We were evolved to fight

[Chernabog]

But seriously tkotom why no sig?

 

[Prokofievian]

This cultural revolution would most likely be attributed the the sedentary lifestyle as a result of domestication and the development of agriculture. With that there was more time for what we would see as culture to be developed.

Was there any evidence of agriculture or domestication of animals 40,000 years ago?

I'm not understanding what you mean by ancient homo sapiens. Are you talking about homo sapien neanderthalis or the homo sapiens that came out of east africa?

Archaic Homo Sapiens is a pretty disputed term, I agree. However, lets go with fossils which don't have the "pentagon" of homo erectus, larger brain-size, but retain features like the brow-ridge and occipital torus. Homo Heidelbergensis and Homo Rhodesiensis for example.

 

[ocean size]

Was there any evidence of agriculture or domestication of animals 40,000 years ago?

What cultural explosion is it that you think happened that far back? Other than HS likely out-competing Neanderthal.

 

[Prokofievian]

What cultural explosion is it that you think happened that far back? Other than HS likely out-competing Neanderthal.

Well, agriculture I think dates back maybe 10-13 thousand years ago. It seems like it's a culmination rather than an impetus.


But, from what I remember, the revolution focussed around things like Art, tools, homes etc.

 

[ocean size]

Well, agriculture I think dates back maybe 10-13 thousand years ago. It seems like it's a culmination rather than an impetus.


But, from what I remember, the revolution focussed around things like Art, tools, homes etc.

Neanderthals are thought to have created cave art, and primitive tribes with no other natural resources still use stone weapons, like the PNG highlanders I mentioned. Dunno how people were living. But at the time man and Neanderthal existed, my understanding is they weren't that different culturally.

 

[Prokofievian]

Neanderthals are thought to have created cave art, and primitive tribes with no other natural resources still use stone weapons, like the PNG highlanders I mentioned. Dunno how people were living. But at the time man and Neanderthal existed, my understanding is they weren't that different culturally.

I had thought that the opinions of Neanderthal art were that they were largely copies. Stone tools are still used yes, however, there was an advancement in tools during that time period(I'm a bit hazy on this, but I think blades was the big difference). It was my understanding that the neanderthals and humans weren't that different culturally, with the neanderthals being perhaps more advanced in some aspects: until that time.

 

[klimt]

OK, so it could just be your choice of wording, but your title reflects a very frustrating misunderstanding of evolution. We did not evolve to fight, our current physiology reflects an evolution during which we fought... there is a huge difference. There is never any predetermined or inevitable outcome.

 

[Gawd]

Yeah, but the big question for me is why we found so much rapid development in such a short period of time in AHS, but almost no development of any sort of the same kind in neanderthals, despite the difference in brain size and encephalization quotients.

Like...the fuck were they doing during that other 60 thousand years?

They were preparing their revenge...

 

[tkotom]

But seriously tkotom why no sig?

Which sig mate?

 

[J Storm**]

then how come an ape can easily kill the shit out of a human?

 

[Cestus]

then how come an ape can easily kill the shit out of a human?

Because the chimp don't give a fuck about pseudo internet science

It just run at you, bite your balls, disjoint your arms and rip off your face before you can say "let me bang bro!"

 

[J Storm**]

Because the chimp don't give a fuck about pseudo internet science

It just run at you, bite your balls, disjoint your arms and rip off your face before you can say "let me bang bro!"

if i had a bat with me, i'd have a chance. crack that sucker in the dome.

 

[Cestus]

if i had a bat with me, i'd have a chance. crack that sucker in the dome.

You will probably have one swing before shit happens, hope for you it's enough :icon_chee

What i say it's that if i have to chose between have a bat against a chimp or barehands against a dog twice the size of the chimp...

...i will chose the dog, even two dogs, without esitation :icon_chee

 

[Dogstarman]

OK, so it could just be your choice of wording, but your title reflects a very frustrating misunderstanding of evolution. We did not evolve to fight, our current physiology reflects an evolution during which we fought... there is a huge difference. There is never any predetermined or inevitable outcome.

it is not my title but I just copied from the article.

don't be frustrated at me, bro.

 

[J Storm**]

You will probably have one swing before shit happens, hope for you it's enough :icon_chee

What i say it's that if i have to chose between have a bat against a chimp or barehands against a dog twice the size of the chimp...

...i will chose the dog, even two dogs, without esitation :icon_chee

a game pitbull? hellll no. gimme that bat and the monkey any day.

 

[Cestus]

a game pitbull? hellll no. gimme that bat and the monkey any day.

I prefer have a game pit mad at me that a caucasian ovcharka mad at me

Definitely some giant shit you don't want see jumping at you

Still, in Soviet Russia men with bat chase bears :icon_chee

 

[LucasWithLidOff]

Humans beings did not evolve into the most dominant species this world has ever seen due to stength or fighting skills......

This.

We sacrificed jaw strength for cranial capacity and grip strength for precision.

 

[Cestus]

This.

We sacrificed jaw strength for cranial capacity and grip strength for precision.

And claws for fap fap

 

[Jing]

I'm pretty sure Jesus Christ wasn't a monkey

Aww damnit. First phantom, now you?

 

[Yardener]

Holy shit that dog looks vicious. But, back to the comparative anthropology between homo sapiens and neanderthals. I love this topic...

Here's a short wikipedia article on what it means for a human to be "modern" and the two competing theories as to why/when that happened.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Behavioral_modernity

I ascribe more to the "Great Leap Forward" idea - that "modern" homo sapiens emerged quite suddenly from our more archaic forebears.

There's lots of theories as to why/how this happened 50,000 yrs ago. And who knows? It was probably a synergistic effect from co-occuring factors. The "theory of the mind" concept is the part I like best. Somehow (genetic mutation, advent of cooking which released more nutrients to fuel more brain power, etc?) our brain developed the capacity for complex speech - likely during cooperative hunting. This allowed the emergence of a proper mind (it's harder to think to yourself w/out complex language). Homo sapiens became aware of the concept of self, developed an ID, an ego, and basically considered their consciousness and what was up w/, well, everything. The universe, nature, and all those questions we still wonder about today as humans. This then, almost immediately, spurred an explosion of culture to fully express this new consciousness.

Meanwhile, with more advancement, humans have more TIME to sit around, discuss, and THINK about all this stuff. Not everyone had to hunt/gather 24/7. This then leads to some people having the time, purposefully afforded by the group/tribe, to specialize and LEARN new things. The first was the Shaman.