reason the history channel thinks that Ancient Aliens is worth broadcasting? That's all I can figure.

_________________
"For every moment of triumph, for every instance of beauty, many souls must be trampled." Hunter S Thompson
"It is easy to kill someone with a slash of a sword. It is hard to be impossible for others to cut down" - Yagyu Munenori


Top
marnixR
Post  Post subject: Re: David Attenborough and the AAH  |  Posted: Sat Sep 24, 2016 4:53 pm
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 8:35 pm
Posts: 4798
Location: Cardiff, Wales

Offline
still, I would have expected better from David Attenborough - I had not really thought he would be that frivolous with theories on human evolution
unless it's supposed to be about showing historical examples of theories of the past, or a mistaken attempt at evenhandedness

_________________
"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." (Philip K. Dick)
"Someone is WRONG on the internet" (xkcd)


Top
Falconer360
Post  Post subject: Re: David Attenborough and the AAH  |  Posted: Sat Sep 24, 2016 7:04 pm
User avatar
Original Member
Original Member

Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 10:30 pm
Posts: 985
Location: Somewhere in the Great State of Washington

Offline
I too would expect better from him, but I'm just hoping that maybe this is just a symptom of his age. That he's just old and has been conned into this or as you said it's a mistaken attempt at even handedness.

_________________
"For every moment of triumph, for every instance of beauty, many souls must be trampled." Hunter S Thompson
"It is easy to kill someone with a slash of a sword. It is hard to be impossible for others to cut down" - Yagyu Munenori


Top
Rory
Post  Post subject: Re: David Attenborough and the AAH  |  Posted: Sat Sep 24, 2016 8:37 pm
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 07, 2014 6:02 am
Posts: 1917

Offline
Suppose you are teaching a 12 year old about quadratic equations. You use an applied problem to assess the pupil's understanding in a formative way. The student knows that the answer is 7 and is hung up on making sure that you know that they know that the answer is 7.

Do you really care about the arbitrary answer?

No, you care about the thought processes occurring during formulation of the answer.

Sometimes I think that the scientific community has the mentality of the 12 year old and are too concerned with immediately shutting down discussion and debate. If Attenborough has a misconception, isn't it more fruitful to try to understand his thought processes, than to holler "You! Are! Wrong!" :?:

_________________
If you are doomed to be boring - make it short. Andre Geim


Top
marnixR
Post  Post subject: Re: David Attenborough and the AAH  |  Posted: Sat Sep 24, 2016 9:21 pm
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 8:35 pm
Posts: 4798
Location: Cardiff, Wales

Offline
ok, so some people behave like the Internet cretins they are, but the majority of people merely shake their head in disbelief that a theory that over nearly 50 years hasn't moved out of the doldrums should be dragged in the open like there's any new evidence that might bring it back to life, and that of all people it has to be David Attenborough, who is considered by many people to be the best populariser for the life sciences that has appeared on our screens

it's this discordance which makes people sad rather than angry, because the last thing you want to do is to give the conspiracy theorists ammunition so that can say "see ? even David Attenborough agrees with us, so there must be some truth in our theory"

that, in essence, is the damage done by his incautious backing of a discredited theory, which goes far beyond the "boo ! you're wrong !" strawman you're erecting

_________________
"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." (Philip K. Dick)
"Someone is WRONG on the internet" (xkcd)


Top
Dywyddyr
Post  Post subject: Re: David Attenborough and the AAH  |  Posted: Sat Sep 24, 2016 9:52 pm
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 26, 2015 1:53 pm
Posts: 87

Offline
Rory wrote:
Sometimes I think that the scientific community has the mentality of the 12 year old and are too concerned with immediately shutting down discussion and debate. If Attenborough has a misconception, isn't it more fruitful to try to understand his thought processes, than to holler "You! Are! Wrong!" :?:

What utter crap: the guy is publicly airing this hypothesis as if it had validity.
The guy is, as was noted on the other forum, a "national treasure". If he says something on TV then large numbers of people are going to accept it as incontrovertible fact.
If he had "thought processes" that justified the making of two programmes then those programmes should have started with an explanation of those "processes".


Top
Rory
Post  Post subject: Re: David Attenborough and the AAH  |  Posted: Sat Sep 24, 2016 10:05 pm
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 07, 2014 6:02 am
Posts: 1917

Offline
FYI if it looks like I'm ignoring you it's because I am.

_________________
If you are doomed to be boring - make it short. Andre Geim


Top
Dywyddyr
Post  Post subject: Re: David Attenborough and the AAH  |  Posted: Sat Sep 24, 2016 10:23 pm
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 26, 2015 1:53 pm
Posts: 87

Offline
Rory wrote:
FYI if it looks like I'm ignoring you it's because I am.

I can tell.
Ignoring me is far easier than giving a rational response, isn't it?


Top
Curiosity
Post  Post subject: Re: David Attenborough and the AAH  |  Posted: Sun Sep 25, 2016 12:18 am

Joined: Sat Sep 24, 2016 2:24 am
Posts: 7

Offline
I think it'd be great to have Attenborough in a discussion with a panel of evolutionary biologists, so the whole world could watch his views get destroyed,
and would be great if he admitted he's probably wrong. Unfortunately the general public are sometimes too keen on embracing certain scientists, and end up
accepting arguments from authority, when that is counter to what science is about.


Top
paleoichneum
Post  Post subject: Re: David Attenborough and the AAH  |  Posted: Sun Sep 25, 2016 12:45 am
User avatar
Original Member
Original Member

Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2011 1:23 am
Posts: 475

Online
Rory wrote:
Suppose you are teaching a 12 year old about quadratic equations. You use an applied problem to assess the pupil's understanding in a formative way. The student knows that the answer is 7 and is hung up on making sure that you know that they know that the answer is 7.

Do you really care about the arbitrary answer?

No, you care about the thought processes occurring during formulation of the answer.

Sometimes I think that the scientific community has the mentality of the 12 year old and are too concerned with immediately shutting down discussion and debate. If Attenborough has a misconception, isn't it more fruitful to try to understand his thought processes, than to holler "You! Are! Wrong!" :?:

This isnt one of those situations though. Why do you feel it its, and what would be gained?

_________________
The needs of the many outweigh the need of the few - Spock of Vulcan & Sentinel Prime of Cybertron ---proof that "the needs" are in the eye of the beholder.


Top
Pong
Post  Post subject: Re: David Attenborough and the AAH  |  Posted: Sun Sep 25, 2016 9:02 am
Original Member
Original Member

Joined: Sat May 28, 2016 2:53 am
Posts: 219

Offline
marnixR wrote:
conspiracy theorists

Strong! And after Rory said "immediately shutting down discussion and debate".

Thing about the badly-named Aquatic Ape Hypothesis, is it acts as an umbrella also for reasonable observations. Lots of species can swim when they hit the water. Lots can - though rarely do - voluntarily enter water. And they maintain traits just for those rare events. Here it appears I'm arguing "in support of" AAH.

So what if I wanted to discuss amphibious behaviour in bears, at a time when nobody acknowledged bears so much as dip a paw in water? I'd better not call it Aquatic Bear Hypothesis lest generations of scientists howl down my suggestion.


Top
iNow
Post  Post subject: Re: David Attenborough and the AAH  |  Posted: Sun Sep 25, 2016 2:09 pm
User avatar
Original Member
Original Member

Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 11:40 pm
Posts: 5601
Location: Iowa

Offline
Rory wrote:
FYI if it looks like I'm ignoring you it's because I am.

This surprises me given your stated passion for science and deep desire to teach it as a process to our children. Wouldn't it be better to address criticisms with facts and evidence than to simply run from them?

_________________
iNow

"[Time] is one of those concepts that is profoundly resistant to a simple definition." ~C. Sagan


Top
Rory
Post  Post subject: Re: David Attenborough and the AAH  |  Posted: Sun Sep 25, 2016 10:22 pm
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 07, 2014 6:02 am
Posts: 1917

Offline
I'm not going to engage in dialogue with someone who speaks to me in the way D. does. It's not about content, but form.

For example - rather, by contrast - I look forward to my exchanges with you, iNow, even when we disagree.

_________________
If you are doomed to be boring - make it short. Andre Geim


Top
iNow
Post  Post subject: Re: David Attenborough and the AAH  |  Posted: Sun Sep 25, 2016 10:36 pm
User avatar
Original Member
Original Member

Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 11:40 pm
Posts: 5601
Location: Iowa

Offline
Rory wrote:
It's not about content, but form.

Except, it very much IS about the content. The content of your posts has been repeatedly challenged by several people yet you've repeatedly refused to support your claims. That's unacceptable, Rory, and I'm quite sure you know that (or at least you do now if for some strange reason you previously didn't).

_________________
iNow

"[Time] is one of those concepts that is profoundly resistant to a simple definition." ~C. Sagan


Top
Dywyddyr
Post  Post subject: Re: David Attenborough and the AAH  |  Posted: Sun Sep 25, 2016 10:55 pm
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 26, 2015 1:53 pm
Posts: 87

Offline
Rory wrote:
I'm not going to engage in dialogue with someone who speaks to me in the way D. does. It's not about content, but form.

As opposed to, say, the "form" of repeating arguments that have either been shown to be wrong or that you have have shown you can't (or won't) support?
I always find it "funny" when someone - anyone - thinks it's okay to espouse nonsense and/ or falsehoods but complains that being pulled up short and having that nonsense described as what it is is somehow "rude" or "inconsiderate".
Isn't it rude AND inconsiderate to espouse obvious (and easily refuted) nonsense in (what we hope is) intelligent company?


Top
Rory
Post  Post subject: Re: David Attenborough and the AAH  |  Posted: Mon Sep 26, 2016 7:32 pm
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 07, 2014 6:02 am
Posts: 1917

Offline
Frankly I don't know what you guys are going on about.

I'm not supporting the AAH, I'm suggesting that Attenborough's endorsement of the hypothesis be publicised in the context of a discussion or debate.

Critical thinking... radical for you guys, I know. It's so much easier to shout "YOU ARE WRONG"

And yes, it is about form. The minute a person disrespects me is the minute I stop owing him respect.

_________________
If you are doomed to be boring - make it short. Andre Geim


Top
PhDemon
Post  Post subject: Re: David Attenborough and the AAH  |  Posted: Mon Sep 26, 2016 7:38 pm

Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2013 10:44 am
Posts: 491
Location: Newcastle-upon-Tyne

Offline
Quote:
And yes, it is about form. The minute a person disrespects me is the minute I stop owing him respect.
. You are rapidly losing mine, you seem to think people pointing out your fallacious arguments is "disrespectful", no, it is YOU not applying critical thinking but preferring your knee jerk emotional arguments. As for the AAH, it has been discussed and kicked around for years and has never had enough supporting evidence to be taken seriously, would you say the same if Attenborough presented a show on creationism or any other branch of woo?

_________________
"The big trouble with dumb bastards is that they are too dumb to believe there is such a thing as being smart"

- Kurt Vonnegut, The Sirens of Titan


Top
paleoichneum
Post  Post subject: Re: David Attenborough and the AAH  |  Posted: Mon Sep 26, 2016 11:08 pm
User avatar
Original Member
Original Member

Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2011 1:23 am
Posts: 475

Online
Rory wrote:
Frankly I don't know what you guys are going on about.

I'm not supporting the AAH, I'm suggesting that Attenborough's endorsement of the hypothesis be publicised in the context of a discussion or debate.

Critical thinking... radical for you guys, I know. It's so much easier to shout "YOU ARE WRONG"

And yes, it is about form. The minute a person disrespects me is the minute I stop owing him respect.

At this point, though, no one HAS disrespected you, they have pointed out what they see as problems with your posted arguments on various threads. When this has happened you have most often made commentary about the poster, and disparaging comments such as above in red. That is the only disrespect that I have regularly seen.

Also why does it matter what Mr Attenborough was thinking leading up to the posting of the programs. Science is not a place that "equal time for all positions" has ever been granted. Thus AAP has no reason to be presented as a viable option in a debate at all.

_________________
The needs of the many outweigh the need of the few - Spock of Vulcan & Sentinel Prime of Cybertron ---proof that "the needs" are in the eye of the beholder.


Top
Rory
Post  Post subject: Re: David Attenborough and the AAH  |  Posted: Wed Sep 28, 2016 10:18 pm
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 07, 2014 6:02 am
Posts: 1917

Offline
Maybe in your world calling somebody else's suggestion "utter crap" isn't rude, but then, I don't want anything to do with you.

My point is not to present the AAH as a valid hypothesis. My point is that, if these matters are not discussed and debated in a public forum, then how are the younger generations and laymen supposed to follow your line of reasoning?

All that they will learn is that they will be mocked, if they live in a society that believes Earth is flat, for claiming the Earth is spherical.

That's not Science; it's just blindly following majority opinion out of fear.

_________________
If you are doomed to be boring - make it short. Andre Geim


Top
PhDemon
Post  Post subject: Re: David Attenborough and the AAH  |  Posted: Wed Sep 28, 2016 10:31 pm

Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2013 10:44 am
Posts: 491
Location: Newcastle-upon-Tyne

Offline
Quote:
Maybe in your world calling somebody else's suggestion "utter crap" isn't rude, but then, I don't want anything to do with you.


Pointing out when someone is talking crap isn't rude, it's a public service... You need to get a thicker skin (or stop talking crap)...

I've a feeling you'll probably put me on ignore soon too :shrug:

_________________
"The big trouble with dumb bastards is that they are too dumb to believe there is such a thing as being smart"

- Kurt Vonnegut, The Sirens of Titan


Top
Dywyddyr
Post  Post subject: Re: David Attenborough and the AAH  |  Posted: Wed Sep 28, 2016 10:57 pm
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 26, 2015 1:53 pm
Posts: 87

Offline
Rory wrote:
Maybe in your world calling somebody else's suggestion "utter crap" isn't rude, but then, I don't want anything to do with you.

If an idea is utter crap then why do you consider it "rude" to point that out?
Why is it not "rude" to spout utter crap?
Or is a double standard your general modus operandi?

Quote:
My point is not to present the AAH as a valid hypothesis. My point is that, if these matters are not discussed and debated in a public forum, then how are the younger generations and laymen supposed to follow your line of reasoning?

Except that we're not talking about discussing it, we're talking about a national figure presenting it on national radio.
IF it had been presented as part of a discussion about the evolution of humans, and stated to be merely a (largely discredited) hypothesis that's one thing but effectively championing said hypothesis is quite another.


Quote:
All that they will learn is that they will be mocked, if they live in a society that believes Earth is flat, for claiming the Earth is spherical.
That's not Science; it's just blindly following majority opinion out of fear.

You don't have much of a clue, do you?
How about if they live in a society that has evidence that the "Earth is flat" and they claim (with twisted, cherry-picked and/ or non-existent "evidence") that it's round?


Top
paleoichneum
Post  Post subject: Re: David Attenborough and the AAH  |  Posted: Thu Sep 29, 2016 1:55 am
User avatar
Original Member
Original Member

Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2011 1:23 am
Posts: 475

Online
Rory wrote:
Maybe in your world calling somebody else's suggestion "utter crap" isn't rude, but then, I don't want anything to do with you.

You need to stop taking comments on the subject matter of your posts as personal attacks. They aren't. You also need to realize that YOU open your comments to commentary as soon as you hit post.

Rory wrote:
My point is not to present the AAH as a valid hypothesis. My point is that, if these matters are not discussed and debated in a public forum, then how are the younger generations and laymen supposed to follow your line of reasoning?

A public debate is not how science should EVER be dealt with, its how invalid ideas such a creationism and antivaccination gain traction. A public debate inherently moves the pseudoscience to an even plane with science and people then ignore everything that happens in the debate, just going with "SEE IT WAS TREATED THE SAME!!"

Rory wrote:
All that they will learn is that they will be mocked, if they live in a society that believes Earth is flat, for claiming the Earth is spherical.
That's not Science; it's just blindly following majority opinion out of fear.

No, thats a strawman that asserts that people are afraid of looking at the consistent data. That is not the situations in this case however, and so your analogy fails.

A better analogy is would be equating AAP with "Intelligent design", in that they both rely on very small sets of cherry picked data and avoid discussion of anything else.

_________________
The needs of the many outweigh the need of the few - Spock of Vulcan & Sentinel Prime of Cybertron ---proof that "the needs" are in the eye of the beholder.


Top
iNow
Post  Post subject: Re: David Attenborough and the AAH  |  Posted: Thu Sep 29, 2016 3:36 am
User avatar
Original Member
Original Member

Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 11:40 pm
Posts: 5601
Location: Iowa

Offline
Rory wrote:
...if these matters are not discussed and debated in a public forum, then how are the younger generations and laymen supposed to follow your line of reasoning?

They've been debated out in the open. There's no there there.

We've known this for quite some time, and anyone who spends any amount of time on science forums like ours has done it scores of times and seen it done scores more by others, but if more help is needed for the naive and uninitiated out there then perhaps one should begin here:

http://johnhawks.net/weblog/topics/pseu ... heory.html
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Aquatic_ap ... hypothesis
http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/obs ... s-all-wet/
http://theconversation.com/sorry-david- ... -why-65570

Must I quote the multiple differing angles and perspectives through which AAH (it even has its own acronym we've seen it so damned many times!!) has been roundly and thoroughly debunked, or will these links satisfy the poor uninformed among us?

Rory wrote:
That's not Science; it's just blindly following majority opinion out of fear.

Oh, FFS...seriously, Rory?

_________________
iNow

"[Time] is one of those concepts that is profoundly resistant to a simple definition." ~C. Sagan


Top
Rory
Post  Post subject: Re: David Attenborough and the AAH  |  Posted: Thu Sep 29, 2016 4:56 am
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 07, 2014 6:02 am
Posts: 1917

Offline
Yeah, I'm sure you're all right. We'll just tell the public what is right and wrong. Nice work, scientists!

_________________
If you are doomed to be boring - make it short. Andre Geim


Top
PhDemon
Post  Post subject: Re: David Attenborough and the AAH  |  Posted: Thu Sep 29, 2016 6:43 am

Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2013 10:44 am
Posts: 491
Location: Newcastle-upon-Tyne

Offline
Deleted- I can't be bothered with this fool any more.

_________________
"The big trouble with dumb bastards is that they are too dumb to believe there is such a thing as being smart"

- Kurt Vonnegut, The Sirens of Titan


Top
marnixR
Post  Post subject: Re: David Attenborough and the AAH  |  Posted: Thu Sep 29, 2016 6:56 am
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 8:35 pm
Posts: 4798
Location: Cardiff, Wales

Offline
Rory wrote:
Yeah, I'm sure you're all right. We'll just tell the public what is right and wrong. Nice work, scientists!


you would expect a doctor to tell you what is wrong from right in medical matters, so why shouldn't anthropologists do the same for human evolution ?

there's no fear or persecution involved, just informed common sense

_________________
"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." (Philip K. Dick)
"Someone is WRONG on the internet" (xkcd)


Top
paleoichneum
Post  Post subject: Re: David Attenborough and the AAH  |  Posted: Thu Sep 29, 2016 11:20 am
User avatar
Original Member
Original Member

Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2011 1:23 am
Posts: 475

Online
Rory wrote:
Yeah, I'm sure you're all right. We'll just tell the public what is right and wrong. Nice work, scientists!

You don't expect a weighted debate on mechanical matters with what is wrong with your car. Or a debate as to if it's gas or "humors" causing your indigestion. Why do you expect different from scientists on their respective fields?

_________________
The needs of the many outweigh the need of the few - Spock of Vulcan & Sentinel Prime of Cybertron ---proof that "the needs" are in the eye of the beholder.


Top
Lynx_Fox
Post  Post subject: Re: David Attenborough and the AAH  |  Posted: Thu Sep 29, 2016 5:06 pm

Joined: Wed Dec 30, 2015 5:17 am
Posts: 228
Location: US Pacific NorthWest

Offline
marnixR wrote:
did David Attenborough or the BBC give any rationale for why they thought this was worth broadcasting ?


My simple answer is Attenborough is often given too much credit for his science knowledge despite the fact he essentially has little science education or credibility or is just incorrectly grouped into "smart guy" that seems to give many popular folks undue credit for have a valid opinion on topics way outside their actual knowledge.. That being said, Attenborough deserves full credit for bringing science into the living rooms of tens of millions of people--something few scientist have the time, desire or cultural support within their scientific social circle to do.


Top
marnixR
Post  Post subject: Re: David Attenborough and the AAH  |  Posted: Thu Sep 29, 2016 7:54 pm
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 8:35 pm
Posts: 4798
Location: Cardiff, Wales

Offline
I still think it's more like an old man's folly - probably didn't see that it could do any damage, until the backlash hit him

_________________
"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." (Philip K. Dick)
"Someone is WRONG on the internet" (xkcd)


Top
Rory
Post  Post subject: Re: David Attenborough and the AAH  |  Posted: Thu Sep 29, 2016 10:18 pm
User avatar

Joined: Wed May 07, 2014 6:02 am
Posts: 1917

Offline
There's a time and place for scientific discussion and debate.

Making out like the emergency room is a valid comparison = just strawman.

You can come back if you want, PhDemon, I'm going.

_________________
If you are doomed to be boring - make it short. Andre Geim


Top
paleoichneum
Post  Post subject: Re: David Attenborough and the AAH  |  Posted: Thu Sep 29, 2016 11:49 pm
User avatar
Original Member
Original Member

Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2011 1:23 am
Posts: 475

Online
Rory wrote:
There's a time and place for scientific discussion and debate.

Making out like the emergency room is a valid comparison = just strawman.

You can come back if you want, PhDemon, I'm going.

Why do you feel that medicine as a comparison is a strawman?

Given that medicine is a subset of biology it seems an entirely viable comparison.

_________________
The needs of the many outweigh the need of the few - Spock of Vulcan & Sentinel Prime of Cybertron ---proof that "the needs" are in the eye of the beholder.


Top
marnixR
Post  Post subject: Re: David Attenborough and the AAH  |  Posted: Fri Sep 30, 2016 6:55 am
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 8:35 pm
Posts: 4798
Location: Cardiff, Wales

Offline
Rory wrote:
There's a time and place for scientific discussion and debate.

Making out like the emergency room is a valid comparison = just strawman.


who said anything about an emergency room ? I was more thinking about going to your GP, and seeking advice
surely you're more likely to take his advice (because he's a competent practitioner) rather from a random person in the street

somehow you seem to think that science is about authority figures pronouncing ex-cathedra but that's just not so : the only reason why you as a layman would accept a practitioner's point of view is that s/he is more likely to be better informed than you are

when it's two scientists debating amongst themselves it's more likely the strength of the evidence and the arguments that will set the debate - in that respect the AAH only has marshmallow legs to stand on, and that's why amongst professional anthropologists it's not taken seriously - nothing to do with some authority figure pronouncing that anyone who dares to take it seriously will be excommunicated

_________________
"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." (Philip K. Dick)
"Someone is WRONG on the internet" (xkcd)


Top
Pong
Post  Post subject: Re: David Attenborough and the AAH  |  Posted: Fri Sep 30, 2016 9:23 pm
Original Member
Original Member

Joined: Sat May 28, 2016 2:53 am
Posts: 219

Offline
Maybe wise to step back and ask "What is this 'utter crap' AHH after all?"

I suggest it's a strawman. For example:
marnixR wrote:
a theory that never amounted to the sum of its parts

...which means at least some parts aren't utter crap. SO we shouldn't dismiss the whole mixed bag dubbed AAH as "roundly and thoroughly debunked". A constructive debate is possible and necessary: we need to consolidate the good from the bad, and coin a new name for our (smaller) set of reasonable theories.


Top
iNow
Post  Post subject: Re: David Attenborough and the AAH  |  Posted: Fri Sep 30, 2016 10:37 pm
User avatar
Original Member
Original Member

Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 11:40 pm
Posts: 5601
Location: Iowa

Offline
Should we pull out the quote unquote smaller reasonable bits of creationism, too? Maybe the stork theory of childbirth?

_________________
iNow

"[Time] is one of those concepts that is profoundly resistant to a simple definition." ~C. Sagan


Top
Echelon Eight
Post  Post subject: Re: David Attenborough and the AAH  |  Posted: Sat Oct 01, 2016 6:45 am

Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2016 6:00 am
Posts: 3

Offline
It's always amazed me, that the AAT attracts so much scorn. I saw Attenbrorough avow it, and merely nodded my head.

I've read the attacks on the AAT in the comments above... and am er, amazed.

Either a lot of you, are very stupid, or I am.

Would any of you oppose a new thread on the subject? That way, I, or some of us, could become less stupid.


Top
Echelon Eight
Post  Post subject: The Aquatic Ape Theory - Taken Seriously  |  Posted: Sat Oct 01, 2016 7:25 am

Joined: Sat Oct 01, 2016 6:00 am
Posts: 3

Offline
MODNOTE: This post and two of the three replies that follow was originally submitted as a new thread, but have been merged here as part of our already active AAH discussion.

You may be sick of this idea. You don't have to read on.


Now that you are reading on...

The disdain this idea is held in (here) amazes me.

I used to be an expert in this theory.

Now... either, there has been some new discoveries in this area that I am not aware of, and I would love to know about these... Or... there's some kind of anti-scientific hate-thing going on with regard to the AAT.

Why would that be? What is it about the AAT that incites such tribal violence?

I heard David Attenborough say he agrees with the AAT. That made you crazier.

There's a long list of Ph.Ds who think that that AAT deserves more than tribal hyena hunting.

You willing to listen to them? Or me?

I ask you: if there was a 'deal breaker' for the AAT, what is it?

(Keep in mind, all criticisms of the AAT should equally be leveled at any other theory of human evolution – your own proffered theory should be better than the AAT, before it can be a criticism).

So, what is it?


Top
Daecon
Post  Post subject: Re: The Aquatic Ape Theory - Taken Seriously  |  Posted: Sat Oct 01, 2016 7:34 am
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 28, 2015 11:32 pm
Posts: 38
Location: Upper Hutt, New Zealand

Offline
It's not a theory, it's a hypothesis. Many of the main points of the hypothesis are unfounded.

I suggest you re-read iNow's links in post #24 in the other thread, which I know you must have seen because you've already posted in that thread.


Top
Pong
Post  Post subject: Re: David Attenborough and the AAH  |  Posted: Sat Oct 01, 2016 8:29 am
Original Member
Original Member

Joined: Sat May 28, 2016 2:53 am
Posts: 219

Offline
iNow wrote:
Should we pull out the quote unquote smaller reasonable bits of creationism, too? Maybe the stork theory of childbirth?

...or - my ridiculous claim - the Aquatic Bear Hypothesis.

You may see only the strawman if you prefer.


Top
Pong
Post  Post subject: Re: The Aquatic Ape Theory - Taken Seriously  |  Posted: Sat Oct 01, 2016 8:49 am
Original Member
Original Member

Joined: Sat May 28, 2016 2:53 am
Posts: 219

Offline
I think Daecon's correct. But what is this Aquatic Ape Hypothesis, really?

Seems a catch-all for everything about human evolution relating to water bodies. SO it means different things to different people. We can't have a constructive discussion on that basis.


Top
marnixR
Post  Post subject: Re: David Attenborough and the AAH  |  Posted: Sat Oct 01, 2016 1:45 pm
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2011 8:35 pm
Posts: 4798
Location: Cardiff, Wales

Offline
the main problem with the AAH is that it's very hard to pin the claims down to specifics
how much exposure to which watery environment ? how to interpret when features occurred if they can't be found in the fossil record ?

the main thing about the hypothesis is that the items that could be tested have been disproven, meaning that whatever is left is untestable - in the meantime the various explanations of what it means to be aquatic are so widely spread that it could mean living near lakes ranging to spending long times in a marine environment

until about 10 years ago I thought the best hope for testableevidence were the Danakil Alps and some genetic marker which occurred in African apes only - still, the Danakil Alps have so far remained silent, and the genetic marker proved to be a red herring

as for the other items, WHEN did humans acquire subcutaneous fat, WHEN did they lose their hearing cover, WHEN did they develop their sweating mechanism, when, when, when ...

until we can correlate the items claimed to point to a watery past with the presence of such an environment, there is very little evidence to firm up the hypothesis into a proper theory

_________________
"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." (Philip K. Dick)
"Someone is WRONG on the internet" (xkcd)


Top
CEngelbrecht
Post  Post subject: Re: David Attenborough and the AAH  |  Posted: Sat Jan 21, 2017 3:41 am
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2017 3:38 am
Posts: 76

Offline
Nullius in verba...

_________________
"The suppression of uncomfortable ideas may be common in religion or politics, but it is not the path to knowledge. Accepted and conventional ideas are often wrong, and fundamental insights can arise from most unexpected sources."
- Carl Sagan


Top
paleoichneum
Post  Post subject: Re: David Attenborough and the AAH  |  Posted: Sat Jan 21, 2017 11:03 am
User avatar
Original Member
Original Member

Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2011 1:23 am
Posts: 475

Online
CEngelbrecht wrote:
Nullius in verba...

Troll

_________________
The needs of the many outweigh the need of the few - Spock of Vulcan & Sentinel Prime of Cybertron ---proof that "the needs" are in the eye of the beholder.


Top
CEngelbrecht
Post  Post subject: Re: David Attenborough and the AAH  |  Posted: Sat Jan 21, 2017 3:56 pm
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2017 3:38 am
Posts: 76

Offline
paleoichneum wrote:
CEngelbrecht wrote:
Nullius in verba...

Troll


"Accuse your oponent of your own own greatest weakness."
- Niccolò Machiavelli

_________________
"The suppression of uncomfortable ideas may be common in religion or politics, but it is not the path to knowledge. Accepted and conventional ideas are often wrong, and fundamental insights can arise from most unexpected sources."
- Carl Sagan


Top
CEngelbrecht
Post  Post subject: Re: David Attenborough and the AAH  |  Posted: Sat Jan 21, 2017 4:06 pm
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2017 3:38 am
Posts: 76

Offline
marnixR wrote:
WHEN did humans acquire subcutaneous fat, WHEN did they lose their hearing cover, WHEN did they develop their sweating mechanism, when, when, when ...


I'm sorry, have any of the dry scenarios answered the exact same questions, since I last checked?

The timeline has no consensus amongst aquatic proponents, but safe to say the growth of the Homo brain, dependent on a series of nutrients almost exclusively found in saline aquatic foodchains, sparks off at least two million years ago. So at least since then.

http://aquatic-human-ancestor.org/anatomy/brain.html

But, habitual bipedalism, argued also as aquatic because all apes and monkeys become vertical bipedal in shallow water, is presented as much older than that, that can be as much as 15 million years old, the change in diet allowing for the brain spurt only coming much later.



http://aquatic-human-ancestor.org/timeline.html

_________________
"The suppression of uncomfortable ideas may be common in religion or politics, but it is not the path to knowledge. Accepted and conventional ideas are often wrong, and fundamental insights can arise from most unexpected sources."
- Carl Sagan


Last edited by CEngelbrecht on Sat Jan 21, 2017 4:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.


Top
CEngelbrecht
Post  Post subject: Re: David Attenborough and the AAH  |  Posted: Sat Jan 21, 2017 4:09 pm
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2017 3:38 am
Posts: 76

Offline
marnixR wrote:
still, I would have expected better from David Attenborough - I had not really thought he would be that frivolous with theories on human evolution


Right, it couldn't possibly be because Sir David has seen through all the nonsense. Because unlike academics worldwide, he still has freedom of thought.

You still suffer from having the wrong null hypothesis. Your null hypothesis is that if Elaine Morgan argued for it, then it has to have been nuts through and through, only because she didn't have that degree. That's why your entire thought process is flawed. You start with the wrong null hypothesis and think you don't have to read the source texts.

_________________
"The suppression of uncomfortable ideas may be common in religion or politics, but it is not the path to knowledge. Accepted and conventional ideas are often wrong, and fundamental insights can arise from most unexpected sources."
- Carl Sagan


Top
CEngelbrecht
Post  Post subject: Re: The Aquatic Ape Theory - Taken Seriously  |  Posted: Sat Jan 21, 2017 4:14 pm
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2017 3:38 am
Posts: 76

Offline
Pong wrote:
I think Daecon's correct. But what is this Aquatic Ape Hypothesis, really?


To quote:

"Waterside hypotheses of human evolution assert that selection from wading, swimming and diving and procurement of food from aquatic habitats have significantly affected the evolution of the lineage leading to Homo sapiens as distinct from that leading to Pan. (p118)"
Kuliukas, A., Morgan, E. (2011). Aquatic scenarios in the thinking on human evolution: What are they and how do they compare?. In: Vaneechoutte, M., Verhaegen, M., Kuliukas, A. (2011). Was Man More Aquatic in the Past?

Unquote.

Anything crazy in this? Anything at all???


_________________
"The suppression of uncomfortable ideas may be common in religion or politics, but it is not the path to knowledge. Accepted and conventional ideas are often wrong, and fundamental insights can arise from most unexpected sources."
- Carl Sagan


Top
CEngelbrecht
Post  Post subject: Re: David Attenborough and the AAH  |  Posted: Sat Jan 21, 2017 4:38 pm
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2017 3:38 am
Posts: 76

Offline
Curiosity wrote:
I think it'd be great to have Attenborough in a discussion with a panel of evolutionary biologists, so the whole world could watch his views get destroyed, and would be great if he admitted he's probably wrong. Unfortunately the general public are sometimes too keen on embracing certain scientists, and end up accepting arguments from authority, when that is counter to what science is about.


Nullius in verba is the motto of the Royal Society, of which Sir David is a member. Take no one's word for it, see it for yourself.

Quote:
"The fact that [AAH's] principal exponent these days is not only a woman, Elaine Morgan, but an amateur, a science writer without proper official credentials in spite of her substantial researches, makes the prospect of vindication all the more enticing. The establishment has responded quite ferociously to her challenges, mostly treating them as beneath notice, but occasionally subjecting them to withering rebuttal. During the last few years, when I have found myself in the company of distinguished biologists, evolutionary theorists, paleoanthropologists and other experts, I have often asked them just to tell me, please, exactly why Elaine Morgan must be wrong about the aquatic theory. I haven’t yet had a reply worth mentioning, aside from those who admit, with a twinkle in their eyes, that they have also wondered the same thing."
- Dan Dennett, "Darwin's Dangerous Idea", 1995.


Sir David has had such conversations with voices of authority, as did Elaine Morgan and others. And you don't hear about such sessions, 'cause it's the authority that walks away defeated, and they keep bloody quiet about it. They're the ones, that won't admit they're probably wrong. Only because they have to protect their academic careers, leaving them with de facto no freedom of thought. The scientific method doesn't reign here, only Thrasymachus.


_________________
"The suppression of uncomfortable ideas may be common in religion or politics, but it is not the path to knowledge. Accepted and conventional ideas are often wrong, and fundamental insights can arise from most unexpected sources."
- Carl Sagan


Top
CEngelbrecht
Post  Post subject: Re: David Attenborough and the AAH  |  Posted: Sat Jan 21, 2017 5:02 pm
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2017 3:38 am
Posts: 76

Offline
Rory wrote:
Must I quote the multiple differing angles and perspectives through which AAH (it even has its own acronym we've seen it so damned many times!!) has been roundly and thoroughly debunked


It is so dreadful to see, that in the human world, wishful thinking reigns supreme over rationality. This is why Donald Trump is POTUS.

The notion of Homo sapiens descending from recent beach apes has never been debunked. Not in the slightest. 'Cause it's probably true.


_________________
"The suppression of uncomfortable ideas may be common in religion or politics, but it is not the path to knowledge. Accepted and conventional ideas are often wrong, and fundamental insights can arise from most unexpected sources."
- Carl Sagan


Top
CEngelbrecht
Post  Post subject: Re: David Attenborough and the AAH  |  Posted: Sat Jan 21, 2017 5:12 pm
User avatar

Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2017 3:38 am
Posts: 76

Offline
marnixR wrote:
I still think it's more like an old man's folly - probably didn't see that it could do any damage, until the backlash hit him


Like the old man's folly of Phillip frickin' Tobias, I reckon?

Quote:
The Savannah hypotheses: origin, reception and impact on paleoanthropology.
Bender R1, Tobias PV, Bender N.

Abstract
The reconstruction of the human past is a complex task characterized by a high level of interdisciplinarity. How do scientists from different fields reach consensus on crucial aspects of paleoanthropological research? The present paper explores this question through an historical analysis of the origin, development, and reception of the savannah hypotheses (SHs). We show that this model neglected to investigate crucial biological aspects which appeared to be irrelevant in scenarios depicting early hominins evolving in arid or semi-arid open plains. For instance, the exploitation of aquatic food resources and other aspects of hominin interaction with water were largely ignored in classical paleoanthropology. These topics became central to alternative ideas on human evolution known as aquatic hypotheses. Since the aquatic model is commonly regarded as highly controversial, its rejection led to a stigmatization of the whole spectrum of topics around water use in non-human hominoids and hominins. We argue that this bias represents a serious hindrance to a comprehensive reconstruction of the human past. Progress in this field depends on clear differentiation between hypotheses proposed to contextualize early hominin evolution in specific environmental settings and research topics which demand the investigation of all relevant facets of early hominins' interaction with complex landscapes.
PMID: 23272598


You say it yourself, Marnix. Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. We're still the furless ape.

Image
http://aquatic-human-ancestor.org/curre ... ories.html

_________________
"The suppression of uncomfortable ideas may be common in religion or politics, but it is not the path to knowledge. Accepted and conventional ideas are often wrong, and fundamental insights can arise from most unexpected sources."
- Carl Sagan


Top
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Print view

Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
Jump to:   


Delete all board cookies | The team | All times are UTC


This free forum is proudly hosted by ProphpBB | phpBB software | Report Abuse | Privacy