Evolution and humans: all over Africa (Evolution)

by David Turell @, Tuesday, May 01, 2018, 17:53 (414 days ago) @ dhw

DAVID: Glaciation started two million years ago and they came and went. They did not reach into Africa where the temperatures did dip but Neanderthals and early Homos thrived in their primitive ways. They existed before this last glacial period (which we still in to a degree because of the polar ice caps) and could have civilized in a previous pause like this one, but they didn't.

dhw: I would suggest that if organisms are thriving, they don’t need to change, and so it takes something special to trigger advances: e.g. a stroke of genius that makes life even better (tools, weapons), or a climate change that offers new opportunities but still needs individual geniuses to exploit the new potential for improvement.

Chimps are still thriving, but Lucy and her bunch came down from the trees. Your answer does not explain Lucy. The trees were not satisfying?


DAVID: The long pauses at each stage of new brain size are compatible with having to learn to use the new size, opposite to your view.

If no advances are made, what is being learned? You only learn what already exists, so there is no need for expansion! Hence stasis.

If a brain is built for more advanced thought by the s/s/c, why not start using it?

DAVID: […] My point is simple. Its not just climate, but as usual in discussion about evolution, multifactorial issues to be considered.

I’m sure this is true, but as above, it is you who have constantly asked why there was a long period of stasis and then a sudden burst 12,000 years ago. You didn’t question the researchers’ proposed answer until you realized it fitted in with my hypothesis.

Thanks for the psychoanalysis. Of course climate was a major factor, but given some more reflection I noted that there were previous good climate periods that were not used, and I noted that the best civilized ideas came from those who migrated north to colder climes. So which climate is best for advanced thinking? It is funny that a new single point you seize upon is a be all and end all for your theory, when lots of other factors need to be considered. Multifactorial is the proper approach.


Complete thread:

 RSS Feed of thread

powered by my little forum