Misinterprited Motion? H03

Is the value of walking only misinterpreting motion?  There is a term, spurious correlation, which describes the effect of two things apparently correlating in motion, when in reality they are not actually connected and the apparent correlation is only chance.  So is walking only a case of spurious correlation?  In Gymnasium for the Mind, Christopher Orlet puts forward the idea that there is a connection between great minds and walking.  For examples he points out that Charles Darwin had a walking path along the boundaries of his property which he traversed daily, and that Henry David Thoreau, a noted poet and philosopher, walked an estimated 250,000 miles in his life time, a feat that is less impressive when you consider that he was born in 1817.  He the points to the early twentieth century and gives a long list of names such as Einstein and Fraud, who were great thinkers, and apparently walkers, of their day.  It is interesting to note that these many men were, in fact, thinkers of the early twentieth century.  This was an age of political, ideological, social, and scientific revolution unparalleled in human history.  This is the age that saw the creation and discovery of atomic energy, jet aircraft, radar technologies, and many others.  It also saw the blossoming of socialism with the birth of Soviet Russia, wide spread proliferation of women’s suffrage, two world wars and the creation of a new world order that would remain in place until the fall of the Soviet Union. These were turbulent times, innovative times, revolutionary times.  Humankind, however, had been walking since it’s dawn, yet such as happened in the first half of the twentieth century has not been happening for all of human history.  Many great minds have been produced over the eons that is true, but were the great because they walked, or did they walk because they were great?  Did walking even play a roll, or was it simple a spurious correlation.