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

Our Skulls Didn’t Evolve to be Punched

phenomena.nationalgeographic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 94 posts

Re: Our Skulls Didn’t Evolve to be Punched

#51

Post by zarify »

usumoio wrote: post #34
interg12 wrote: post #33

I worked at an oral surgeons office for a few years. Everytime we performed jaw surgery on someone who was in a fight, 9/10 times they also had a broken hand. The hand wasn't designed for punching either.

I've studied Martial Arts for about 12 years. You're totally right. It takes years of training to learn how to properly throw a punch such that you harm your opponent and do not break your own hand.

And part of that is not attacking targets where you're likely to significantly injure yourself as well as your opponent. There's a lot to be said for not punching someone in the jaw.

Re: Our Skulls Didn’t Evolve to be Punched

#52

Post by aResponder52 »

zarify wrote: post #51
usumoio wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've studied Martial Arts for about 12 years. You're totally right. It takes years of training to learn how to properly throw a punch such that you harm your opponent and do not break your own hand.

And part of that is not attacking targets where you're likely to significantly injure yourself as well as your opponent. There's a lot to be said for not punching someone in the jaw.

and that part about the right way to hit different parts of the body.

a slap is almost as hard, and won't hurt the slapper.

Re: Our Skulls Didn’t Evolve to be Punched

#53

Post by aResponder52 »

baddox wrote: post #13
thefreeman wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wouldn't their increased strength and size also offset the increased force of the blows to make it about the same as the current situation? In my head I'm comparing it to something like: If a 250 lb NFL linebacker tackled me at full speed I am pretty sure I would break multiple bones. But NFL running backs take that kind of beating 40-50 times a game, 20 games a year.

Not everything scales the same. I suspect that heavyweight boxers, for example, can hurt each other a lot more than featherweight boxers.

Can confirm. Getting hit by a 200+ pounder sucks. Getting hit by a 130lber makes you wonder if they're even trying.

Re: Our Skulls Didn’t Evolve to be Punched

#54

Post by aResponder52 »

GhotiFish wrote: post #45
thefreeman wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wouldn't their increased strength and size also offset the increased force of the blows to make it about the same as the current situation? In my head I'm comparing it to something like: If a 250 lb NFL linebacker tackled me at full speed I am pretty sure I would break multiple bones. But NFL running backs take that kind of beating 40-50 times a game, 20 games a year.

It's the cube square law in action. Elephants can seriously injure themselves from falling over. If I fall over I get a sore butt. Yet if you were to scale me to the kind of weight an elephant has, I'd have a far larger fall, so obviously scale has a real effect. I think the thing is, NFL running backs are trained to survive that kind of abuse.

They're on some painkillers, too, and have short careers.

Re: Our Skulls Didn’t Evolve to be Punched

#55

Post by aResponder52 »

jessaustin wrote: post #46
john_b wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The context of the parent was violence in the absence of weaponry.

How is that context relevant? There are rocks and sticks on the savanna. Humans are tool-users, so their most natural fighting techniques use tools.

Depends. Two guys who just want to fight are probably going to have a shoving match which will end when one gets pinned and the other guy gets pulled off.

Two groups of guys who have some need to fight over are more likely to use tools.

Re: Our Skulls Didn’t Evolve to be Punched

#56

Post by Theodores »

azakai wrote: post #38
ultimatedelman wrote: post #24

What's silly to me about the original argument is that the authors think that our ancestors fought in a kind of "put your dukes up" kind of fighting where only punches are thrown. While not an expert in the subject, I feel it's safe to assume that fights for mates and territory where the loser dies would not be fist fights but rather full-on fights to the death using every biological weapon available, including feet…

Such duels are often heavily ritualized, they aren't necessarily lacking in rules. The victor doesn't want to kill the opponent, they want to prove their social standing. For example wolves have a submissive signal they can show, that stops a fight in the middle, avoiding serious injury or death. If every such duel ended in a death, the population would quickly shrink.

I think that winning is what is important in an on-going war that is fought on a daily basis, the prize being females/territory.

I base my opinion on the antics of the foxes fighting outside my window right now. I am fairly sure I won't find a dead fox on my doorstep in the morning and I am fairly sure tomorrow will be another chapter in the on-going duel. Their fighting is truly no-holds barred however killing is not necessary to win females/territory. A given territory only supports a given quantity of a given species, a given territory can only be defended up to a certain area, so there is no concern needed to only fight so far lest the population/gene pool be diminished.

As for us humans and how we fight, we are pack animals that can augment our fights with words. This applies okay in pub brawl situations, however, we have no hesitation at all when it comes to wiping out rival tribes. This has applied historically, I think that Hitler bloke was quite keen on wiping out the Jewish tribe and, although worded differently, Bush and Blair had no qualms when it came to wiping out tribes of people in more recent times. We also have class hierarchy so the rich have no problems sending millions of their own off to certain death, e.g. WW1, because they are a different tribe within a tribe. Concern for population depletion really matters not.

Re: Our Skulls Didn’t Evolve to be Punched

#57

Post by gress »

monochr wrote: post #43
gress wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How would you determine whether the cause of them not dying was 'the shape of their foot', and not any of thousands of other features you could arbitrarily pick, such as 'the balance of their skeleton', or 'their gait', or 'the thickness of their skull' or 'the responsiveness of their reflexes'?

You don't and neither does evolution. All that the DNA knows is that it got into the next generation and it will keep doing whatever it was doing before plus or minus a few small random mutations.

Exactly, so these just so stories are just that.

Re: Our Skulls Didn’t Evolve to be Punched

#58

Post by dfc »

thefreeman wrote: post #9
blisterpeanuts wrote: post #2

Interesting. I would think that pre-modern humans would be unlikely to strike each other with very much force, simply because they were so strong that one or two blows would debilitate if not kill the opponent. The Neanderthals are thought to be many times stronger than modern humans, judging by the thickness of their bones and the size of the muscle attachment sites, as well as their likely lifestyles in the brutal…

Wouldn't their increased strength and size also offset the increased force of the blows to make it about the same as the current situation? In my head I'm comparing it to something like: If a 250 lb NFL linebacker tackled me at full speed I am pretty sure I would break multiple bones. But NFL running backs take that kind of beating 40-50 times a game, 20 games a year.

Do RBs get the ball that many times per game? I am genuinely curious. I rarely/never watch football so that could be a low number.

Re: Our Skulls Didn’t Evolve to be Punched

#59

Post by gamegoblin »

baddox wrote: post #13
thefreeman wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wouldn't their increased strength and size also offset the increased force of the blows to make it about the same as the current situation? In my head I'm comparing it to something like: If a 250 lb NFL linebacker tackled me at full speed I am pretty sure I would break multiple bones. But NFL running backs take that kind of beating 40-50 times a game, 20 games a year.

Not everything scales the same. I suspect that heavyweight boxers, for example, can hurt each other a lot more than featherweight boxers.

This is actually why I much prefer watching lower weight MMA fights to the bigger guys. The fights tend to go on longer and are more dynamic. With the bigger guys, one solid punch to the head and it's often game over.

http://fightnomics.com/blog/ufc-finishes-by-weight-class-201...

Re: Our Skulls Didn’t Evolve to be Punched

#60

Post by dbbolton »

I honestly can't even read the article because that GIF is so annoying.

I have two different GIF-stopping extensions and neither of them works because of the way the elements are nested (I guess).

I'm actually so irritated that I'm binding giphy to 0.0.0.0 in my hosts file.

/rant

Post reply on HN