Reply to John Langdon's review of the eBook: Was Man more aquatic in the past? Fifty years after Alister Hardy,Waterside Hypotheses of Human Evolution, Mario Vaneechoutte, Algis Kuliukas, Marc Verhaegen (Eds.). Bentham eBooks (2011). 244 pp., elSBN: 9781608052448

Mario Vaneechoutte; Stephen Munro; Marc Verhaegen

首页> 外文期刊>HOMO >Reply to John Langdon's review of the eBook: Was Man more aquatic in the past? Fifty years after Alister Hardy,Waterside Hypotheses of Human Evolution, Mario Vaneechoutte, Algis Kuliukas, Marc Verhaegen (Eds.). Bentham eBooks (2011). 244 pp., elSBN: 9781608052448

【24h】

Reply to John Langdon's review of the eBook: Was Man more aquatic in the past? Fifty years after Alister Hardy,Waterside Hypotheses of Human Evolution, Mario Vaneechoutte, Algis Kuliukas, Marc Verhaegen (Eds.). Bentham eBooks (2011). 244 pp., elSBN: 9781608052448

机译：回复约翰·兰登（John Langdon）对电子书的评论：过去，人类是否更水生？在《人类进化的水滨假说》（Alister Hardy）出版五十年后，马里奥·瓦尼切特（Mario Vaneechoutte），阿尔吉斯·库利卡斯（Algis Kuliukas），马克·韦尔哈根（Marc Verhaegen）编辑。边沁电子书（2011）。 244页，elSBN：9781608052448

获取原文

获取原文并翻译 | 示例

掌桥外文数据库（机构版） >>

开具论文收录证明 >>

文献代查 >>

页面导航

摘要
著录项
相关主题

摘要

We welcome the opportunity, offered by the editors of HOMO - Journal of Comparative Human Biology, to respond to John Langdon's review (Langdon, 2012) of our recently published eBook, Was Man More Aquatic in the Past? (Vaneechoutte et al., 2011). Langdon's review, however, is not so much about the eBook itself- as he hardly discusses any of the rich data and hypotheses forwarded by the eBook - but rather represents his critical attitude towards the aquatic hypothesis (AH). His criticisms are largely rhetorical, focusing on philosophical questions about science, rather than substance, and as such they can be applied equally to science in general. Our comments address these reflections, and also highlight the fact that some of Langdon's statements are based on misinterpretations and misrepresentations, not only of the content of the eBook and of the AH, but also of some of the palaeo-anthropological and comparative biological data.

机译：我们欢迎HOMO-比较人类生物学杂志的编辑提供的机会，以回应约翰·兰登对我们最近出版的电子书《过去的人类是否更水生》的评论（兰登，2012年）。（Vaneechoutte et al。，2011）。但是，兰登的评论与其说是电子书本身，不如说是他几乎没有讨论电子书转发的任何丰富数据和假设，而是代表了他对水生假设（AH）的批判态度。他的批评主要是修辞学，侧重于关于科学的哲学问题，而不是实质问题，因此，它们在总体上可以同等地应用于科学。我们的评论针对这些思考，并强调了这样一个事实，即兰登的某些陈述不仅基于电子书和AH的内容，而且还基于某些古人类学和比较生物学数据的误解和错误陈述。

著录项

来源
《HOMO》 |2012年第6期|496-503|共8页
作者
Mario Vaneechoutte; Stephen Munro; Marc Verhaegen;
展开▼
作者单位

Laboratory Bacteriology Research, Faculty of Medicine & Health Sciences, University of Ghent, Belgium;

National Museum of Australia, Canberra, Australia;

Study Centre for Anthropology, Putte, Belgium;

展开▼
收录信息
原文格式 PDF
正文语种 eng
中图分类
关键词

Reply to John Langdon's review of the eBook: Was Man more aquatic in the past? Fifty years after Alister Hardy,Waterside Hypotheses of Human Evolution, Mario Vaneechoutte, Algis Kuliukas, Marc Verhaegen (Eds.). Bentham eBooks (2011). 244 pp., elSBN: 9781608052448

摘要

著录项

相关主题

期刊订阅