The evolution of complex life

[Commander Dutch]

Predators -- at least in nature -- don't tend to be overly bright. Their survival is dependent on the availability of prey, too. You've no doubt heard about how wolf populations rise and fall with the number of prey animals in their area. Wolves are interesting because they live in and hunt in communal groups, much like whales and dolphins. Unlike other predators like hawks, owls (*sob*), tigers, etc. they developed smarts and cooperation as a survival technique. But even so, if their prey dies off so do they.

In the jungle, everything is prey. Kill or be killed. Eat or be eaten. In order to avoid being killed and eaten, prey need to smarten up or be prolific. In order to keep up, the predators need to be smarter in hunting prey...or go back to eating veggies.

Your wolf analogy is good, but also note that, as man killed off the predators (actually replacing them) the deer population exploded resulting in starvation and spreading disease. The system needs to be balanced.

That said, the balance is not static since the smarter prey live long enough to spread their genes and the smarter predators likewise live longer to spread their genes.

Working as a team, be it for hunting or defense, works for some species. Note to that there has to be enough food to feed the group or they'll either break apart or turn on each other.

 

[Commander Dutch]

Just quit. Him too. This is a cool and very rare intelligent discussion. You boys quit fucking it up. Thanks. Love, mom

You babied him and called me an asshole, mom!

Is that because you know he's a baby and that, as the oldest, I can handle it? LOL

 

[ThatOwlWoman]

You babied him and called me an asshole, mom!

Is that because you know he's a baby and that, as the oldest, I can handle it? LOL

Just don't make me come down there. lol

 

[ThatOwlWoman]

In the jungle, everything is prey. Kill or be killed. Eat or be eaten. In order to avoid being killed and eaten, prey need to smarten up or be prolific. In order to keep up, the predators need to be smarter in hunting prey...or go back to eating veggies.

Your wolf analogy is good, but also note that, as man killed off the predators (actually replacing them) the deer population exploded resulting in starvation and spreading disease. The system needs to be balanced.

That said, the balance is not static since the smarter prey live long enough to spread their genes and the smarter predators likewise live longer to spread their genes.

Working as a team, be it for hunting or defense, works for some species. Note to that there has to be enough food to feed the group or they'll either break apart or turn on each other.

One of the ongoing issues in Alaska. They want the money from the big game hunters who come in from the outside, so they periodically try to wipe out the predators. The DNR understands that predators are necessary for the health of the herds like the caribou, and that they take the weakest, not the trophy animals. Good luck trying to convince the poorly-educated citizens of that, though.

 

[Commander Dutch]

Just don't make me come down there. lol

Yesssss, Mommmmm. <smacks Perry in the back of the head when Mom isn't looking>

 

[Cypress]

It doesn't have to be a goal to make styrofoam cups (see George Carlin), it can only be a consequence.

Again, using the Red Queen hypothesis, prey evolves to evade predators. For simians, this involved an excellent tree climbing ability. A consequence of that ability is to reach fruits at the tops of trees such as bananas. Simians who like bananas will be getting a twofer.

Likewise, human prey are lacking in fangs and claws plus are slower than four-legged predators. Many animals can use tools, but they are all limited in usage. Mankind expanded up tool-making skills which led to weapons and creating shelters. As the beginning of 2001: A Space Odyssey demonstrated, our tool-making advanced from a bone mace to a nuclear weapon in orbit. In that case, evolution didn't favor making nukes, it favored mankind surviving to procreate by making better tools for survival. Nukes were only a consequence of our more intelligent tool-making abilities.

2001, great movie.

I think human innovative technological advancement was driven by the five percent among us who are genuises. The other 95 percent of us were just along for the ride. Technological advancement doesn't seem to have improved us physically or biologically. A lot of us are only kept alive by pills and treatments. Supposedly our brain size has shrunk over the past 30k years since the late Paleolithic.

 

[Commander Dutch]

One of the ongoing issues in Alaska. They want the money from the big game hunters who come in from the outside, so they periodically try to wipe out the predators. The DNR understands that predators are necessary for the health of the herds like the caribou, and that they take the weakest, not the trophy animals. Good luck trying to convince the poorly-educated citizens of that, though.

Which is one of the major problems in our society; stupid people. Sure, education helps but our culture has been increasingly anti-education since the 1970s. Another proble is the uneducatable. In short, stupid people. What to do about them? It's considered uncivilized to kill them. I favor letting them remove themselves from the gene pool as much as possible. All voluntary, of course.

One idea would be "The Russian Roulette TikTok Challenge" with $1,000,000 going to those who survive 100 efforts with 5-shot revolver*. No one under 18 allowed.

*semi-autos are also allowed.

 

[Cypress]

Survival is the goal of all species on this planet. In your Doomsday scenario, we would definitely see that happening on a horrendous scale as we killed each other for supplies. You know what else we would see? The best survival mechanism of all -- cooperation. Your very body exists as it does because eons ago simple cells cooperated for the survival of both. Humans and other species have evolved to cooperate for survival for as long as life has existed here.

I'd like to know the why of that, wouldn't you?

Supposedly, one theory based on a study of ground squirrels is that altruism and cooperation only extends to their close relatives, because if your sister survives that is a way to ensure some of your genetic information will carry on, even if you don't.

I would like to know why homo sapiens were the only human species to survive, when there were at least half a dozen human species in the early Paleolithic.

 

[ThatOwlWoman]

Supposedly, one theory based on a study of ground squirrels is that altruism and cooperation only extends to their close relatives, because if your sister survives that is a way to ensure some of your genetic information will carry on, even if you don't.

I would like to know why homo sapiens were the only human species to survive, when there were at least half a dozen human species in the early Paleolithic.

The question of the ages. How did we manage to assimilate some of their genes and come out the one left standing?

 

[ThatOwlWoman]

2001, great movie.

I think human innovative technological advancement was driven by the five percent among us who are genuises. The other 95 percent of us were just along for the ride. Technological advancement doesn't seem to have improved us physically or biologically. A lot of us are only kept alive by pills and treatments. Supposedly our brain size has shrunk over the past 30k years since the late Paleolithic.

That turns out to be false.

UNLV Research: No, the Human Brain Did Not Shrink 3,000 Years Ago

We are much taller and have longer lives than our earlier ancestors. Consistent diet has a lot to do with that, along with knowledge of sanitation and drugs to treat infection.

That's an interesting comment about genius creating technological advances. Was it accident or genius when we learned how to harness and use fire? Or was it just an accident as early humans went picking through the ashes of a forest fire, picking up the yummy BBQed critters and eating them, and deciding that fire makes things taste and digest good, so how can we get some? Was the atlatl developed over time, or was it from a spark in the head of a hunter by his campfire, trying to figure out how to fix his weak spear cast so next time, the food didn't get away?

 

[Cypress]

That turns out to be false.

UNLV Research: No, the Human Brain Did Not Shrink 3,000 Years Ago

We are much taller and have longer lives than our earlier ancestors. Consistent diet has a lot to do with that, along with knowledge of sanitation and drugs to treat infection.

That's an interesting comment about genius creating technological advances. Was it accident or genius when we learned how to harness and use fire? Or was it just an accident as early humans went picking through the ashes of a forest fire, picking up the yummy BBQed critters and eating them, and deciding that fire makes things taste and digest good, so how can we get some? Was the atlatl developed over time, or was it from a spark in the head of a hunter by his campfire, trying to figure out how to fix his weak spear cast so next time, the food didn't get away?

I suppose that will be an ongoing area of research and debate: how did humans change physically from when we were never nomadic hunter gatherer to when we became sedentary agriculturalists.

We do a lot more vegging out in front of the TV, and I always heard that our brains don't have to be as active as a hunter gatherer who is constantly on the edge of survival

 

[ThatOwlWoman]

I suppose that will be an ongoing area of research and debate: how did humans change physically from when we were never nomadic hunter gatherer to when we became sedentary agriculturalists.

We do a lot more vegging out in front of the TV, and I always heard that our brains don't have to be as active as a hunter gatherer who is constantly on the edge of survival

I don't think there's any evidence that we are brighter than our ancestors, although of course there's no way to measure that. We live longer thanks to clean water, easy food, modern medicine -- but are we actually healthier with our mostly sedentary lifestyles?

 

[Cypress]

I don't think there's any evidence that we are brighter than our ancestors, although of course there's no way to measure that. We live longer thanks to clean water, easy food, modern medicine -- but are we actually healthier with our mostly sedentary lifestyles?

Paleoanthropology is fascinating, no?

We have access to medicine and large quantities of meat now, but I have heard paleoanthropologists say that Neolithic sedentary agriculturalists shrunk in physical body size and became less healthy than their Paleolithic nomadic hunter gatherer progenitors.

The advantage the agriculturalists had is they weren't as prone to starvation and they could support larger communities.

 

[Saint Guinefort]

Stop being mean. You're so super smart and educated and can add a lot to any discussion. Esp. science topics. Ditto for him. I know he's an asshole. Try to get past that. Thanks!

You're right. I only gave one try to get Dutch to discuss like adults when I said this:

Look, I'm actually making a good faith effort to not be a dick. Please drop the Perry PhD shit. Thanks.

Now, to your point: do you not realize trees obey the laws of physics and don't have "free will" themselves?

His response showed me that I was CLEARLY in the wrong.

When you're a dick, I'll use it at my pleasure.

Yes, Perry PhD. Do you realize the difference between a living thing and inanimate matter? You're the "doctor" and chemist. Are you saying there's no difference except for chemical structure?

I will attempt to be more of a door mat for him in the future.

 

[Saint Guinefort]

Which is one of the major problems in our society; stupid people. Sure, education helps but our culture has been increasingly anti-education since the 1970s. Another proble is the uneducatable. In short, stupid people. What to do about them? It's considered uncivilized to kill them. I favor letting them remove themselves from the gene pool as much as possible. All voluntary, of course.

One idea would be "The Russian Roulette TikTok Challenge" with $1,000,000 going to those who survive 100 efforts with 5-shot revolver*. No one under 18 allowed.

*semi-autos are also allowed.

You're so smart.

 

[ThatOwlWoman]

You're right. I only gave one try to get Dutch to discuss like adults when I said this:

His response showed me that I was CLEARLY in the wrong.

I will attempt to be more of a door mat for him in the future.

One of those doormats that says "Go the fuck away"? lol

 

[ThatOwlWoman]

Paleoanthropology is fascinating, no?

We have access to medicine and large quantities of meat now, but I have heard paleoanthropologists say that Neolithic sedentary agriculturalists shrunk in physical body size and became less healthy than their Paleolithic nomadic hunter gatherer progenitors.

The advantage the agriculturalists had is they weren't as prone to starvation and they could support larger communities.

A good demonstration of the "use it or lose it" principle, eh? Cultures that have more protein do tend to have larger body sizes.

 

[Commander Dutch]

Supposedly, one theory based on a study of ground squirrels is that altruism and cooperation only extends to their close relatives, because if your sister survives that is a way to ensure some of your genetic information will carry on, even if you don't.

I would like to know why homo sapiens were the only human species to survive, when there were at least half a dozen human species in the early Paleolithic.

Short answer: we killed off the competition just as assuredly as we did the buffalo and the dodo bird.

 

[Commander Dutch]

I don't think there's any evidence that we are brighter than our ancestors, although of course there's no way to measure that. We live longer thanks to clean water, easy food, modern medicine -- but are we actually healthier with our mostly sedentary lifestyles?

The evidence seems to suggest we're about the same as our ancestors 30,000 years ago. The difference is tech, which drives our culture.

Take away the tech and we revert to our base form. About the same as Native Americans before the Euros or Northern Europe before the Romans.

 

[Commander Dutch]

The question of the ages. How did we manage to assimilate some of their genes and come out the one left standing?

There was some assimilation as show by levels of neanderthal genes, but mostly the one left standing.