Waterside Hypotheses 5: Anthropology rejects our science. Problems and solutions of peer review.

Part 5 of 5: In the final part of the talk, I describe how the authorities in anthropology rejected our attempts to publish findings in support of an hypothesis of the waterside hypothesis of human evolution I have labelled "River Apes... Coastal People". I describe how the peer review process itelf is flawed when it comes to trying to get 'new' ideas into the literature and how openning up peer review would help this process.

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• aquatic ape
• current anthropology
• peer review
• open peer review
• ejScience
• Batten disease
• human evolution

[christofftennant]

Hi Algis...Very interesting stuff enjoyed hearing you argue your points.

It seems like a sound theory to me.

[AlgisKuliukas]

Cheers Chris!

[Sendamagicmoment]

Great talk Algis. I think your version of the hypothesis was explained more clearly than the whole BBC documentary on the subject and it makes more sense. The one question I had was even though walking upright in water makes sense wouldn't spending large amounts of time in water cause the ape's skeletal structure to weaken thus it wouldn't actually help them walk upright on land. Perhaps spending time in water created other musculo/skeletal adaptations that along with another environmental

[AlgisKuliukas]

It's a fair point but you see I don't think they spent all that long in water. Seasonally-flooded galery forests are not flooded all that much. Remember the point about tiny amounts of selection.

[AlgisKuliukas]

Thanks, Stefan. The EJS idea is almost certainly too big for us - so I'm just hoping someone comes along and wants to take it over.

Algis

[AlgisKuliukas]

Thanks so much "C.B." I really appreciate your feedback! Algis

[jostpuur]

Scientific community is corrupt. Debating with scientists is like debating with priests. No point in wasting time.

The correct approach is to merely inform those who are interested in the human evolution. The corrupt scientific community will eventually lose its credibility, like the church has been losing its.

[VojvodinaNet]

Thanks, Algis! I liked your videos very much, though I think you could have gone much more into detail about "Waterside Theory". I also think that there is nothing wrong with the word "aquatic" - if our babies can swim before they can walk, if we are built to handle cold in water but not on land - we are aquatic. Also, there is a conspiracy to prevent changes to scientific dogmas - politically motivated.

[DarkClaw89]

Great criticism of the peer review process! No wonder I could not find anything in the journals.

Waterside hypothesis definitely has merit! However, I'm concerned about how it contributed to bipedalism, my one problem with this hypothesis is that it assumes early hominins were terrestrial quadrupeds to begin with (an unknown variable). Gibbons for example are bipedal terrestrially (obviously not primary form of locomotion), so who knows!

It seems water definitely had a large part to play overall

[mikeycbaby]

Algis, I found your take on the hypothesis very compelling. You made some excellent points. I only hope you don't give up trying to publish your paper.

[061369317]

Hi Algis,

Very informative and eventually moving 5 parts exposé !

This interesting theory could be a sound alternative to the 'hot tin roof ape' current theory ;-)

[Sendamagicmoment]

... the creature to spend a significant amount of time in water like semi-aquatic creatures that we see today like otters, or seals etc. In my experience learning about how paradigm changing traits seem to develop, they rarely seem to evolve directly for the uses that we see them having today. Example feathers didn't evolve directly for flight, lungs in fish didn't develop directly for life on land etc...