Re: Chimp, Y, and social structure


"quercophile" <ed.byron.adams@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1125753967.309056.98560@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> Paul Crowley wrote:
>
>> True. Or, at least, if we take the bulk of
>> other species as our model, then it is true.
>> But is that the right model to take? Surely
>> a more appropriate one is the modern human
>> population, and _its_ genetic characteristics?
>> THAT demonstrates an extraordinary species
>> with extraordinary behaviour (by typical
>> mammalian standards). All we have to do is
>> to assume that is the appropriate model.
>
> I think one of the basic points of studying human evolution is
> understanding where we came from so we can better understand ourselves.
> The "basic nature" of humanity has been in the realm of philosophers
> and there we have tow opposing POV. Are we as Hobbes described, or
> Rosseau?
>
>
>> As exhibit B, there is the very rapid evolution
>> of remarkable capacities. None of these
>> could have evolved by the usual methods
>> of a slow percolation of superior genes
>> through populations dispersed over a whole
>> continent (or over several).
>
> I've always had questions about the relative speed of human evolution,
> compared to other long generation species. No one has been able to
> answer them. Got any references? Certainly, isolation of groups of the
> species would speed the process. In fact, isolation of populations is
> essential for evolution of any species.

Not really. If you place a population in a situation in which it can survive
but is poorly adapted selection seems to act fairly quickly to put together
the best set of genes for local circumstances. After that you have to wait
on mutations but those are fairly common and if something minor can enhance
survival the species can continue to change at a fairly brisk rate. It is
easier to see this with bacteria and other microbes than higher oganisms but
it does happen.

Take a good hard look at domestic animals compared to wild ancestors. The
really wild cases are in tropical fish.

>
>
>> But, as a general statement, it is unexceptional
>> -- and we have many examples of one human
>> population completely wiping out others
>> within the past 200 years. (Where do you live?
>> Did your ancestors live there 400 years ago?
>> Or is the population who did live there extinct?
>> Or virtually extinct?)
>
> Why is it that professional anthropologists ignore the apparent
> selective process of homicide?
>
>
>> Is there good evidence about the extent of
>> sexual dimorphism at any time (before H.sap)?
>> What relevance does it have anyway?
>
> A. afarensis males were roughly twice the size of females. Greater
> sexual dimorphism in primates is associated with gorilla/harem type
> social order.
>


.

Relevant Pages

  • tufa umana ie foarte stufoasa
    ... Study finds twist in human evolution By SETH BORENSTEIN, ... The old theory was that the first and oldest species in our family ... tree, Homo habilis, evolved into Homo erectus, which then became us, ... In 2000 Leakey found an old Homo erectus complete skull within walking ...
    (soc.culture.romanian)
  • Re: Chimp, Y, and social structure
    ... > other species as our model, ... I've always had questions about the relative speed of human evolution, ... > Or virtually extinct?) ... sexual dimorphism in primates is associated with gorilla/harem type ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)
  • Re: Old News
    ... by their own species, or by others. ... Ground suitable for burrows would very likely be in ... any ordinary rock. ... two major problems in human evolution: ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)
  • Re: Couple questions for evolution experts
    ... responses. ... is there so much pain and not a larger birth canal? ... species to "know" when the female was in heat and fertile, ... As to your specific questions about human evolution - these are indeed ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: USA Today
    ... }>>"Darwin's famous The Origin of Species concludes that over eons of time, ... }>>empirical fossil evidence." ... }>> The essay seems to be stuck on the idea that the only evidence is ... }> about human evolution, except for this short statement in the conclusion: ...
    (talk.origins)