pause at 1:50...look at that mountain range behind him. imagine that back when those early hominids were walking in that very spot, they saw those very same mountains, much as they are now. that's so amazing to me. millions of years ago our early ancestors walked in this one spot of earth...and millions of years later a man stands on it again, being filmed by a camera(our technology). its just astounding...life that is. evolution. all of it. so beautiful and uplifting.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
the only thing if that were true...why did the chimps stay the same (quadruped) and human started walking upright...if the land changed so much it would have effected all the animals the same.
Picture evolution as a giant tree. Each branch is where a species breaks away from a common ancestor. When the weather and land changed some apes stayed in the trees and some human ancestors broke away to search for a more uncontested source of food. The fewer trees there were, the less food was available in them. It would definitley not have affected all animals the same way.
@ggenson The tree analogy is great, and commonly used, but it can sadly easily be misconstrued.
When species diverge and start adapting to their respective environments, they are only changing in that, through natural selection, they will adapt to their changing environment; however, that can involve regression (e.g. cave fish losing vision). But species further "up" the tree are not "more advanced".
You didn't misrepresent this; I just wanted to add that lest xenex23 misunderstand.
chimps and humans come from the same common ancestor. Chimps did not -stay- anything. They changed too, they just found other more successful ways of doing so.
a good reason why you don't seen chimps very much in the plains of east africa, but in the forests of west africa. modern chimps are the descendants of an ape population that stayed or migrated to where the trees were, and thus didn't need to produce any drastic adaptations.
I really need to see a video explaining how animals and humans developed there sense of balance. If you look @ our human feet they look out of proportion to be able to balance us yet the do. I would say the swelling of the brain allowed the sense of balance to develop. The human brain seems to beg for endless challenges that other animals have no chance of matching
As you know, all animals can balance, and even if you limit it to bipedalism, it didn't develop exclusively in the human line, as birds are bipedal as well.
I did a quick journal search, and didn't find anything specific, though. It seems like a trait that would be easily selected for, as the advantages of being able to balance would make you far more fit than a flailing puddle of goo :-)
This is a month old but if youd still like my opinion keep reading.
I am not 100% on this btw. Geologists use mri to see inside fossilized skulls. They look at the development of what you'd call the middle ear. In birds, especially, it is very complex. Its complexity is proprtional to the balance the animal needs in its environment. Sharks have highly developed one too.
I saw a video related but not sure where it was some months ago.
"Maybe a life at waters edge encouraged anotomical change". I would like to hear as to how scientists say this part happened because from what I know about natural selection, a species can't evolve by simply wanting to.
Yeah, for both of you I personally think that it should be called "wading ape hypothesis."
Aquatic makes it sounds a lot different. Like, I think you must be a little crazy to think that we evolved from animals swimming in salt water all day.
But it would make sense if we were waders because we do still have large ears and hair on our heads, both above water for a lot of the time spent wading.
We're also taller and our lower hairs tend to be a little glossier.
I think it makes more sense to look at it as if we were freshwater waders, like we see chimps doing here, rather than swimming animals.
On the "relevant questions," the differences he brought up between aquatic animals and us really only have to do with animals that live exclusively in the water and that swim, instead of wade.
Elaine Morgan says we're streamlined for swimming, but that isn't quite the case with our pot bellies.
I agree. It's much more likely that we descended from a primate that lived in a marshy or swampy environment, but even then there isn't much evidence to back it up.
The aquatic ape hypothesis (as it should be called) is quite a stretch.
Little to no evidence. Far-fetched conclusions. Major proponents dismiss contravening evidence, continue to push debunked ideas, and display fanaticism (that in itself does not necessarily make it false).
More evidence leans toward what is presented in this video, walking upright in trees hanging on to overhead branches, or walking upright after descending from trees to see over grass in the plains.
That said, I'm not a primatologist, but I am skeptical, and will wait for solid evidence.
@tehinfidel it's not far-fetched at all. the footprints are human-like because of the inward big toe. plus, there are plenty of fossils of bipedal apes dating back 5 million years ago.
@captainbrush You're replying without looking at the context of the original comment, and thus have lost the plot. He was asking about the plausibility of the Aquatic Ape "Theory", not evolution in general.
You know I've been doing reading and I've always assumed the first race of humans where African but now evidence is contradicting because many of the transnational humans have been found in India to Europe and as one sang I've herd shave the hair off a chimp and it skin is white, it would be interesting to find what race is the parent of which.
Please note, those were HUMAN tracks in the ash, no "missing link." He said himself they are not the prints of a freakish "apeman" they are homo sapient feet... this whole speculation thing gets so old....
Another hypothesis is that they just were a genetic variation, not that they chose to walk upright. Wait, there have been no less than 2 such chimps born with upright posture inthe past 100 years.
Thanks to your erudite and well-argued assertion, I and all of science have now seen the error of our ways, and I hereby renounce the mountains of evidence for evolution and will now subscribe to one particular interpretation of religious scripture.
So, which magic-man non-explanation for the diversity of life am I to choose from among the thousands that mankind has invented over the centuries?
I love Attenborough's doco's... they are the BEST! In this clip, the upright walking in apes and the fossilied footprints... they are eerie to think about and look at.
Sadly there is no conclusive evidence for the Aquatic Ape theory
It would certainly explain a lot
RazielKain 1 year ago
pause at 1:50...look at that mountain range behind him. imagine that back when those early hominids were walking in that very spot, they saw those very same mountains, much as they are now. that's so amazing to me. millions of years ago our early ancestors walked in this one spot of earth...and millions of years later a man stands on it again, being filmed by a camera(our technology). its just astounding...life that is. evolution. all of it. so beautiful and uplifting.
avedic 1 year ago 3
well we developed upon apes well thts mi religion
toppsa1 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
the only thing if that were true...why did the chimps stay the same (quadruped) and human started walking upright...if the land changed so much it would have effected all the animals the same.
xenex23 2 years ago
Picture evolution as a giant tree. Each branch is where a species breaks away from a common ancestor. When the weather and land changed some apes stayed in the trees and some human ancestors broke away to search for a more uncontested source of food. The fewer trees there were, the less food was available in them. It would definitley not have affected all animals the same way.
ggenson 2 years ago 9
@ggenson The tree analogy is great, and commonly used, but it can sadly easily be misconstrued.
When species diverge and start adapting to their respective environments, they are only changing in that, through natural selection, they will adapt to their changing environment; however, that can involve regression (e.g. cave fish losing vision). But species further "up" the tree are not "more advanced".
You didn't misrepresent this; I just wanted to add that lest xenex23 misunderstand.
tehinfidel 2 years ago
touche
ggenson 2 years ago
chimps and humans come from the same common ancestor. Chimps did not -stay- anything. They changed too, they just found other more successful ways of doing so.
beege19 2 years ago 6
a good reason why you don't seen chimps very much in the plains of east africa, but in the forests of west africa. modern chimps are the descendants of an ape population that stayed or migrated to where the trees were, and thus didn't need to produce any drastic adaptations.
soulhammer4 2 years ago 3
The controversial one seems the more likely
questionsamson 2 years ago
This is incredible.
The moment when George Bush learned to walk upright.
203207ab 2 years ago 15
@203207ab hahaahaha
luftim 1 year ago 2
@203207ab LOL
Chimpangel 1 year ago
I really need to see a video explaining how animals and humans developed there sense of balance. If you look @ our human feet they look out of proportion to be able to balance us yet the do. I would say the swelling of the brain allowed the sense of balance to develop. The human brain seems to beg for endless challenges that other animals have no chance of matching
MicrosoftsourceCode 2 years ago
Good question; sorry I missed it.
As you know, all animals can balance, and even if you limit it to bipedalism, it didn't develop exclusively in the human line, as birds are bipedal as well.
I did a quick journal search, and didn't find anything specific, though. It seems like a trait that would be easily selected for, as the advantages of being able to balance would make you far more fit than a flailing puddle of goo :-)
However, I have some ideas for this; stay tuned.
tehinfidel 2 years ago
This is a month old but if youd still like my opinion keep reading.
I am not 100% on this btw. Geologists use mri to see inside fossilized skulls. They look at the development of what you'd call the middle ear. In birds, especially, it is very complex. Its complexity is proprtional to the balance the animal needs in its environment. Sharks have highly developed one too.
I saw a video related but not sure where it was some months ago.
okeeffdp 2 years ago
"Maybe a life at waters edge encouraged anotomical change". I would like to hear as to how scientists say this part happened because from what I know about natural selection, a species can't evolve by simply wanting to.
TheDelightfulOne 2 years ago
Yeah, for both of you I personally think that it should be called "wading ape hypothesis."
Aquatic makes it sounds a lot different. Like, I think you must be a little crazy to think that we evolved from animals swimming in salt water all day.
But it would make sense if we were waders because we do still have large ears and hair on our heads, both above water for a lot of the time spent wading.
We're also taller and our lower hairs tend to be a little glossier.
hellomate639 2 years ago
This is great for aquatic theory...
hellomate639 2 years ago
aquaticape(.)org
tehinfidel 2 years ago
I still think aquatic theory is really flawed.
I think it makes more sense to look at it as if we were freshwater waders, like we see chimps doing here, rather than swimming animals.
On the "relevant questions," the differences he brought up between aquatic animals and us really only have to do with animals that live exclusively in the water and that swim, instead of wade.
Elaine Morgan says we're streamlined for swimming, but that isn't quite the case with our pot bellies.
hellomate639 2 years ago
I agree. It's much more likely that we descended from a primate that lived in a marshy or swampy environment, but even then there isn't much evidence to back it up.
The aquatic ape hypothesis (as it should be called) is quite a stretch.
Leehofooks 2 years ago 3
What's your opinion on the probability of AAT?
hellomate639 2 years ago
Little to no evidence. Far-fetched conclusions. Major proponents dismiss contravening evidence, continue to push debunked ideas, and display fanaticism (that in itself does not necessarily make it false).
More evidence leans toward what is presented in this video, walking upright in trees hanging on to overhead branches, or walking upright after descending from trees to see over grass in the plains.
That said, I'm not a primatologist, but I am skeptical, and will wait for solid evidence.
tehinfidel 2 years ago
@tehinfidel it's not far-fetched at all. the footprints are human-like because of the inward big toe. plus, there are plenty of fossils of bipedal apes dating back 5 million years ago.
captainbrush 1 year ago
@captainbrush You're replying without looking at the context of the original comment, and thus have lost the plot. He was asking about the plausibility of the Aquatic Ape "Theory", not evolution in general.
tehinfidel 1 year ago
You know I've been doing reading and I've always assumed the first race of humans where African but now evidence is contradicting because many of the transnational humans have been found in India to Europe and as one sang I've herd shave the hair off a chimp and it skin is white, it would be interesting to find what race is the parent of which.
whydid666 2 years ago
At 3:50, doesn't it look like a man is approaching from behind. The chimp really acts like a man!
Fader45 2 years ago
Please note, those were HUMAN tracks in the ash, no "missing link." He said himself they are not the prints of a freakish "apeman" they are homo sapient feet... this whole speculation thing gets so old....
liliokilani 2 years ago
Another hypothesis is that they just were a genetic variation, not that they chose to walk upright. Wait, there have been no less than 2 such chimps born with upright posture inthe past 100 years.
liliokilani 2 years ago
best bit of t.v. ever. thanks for posting.
collieennis 2 years ago
yes, we evolved, evidence is out there
immortalmutation 2 years ago 4
This comment has received too many negative votes show
this is shit god create human dem did not came form animals
shastri153 2 years ago
Thanks to your erudite and well-argued assertion, I and all of science have now seen the error of our ways, and I hereby renounce the mountains of evidence for evolution and will now subscribe to one particular interpretation of religious scripture.
So, which magic-man non-explanation for the diversity of life am I to choose from among the thousands that mankind has invented over the centuries?
tehinfidel 2 years ago
what you just said maybe the most hilarious thing i've heard but it is so true!
RockSmithStudio 2 years ago
New study finds that walking upright might have originated in the trees
SuperiorAtheist1 2 years ago
This is my favourite clip of all time from a wildlife doco. Thanks for putting it up.
Algis Kuliukas
AlgisKuliukas 2 years ago
I love Attenborough's doco's... they are the BEST! In this clip, the upright walking in apes and the fossilied footprints... they are eerie to think about and look at.
neostryke 2 years ago
Another great video ;)
selvatico3 2 years ago
Thanks for the upload!
Michel290389 2 years ago
Thank you for great videos.
organdva 2 years ago
I like how in 3:10 the mommy is holding the baby monkey in her arms
EminemGuy47 2 years ago
Nice!
EminemGuy47 2 years ago
Stunning footage of chimpanzees walking upright starting from 2:56.
tehinfidel 2 years ago
Bonobos as you know also do this.
Antiks72 2 years ago