What burns more calories, walking on your hands or feet?

I would like to modify a theory I had about aerobic vs. anaerobic exercises. I was trying to prove that strength training involving your arms isn't anywhere near as effective for weight loss as cardio workouts.

I theorized that walking across the room on your hands and on your feet burns about the same amount of calories, since you are moving the same weight the same distance.

But it seems that this is inaccurate. I asked this question online and I got the following answer from a member named RM: "It's true that it's the same weight and distance so in that sense it's the same work. However, the EFFICIENCY of doing that work is far less when walking on your hands... we are made to walk on our feet not our hands. As a result of lower efficiency we do more work walking on our hands with the energy (calories burned) dissipated as heat."

However, I am still sticking to the theory that exercising involving efficient muscles (aerobics) are better for weight loss because you are more likely to stick to them since they burn energy without making you very tired.

Big engines burn more energy and they get burnt out less quickly. Your legs are carrying more weight and they are stronger so they don't make you as tired as your arms. Think of your legs as an SUV and your arms as a motorcycle. If you wanna burn more gas, drive the SUV.