The " I always wondered" thread

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Ramo
An ape-like muscular system would've been selected out of humans since it would've been a waste of resources.

Why? I think the ability to chuck bigger spears for longer distances was a definite plus for most of human history.

IMHO, the changes in skeletal structure that permit humans to walk upright, thus to develop intelligence, also rendered humans weaker.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Urban Ranger

For humans, this is no longer the case. In the course of evolution, only the more intelligent tribes could survive against all the natural elements, thus intelligence became the prime factor that is selected for.

"The more intelliegent?" the line of homo was making tools long before homo sapiens sapiens, and unless competition between homonids was fierce and new technological and cultural breakthroughs common, i can;t see why strength would be selected against, nuless ramo is correct and brainpower could be used better elsewhere 9though I have doubts about the notino that it takes more brain capacity to run stronger muscles).

The shift to bipedalism seems to make sense, though orangutans share the upright stance (look at them when they walk, they walk more upright than chimps) and yet, as I said, they are much stronger than us.

[Ramo]

Why? I think the ability to chuck bigger spears for longer distances was a definite plus for most of human history.

The ability to construct a better spear was a bigger plus, and the ability to throw a bigger spear would've undermined that ability.

Do ape's have more muscles? Or stronger muscles?

Probably both more muscles and a higher density of muscular fibers. For either reason, the ape needs a lot more energy.

[Dinner]

Could it be that realitively more energy was invested in the brain so realitively less energy had to be invested some where else? Also lot's of muscles require lots of food to support; as early humans would have been hunter/gatherers/scavengers why expend lots of energy on anything but the bare amount needed for survival?

[Ramo]

Yep, that's exactly what I'm saying.

[OzzyKP]

Some animals live a few days, some animals live 200 years or more. Humans live around 80 years. Why?

What causes us to "time out"?

[Zero]

Originally posted by orange
How did Zylka get to be so ****ed up?

drugs.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Ramo
Yep, that's exactly what I'm saying.

Yes, but the brain is an incredible energy hog. was competiton among homonids so strong? i mean, why would a creature half as creative as man, but twice as strong, be a failure? The only thing that I can see wipping it out is, well, another set of homonids.

Does anyone have a clue about relative strenghts of the line of homonids?

[GePap]

Originally posted by OzzyKP
Some animals live a few days, some animals live 200 years or more. Humans live around 80 years. Why?

What causes us to "time out"?

Thanks for introducing a fine question!

[Bosh]

Also the way humans evolved was to become more childlike (there's a scientific word for this process that eludes me), that's why we are less hairy, better at learning, and have a bigger brain:body ratio just like chimp babies compared to adult chimps. That's also part of the reason why we're weaker.

[Spiffor]

Oerdin :
From whay I have gathered with ecologist friends (I am pro-nuclear myself, so it has sparked more than one discussion ), ecologists consider that we cannot deal properly with the nuclear rejections, and we have no other choice than to hide them for the next thousands of years.
To them, this means we are poisoning the Earth of our Children, grandchildren etc. for millenia to come in order to have some electricity. This is a responsibility they don't want to take.

To fight global warming, they favor the adoption of 'clean' energy sources such as wind-energy and solar enegry, as well as more efficient standards.

[Ramo]

Yes, but the brain is an incredible energy hog. was competiton among homonids so strong? i mean, why would a creature half as creative as man, but twice as strong, be a failure? The only thing that I can see wipping it out is, well, another set of homonids.

The neandertals and homo erectus were outcompeted/exterminated by homo sapiens sapiens, likely because they weren't smart enough. The same goes for the other hominid dead ends.

Does anyone have a clue about relative strenghts of the line of homonids?

I seem to recall something about neanderthals being stronger than homo sapiens sapiens.

[orange]

I've seriously wondered why people in the green movement haven't embraced nuclear power. It produces very little pollution and solves, what many of them considered to be, the great threat to the world today, global warming. I don't think GW will be nearly as big an issue as the pundits say but I would like to see fewer fossil fuels used.

I have no problems with nuclear, as long as it is done properly. I would prefer other forms, but until then, I don't see why we're not doing more with nuclear...would rather see fusion...

[DAVOUT]

I wonder if the laundring of black money (recycling it into the visible economy) has positive or negative effects on growth.

[TheStinger]

I wonder why in films all english people are portrayed as having London or upper class accents when infact less than 1/3 of the english speak like that