denis
Caneguru
Posts: 1,760
|
Post by denis on Jun 26, 2023 13:53:17 GMT
“I'm sure this humble review will generate some comments and all I would ask is that you go easy on me, because I'm sticking my neck out here a bit. I'm really quite fed up with the constant comparison made between us and chimpanzees. There are several fundamental reflexes that we have that chimps don't and its almost like we never really discuss those. So I read a good deal of this book wanting to find further information on our differences, rather than our similarities. Since this book came out, scientists have spent 20 years digging up Little Foot and that's when I became really excited about our origins, although even that debate seems to have died down. OK, so here's my take on where we are from. There is a fundamental difference between our spines and that of chimps. Our spines have more vertebrae and most importantly our spines are able to lordose, which is key to being able to shift your weight into your pelvis in order to walk efficiently. The only primates who have spines that lordose are old world monkeys and they also happen to be great swimmers and will hunt for food in water. So it seems to me that the common ancestor has to be Old World Monkeys, but hardly any attention is given to them? There is a fantastic series of videos on YouTube of a Capuchin monkey, who is incidentally a New World Monkey, but its quite astonishing how 'human like' that little fellow is. Also, if you throw a newborn chimp into water it will sink, whereas if you throw a human baby into water it will swim. To my mind that fundamental difference in a neo-natal reflex shows us that we need to stop looking at chimps and gorillas for clues as to our evolution and basically go much much further back to Old World Monkeys. Little foot, like Old World Monkeys has tiny hands. I think our hands and the development of our brains are inextricably linked. Let's also remind ourselves that to hone a handaxe (Homo Erectus), that specific endeavour just happens to utilise exactly the same region of our brains that is now given over to language...” www.amazon.com.au/Aquatic-Ape-Hypothesis-Elaine-Morgan/dp/0285643614 |
|
denis
Caneguru
Posts: 1,760
|
Post by denis on Aug 26, 2023 9:55:15 GMT
|
|
denis
Caneguru
Posts: 1,760
|
Post by denis on Aug 26, 2023 10:17:18 GMT
|
|
moxohol
Caneguru
Biohacker
Si vis pacem, para bellum
Posts: 3,328 
|
Post by moxohol on Aug 26, 2023 11:11:11 GMT
I heard consumption of fish was the magic button that accelerated the encephalization quotient & evolution of humans. Makes sense to me since large doses of Omega 3s are known to heal some brain injuries.
|
|
denis
Caneguru
Posts: 1,760
|
Post by denis on Aug 26, 2023 12:18:24 GMT
|
|
denis
Caneguru
Posts: 1,760
|
Post by denis on Aug 26, 2023 12:28:12 GMT
“ The Acheulean is a widespread archaeological industry found in assemblages throughout Africa and Eurasia and spanning huge swaths of time—up to 1.5 million years—only ending around two hundred thousand years ago when handaxes and cleavers were replaced by the hafted, pointed tools of projectile technology.
The early Acheulean—from around 1.7 to 0.8 million years ago—is the time during which the morphology of the human hand evolved into its present form. The main change was in the shape of the trapezoid bone in the wrist from pyramid-shape to boot-shape, which resulted in the expansion of the palmar aspect of the hand. This enabled these early humans to combine a power grip with a precision grip more effectively, making what was an already capable hand even better at making and using tools. The grip could now carry out more and more refined, two-handed manipulation of materials.
Whilst the human hand was evolving during this time into a shape that is essentially the same as ours today, the human brain was also growing—from its 600 cm3 (Homo habilis) around 2 million years ago, to its maximum 1500 cm3 in our Neanderthal cousins (Homo sapiens neanderthalensis) around three hundred thousand years ago, near the end of the Acheulean. The brain size of Homo sapiens has shrunk during the last twenty-eight thousand years and is around 1350 cm3 today.
A Vital Sense of Form
With their improving manipulative skills and enhanced cognitive powers, by around 1.4 million years ago the early Acheuleans were exhibiting an aesthetic awareness, which is rendered in the characteristic simplicity, symmetry, and sometimes beauty of the Acheulean handaxe. The so-called great handaxe tradition is the “longest-lasting entity in the human cultural record.”[3] While the Acheulean is defined largely by the presence of handaxes, cleavers, and other large cutting tools, many of these artefacts nonetheless present a paradox. As Pope and colleagues observe:
The tool itself often displays such attention to detail in terms of symmetry and form that they appear over-engineered for the range of simple functional tasks envisaged. The finesse, exactitude and apparent aesthetic sense worked into what are essentially meat knives continues to demand an adequate explanation, an explanation which might throw some light onto the fundamental relationship between form and function in the material culture of early humans.[4]
These Acheulean makers had the intelligence, the aesthetic sensibility, and the hand-eye coordination to engage with materials in a manner that demonstrates consummate care, attentiveness, and skill. There is even the strong indication that the shape of these tear-drop “tools” in many cases conform to the aesthetic proportion of the “Golden Section,” a proportion expressed as the ratio 0.61: 1, used in classical architecture and also underlying the European A series of paper sizes, allowing an A4 sheet to be folded into two A5s, at the same time retaining the same proportion. Another proportion that longer “tools” have been found to exhibit is the shorter ratio, 0.50:1 (also described as 1:2) where “the seamless gradient of proportion from 0.61 in shorter to 0.50 in longer bifaces may indeed be one of the most remarkable things about the Acheulean.”[5]
|
|
moxohol
Caneguru
Biohacker
Si vis pacem, para bellum
Posts: 3,328
|
Post by moxohol on Aug 26, 2023 15:53:49 GMT
This occurred when humans switched from hunter-gather to agrarian societies. Much visual & spatial cortex downsized but the neocortex increased due to a different set of skillsets required. That’s my understanding. But of course I thought u were named Denise Minger not Denis Eminger. Somebody had a hiccup there? “Whadya gunna call the kid?” “D-d-denis..*HIC*..M-m-minger.” “Wuzzat again?...*poke-poke*...’Eminger’...Oh, OK!” |
|
denis
Caneguru
Posts: 1,760
|
Post by denis on Aug 26, 2023 16:30:03 GMT
This occurred when humans switched from hunter-gather to agrarian societies. Much visual & spatial cortex downsized but the neocortex increased due to a different set of skillsets required. That’s my understanding. But of course I thought u were named Denise Minger not Denis Eminger. Somebody had a hiccup there? “Whadya gunna call the kid?” “D-d-denis..*HIC*..M-m-minger.” “Wuzzat again?...*poke-poke*...’Eminger’...Oh, OK!” Denise Minger ? Human Evolution and the Archaeology of the Social Brain by John Gowlett, Clive Gamble, and Robin Dunbar The Social Brain and Its Implications The social brain hypothesis owes its origin to an attempt to explain why primates have significantly larger brains relative to body size than all other animals (Byrne and Whiten 1988). The central claim is that primates live in a more complex social world that is computationally more demanding than anything found elsewhere: the need to keep track of the dy- namically changing world of alliances and friendships that typify primate society imposes demands on the animals that are simply not matched in the less socially intense societies of other birds and mammals (Dunbar 1988; Harcourt 1988). Indeed, more recent analyses suggest that there is a striking difference between anthropoid primates and other birds and mammals in both the complexity of their social systems (pri- mate groups are more strongly bonded) and the cognitive demands involved: only in primates is there a quantitative relationship between social group size and relative brain size (Dunbar, Gamble, and Gowlett 2010; Dunbar and Shultz 2007; Shultz and Dunbar 2007, 2010a). This relationship is particularly clear with respect to frontal lobe volume, the region that is the most recently enlarged in primates (Dunbar 2003b, 2011). Indeed, neuroimaging has now demonstrated a correlation across individuals between the volume of key regions in the frontal lobe and both social cognitive competences (Powell et al. 2010, 2012) and social group size (Lewis et al. 2011). The substantive issue is the fact that, within anthropoid primates, social group size correlates closely with relative brain size (and, in particular, relative neocortex size), albeit with a grade difference between monkeys and apes (apes seem to require more brain volume to support groups of a given size than monkeys; fig. 1). The APE equation relating group size to neocortex size predicts a social group size of ∼150 for modern humans, a value that occurs extensively both in data sets on natural group sizes and in the size of personal social networks (Dunbar 1993, 2008). That modern humans seem to fit neatly onto the end of the ape distribution inevitably raises the question of whether this relationship can be used to reconstruct the group sizes of ancestral hominid popula- tions. In an early attempt to do so, Aiello and Dunbar (1993) estimated the likely pattern of change in group size across hominids by interpolating cranial volumes for individual fos- sils into the generic primate regression equations. Since then, use of an explicit ape regression equation, better measures of fossil brain volumes, and use of population means has allowed improved estimates (Dunbar 2009b) |
|
denis
Caneguru
Posts: 1,760
|
Post by denis on Aug 28, 2023 5:54:23 GMT
|
|
captkronos
Caneguru
If you loved the Shovelglove, here comes the Paddletub!
"You Eat Life or Life Eat You"
Posts: 480
|
Post by captkronos on Aug 28, 2023 20:12:48 GMT
I'm not sure any "plant-based" diet has ever existed in any human civilization apart from periods of starvation like the Irish potato famine. My big picture theory of any benefit it has is that it's a starvation diet, and the body's stress mechanisms will kick in for a while to survive, like using a sauna does. You don't want to "live" in the sauna, but short periods will benefit you with the stress mechanisms being activated. That's how I think veganism works in the short term, which can even be years before the body gives out. Why would any human deny the consumption of eggs? Nature's most perfect food? It defies logic and nature, which always seeks the shortest most efficient path. There are 3700 calories in a pound of animal fat, there are 200 in a pound of kale. Nature designed us to run on the most efficient fuel. So, yes, it COULD have anti-aging benefits in the same way fasting does. Doesn't mean it's healthy because of what it HAS, but because of what it doesn't.
|
|
lardy
Caneguru
Posts: 576
|
Post by lardy on Aug 28, 2023 21:57:18 GMT
I'm not sure any "plant-based" diet has ever existed in any human civilization apart from periods of starvation like the Irish potato famine. My big picture theory of any benefit it has is that it's a starvation diet, and the body's stress mechanisms will kick in for a while to survive, like using a sauna does. You don't want to "live" in the sauna, but short periods will benefit you with the stress mechanisms being activated. That's how I think veganism works in the short term, which can even be years before the body gives out. Why would any human deny the consumption of eggs? Nature's most perfect food? It defies logic and nature, which always seeks the shortest most efficient path. There are 3700 calories in a pound of animal fat, there are 200 in a pound of kale. Nature designed us to run on the most efficient fuel. So, yes, it COULD have anti-aging benefits in the same way fasting does. Doesn't mean it's healthy because of what it HAS, but because of what it doesn't. Animal products are the most efficient in terms of expenditure, that doesn't necessarily mean it's the most suitable fuel though. The truth is the argument was/is and probably always will be on-going what we KNOW is that including Fruits and vegetables as part of a balanced diet is getting the best results so far (for the general population as a whole not individually). I strongly believe we are omnivores and agree that a vegan lifestyle indefinitely probably isn't the healthiest thing in the world, maybe one day we will find out what's best for us but I think it's down to each person rather than a black & white answer of "This is what you should eat." |
|
|
|
Post by mr potatohead on Sept 17, 2023 8:39:02 GMT
HERE's some news and an interesting conversation between Dr Tom Cowan and Dr Veronica Tilden concerning fertility, vegans birth deformed children and 4th generation malnourished cats are born crazy/nasty/stupid. What was notable to me was that vegans (who eat no animal sourced food?), like 7th D.A., give birth to deformed children. Wow. How sad.
|
|
|
|
Post by dbigkahunna on Sept 17, 2023 16:24:18 GMT
Hunter/Gatherers life span tended to be short and brutish harsh. Someone who survived into their 30's was old. If a malevmade it into their teens, their ending tended to be sudden with an accident or war.
Old age was so uncommon, it was revered.
My preference is for fish and lean meats for lots of protein, vegetables with really good olive oil, occasional bread with butter, salt and black pepper. Some fruits with an occasional sweet treat. I don't eat or exercise to train. I do both to live and enjoy life.
|
|
|
|
Post by BigBruvOfEnglandUK on Sept 17, 2023 19:13:48 GMT
Well it definitely can't be the diet that humans were on from the beginning of their existence. It would be ridiculous to think that, m8s.  |
|
|
|
Post by BigBruvOfEnglandUK on Sept 17, 2023 19:22:42 GMT
I heard consumption of fish was the magic button that accelerated the encephalization quotient & evolution of humans. Makes sense to me since large doses of Omega 3s are known to heal some brain injuries. I think the evolution had already happened long before humans started catching the kind of fish that are high in omega 3s. |
|
