Plan B Forum

Recently, Discovery Channel and Animal Planet aired the amazing: a new documentary about the existance of 'aquatic apes', or as they're better known to the world:
Mermaids!

Artist's depiction;


Mermaids: the Body Found
A long, 90 to 120 minute project (depending on how many commerials) that gathers film footage, navy audio and archaeological evidence; as well as fitting in the scientific theory (note: not fact) of man's evolution which includes a period where humanity almost became aquatic. This theory seeks to explain hairlessness, bipedalism and encephalization, by saying those adapations were steps towards homo sapiens eventually becoming sea mammals.

BTW I enjoy this type of hypothetical speculation on xenobiology and cryptozoology, a lot.

However!


This was Discovery, not the SyFy Channel. Why was his portrayed so seriously as a viable educational program!?

Who did they think they were fooling? ...and more importantly, why? The disclaimers were there in the credits, but so small as to decept the uniniated in the ways of Hollywierd. So much so, I had co-workers rushing up to me, exclaiming, 'Mermaids are real!' ...breathlessly excited, that science had discovered a new species of man. [!]

I was told the fauxumentary contained camera-phone shot YouTube videos (faked) and forensic scientist testimony (scripted)

The level of detail put into this fraud was rather impressive, but not escapable to the SCIENCE FICTION trained eye;



They claimed larger eyes and cranial ridges, were better adapted to ocean life... then why was the nose so small, and not gravitated to the top of the head for better breathing?

They still have external breasts (without nipples) and a body shape that suggests a hominid pelvis used for walking.

The spine still attaches to the base of the skull, an upright adaptation; and not the back, a horizontal (swimming) postion.

The shoulders were not aquadynamicly streamlined, after 3 millions years of evolution, supposedly.

The 'tail' not acting like flippers; if they were indeed fused legs....

Where's the chas chas?







I liked it, but why perpetuate such a hoax?


This wasn't Science Theory, but Science Fantasy.

loCAtek wrote:...the scientific theory (note: not fact) of man's evolution...

Maybe you ought to look up the word 'theory' as used in a scientific sense.

Why do you suggest that sean?

Because the way you dismissively use it suggests you take it to mean nothing more than a guess - a scientific theory is one that provides the best explanation for all the available evidence. Unlike, say, so-called intelligent design, which bears none of the hallmarks of a scientific theory and which is nothing but an attempt to fit the facts into preconceived dogma.

Gravity is "just" a theory too, you know. I wouldn't suggest you walk off the edge of any cliffs for that reason, however.


ETA - besides, which, that evolution has occurred in man is also a fact - one need only observe the several species of the genus Homo that existed prior to emergence of Homo sapiens. What the theory of evolution does is explain the how and the why of the fact of evolution.

Granted, however there are theories within the greater theory;

scientific theory (note: not fact) of man's evolution which includes a period where humanity almost became aquatic.

That theory was called the Aquatic Ape Hypothesis and it's not widely accepted by credible anthropologists. It's largely based on speculation; with no physical fossil evidence to confirm it.
I find this very hard to believe; that a mammalian species that evolved for millions of years [supposedly] has left zero remains behind.

I understand that 'the sea doesn't give up her dead', but some fossilized remains of ancient cetaceans in the process of evolution, have been found on land. A homo aquaticus, would still have the denser calicum bones of land animals, that should have survived at some stage of their development.


LIke this. This just in:

New human species identified from Kenya fossils

Anthropologists have discovered three human fossils that are between 1.78 and 1.95 million years old. The specimens are of a face and two jawbones with teeth.



With the discovery of the three new fossils researchers can say with more certainty that H.rudolfensis really was a separate type of human that existed around two million years ago alongside other species of humans.

Yes, it's called the Aquatic Ape Hypothesis i.e. not a theory, and therefore labelling it as you did was mistaken.

Ah so! Then that's another thing the fauxumentary got wrong. This was from thier press release;

As the crescendo to Monster Week, a weeklong network programming stunt airing from May 21 to May 28, Mermaids: The Body Found is a story about evolutionary possibility grounded in a radical scientific theory – the Aquatic Ape Theory, which claims that humans had an aquatic stage in our evolutionary past.

The Aquatic Ape Theory term is spreading around, I had tried to google it.

Besides, no one does that shtick better than the Divine Miss M




...and that was live!