I doubt you are going to be satisfied with any answer since the authorities on the matter can't test the many hypothesis and don't all agree. Around the time of homo erectus (1.89 million years ago), hominids began walking upright on a more permanent basis but this wasn't the only evolutionary event. Additionally, hominids began growing taller now as well [1].

Charles Darwin hypothesized that upright walking was linked to tool use in 1871 [2]. In 2009, Lovejoy reformalized Darwin's hypothesis and came to the conclusion that upright walking comes down to food and sex [3].

To be successful providers, males needed their arms and hands free to carry food, and thus bipedalism evolved. This scenario, as with all bipedalism hypotheses, is really hard to test. But earlier this year, researchers offered some support when they found that chimpanzees tend to walk bipedally when carrying rare or valuable foods.

 

At this point, Lovejoy suggests, a mutually beneficial arrangement evolved: Males gathered food for females and their young and in return females mate exclusively with their providers. To be successful providers, males needed their arms and hands free to carry food, and thus bipedalism evolved. This scenario, as with all bipedalism hypotheses, is really hard to test. [1]

In 1980, Peter Rodman and Henry McHenry claimed that bipedalism carries bioenergetic advantages [4]. Then in 2007, another group of researchers validated the energy advantage of walking upright [5].

Raichlen notes that if the same variation existed in our early ape-like ancestors as does in today's chimps, with some finding it easier to walk than others, this could have helped to drive adaptation. "That's what natural selection would be able to work on," he says [5].

Since there is no agreement and testing many of theses hypothesis are impossible since early hominids no longer exist, no one in their right mind can say, "Chris, this is why we evolved to walk." Even if they were correct, it would take some time to cycle through the academic community before it gained enough support to be the consensus.

I doubt you are going to be satisfied with any answer since the authorities on the matter can't test the many hypothesis and don't all agree. Around the time of homo erectus (1.89 million years ago), hominids began walking upright on a more permanent basis but this wasn't the only evolutionary event. Additionally, hominids began growing taller now as well [1].

Charles Darwin hypothesized that upright walking was linked to tool use in 1871 [2]. In 2009, Lovejoy reformalized Darwin's hypothesis and came to the conclusion that upright walking comes down to food and sex [3].

To be successful providers, males needed their arms and hands free to carry food, and thus bipedalism evolved. This scenario, as with all bipedalism hypotheses, is really hard to test. But earlier this year, researchers offered some support when they found that chimpanzees tend to walk bipedally when carrying rare or valuable foods.

At this point, Lovejoy suggests, a mutually beneficial arrangement evolved: Males gathered food for females and their young and in return females mate exclusively with their providers. To be successful providers, males needed their arms and hands free to carry food, and thus bipedalism evolved. This scenario, as with all bipedalism hypotheses, is really hard to test. [1]

In 1980, Peter Rodman and Henry McHenry claimed that bipedalism carries bioenergetic advantages [4]. Then in 2007, another group of researchers validated the energy advantage of walking upright [5].

Raichlen notes that if the same variation existed in our early ape-like ancestors as does in today's chimps, with some finding it easier to walk than others, this could have helped to drive adaptation. "That's what natural selection would be able to work on," he says [5].

Since there is no agreement and testing many of theses hypothesis are impossible since early hominids no longer exist, no one in their right mind can say, "Chris, this is why we evolved to walk." Even if they were correct, it would take some time to cycle through the academic community before it gained enough support to be the consensus.

I doubt you are going to be satisfied with any answer since the authorities on the matter can't test the many hypothesis and don't all agree. Around the time of homo erectus (1.89 million years ago), hominids began walking upright on a more permanent basis but this wasn't the only evolutionary event. Additionally, hominids began growing taller now as well [1].

Charles Darwin hypothesized that upright walking was linked to tool use in 1871 [2]. In 2009, Lovejoy reformalized Darwin's hypothesis and came to the conclusion that upright walking comes down to food and sex [3].

To be successful providers, males needed their arms and hands free to carry food, and thus bipedalism evolved. This scenario, as with all bipedalism hypotheses, is really hard to test. But earlier this year, researchers offered some support when they found that chimpanzees tend to walk bipedally when carrying rare or valuable foods.

At this point, Lovejoy suggests, a mutually beneficial arrangement evolved: Males gathered food for females and their young and in return females mate exclusively with their providers. To be successful providers, males needed their arms and hands free to carry food, and thus bipedalism evolved. This scenario, as with all bipedalism hypotheses, is really hard to test. But earlier this year, researchers offered some support when they found that chimpanzees tend to walk bipedally when carrying rare or valuable foods [1].

In 1980, Peter Rodman and Henry McHenry claimed that bipedalism carries bioenergetic advantages [4]. Then in 2007, another group of researchers validated the energy advantage of walking upright [5].

Raichlen notes that if the same variation existed in our early ape-like ancestors as does in today's chimps, with some finding it easier to walk than others, this could have helped to drive adaptation. "That's what natural selection would be able to work on," he says [5].

Since there is no agreement and testing many of theses hypothesis are impossible since early hominids no longer exist, no one in their right mind can say Chris this is why we evolved to walk. Even if they were correct, it would take some time to cycle through the academic community before it gained enough support to be the consensus.

I doubt you are going to be satisfied with any answer since the authorities on the matter can't test the many hypothesis and don't all agree. Around the time of homo erectus (1.89 million years ago), hominids began walking upright on a more permanent basis but this wasn't the only evolutionary event. Additionally, hominids began growing taller now as well [1].

Charles Darwin hypothesized that upright walking was linked to tool use in 1871 [2]. In 2009, Lovejoy reformalized Darwin's hypothesis and came to the conclusion that upright walking comes down to food and sex [3].

To be successful providers, males needed their arms and hands free to carry food, and thus bipedalism evolved. This scenario, as with all bipedalism hypotheses, is really hard to test. But earlier this year, researchers offered some support when they found that chimpanzees tend to walk bipedally when carrying rare or valuable foods.

At this point, Lovejoy suggests, a mutually beneficial arrangement evolved: Males gathered food for females and their young and in return females mate exclusively with their providers. To be successful providers, males needed their arms and hands free to carry food, and thus bipedalism evolved. This scenario, as with all bipedalism hypotheses, is really hard to test. [1]

In 1980, Peter Rodman and Henry McHenry claimed that bipedalism carries bioenergetic advantages [4]. Then in 2007, another group of researchers validated the energy advantage of walking upright [5].

Raichlen notes that if the same variation existed in our early ape-like ancestors as does in today's chimps, with some finding it easier to walk than others, this could have helped to drive adaptation. "That's what natural selection would be able to work on," he says [5].

Since there is no agreement and testing many of theses hypothesis are impossible since early hominids no longer exist, no one in their right mind can say, "Chris, this is why we evolved to walk." Even if they were correct, it would take some time to cycle through the academic community before it gained enough support to be the consensus.