Aquatic humans never existed, therefore, they never left the water.
Aquatic Humans and Humans are the same thing. There are a wide range of physiological traits in human beings that can be explained by an evolutionary period in human existence that involved a partial, complete and then semi-aquatic phase in human prehistory.
These features include:
Hairlessness
Streamlined body
Reduced sense of smell
Subcutaneous body fat
Bipedalism
Diving reflex
Exostoses
The Nose
Downward facing nostrils
Philtrum
Breath control
Speech
Salt Tears
Eccrine sweat skin glands
Large Sebaceous glands
Hymen
New-born swim ability
Webbed fingers and toes
Lunar Menstruation cycle
Lowest blood cell count of the apes
Highest haemoglobin per cell of the apes
Seafood diet bias
Humans are the only terrestrial animals that can voluntarily hold their breath at will.
The ability to hold and control breath is necessary for complex speech. This ability would, of course, also be needed for diving. It is likely that the ability of humans and aquatic mammals to hold their breath was an adaptation meant for diving, and that the development of complex speech was a side effect.
Also, humans have a descended larynx, which other apes do not. This allows us to gulp large amounts of air. Most animals only breathe through the nose, but the descended larynx allows humans to breather through our mouths, which allowed us to take deep breaths "prior to diving" (Watson). The larynx thus allowed early humans to spend longer periods of time underwater than they could have if they were taking shallow breaths through their noses. Complex speech is also dependent on the descended larynx. Other aquatic mammals, such as sea lions, walruses, and manatees have descended larynxes.
There is another similarity between humans and aquatic mammals: the diving reflex, also known as bradycardia, a decrease in heart rate and redistribution of blood to the brain and the organs. This is a natural reaction of humans to being submerged. Other apes do not share this ability, as they obviously have no use for it. "Humans can dive to depths of one hundred meters at the extreme but most humans can certainly dive to ten meters," which no ape would do (Watson). The diving reflex makes swimming and diving practical, and humans have no living ancestors that possess this trait. It must have been acquired at some point after humans split from apes, and this supports the idea that man evolved in an aquatic or semi-aquatic environment.
Suggestion that Pachyderms all shared a more intense evolutionary period with us and the sea. The Seal, Dugong and Walrus quite obviously going the way of the Dolphin, although there is no reason why time and the environment should not leave them where they are or move them in the direction of the land once more.
The Hippopotamus still living a semi-aquatic existence, whilst a distant relative went all the way and became the Blue Whale, fully aquatic and the largest animal to have ever lived as far as we know.
The Elephant, Tapir (both of whom have trunks [read:Snorkel] which have been shown in prehistoric times to have been moving towards the top of the skull, clearly an advantage in the water) and Rhino also share with the other Pachyderms the hairlessness seen in humans and share numerous other similarities not seen in non-aquatic or semi-aquatic mammals.
Elephants by way of interest also have webbed feet although this has atrophied as in humans. They can also swim for six hours straight and their large size is in anycase probably attributable to a long period of permanent water habitation. Elephants also show the crying response when emotional. Hardly any land creatures cry and hardly any sea creatures don't. They are also highly intelligent and have a complex language which includes Infrasound comunnication.
The Aquatic Ape Theory is at least a reasonable hypothesis, if not a fully acceptable scientific theory. It provides a sensible explanation for why human beings, while genetically similar to apes, possess so many different physical features, and how these physical adaptations could have come into being. Without the Aquatic Ape Theory, it is hard to explain the parallels between humans and aquatic mammals. Science, especially evolutionary Biology, is a constantly changing field. Nothing is set in stone. The AAT may someday replace the "Savannah theory of human evolution" which most evolutionary biologists now deny they ever supported which is telling, especially since this coincided with the discovery that the whole basis for the so-called "Savannah theory" was incorrect and the environment which produced upright man was wet and wooded.
Perhaps a third theory will arise. At the very least, Elaine Morgan's books have made some scientists rethink what they have been taught about evolution.
humans catch animals surviving in water and many times oil tanks sink in water and due to blockage of oxygen many aquatic animals have to loose their lives these two things are very common and harm the aquatic life widely
The word aquatic means that something is related to water. There are aquatic animals that live in the water and aquatic sports which are activities performed in the water.
If it lived out of the water it would not be aquatic.
No primates are aquatic. All primates live on land. Only a few can swim at all, and humans are one of these.
Water lilies provide oxygen for aquatic life in the pond and keep the algae down. They also are very beautiful to look at. Think Monet.
When feeding aquatic turtles you have to put both the turtles and the pellets in water for the turtles to be able to eat the pellets. Unlike humans, aquatic turtles have fixed tongues meaning that they can't move them. So to get the food down their throat they use water. A turtle may grab a chunk of food on land but then they will rush to the nearest water to swallow it. So yes, feed your aquatic turtles in water.
All except for aquatic mammals such as dolphins and whales and reptiles such as snakes and turtles.
Operating or living or growing in water; "boats are aquatic vehicles"; "water lilies are aquatic plants"; "fish are aquatic animals".
An edible aquatic plant named 'Kalmia' or 'kalmi' is eaten as food. also it can be sea weed most of the time
Of course they are. Everything in the environment is affected, actually. But focusing in on the aquatic systems I could give you more information. First of all they are GREATLY affected! The acid rain raises the pH levels of the water. As this happens it kills off many species of aquatic life. The first to go are normally the craw fish and clam species, then most fish die off. Depending on how quickly the acid rain gets to the aquatic system, some species may be capable of actually adapting to the rain acidic water. When it comes to humans, the aquatic systems that are affected WILL affect us! We have to drink that water sooner or later! I understand it's put through filters and cleaned but the acidic water will still affect us.
Aquatic animals are animals that live in water.
Water pollution can have many negative effects including killing aquatic animals, causing humans to become ill, disrupting food-chains, and destroying ecosystems.