Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Small prey compelled prehistoric humans to produce appropriate hunting weapons

phys.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 50 posts

Re: Small prey compelled prehistoric humans to produce appropriate hunting weapons

#41

Post by jahewson »

SoftTalker wrote: post #6
ChuckMcM wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the interesting things for me about the hypothesis is that if humans had developed better food preservation techniques this outcome might have been different. Specifically a lot of large animals would rot before one could finish eating them so the rate of consumption was higher than strictly necessary. (not that early humans cared, but later humans developed a wide range of preservation methods due to scarcity…

I think more to be able to live in climates where hunting, foraging, or farming year-round was not possible.

Early humans were nomadic. They had no need to stay in the same place year-round. Just follow the animals.

Re: Small prey compelled prehistoric humans to produce appropriate hunting weapons

#42

Post by preisschild »

myshpa wrote: post #2

> A new study from the Department of Archaeology at Tel Aviv University found that the extinction of large prey, upon which human nutrition had been based ... We ate them all. https://ourworldindata.org/wild-mammal-decline A global population half the size of London contributed to many of the world’s largest mammals to extinction. The per capita impact of our hunter-gatherer ancestors was huge. ... Trace the footstep…

I don't think we will pivot completely to plant-based diets, but we could use artificially grown meat.

Re: Small prey compelled prehistoric humans to produce appropriate hunting weapons

#43

Post by WaxProlix »

DangitBobby wrote: post #32
j16sdiz wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh. That's why Elon Musk have 11 kids.

It sounds like you are disputing the premise but at least at a glance it seems obviously true. Why do you think surviving previously unsurvivable ailments or living a normal life with what would have otherwise been a debilitating illness past reproductive age isn't partially nullifying natural selection? And is the billionaire with 11 kids the normal case or just maybe slightly cherry picked?

Because circumstances have changed, selective pressures have changed, and an ability to grab the half gnawed finger bone from your fellow ape-creature is less valuable now than it once was. In a world where the disabled can write code or whatever, they have evolutionary value. I don't disagree with the premise btw of devolution a la Idiocracy, just think your specific argument falls flat.

Re: Small prey compelled prehistoric humans to produce appropriate hunting weapons

#44

Post by kbelder »

SoftTalker wrote: post #24
Nursie wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you mean by backsliding? Is it only 'evolution' when things become stronger/smarter/faster? Evolution is organisms adapting to their environment in the face of selection pressure, it has no particular direction.

A lot of people who would not have survived childhood in the past now live. Birth defects, childhood cancers, diabetes, severe asthma or allergies, poorly functioning immune systems, profoundly poor vision or hearing, etc. Who uses birth control? Smart, pragmatic, disciplined, responsible people. This is being selected against. I was using "evolution" in the sense of "survival of the fittest" and there aren't really…

People who don't want kids are being selected against.

Sex drive will eventually be replaced with a reproduction drive.

Re: Small prey compelled prehistoric humans to produce appropriate hunting weapons

#45

Post by DoreenMichele »

SoftTalker wrote: post #24
Nursie wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you mean by backsliding? Is it only 'evolution' when things become stronger/smarter/faster? Evolution is organisms adapting to their environment in the face of selection pressure, it has no particular direction.

A lot of people who would not have survived childhood in the past now live. Birth defects, childhood cancers, diabetes, severe asthma or allergies, poorly functioning immune systems, profoundly poor vision or hearing, etc. Who uses birth control? Smart, pragmatic, disciplined, responsible people. This is being selected against. I was using "evolution" in the sense of "survival of the fittest" and there aren't really…

I'm pretty sure evolution and survival of the fittest is not as simple and straightforward as having more babies. Among other things, if you have fewer kids but they thrive and reproduce, then you're still in the game.

Re: Small prey compelled prehistoric humans to produce appropriate hunting weapons

#46

Post by pizzafeelsright »

klyrs wrote: post #26
pizzafeelsright wrote: post #18

"humans began to make stone tools about 3 million years ago" is just as accepted as "male and female he created them". I wonder if others read this text the same way I do.

I accept the first statement as an indication that we have reasonably strong evidence that human-ish (that is, genus homo ) primates were using tools that had been fabricated, not just found; and that such fossils have been dated back to 3 million years ago, give or take. The second statement comes with no evidence, no proof, no error bars. And the interpretation of the Bible as literal truth is an invention of the 1…

The papers written by whom and for how long? Did this research of a multi-million year old world and evidence exist prior to the 18th century?

Re: Small prey compelled prehistoric humans to produce appropriate hunting weapons

#47

Post by dekhn »

SoftTalker wrote: post #5
myshpa wrote: post #2

> A new study from the Department of Archaeology at Tel Aviv University found that the extinction of large prey, upon which human nutrition had been based ... We ate them all. https://ourworldindata.org/wild-mammal-decline A global population half the size of London contributed to many of the world’s largest mammals to extinction. The per capita impact of our hunter-gatherer ancestors was huge. ... Trace the footstep…

There is almost zero evolutionary pressure on the human species right now. We are probably backsliding.

I understand why you think this, but evolution forces are extremely complex, and making value judgements like "backsliding" isn't helpful.

Re: Small prey compelled prehistoric humans to produce appropriate hunting weapons

#48

Post by klyrs »

pizzafeelsright wrote: post #46
klyrs wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I accept the first statement as an indication that we have reasonably strong evidence that human-ish (that is, genus homo ) primates were using tools that had been fabricated, not just found; and that such fossils have been dated back to 3 million years ago, give or take. The second statement comes with no evidence, no proof, no error bars. And the interpretation of the Bible as literal truth is an invention of the 1…

The papers written by whom and for how long? Did this research of a multi-million year old world and evidence exist prior to the 18th century?

> The papers written by whom and for how long?

There are dozens of references to be found [1] if you're interested in reading more. But I'm not sure what you mean by "for how long."

> Did this research of a multi-million year old world and evidence exist prior to the 18th century?

Yes, people located multi-million year old dinosaur fossils prior to the 18th century. They didn't have enough evidence at the time to recognize the implications of what they were finding, nor the extensive chronological dating technologies[2] that we have today.

But I think you're mistaking my point about the 18th century: if the authors of the Bible did not believe it to be the literal truth, why should anybody else?

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oldowan

[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronological_dating

Re: Small prey compelled prehistoric humans to produce appropriate hunting weapons

#49

Post by ETH_start »

There is no need for any species to go extinct for evolutionary pressures to select for adaptations that allow for predation on other species.

The population of a predator reaching the carrying capacity of the existing prey base is enough to make it evolutionarily advantageous to develop means of adding new species to the prey base, ceteris paribus.

Re: Small prey compelled prehistoric humans to produce appropriate hunting weapons

#50

Post by Robotbeat »

Nursie wrote: post #38
candiddevmike wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think OP meant something along the lines of Idiocracy. Or maybe a weird eugenics angle.

Honestly you can view idiocracy as an argument for eugenics... not that I particularly do, but a friend watched it for the first time recently and thought that was what it was. I prefer to treat it as an observation about the direction of culture and a as a comic dystopia. And just a damn good laugh. Though there are definitely moments when I read the news and think "Damn, it really was a prophecy..."

In the strict definition of eugenics, Idiocracy is eugenic in its moral.

I’d be willing to bet most people are to some extent.

I’m not really comfortable with Idiocracy.

Post reply on HN