What's new
By:

Evolution - A serious question.

Red said:
Consciousness studies may be the frontier that bridges science and spirituality. There has been a school of modern physics somewhat enamored with core ideas at the heart of some Eastern mystical traditions. Standing in the way of a further fruition of consciousness studies is Scientism and the dogma of scientific materialism. The observer effect demonstrated by quantum physics, that the act of observation precipitates events, is probably the one insight most responsible for the emerging view that consciousness itself might precede matter, and that in turn is bringing quantum physics closer to the world revealed by the world's mystics through the ages.

Here is an example of a quantum physicist attempting to arrive at a synthesis that is about as far removed from scientific materialism as it gets. I won't judge him. But there is an element of abstraction involved that can seem more divorced from reality then the ravings of a madman, or an ivory towered professor. Still, a good example of how consciousness studies as seen through the lens of a physicist is out there these days.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Fqdcdky9wR4

And a manifesto basically calling for a less materialist dominated paradigm:

https://opensciences.org/about/manifesto-for-a-post-materialist-science
Click to expand...

Nonsense. You speak with the steadfast confidence of the utterly ignorant.
 
One Brow said:
Becasue compared to other apes, humans are weaklings, and one of the adaptations we developed in response was better use of our hands.



Mindless evolution, without question.
Click to expand...

I'm not certain that this is consensus but I think it's the other way around. We are weaklings because of our hands(as opposed to: we have hands because we are weak). One doesn't need to be the biggest dude around if he can use a weapon. It's pretty straightforward to see how tool use would lead to less strength but I don't think there is a clear reason why a lack of strength would lead to tools or the hands needed to use them.

Our hand is a refinement/re-purposing of a climbing limb. The driver of the change seems to be the tools themselves. Once you have developed tools any change that allows you to use them more effectively will be highly advantageous.
 
♪alt13 said:
I'm not certain that this is consensus but I think it's the other way around. We are weaklings because of our hands. One doesn't need to be the biggest dude around if he can use a weapon. It's pretty straightforward to see how tool use would lead to less strength but I don't think there is a clear reason why a lack of strength would lead to tools or the hands needed to use them.

Our hand is a refinement/re-purposing of a climbing limb. The driver of the change seems to be the tools themselves. Once you have developed tools any change that allows you to use them more effectively will be highly advantageous.
Click to expand...

I was thinking the same thing. Do you have a link? My gut feeling that it's a bit of both. A self-reinforcing feedback mechanism.
 
Siro said:
I was thinking the same thing. Do you have a link? My gut feeling that it's a bit of both. A self-reinforcing feedback mechanism.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I don't. I imagine you are right and it is a little of both. Primarily I think it is the tool use that allows for lack of strength.

Strength is not actually all that it's cracked up to be. It takes a lot of calories. If you don't need the extra strength to survive and procreate it will be selected out by famine and hardship.

Also a social group that uses less calories per "unit" can be larger. More hands = more weapons to take territory.
 
♪alt13 said:
Sorry, I don't. I imagine you are right and it is a little of both. Primarily I think it is the tool use that allows for lack of strength.

Strength is not actually all that it's cracked up to be. It takes a lot of calories. If you don't need the extra strength to survive and procreate it will be selected out by famine and hardship.

Also a social group that uses less calories per "unit" can be larger. More hands = more weapons to take territory.
Click to expand...

You're preaching to the choir. :)
 
♪alt13 said:
I hope I don't sound preachy, I'm just super into the 'drivers' of evolution. **** is fascinating. I think metabolism is often over looked.
Click to expand...
Oh, not at all. It's a fairly common idiom... I just meant that I hold a similar view. The combination of deft tool manipulation with sufficient intelligence is a far superior than more traditional physical tools as a measure of fitness. Energy use is a simplification, of course, but it is often used in evolutionary arguments, and it is instructive. Like always at this hour, I'm in bed reading and too lazy to type long responses from my tablet, but I agree with you.
 
Usable hands is a byproduct of bipedalism. Prevailing thought used to be that ancestors of humans developed bipedalism as a result of dwindling forest and rising grassland. Recent finds date bipedalism to before vast loss of African forests, so that thought proved incorrect.

Current thought so far as I know is bipedalism was a desired trait because it opened up the males in particular to better help with food acquisition.

Quick search has this article saying it's an adaptation to more flexible branches. https://www.cs.bham.ac.uk/research/projects/cogaff/talks/wonac/sue.d/Thorpe-et-al-Science-2007.pdf
 
As recently as 50,000 years ago, there were at least 4 species of humans on Earth. Ourselves, Neanderthals, Denisovans, and an unknown group. Europeans all have some Neanderthal genes. Australasians have some Denisovan ancestry. Probably better seen as subspecies since Homo sapiens was able to breed with these other human groups....

https://www.sci-news.com/otherscien...-neanderthal-genome-fourth-lineage-01624.html

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/denisovan-genome/

https://www.livinganthropologically.com/anthropology/denisovans-neandertals-human-races/
 
Red said:
As recently as 50,000 years ago, there were at least 4 species of humans on Earth. Ourselves, Neanderthals, Denisovans, and an unknown group. Europeans all have some Neanderthal genes. Australasians have some Denisovan ancestry. Probably better seen as subspecies since Homo Sapiens was able to breed with these other human groups....

https://www.sci-news.com/otherscien...-neanderthal-genome-fourth-lineage-01624.html

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/denisovan-genome/
Click to expand...

I'm still awaiting an answer from you on your fluted point (Clovis). Did you find it? You into looking for artifacts?
 
Dr. Jones said:
I'm still awaiting an answer from you on your fluted point (Clovis). Did you find it? You into looking for artifacts?
Click to expand...

Sorry, must have missed your question. No, not my find. The Mrs. found a small one years ago, and I hunt one site that yields Late Paleo forms. The one pictured was found in Ohio. Yes, been an artifact hunter for many years. Belong to the American Society for Amateur Archaelogy(ASAA). Dr. "Mike" Gramly's working group. Recently undertook further excavations at the Sugarloaf site in Deerfield, Ma. Gramly considers it the largest Clovis habitation site in North America. The peopling of the Americas is the most exciting frontier in American archaeology at the moment. Now that we know people were here before the people who developed Clovis technology, it has gotten very exciting.

Anyway, I figured if I'm hanging around, needed to remove the Cotton avatar, lol...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top