This post was mentioned on Twitter by Vincent_Cooper: Consciousness and the Direction of Structure http://www.brainwaving.com/2009/11/17/377/...

As a theory in its own right the AAT seems to have some serious flaws, a basic summary on Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aquatic_ape_hypothesis highlights the key elements

I see no need whatsoever to evoke a semi-aquatic phase, the increasingly anomalous traits that emerged in ape/hominid/human evolution can be explained by simply taking account of the ecological factors and biochemical effects known to be part of our ancestral environment for millions of years. More a case of joining the dots between accepted data than inventing new scenarios. The hormonally modified developmental environment I have proposed simultaneously addresses all the major traits as hormones have a blanket effect on genetic expression. This would not only account for the accelerating expansion of our brain it would also account for the equally enigmatic and sudden stall in that expansion, something that adaptive theory alone cannot easily address. This in turn ties a basic evolutionary theory into a practical model that can offer some insight into the current workings of our brain/mind and ultimately the ever-greater scale of crisis we repeatedly create as well as our utterly inept responses. Aside from the accepted data that it draws on the basic theory is also currently testable, it predicts that a wholly different and greatly more functional self is still latent in all humans. Accessing that state of being is currently feasible and in fact already evidenced in a very limited way.
Importantly and unlike AAT it is already attracting initial support from across a number of disciplines, something incredibly unusual for such a radical leftfield theory so early in its genesis. Finally based on initial reaction from a wider audience it seems to have an element of instinctive common sense based on readers subjective experience, a rare commodity that in a sane world would carry a lot more import than overly rationalised scientific protocols or dogmatised philosophies. Of course it is early days and I invite anyone to look at the whole picture, consider the evidence and find serious flaws or alternatively improve its clarity and simplicity.