Evolution isn’t aimed. A T-Rex needs to be good enough to hunt enough food.
Our ancient ancestors smashed the skulls of animals killed by African predators to eat the brains, smashed bones to eat the marrow.
Later as our ancestors became bigger and stronger they hunted and needed to communicate with each other to effectively track and take down an animal. Maybe they needed twenty words. Chickens have three words (or cluck patterns)
At the same time women collected stuff and needed to share how to identify this from that with younger women. They might have needed a hundred words.
Then those who could talk better were more attractive to the other sex than those who couldn’t (even now being well spoken is attractive) then a few millions of years later we’re making stone knives, hammers, axes; then ten minutes later aeroplanes and machine guns
In short: we had it hard enough we needed to share information. We later found communication sexy. T-Rex had no such trouble. We seem to be the only animal that solved “scavenging is dangerous” and “hunting is hard” with talking to each other rather than by getting bigger and getting claws or vicious teeth
I understand we selected for tall by fighting humans
I realise that, but the use of tools and sharing of ideas may well have had advantages against the T-Rex. Just as I’m sure they’ve helped us against things that would eat or kill us.
We seem to be the only animal that solved “scavenging is dangerous” and “hunting is hard” with talking to each other rather than by getting bigger and getting claws or vicious teeth
Right, but why are we the only ones to solve it that way? Some lesser “dinosaur” could have evolved tactics to fight bigger predators through basic weapons (sharp sticks), but no evidence of that exists.
An advantage is an advantage, so I think it’s reasonable to ask why mammals and not murder chickens came up with it.
Evolution isn’t aimed. A T-Rex needs to be good enough to hunt enough food.
Our ancient ancestors smashed the skulls of animals killed by African predators to eat the brains, smashed bones to eat the marrow.
Later as our ancestors became bigger and stronger they hunted and needed to communicate with each other to effectively track and take down an animal. Maybe they needed twenty words. Chickens have three words (or cluck patterns)
At the same time women collected stuff and needed to share how to identify this from that with younger women. They might have needed a hundred words.
Then those who could talk better were more attractive to the other sex than those who couldn’t (even now being well spoken is attractive) then a few millions of years later we’re making stone knives, hammers, axes; then ten minutes later aeroplanes and machine guns
In short: we had it hard enough we needed to share information. We later found communication sexy. T-Rex had no such trouble. We seem to be the only animal that solved “scavenging is dangerous” and “hunting is hard” with talking to each other rather than by getting bigger and getting claws or vicious teeth
I understand we selected for tall by fighting humans
I realise that, but the use of tools and sharing of ideas may well have had advantages against the T-Rex. Just as I’m sure they’ve helped us against things that would eat or kill us.
Right, but why are we the only ones to solve it that way? Some lesser “dinosaur” could have evolved tactics to fight bigger predators through basic weapons (sharp sticks), but no evidence of that exists.
An advantage is an advantage, so I think it’s reasonable to ask why mammals and not murder chickens came up with it.
Weird to leave at animals like crows with that last one.