Optimal Productivity

[FREDERIC DUPONT]

(...) persistence hunting.  (...)

 

Did you mean subsistence hunting?

[Connor Davies]

Did you mean subsistence hunting?

 

Truly one of the most beautiful things I've ever seen in my life.

[Bill Köhntopp]

you see? 8 hours of hunting the animal, no time to waste

 

Very impressive!!!

[FREDERIC DUPONT]

Nice story indeed... however, the commentary gets way ahead of what we really know; it it but mere speculation.

[Cody Hahn]

Did you mean subsistence hunting?

No Fred, I believe he really does mean persistence hunting. Some north american indian peoples such as the Hopi and Zuni reportedly ran deer to death in order to obtain a hide that was free of any lacerations, such as would be the case if the animal were pierced by an arrowhead or lance head. These hides were to be blemish free for ceremonial purposes. They supposedly would stuff pollen up the deer's nostrils to suffocate it if it wasn't already dead from the running.

[Hanuman]

although there is a lot of speculation on this topic the fact that humans havent continued to evolve down this path,i.e. becoming even more optimised for persistence hunting reflects what made humans really a powerful predator, our highly developed brains. seeing as all animals are naturally lazy- as saving energy is a survival tactic itwould seem more likely that we hunted by using our brains ie hunting via traps and weapons as many tribal communities still do today. this may also help to explain the huge variety in human form as the main selective pressure on humans was brain power

 

therefore the wide range of hunting tactics seen such as persistence hunting, trapping, stealthy hunting are more likely to be a cultural heritage rather than a genetic predisposition

[Mikkel Ravn]

although there is a lot of speculation on this topic the fact that humans havent continued to evolve down this path,i.e. becoming even more optimised for persistence hunting reflects what made humans really a powerful predator, our highly developed brains. seeing as all animals are naturally lazy- as saving energy is a survival tactic itwould seem more likely that we hunted by using our brains ie hunting via traps and weapons as many tribal communities still do today. this may also help to explain the huge variety in human form as the main selective pressure on humans was brain power

 

therefore the wide range of hunting tactics seen such as persistence hunting, trapping, stealthy hunting are more likely to be a cultural heritage rather than a genetic predisposition

Good points, but the question is really if our highly developed brain made us powerful predators, or if the causality was really the reverse: That persistence hunting provided the ecological niche which made evolutionary selection for higher cognition possible?

 

We know, of course, that Homo Sapiens have extraordinary cognitive abilities, but biologists have been searching for the answer to how exactly that cognition came to be; Exactly which evolutionary circumstances would have favored high cognition over other traits, e.g. speed, strength or camouflage?

 

in this book, Bernd Heinrich puts forward a beautiful theory about how the demands of persistence hunting favored those individuals with a higher capacity for abstract thinking: What sets humans apart from most other animals, is that we are able to form mental images and sustain them, regardless of the context before our eyes. The reason that lions do not persistence hunt (besides the fact that the heat would kill them due to their physiology) is, that as soon as the prey is out of sight, it is also out of mind. The lion cannot form the abstraction, that the prey is not really gone, it is merely out of sight, behind the horizon of the hill, or hidden in the thicket. Homo Sapiens, on the other hand, may have gradually evolved that ability, because the individuals that were able to form such abstractions, and maintain a mental image of the prey that, while being out of sight, was still present  on the other side of the hill, would have succeeded with persistance hunting to a higher degree than lesser gifted individuals, thus having better odds for survival and reproduction by getting adequate nutrition.

 

The theory fits with our physiology: We are air cooled by having pores that excrete sweat, thereby cooling us by evaporation, making sustained medium power output possible, even in warm climates. Our heads are covered in hair to avoid the sun overheating our brain. Our glutes are not activated when we walk, but they are when we run - If we were made for walking, our glutes in all likelihood wouldn't be there (imagine that!)

[Connor Davies]

I think I heard that there were 17 distinct evolutionary markers that signified that we evolved as persistence hunters.  Things like sweat, lack of body hair, bipedalism ect...

 

The theory I like the most which explains the development of the human brain attributes it all to the fact that we cook our food.  Since we don't have to waste so much energy on breaking down our food, we can afford to have the largest proportional cognitive energy expenditure of any creature on the planet.  We expend very little energy on digestion in comparison to, well, nearly everything.

 

Also, if you look at other primates, they have much larger jaw muscles than we do.  The jaw muscles wrap all the way over to the top of the skull, and so impede the development of a larger brain. 

 

Side note: an omega-3 deficiency in children will result in both dental problems and intellectual developmental issues/behavioural issues.  I'm not entirely sure how smaller jaws can also lead to weaker minds, but the link is clearly established.

 

As to why we had a need to develop consciousness...  Apart from the capacity for abstract thought being clearly useful in the field of persistence hunting (watch the video again, the hunter has to extrapolate the actions of his prey in order to find it) increased memory would also be useful, as remembering which plants were toxic or where to find food would allow you to survive just that little bit longer.

 

But the main reason I feel is that as pack animals, we've been outsmarting each other for millions of years.  Chimpanzees have shown a remarkable capacity for deception and betrayal.  Humans develop the capacity to lie at a relatively young age (around 4 or so) whereas most other creatures can't even grasp the concept that other people share a different worldview to them and could know some thing they don't, or not know something they do.  While basic abstract thought may have come first, as soon as we realised we could lie we had an entirely new way to deal with our enemies rather than just being bigger, stronger ect...

 

I'm not denying that other hunting techniques are our heritage, but before we developed traps, weapons ect we had to catch our food somehow.  If you couldn't sneak up on the thing and kill it quickly, you had to chase it down, right?

[Bill Köhntopp]

no one can really say THIS is the right theory, the professionals also not, there are so many different stories about why we walk upright and so on...and everyone could be true if you can imagine the evolution.

 

Neanderthal people(how you call them?!) had a bigger brain as we have right now and they had bigger jaws too. So, here is no end in sight.

[Connor Davies]

Neanderthal people(how you call them?!) had a bigger brain as we have right now and they had bigger jaws too. So, here is no end in sight.

Yeah, but we ate those guys, so F--- them.

[Bill Köhntopp]

Yeah, but we ate those guys, so F--- them.

HAHAHA so true!

Heard that we just were more cruel to them as they to us, so we killed them with a smile and they died with one...sounds crazy!

[Philipp Zimmermann]

Hi,

 

Before we start hunting with weapons our diet consists out of a lot plants, small animals and so on.

As we were able to make bigger weapons, we also start to hunt bigger animals.

And humans were able to "play as a team" while hunting, this was a big advantage even hunting with bare hands.

 

I also think that we eat quite regulary, because our ancestors didn´t hunt everyday and it is some sort of fighting boredom.

 

The other point is that there is no really need for us to have such big brains to survive in the wild.

We were already nearly perfect adepted when we start making traps and weapons, we had already a safe population at this time.

But some scientists have a solution, in my opinion, for the question: why the brain is so big?

Intelligence is sexy!

They think that the ones with bigger brains( bigger, better weapons, houses, etc...) had an advantage when it comes down to getting laid.

So our brains did´nt evolved, because of the advantages we earned at hunting that were just positive side effects or builing better homes, it evolved because our ancestors wanted to get laid.

 

Just my 2 cents.^^

Hope my english is okay.^^

[Andrew Long]

Good points, but the question is really if our highly developed brain made us powerful predators, or if the causality was really the reverse: That persistence hunting provided the ecological niche which made evolutionary selection for higher cognition possible?

 

We know, of course, that Homo Sapiens have extraordinary cognitive abilities, but biologists have been searching for the answer to how exactly that cognition came to be; Exactly which evolutionary circumstances would have favored high cognition over other traits, e.g. speed, strength or camouflage?

 

in this book, Bernd Heinrich puts forward a beautiful theory about how the demands of persistence hunting favored those individuals with a higher capacity for abstract thinking: What sets humans apart from most other animals, is that we are able to form mental images and sustain them, regardless of the context before our eyes. The reason that lions do not persistence hunt (besides the fact that the heat would kill them due to their physiology) is, that as soon as the prey is out of sight, it is also out of mind. The lion cannot form the abstraction, that the prey is not really gone, it is merely out of sight, behind the horizon of the hill, or hidden in the thicket. Homo Sapiens, on the other hand, may have gradually evolved that ability, because the individuals that were able to form such abstractions, and maintain a mental image of the prey that, while being out of sight, was still present  on the other side of the hill, would have succeeded with persistance hunting to a higher degree than lesser gifted individuals, thus having better odds for survival and reproduction by getting adequate nutrition.

 

The theory fits with our physiology: We are air cooled by having pores that excrete sweat, thereby cooling us by evaporation, making sustained medium power output possible, even in warm climates. Our heads are covered in hair to avoid the sun overheating our brain. Our glutes are not activated when we walk, but they are when we run - If we were made for walking, our glutes in all likelihood wouldn't be there (imagine that!)

I feel my glutea contracting when I walk so where did you get this info from?

[Mikkel Ravn]

I think it was Daniel Lieberman from Harvard who mentioned it in a video or article somewhere...

http://barefootrunning.fas.harvard.edu

[Connor Davies]

Yah I think glutes were developed to help with bipedal walking.  Notice that glutes are absent on quadrupeds.

[Bill Köhntopp]

 

They think that the ones with bigger brains( bigger, better weapons, houses, etc...) had an advantage when it comes down to getting laid.

So our brains did´nt evolved, because of the advantages we earned at hunting that were just positive side effects or builing better homes, it evolved because our ancestors wanted to get laid.

 

Isn't there the phrase "silly f*** good"?( in Germany its well known )

[Philipp Zimmermann]

Yes, I think everyone heard this phrase,  at least here in Germany

 

But when the scientists say that the more intelligence forefathers had an advantage at getting laid, they talk about reproducing and not just getting laid for fun

 

Well today I think we switched the postions and the not so intelligence have an advantage at reproducing/getting laid, if that is so good will we see in the future

[Mikkel Ravn]

Well, when standing up, the glutes don't really activate before the leg is extended behind the centerline of the hip. That sort of forward thrusting movement does occur to a much greater extent in running than in walking.

[Connor Davies]

Well, when standing up, the glutes don't really activate before the leg is extended behind the centerline of the hip. That sort of forward thrusting movement does occur to a much greater extent in running than in walking.

Ah, but what was the pelvic tilt like on these test subjects?