I am highly passionate in biology and have chosen the Aquatic Ape Theory to write about in this essay. I came across the theory while watching a Ted Talk by Elaine Morgan, writer of the book The Aquatic Ape Hypothesis published in 1997.

This controversial theory explains the possibility that humans could have a semi-aquatic stage in our evolutionary pathway. This is of great significance as it contradicts the more well-known theory of humans originating from terrestrial apes that lived on savannas, instead of swamp or oceanic conditions.

The theory claims that our aquatic ancestors had the ability to stay in water for extended periods of time, thus has evolved to be equipped with the necessary traits to fulfil such a feat. Through centuries of evolution, these traits has been passed down to homosapiens, where biological and physiological evidences can be observed. Proponents to the theory bring up the fact that bipedalism and a lack of body hair are physiological evidences. In aquatic conditions, bipedalism offers multiple advantages such as keeping our heads above water and allowing us to wade through water. Similarities can be drawn from our lack of body hair to animals such as elephants and rhinoceros, animals without body hair who have fossil records on having aquatic ancestors. Another fact is that every hairless mammal (i.e. dugongs and dolphins, with the exception of the naked mole rat) has an evolutionary pathway conditioned by water, hence suggesting that the generally furless humans have once been in aquatic conditions. All these evidences point to humans being of aquatic origin.

Humans have a greater affinity to water compared to other ape species, where our bodies are streamlined for greater efficiency for moving through water.

I believe this theory is relevant to a large extent as it accounts for the bizarre and incredible phenomenon of infant swimming. Where an infant submersed in water would spontaneously initiate the diving response of holding its breath and moving its arms rhythmically to prevent drowning. Such a response is unheard of in infants of any other terrestrial species. This phenomenon is testament to a humans affinity to water as compared to other ape species, and the main cause of this difference could be due to this theory.

However, even with all these theoretical evidences being observed, I must address the fact that there are multiple inconsistencies with this, one being a lack of fossil evidence to prove its authenticity.

Although I agree with the theory, I feel that the theory is limited due to it being highly biased as it is based on multiple causalities and empirical evidences rather than the facts being proven in a scientific manner. There is also a lack of evaluation of the theory by scientific personnel and there is a chance of these observations being completely coincidental cannot be negated as there is a lack of scientific proof. This is a fundamental flaw in the theory which has led to it being a punching bag for criticism by anthropologists and scientists

Certain key aspects of the theory is still relevant, but the current people are to etreme