Ageofknowledge Said
The prevailing evolutionary theory to account for the appearance of bipedalism is that the habitat of the hominids changed from woodland to open savanna. Under these conditions, erect posture would be helpful in detecting predators and maintaining body temperature. However, with recent studies pushing bipedalism back to at least 4 million years, the woodland habitat does not provide the proper driving force to select for the appearance of a bipedal stance.
Chimpanzees have shown relatively advanced forms of bipedalism , and not many chimpanzees are found in open plains.
Bipedalism uses twice the energy as mammalian quadrupedalism. Therefore, one would expect to find a fairly robust theory to explain why hominids opted to use so much energy to get around.
Once again you seem to be assuming that they 'opted' to do something all of a sudden. As I said before it was a gradual process. The likes of Ardipithecus Ramidus a species that lived in a wooded envroment showed developments of bipedalism, gradually as hominoids moved away from wooded areas, the bipedeal traits evolved more, i.e. natural selection.
Most evolutionary theories constructed to account for the appearance of bipedalism have serious problems, since they rely upon the change from woodland to savanna habitat, which occurred after bipedalism arose. This eliminates the ecology, the thermoregulation, and the enhanced vision hypotheses. The original hunting hypothesis (proposed by Charles Darwin) has been invalidated, since the appearance of hunting tools were much later than the appearance of bipedalism.
Most scientists now believe that Bipedialism occurred DURING the change from woodland to savanna, so to say that it a serious problem is a bit if an exaggeration.
The male provider model states that monogamous males provided for pregnant/nursing mates and their offspring. All available evidence indicates that early hominids were polygynous and not monogamous and that male provisioning of immobile females and offspring was unlikely. No monogamous primate species is known to have a male who provides food for the female and her offspring. Even so, in hunter/gatherer societies, the average human female gathers an estimated 12,000 calories per day in food while the male averages only about 7,230 calories. So much for male provisioning!
You are right, and most scientists now reject the male provider theory, but I fail to see what it has to do with the conversation.
The final explanation was that scarce dietary resources required an efficient means of travel. In the late Miocene, hominid dietary resources become thinly dispersed in some areas, requiring possible extensive travel to exploit those resources. Why energy-consuming bipedalism, as opposed to quadrupedalism, would be chosen as the means of travel, remains a question.
You are right, it remains a question, a question that scientists are beginning to answer, but it certainly doesn't give more credence to 'Adam'.
Like I said, keep talking. It's entertaining.
Go on to an evolutionary forum and you would be the one that would be entertaining, so please lets keep this civil, and refrain from childishness.