On Mon, 26 Mar 2001 18:07:55 -0400, matesz <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>The fundamental idea may itself be wrong.   In Nutrition and Evolution,
>Crawford and Marsh argue convincingly (I'm convinced, anyway), that humans
>do not show adequate adaptation to an arid savannah environment, but show
>many characteristics of adaptation to a semi-aquatic coastal life, and that
>the primary evolutionary habitat of humans has been coastal areas, where in
>fact most humans still live today.

You're convinced that humanity developped in a coastal environment.

It's undoubted that, the coastline is a place where gatherers can find
something. Especially seeweed and mussels or crabs.
But think that a coastline, even in rich waters, has only a limited capacity
to sustain humans (per mile).

We know that until recently they didn't have fishhooks and assume that they
didn't have nets.
It would be hard to catch fish, standing on the shore with a sharp stick.

Please explain what you suppose these hominids ate.

There a several traits of australipithecines, homo habilis, homo erectus
ramapithecus, earlier primates we can see in the developement of the human
species.
Please explain for which of them you see on the coastline (only).
Or is it annother, none of them?
And for which time do you assume an aquatic adaption?

Several months ago I've answered to some of your points promoting the
aquatic theory. I recall that for me it had some interesting analogies, but
was not really convincing.

For example you cite:

>"Perspiration is not a technique the savannah
>animals employ:  it is too expensive, except for an animals like the
>hippopotamus which does sweat ..

Which advantage would have sweating in the water?
Sweating, the almost unique human cooling system allows a human to stay
active even in the heat. When the lions sleep.

Thats a big evolutionary advantage.
It requires humans to have access to fresh water (to sweat out).
I would say that's "expensive" may be, but it pays.
Humans are capable to aquire water even in the driest landscapes
(like the aboriginals in the outback of Australia).
Kiosan do well in todays savannah of africa.
It wasn't such dry as it is today. It developed from woodlands.

Ok, I'm not going through all, just one more

>7.  "There is plenty of evidence that the oldest human settlements were at
>the margins of water...."

Which ones you mean? Chauvet cave? Egypt? Theben? Jericho? Euphrat/Tigris
area? Indus area?
Not you couldn't find some. The coast has many advantages.
But not all are at the coast. There is plenty inlands.

Regards, Amadeus