• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Evolutionary Race

Keneke

Muse
Joined
Jan 16, 2003
Messages
980
As a derivative of the "If not God, then Who?" thread by Cleo in R&P, I read about elephants paying "reverence" to the bones of dead elephants, and El Greco (I think) saying that in a few thousand years, this would give rise to the elephant's first religion, should they last that long.

Interesting! Do you think, that in the evolutionary race for global supremacy, we barely eked out a victory over elephants, dolphins, and chimpanzees? Is the explosion of civilization in the past 10,000 years the evolutionary equivalent of a "photo finish"?
 
Dolphins have intelligence, but they are not able to manipulate their environment as humans can because they don't have hands. Elephants have trunks, but I don't think they are to manipulate their environment as well as humans either. I have no idea about Chimps but I think the lack of the same equipment we have to speak language held them back.

So, dolphins have a little ability for language, but no way to manipulate environment. Elephants, no language no hands. Chimps hands no language. Yep I think that sums it up. I don't think we barely eked out over them, I think we lapped them.
 
Our Father,
who ....

cockroach.jpg
 
Denise said:
Dolphins have intelligence, but they are not able to manipulate their environment as humans can because they don't have hands. Elephants have trunks, but I don't think they are to manipulate their environment as well as humans either. I have no idea about Chimps but I think the lack of the same equipment we have to speak language held them back.

So, dolphins have a little ability for language, but no way to manipulate environment. Elephants, no language no hands. Chimps hands no language. Yep I think that sums it up. I don't think we barely eked out over them, I think we lapped them.

Yes, perhaps we won because we had things other than our brains to help us. Still, I can definitely envision an alternate, bizarro world where elephants had a greater intelligence than man, yet still were defeated by our versatility.
 
Dancing David said:
I don't know seems to me that corn and soybeans have won the race.

Maybe, but we are having way more fun. At least some of us...
 
The elephant "model" would be difficult to evolve into a race of big beasts that can try thinking up a bone god or something.

Heck, it's difficult to think of anything evolving right now.

The biggest evolutionary leaps happen during times of extreme change in environment.

Who would elephants be competing with for food and space besides humans? That may be a key factor in their evolution.

It seems we should be expecting something to be heading into an animal unlike any others on the planet for the next giant leap of intelligence. There are stressors on a lot of species right now.

We've had amphibians, reptiles, and then mammals. What next?

Extrapolating on past evolutionary 'leaps' is tough. So many factors.
 
I'm sure that other animals could develop full religions too in the future. When we were living on the trees, wondering about our dead was probably what sparked the first hints of religion. Since man has already attained an irreversible advantage over other species, the only way that other animals will live long enough to develop a religion is for humans to continue evolving with at least the same rhythm as those 'religious-to-be' animals, so that they maintain a definitive edge over them without feeling threatened.

Now, as for whether elephants or dolphins could have been the leading species, I think it's possible. But I think that the crucial crossroads were long before homo sapiens. Perhaps when our first ancestor walked on 2 legs, or even when land became at least equally favorable for life as water.
 
Before we go patting ourselves on the back I would like to point out one thing...

The race ain't over yet :)

But as long as were discussing it consider this.....

Who'd be running the show now had that meteor not shuffled the deck 65 million years ago.

I doubt that little rat-like creature that was our ancestor would have followed the exact same evolutionary path.

I also suspect that there could easily have been something running around at the time that already had a significant jump on us.

Hey! No fair cheating!
Sorry, the rules don't prohibit meteors. The play stands.
 
Keneke said:
As a derivative of the "If not God, then Who?" thread by Cleo in R&P, I read about elephants paying "reverence" to the bones of dead elephants, and El Greco (I think) saying that in a few thousand years, this would give rise to the elephant's first religion, should they last that long.

Considering that we have no way to know what an elephant is thinking, this may already be a religion.
 
Well, just a view points, most in honor of Gould (whose ideas on evolutionary theory I am very fond of).

First, we have been succesful, but the idea of us being "in the lead" or more advanced is not entirely accurate. Evolution works by an animal adapting to take over a niche in the ecosystem. New species typically arise when one of the following occurs:
1. A species dies out or goes extinct, opening a previously filled niche.
2. Climate or environment change, creating new niches to be filled.
3. New lands or areas open up, allowing species to move to niches in new areas.

Now, what's the point of my reiteration of basic biology? I promise, I am getting there :)

Okay, so, as has been mentioned, humans have two things that set them apart. First we have hands that are capable of fine manipulation of the environment. I specificy fine manipulation because, obviously, even dolphins can manipulate things to a degree, as can other animals. It's the dexterity and versatility of our hands (with opposable thumbs) that's important. Second, we have the ability of language, and again it's a matter of degree. We are able to communicate ideas that are complex, both physcial and abstract concepts.

Now, how does the second paragraph apply to the first?

Well, the ability to manipulate objects allows us to create what we need to fill almost any niche. The ability to communicate means that once one member figures out how to survive, that knowledge can be passed on to others. This helps prevent loss of any survival advantages...social evolution over physical. A new mutation might die out without reproducing...it is much easier to spread knowledge. This means that once we do fill a niche, we tend to be more successful in populating it quickly.

Second, because of our successes and ability to adapt to any niche, we can cause more species to become extinct, opening more niches for us, we can alter our climate on a large scale, causing new niches to open, and we are natural explorers, finding new lands and areas we can fill.

It is precisely because we are not specialized that we are so successful. As to "just beating out" another species, I don't think that's really an issue. They went along a different path; chimpanzees have brains smaller than ours and lack some physical brain structures thought to be critical in communication and higher thought. Elephants lack these structures as well, and also lack manipulative ability. Not to mention that elephants have a more restricted diet. Dolphins, besides the lack of hands, also are limited by their environment (they are made to live in water).

Now my point. Evolution is not really a race. It's more like people filling a theater or concert hall. As long as there are seats open, people try to get in to fill them. We just happen to be good at pointing out empty seats to others of our group, and at elbowing people out of their seats. Not to mention we build a few new ones if there aren't any available :)
 
Huntsman said:
Well, just a view points, most in honor of Gould (whose ideas on evolutionary theory I am very fond of).

First, we have been succesful, but the idea of us being "in the lead" or more advanced is not entirely accurate. Evolution works by an animal adapting to take over a niche in the ecosystem. New species typically arise when one of the following occurs:
1. A species dies out or goes extinct, opening a previously filled niche.
2. Climate or environment change, creating new niches to be filled.
3. New lands or areas open up, allowing species to move to niches in new areas.

Now, what's the point of my reiteration of basic biology? I promise, I am getting there :)

Okay, so, as has been mentioned, humans have two things that set them apart. First we have hands that are capable of fine manipulation of the environment. I specificy fine manipulation because, obviously, even dolphins can manipulate things to a degree, as can other animals. It's the dexterity and versatility of our hands (with opposable thumbs) that's important. Second, we have the ability of language, and again it's a matter of degree. We are able to communicate ideas that are complex, both physcial and abstract concepts.

Now, how does the second paragraph apply to the first?

Well, the ability to manipulate objects allows us to create what we need to fill almost any niche. The ability to communicate means that once one member figures out how to survive, that knowledge can be passed on to others. This helps prevent loss of any survival advantages...social evolution over physical. A new mutation might die out without reproducing...it is much easier to spread knowledge. This means that once we do fill a niche, we tend to be more successful in populating it quickly.

Second, because of our successes and ability to adapt to any niche, we can cause more species to become extinct, opening more niches for us, we can alter our climate on a large scale, causing new niches to open, and we are natural explorers, finding new lands and areas we can fill.

It is precisely because we are not specialized that we are so successful. As to "just beating out" another species, I don't think that's really an issue. They went along a different path; chimpanzees have brains smaller than ours and lack some physical brain structures thought to be critical in communication and higher thought. Elephants lack these structures as well, and also lack manipulative ability. Not to mention that elephants have a more restricted diet. Dolphins, besides the lack of hands, also are limited by their environment (they are made to live in water).

Now my point. Evolution is not really a race. It's more like people filling a theater or concert hall. As long as there are seats open, people try to get in to fill them. We just happen to be good at pointing out empty seats to others of our group, and at elbowing people out of their seats. Not to mention we build a few new ones if there aren't any available :)

Precisely

How did this post already, ack.

Anyway, my question.

So what do you think is in store with what is happening with us and the planet, etc? I can think of a ton of unspecialized creatures that are doing quite well, but they are so successful that they don't need to evolve much more.

Do you think we've reached that state? Crocodiles and cockroaches haven't changed much in eons.

What could possibly be the next step in evolution? What human trait could help us survive a certain scenario that would cause (survivors) us to have a primary trait that would lead us onto another evolutionary path?

I'm trying to envision some next step, but my mind just stalls.
 
You quoted the entire post just for a one-word response?

That's extremely rude. It wastes everyone else's time and board bandwidth.
 
Wrath of the Swarm said:
You quoted the entire post just for a one-word response?

That's extremely rude. It wastes everyone else's time and board bandwidth.

Who peed in your cornflakes :p
 
Re: Re: Re: Evolutionary Race

shemp said:


Why not just ask Patti Henningsen what they're thinking?

That is really really cool, Shemp!

But I notice she hasn't translated anything larger than herself. I'm skeptical about her ability to handle the big stuff.

I'd like to test her out with a hippopotamus and a rhinocerous ot two.

Only then would I trust her with an elephant.
 
Originally posted by Denise

Elephants have trunks, but I don't think they are to manipulate their environment as well as humans either.
I saw an interesting documentary once which showed elephants engaged in what seemed to be rather peculiar behavior. They would push over a tree, eat a few leaves, and then move on to another tree. They seemed to be deliberately going out of their way to be hard on the trees. The long-term effects of this activity by large numbers of elephants, it was explained, is to transform dense woodland to the woodland/grassland mosiac which is more conducive to the nurturing of elephants.

Humans, by contrast, have a unique capacity for transforming an environment into something habitable by humans only so long as resources can be imported from elsewhere.

Originally posted by Eos of the Eons

It is precisely because we are not specialized that we are so successful.
You got me thinking there.

Zebra stripes are, apparently, an example of a unique form of camouflague. While a solitary zebra would stick out like a barber's pole on the savanna, against the background of other zebras the stripes create a very challenging figure-to-ground problem, making it difficult for a predator to stay focused on a particular zebra.

Now I'm going to suggest that humans are actually a lot more specialized than is apparent on the surface, that the niche to which they are specialized is human society, and that previous to the emergence of this artifice, humans as a species had a very tenuous hold on survival. From a survival aspect, the most noteworthy design feature of the human body is the brain -- which, remarkable as it is, would probably not offer a solitary human a much better chance of survival in a harsh environment than would a decent set of claws, or a nice thick coat of fur. Many of the 'niches' we now occupy are, arguably, not real niches at all, but merely artificial ones whose occupants rely on a constant flow of resources while they engage in activities largely irrelevant to wresting resources from the biosphere (though very relevant to survival relative to the 'artificial background'; i.e., human society).

Who peed in your cornflakes
Sorry, but I gotta say that bugs me too. I recommend use of the elipsis...
 
Dymanic said:
IYou got me thinking there.

...the niche to which they are specialized is human society, and that previous to the emergence of this artifice, humans as a species had a very tenuous hold on survival. From a survival aspect, the most noteworthy design feature of the human body is the brain -- which, remarkable as it is, would probably not offer a solitary human a much better chance of survival in a harsh environment than would a decent set of claws, or a nice thick coat of fur. (though very relevant to survival relative to the 'artificial background'; i.e., human society).


Sorry, but I gotta say that bugs me too. I recommend use of the elipsis...

LOL. I'm not really understanding what an elipsis is though. Unless that 's what I've done this time.

Highly specialized brain for sure, but in so many ways, and not all the same for each person. Specialized in living in groups, definitetly got me thinking now too. I'm running out of time here, so thanks for all that, and I'll mull over it all for a bit until I can get back to JREF
 
The ellipsis is the punctuation mark used to signify a trailing off of a statement. It's represented by three periods in immediate succession: ...
 
when used to show words omitted up to the end of a sentence, the ellipsis is .... (last dot being the period).

In the middle of a sentence, it is ... three dots.

at the beginning: ...context....
 

Back
Top Bottom