Posted on 02/19/2006 12:18:49 PM PST by blam
Well, gee, could that possibly be due to the fact that primates, in general, are not predators.
Ah aims to please...
Except for the one we are.
Implied with the "in general".(Chimps also eat meat, but only rarely --- no pun intended)
They post often enough, but the threads they frequent are prone to getting banished to the Religion forum, or sometimes to the Smoky Backroom forum when things get out of hand. But they also pop up frequently on threads about the currently hot topic of "intelligent design".
Intelligent design will become inarguable when we design robots and send them out into the galaxy.
I worded it that way to avoid argument. However, for the sake of argument, I've never heard anyone explain, if they believe in intelligent design, just where the designer came from, and which entity designed the designer, and so forth.
Our limp rationale that things "just happened" is certainly no worse than the limp rationale that an entity or entities unknown caused them to happen, because then how do you explain that beginning?
I'm not denying the existance of any possibility, or any entity. I simply like to cut to the chase with Occam's razor.
Precisely. Personally I'm a big advocate of including "intelligent design" in school curricula, as long as it's the how-to variety. I'm sure we currently have the ability to engineer various one-celled organisms that could survive and thrive on Mars, and eventually evolve into more complex organisms. Quite possible that we are derived from some such venture, but that has no bearing, as you pointed out, on the question of "how it all started".
Other predators could not be avoided, they would find you. Tigers, cave lions, african lions, bears, hyenas, wolves, etc. Nothing we can do about them except band together and fight and lose the occasional family member. But others are more easily avoided by having half a brain, and that is what we probably had back then.
Not in defense of the study or the premise..just semantics...losely speaking, I believe that a Saber Tooth Tiger would be a "cat." As a Wolf would be a dog. Now an Eagle...
We are talking a region that has frequent droughts, and water holes can be few and far between.
I think the author of the article overemphasizes the role of predation in actually changing us.
Certainly it was one of the pressures mitigating against our survival, but competition for resources would have had a more selective function.
Migration, climactic change, and the need to find alternate forms of nourishment would have had a more direct effect in selecting for intelligence.
Predation was a major driving factor in the evolution of such divers creatures as the sauropods and the armadillo. I'm not certain why it wouldn't be a major fact in human evolution, too.
Predation is a major driving factor in any species' evolution.
My point is that it is not necessarily a major driving factor in making the species more intelligent.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.