Final answer:
The savanna hypothesis suggests that bipedalism evolved as an adaptation to the savanna habitat, not the forest. The statement is therefore False since it incorrectly attributes forest origins to the savanna hypothesis.
Step-by-step explanation:
The central idea of the savanna hypothesis is that the evolution of human traits such as upright bipedalism arose as adaptations to living in a savanna habitat. This idea suggests that early hominins developed the ability to walk on two feet to better traverse the wide, open landscapes, perhaps to help monitor for predators, or to travel efficiently between food sources.
However, the statement indicating that the savanna hypothesis posits bipedalism evolved in the forest before hominins moved to the savanna is incorrect. Therefore, the answer to the question is: False.
The evolution of bipedalism is a complex topic with many competing hypotheses, and the savanna hypothesis is just one among many. Other theories consider factors such as energy efficiency, thermoregulation, and the advantages of freeing the hands for tool use. Notably, Mary Leakey's discovery of the Laetoli footprints, which provides important evidence of early bipedalism, supports the notion that bipedalism arose in environments that preceded the vast savannas where hominins would later roam.