Originally posted by Thequ1ckSo there were smart ones amid the dumber, reminds me of the movie with Daryl Hannah, Clan of the cave bear, by Jean Auel. Remember the scene where the shaman is showing her the rocks and counting and she arranges them in series of 5 counting up and the shaman is shocked, saying don't tell this to anyone, this knowledge is dangerous?
I have compiled a series of articles that show how our understanding of lineage and survival-of-the fittest are only aspects to the ongoing forces which are shaping human evolution
The first article gives a brief synopsis of recent human lineage and a more detailed explanation how the pure chaos of interacting lineages makes the concept of a 'missing lin - Becuase it's easier to read one simple book than a whole bunch of hard ones.
Originally posted by sonhouseMight have been social stress too. If there came to be a clan that was just enough more intelligent than the others, then they may have been able to defeat them in war. They could have laid claim to more habitable areas and taken what they wanted from others making their own survival more likely. Maybe they were just smart enough to be dangerous. Wonder when we will evolve out of that stage?
So there were smart ones amid the dumber, reminds me of the movie with Daryl Hannah, Clan of the cave bear, by Jean Auel. Remember the scene where the shaman is showing her the rocks and counting and she arranges them in series of 5 counting up and the shaman is shocked, saying don't tell this to anyone, this knowledge is dangerous?
It's interesting that ...[text shortened]... n were gone and a million years later the same gene thing happened. That is amazing in itself.
Originally posted by joe beyserConsidering the low population of proto-humans, I would think the smarter ones would simply find better hunting grounds and stake claims to a homestead area as far from competition as possible. Their intelligence may have worked in that way just as well as implied superiority in new technology. They could have been better at communicating with each other as well, aiding hunting strategies. They could have simply out hunted the competition, winning by attrition.
Might have been social stress too. If there came to be a clan that was just enough more intelligent than the others, then they may have been able to defeat them in war. They could have laid claim to more habitable areas and taken what they wanted from others making their own survival more likely. Maybe they were just smart enough to be dangerous. Wonder when we will evolve out of that stage?
Originally posted by sonhouseThe smarter ones may have know how to pick up the hot chicks and played the field even in their own clan just after the genetic change.
Considering the low population of proto-humans, I would think the smarter ones would simply find better hunting grounds and stake claims to a homestead area as far from competition as possible. Their intelligence may have worked in that way just as well as implied superiority in new technology. They could have been better at communicating with each other as ...[text shortened]... ing hunting strategies. They could have simply out hunted the competition, winning by attrition.
Originally posted by joe beyserIt would have been difficult to do the genetic diversity thing though. You have a single clan of brights amid a bunch of chimps, you do have a problem with inbreeding.
The smarter ones may have know how to pick up the hot chicks and played the field even in their own clan just after the genetic change.
Originally posted by sonhouseAnd after the inbreeding era we end up like we are now. It all makes sense now. Doesnt much matter how many base pairs changed all at once as long as the speech area of the brain developed. Now they could strategize against the enemies. Come up with a plan of attack and defense that all in the clan could understand. Same with hunting and sweet talking the lasses.
It would have been difficult to do the genetic diversity thing though. You have a single clan of brights amid a bunch of chimps, you do have a problem with inbreeding.
Originally posted by Thequ1ck
It's a common misconception in evolutionary biology to assume that adaptive
changes come about by environmental stressing.
Indeed it has been shown that as conditions become harsher, it's often the less
intelligent people that thrive (explains a lot about the welfare situation eh?).
The HAR regions themselves were expected to have gone through such dramatic
changes due to a time of relative ease rather than the contrary.
It's a common misconception in evolutionary biology to assume that adaptive
changes come about by environmental stressing.
Indeed it has been shown that as conditions become harsher, it's often the less
intelligent people that thrive
Originally posted by Thequ1ckWhich would result in evolution. You seem to have the mistaken impression that evolution=greater intelligence.
Indeed it has been shown that as conditions become harsher, it's often the less
intelligent people that thrive (explains a lot about the welfare situation eh?).
Originally posted by twhiteheadPersonally, I do believe evolution = greater intelligence but that's just my opinion.
Which would result in evolution. You seem to have the mistaken impression that evolution=greater intelligence.
In our current world, poorer people have more children and thus there is fairly strong selection towards those that are poor. Of course this does not mean less intelligent.
Originally posted by Thequ1ckA dumb fat kid walks on thin ice and falls in.... That is just natural selection doing it's work XD
Personally, I do believe evolution = greater intelligence but that's just my opinion.
If human's are too stubborn and unintelligent to react accordingly to their environment
then eventually (and actually relatively quickly) they will get wiped out.
Originally posted by twhiteheadNo, but poor will invariably mean poor education as well as poor health as well as poor living conditions.
Which would result in evolution. You seem to have the mistaken impression that evolution=greater intelligence.
In our current world, poorer people have more children and thus there is fairly strong selection towards those that are poor. Of course this does not mean less intelligent.
Originally posted by Thequ1ckThen you haven't fuilly understood evolution. Evolution leads to greater net procreation rates. It only leads to greater intelligence in so far as its influence on procreation is positive.
Personally, I do believe evolution = greater intelligence but that's just my opinion.