It’s a listicle, of course, but it’s written by an archaeologist, which is good, but she was the recipient of a Templeton grant, which triggers my skepticism. But she makes 6 points about our history:
Species such as Homo Longi have only been identified as recently as 2018. There are now 21 known species of human.
And 20 of them went extinct. We’re part of a dying tree.
Hybrid species of human, once seen by experts as science fiction, may have played a key role in our evolution. Evidence of the importance of hybrids comes from genetics. The trail is not only in the DNA of our own species (which often includes important genes inherited from Neanderthals) but also skeletons of hybrids.
Our sexy ancestors were mating with everything that looked vaguely human. Keep that in mind when the dudebros are whining about how Western women aren’t meeting their high standards of beauty. They’d fuck a chimp if one offered the opportunity.
However, many of the changes in our human evolutionary lineage maybe the result of chance.
For example, where isolated populations have a characteristic, such as some aspect of their appearance, which doesn’t make much difference to their survival and this form continues to change in descendants. Features of Neanderthals’ faces (such as their pronounced brows) or body (including large rib cages) might have resulted simply from genetic drift.
Oh, dear, the evolutionary psychologist won’t like that. Too bad, it’s true.
The origins of our own species coincided with major shifts in climate as we became more distinct from other species at these points in time. All other species of human seem to have died out as a result of climate change.
…and we’re next, at the rate we’re going.
The trail of human compassion extends back one and a half million years ago. Scientist have traced medical knowledge to at least the time of the Neanderthals.
Altruism has many important survival benefits. It enabled older community members to pass on important knowledge. And medical care kept skilled hunters alive.
We should have listened more closely to Kropotkin, rather than the imperialist colonizers who shaped the early perspectives on evolutionary theory. He was on to something (he also considered climate to be a critical evolutionary force.)
Evolution made us more emotionally exposed than we like to imagine. Like domestic dogs, with whom we share many genetic adaptations, such as greater tolerance for outsiders, and sensitivity to social cues, human hypersociability has come with a price: emotional vulnerabilities.
Counterpoint: Republicans and Tories. Human psychopaths seem to have a decided advantage in the acquisition of power.
Given the difference in strength between your average chimp and your average man I’m going to go with “the chimp would fuck them, if it wanted to”.
Louis
To survive, we need a Voight-Kampff test to identify high-functioning narcissists, sociopaths and psychopaths.
Instead of reproducing with those considered beautiful by local standards, it makes sense to go for diversity.
Talking about accidents and emotional vulnerability: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2nnkF9jffdY
Yeah, the police do not send us their best people.
Evolution. Researchers reconstruct the genome of the common ancestor of all mammals.
https://phys.org/news/2022-09-reconstruct-genome-common-ancestor-mammals.html
@ Louis, # 1: Also, a female chimp might not be receptive to the idea.
@Christoph #5,
Agreed. (Although, in my comedy/comedically ambiguous way, I meant that the female chimp would fuck the human…up. Due to the lack of receptiveness.)
I saw a female chimp in a zoo once. She was obviously unhappy (I have very mixed feelings about zoos, some good, some bad. I think it’s a messy area) and reacted to one of the people looking at her through a (clearly very very tough) glass window into her enclosure by hurling herself at that window and hitting it very hard indeed with both her body and hand.
No human could have made the impact this chimp did. Even though the thick, reinforced glass was very securely fixed into the thick concrete walls of the enclosure, the whole lot creaked and wobbled at the impact. Any human {ahem} “encountering” any “reluctant” chimp is coming out as a pink, frothing paste.
Louis
Read and be horrified: https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/prostitute-orangutan-screamed-defecated-brothel-13652061
Moar early ancestors.
Earliest jawed fish found from 436 MyA.
Previously, none had been found before the 419 million year mark.
https://phys.org/news/2022-09-dawn-fishes-early-silurian-jawed.html
Can’t wait to read The Dawn of Everything by Graeber and Wengrow, which makes a related point.
https://www.smbc-comics.com/comics/1664373104-20220928.png
Obligatory SMBC repost.
I seem to recall you giving a talk on a more general version of that statement at Eschaton in Ottawa about ten years ago.
We fuck things much more distantly related than primates.
No anecdotal lists of distantly related things necessary!
#12: Yeah, the importance of chance events in evolution is one of my hobbyhorses.
According to right wing leader and insurrectionist Nick Fuentes, having sex with women is gay:
“Having sex in itself is gay, I think. I think that it’s really a gay act. Think about it this way: What’s gayer than being like ‘I need cuddles. I need kisses … I need to spend time with a woman.’ That’s a little sus.”
#4: But according to commenter Bart on that article: “There is nothing in this study that points to a common ancestor. That is the make-believe start of the evolutionist. All they did was compare the current status of living mammals. Very unscientific. It is based on atheistic fantasy.” (He did get downvoted.)
However, the article itself is problematic — that one can create a model genome that is a precursor of all extant mammals in no way implies that there was a single animal living 180 mya that spawned the entire tree of mammals. And the caption says “earliest common ancestor” when it should say “latest”.
Great summary of the role of chance in evolution. So what the hell is she doing playing footsies with Templeton?
Originally, the Templeton prize was created by old man Templeton, who among other things awarded it to Freeman Dyson.
When Templeton senior died, his fundamentalist son took over.
I have not followed the other aspects of the Templeton foundation. My guess is, the fundie connection has fcked it up the way the tories fcked up Britain.
(Unintended cursive text)
BTW why have I never heard of Penny Spikins before? Well-written articles accessible to non-specialists are not that common.
She and that astronomy bloke should get together and reproduce. Never mind, go for large-scale cloning.
#19 Templeton senior set up the “Templeton Prize for Progress in Religion” and first awarded it to Mother Theresa, so it’s been “fcked up” from the beginning.
@21 “progress in religion” hereby added to my stock of oxymorons (headed by “military intelligence” of course).
^1, 5 and 6.
As alluded by ^16, female receptiveness has nothing to do with it for the dudebros. Mutual affection is ‘gay’, so is rape their sexual motivation?
All sexual pleasure is gay. Surgically replacing your penis with a broomstick, like the one the NYPD used to rape Abner Louima, might be ok … but you can only use it on women; raping Louima was gay.
Come to think of it, any engagement of any sort with other men is gay. Heck, simply being a man is gay. Nick Fuentes should just admit it: he’s as gay as gay can be.
When manly enough to occupy the pole of manliness, all you see in every direction are varying degrees of women.
@birgerjohansson
No need for that, we just need a culture that prizes recognizing them.
Plenty of cultures implemented these leveling mechanisms.
Also, hey! We get our own creationist idiot here in the Swedish government!