The red and green specialists: why human colour vision is so odd
1–10 of 38 posts
Re: The red and green specialists: why human colour vision is so odd
#2So are trichromatic people colorblind to tetrachromats?
BTW. Wikipedia says that trichromatism was normal for mammals in the past, and then they lost one or two cones, which would suggest a different development path. The article does not touch on this.
Or did distinct cones were reduced, and then one of them split into two again? It's also interesting whether chemical structure of cones is similar. I guess I gotta do some research on my own.
Re: The red and green specialists: why human colour vision is so odd
#3https://imgur.com/a/jdVqE
Boy that's some next level webpage design!
Re: The red and green specialists: why human colour vision is so odd
#4https://imgur.com/a/jdVqE Boy that's some next level webpage design!
Url is optimized for mobile (and without the banner). This one is more suited for desktop use [1].
[1] https://aeon.co/ideas/the-red-and-green-specialists-why-huma...
Re: The red and green specialists: why human colour vision is so odd
#5Incredibly stupid experiment. As someone who is red-green color weak, just as 10% of the male population is, I feel insulted by the implication of this article and the obvious glossing over the fact that not all humans see green/red very strongly. This is lazy science, seriously asking people to differentiate between images of apes that want to mate? It made no sense, you basically proved that some people are colorblind... ok. Did you plan and write this over a weekend? Why did you even bother?
Re: The red and green specialists: why human colour vision is so odd
#6> Instead of having good vision, dogs, horses, mice, antelope – in fact, most mammals generally – have long damp snouts that they use to sniff things with. It is we humans, and apes and monkeys, who are different.
What a load of bull. Dogs and wolves eyes are facing forward, as do cats', owls', jumping spiders' main eyes, and generally those of most hunting predators. Eyes facing forward is good for depth perception and judging speeds and thus hunting, a bigger field of view is good for detecting threats from any and all directions and thus for prey animals. The location of the eyes depends mainly on where the animals sits on the predatorprey scale. Apes tend to be apex predators, thus the predator eye location.
Re: The red and green specialists: why human colour vision is so odd
#7https://imgur.com/a/jdVqE Boy that's some next level webpage design!
Url is optimized for mobile (and without the banner). This one is more suited for desktop use [1]. [1] https://aeon.co/ideas/the-red-and-green-specialists-why-huma...
Interestingly, this link works properly on both mobile and desktop. Wonder why the original link is even needed.
Re: The red and green specialists: why human colour vision is so odd
#8Incredibly stupid experiment. As someone who is red-green color weak, just as 10% of the male population is, I feel insulted by the implication of this article and the obvious glossing over the fact that not all humans see green/red very strongly. This is lazy science, seriously asking people to differentiate between images of apes that want to mate? It made no sense, you basically proved that some people are colorbl…
As a fellow colour-blind person (protanomally): you're reading implications that are not in the article.
Re: The red and green specialists: why human colour vision is so odd
#9Incredibly stupid experiment. As someone who is red-green color weak, just as 10% of the male population is, I feel insulted by the implication of this article and the obvious glossing over the fact that not all humans see green/red very strongly. This is lazy science, seriously asking people to differentiate between images of apes that want to mate? It made no sense, you basically proved that some people are colorbl…
As a fellow colour-blind person (protanomally): you're reading implications that are not in the article.
...
Re: The red and green specialists: why human colour vision is so odd
#10As a colour-blind person, this article both makes sense to me, and at the same time it doesn't.
I have often wondered why human colour vision is not evenly distributed across the spectrum of visible light. This seems like a decent enough model for why that might be the case.
However, that makes it very peculiar that there are so many people with colour-blindness like me, especially if it would be such a strong evolutionary advantage. One would expect selection pressure to have removed those genes from the gene pool by now.
My own pet hypothesis is that it has to do with humans being a social species. For us, individual specialisation has much bigger evolutionary benefit, since it is shared, and a lower evolutionary cost, because other members of the group can compensate for shortcomings.
To give an overly simplified "economic" model of it: when we collaborate properly, the net performance of a group is not the average performance of all members, but the sum of the maximum performance of individuals.
So back to colour-blindness. It is fairly well-established that dichromatic colour-blindness helps see through certain types of camouflage. In a hunter/gatherer society, having one member of the group who is good at spotting prey animals (or dangerous predators, for that matter) is a huge advantage for the group, and your friends can assist you with getting ripe berries.