http://io9.com/5899331/humans-could-have-evolved-from-dolphins
Summary:
As the author delves into the question of human evolution, it is clear that he is aware of the very commonly accepted idea that humans and apes branched off from a common ancestor millions of years ago, thus forming two separate species. As he acknowledges this, he also pokes fun at the very thought that humans evolved from "aquatic apes", an idea used to explain the strange differences found between primates and humans. Many species at one point or another, when the going was rough on land, would find themselves taking refuge in the vastness of the oceans. The author argues that it is likely that humans in fact evolved partially in the oceans, as others had done, which would explain many peculiar human traits. Humans develop much less hair on the body compared to our primate relatives. Could this in fact be an adaptation pointing to aquatic life for early human beings? The less hair, the more streamline the body. Another adaptation that has astounded scientists is the partial webbing between each individual finger and toe of a human. With this webbing, early humans could move more powerfully and swiftly through water. Lastly, the fact that new born humans can easily be taught to swim and will naturally hold their breath under water points to the idea of ancient child birth that took place in the water. The author uses these points to show that it is more likely that humans evolved partially on land and partially in the water, rather than completely from an aquatic ancestor, such as an "aquatic ape." He states that there is just not enough evidence that humans could have completely evolved from an aquatic species, clearly trying to put the misleading theory to rest. Many species have entered the waters to return a completely new species, adapted to its new environment. The author suggests that it is likely that at one point humans, having branched off from their primate cousins, spent time in or around water, explaining adaptations found in humans but not in primates. Having said this, the author explains that it is completely unlikely that humans branch off from aquatic mammals.
Connections:
This article directly connects to our unit on evolution as it discusses the ideas of differentiating theories behind human evolution. The author points out the importance of the relationship between environment and evolution, stating that the likeliness humans spent time in the ocean is very high, so the likeliness that some adaptations we see today would come from this time spent in the ocean is very high as well.
Besides just homologous structures, is there any other evidence in embryology or other historic evidence in a certain study that back strengthen the argument of Dolphins being potential ancestors to the human race?
ReplyDeleteDoesn't the homologous structures between the two just mean that they both evolved from a common ancestor? not that one evolved from the other?
ReplyDeleteDoesn't the homologous structures between the two just mean that they both evolved from a common ancestor? not that one evolved from the other?
ReplyDelete