Comments 1 - 29 of 29 Search these comments
They were working a 3-4 hours a day and had longer life expectancy than after the transition to agriculture.
Of course if had a cavity you were screwed, but they weren't eating sugar.
Or you could be raided by the next tribe, but overall better odds than a farmer 8000 yrs ago.
So this is how people went from a leisurely life style of hunting and gathering,
that was what humans evolved to do, and was extremely satisfying on a personal level,
Personally I enjoy a modern lifestyle of smartphones and not starving.
Signs are that in these short intervals when we are not starving, we grow up to the next point where we will be starving - or killing each other - or infecting each other.
The answer to too many eggs is more baskets.
Our ancestors (and those living in the Amazon and Papuan jungles today) knew what the fuck they were doing
TrumpingTits saysOur ancestors (and those living in the Amazon and Papuan jungles today) knew what the fuck they were doing
People were probably smarter than now. Just to survive they had to be experts at hunting, fishing, expert botanists, experts at making stone tools, tanning hides, making tools from ivory and bones, sewing, making fire, they had to have deep knowledge of different environments, animals behavior. Most probably knew several languages as well.
Leisurely? Would you call hunting down a woolly mammoth with a spear or scraping edible moss and collecting berries was a life of leisure?
That would be nice but at max you're gonna move 1 million apes off this planet. That not enough to change anything to what will happen on earth.
Add to that pleasure the adventure of avoiding the saber-tooth cats, giant sloths, various wolf species, bears, etc, that are hunting you.
I have heard that, but do not buy it. A sparse population of men armed with pointy sticks did not wipe out a continent full of mastodons, mammoths, giant sloths, smilodons, giant bears, rhinos, hippos, horses, and so on. If that were the case, then Africa would have lost its large animal species long ago. Try climate change from the receding (and still receding) ice age.
I have heard that, but do not buy it. A sparse population of men armed with pointy sticks did not wipe out a continent full of mastodons, mammoths, giant sloths, smilodons, giant bears, rhinos, hippos, horses, and so on.
Long before global warming.
HeadSet saysI have heard that, but do not buy it. A sparse population of men armed with pointy sticks did not wipe out a continent full of mastodons, mammoths, giant sloths, smilodons, giant bears, rhinos, hippos, horses, and so on. If that were the case, then Africa would have lost its large animal species long ago. Try climate change from the receding (and still receding) ice age.
Humans wiping out large animals is the currently scientifically accepted theory, which makes some sense. For example, large birds were wiped out in historic times in New Zealand, after humans arrived; there is a connection between humans arriving and megafauna extinction; and so on. I do not know enough about this to figure out why Africa was different from everywhere else. Perhaps animals coexisted with humans for so long time that there was some adaptation?
CovfefeButDeadly saysWatch Naked and Afraid and then tell me how leisurely that hunter gatherer lifestyle was.
Our ancestors (and those living in the Amazon and Papuan jungles today) knew what the fuck they were doing compared to these city yahoos.
So this is how people went from a leisurely life style of hunting and gathering
I recall that they studied skeletons of hunter-gatherers vs farmers, and hunter-gatherers were typically more healthy. They were on average more healthy than humans today, with very little to no cardiovascular diseases, high blood pressure or diabetes.
Australia did not have the population of large animals that North America and Europe had.
Primitive people do not grow into billions
Yet by studying skeletons, it became obvious that the life expectancy and the quality of life collapsed after transitioning to agriculture. There were more wars, more famines and more diseases. Why is this?
1 - people were bound to their fields, couldn't move, and had to defend against marauders.
2 - people are far less flexibility in the source of their food and were very vulnerable to bad harvests.
3 - Because they had more food initially, the population grew by a large factor. People lived in denser settlements, and close their livestock. As a result they were far more vulnerable to epidemics.
4 - Because of the much larger population, there is no way they could go back to hunting gathering. The land would just not support all of them.
So this is how people went from a leisurely life style of hunting and gathering, that was what humans evolved to do, and was extremely satisfying on a personal level, to a life of backbreaking work, that could be cut short anytime by diseases, famine or war.
Just because they found a better source of food.
We forget more food just means we will grow to the next limit, and that most likely will be a far more undesirable condition than our current one.