People have always been assholes

[Dukasaur]

https://nationalpost.com/news/world/there-used-to-be-nine-species-of-human-what-happened-to-them

Nine human species walked the Earth 300,000 years ago. Now there is just one. The Neanderthals, Homo neanderthalensis, were stocky hunters adapted to Europe’s cold steppes. The related Denisovans inhabited Asia, while the more primitive Homo erectus lived in Indonesia, and Homo rhodesiensis in central Africa.

Several short, small-brained species survived alongside them: Homo naledi in South Africa, Homo luzonensis in the Philippines, Homo floresiensis (“hobbits”) in Indonesia, and the mysterious Red Deer Cave People in China. Given how quickly we’re discovering new species, more are likely waiting to be found.

By 10,000 years ago, they were all gone. The disappearance of these other species resembles a mass extinction. But there’s no obvious environmental catastrophe – volcanic eruptions, climate change, asteroid impact – driving it. Instead, the extinctions’ timing suggests they were caused by the spread of a new species, evolving 260,000-350,000 years ago in Southern Africa: Homo sapiens.

The spread of modern humans out of Africa has caused a sixth mass extinction, a greater than 40,000-year event extending from the disappearance of Ice Age mammals to the destruction of rainforests by civilisation today. But were other humans the first casualties?

We are a uniquely dangerous species. We hunted wooly mammoths, ground sloths and moas to extinction. We destroyed plains and forests for farming, modifying over half the planet’s land area. We altered the planet’s climate. But we are most dangerous to other human populations, because we compete for resources and land.

History is full of examples of people warring, displacing and wiping out other groups over territory, from Rome’s destruction of Carthage, to the American conquest of the West and the British colonisation of Australia. There have also been recent genocides and ethnic cleansing in Bosnia, Rwanda, Iraq, Darfur and Myanmar. Like language or tool use, a capacity for and tendency to engage in genocide is arguably an intrinsic, instinctive part of human nature. There’s little reason to think that early Homo sapiens were less territorial, less violent, less intolerant – less human.

Optimists have painted early hunter-gatherers as peaceful, noble savages, and have argued that our culture, not our nature, creates violence. But field studies, historical accounts, and archaeology all show that war in primitive cultures was intense, pervasive and lethal. Neolithic weapons such as clubs, spears, axes and bows, combined with guerrilla tactics like raids and ambushes, were devastatingly effective. Violence was the leading cause of death among men in these societies, and wars saw higher casualty levels per person than World Wars I and II.

Old bones and artefacts show this violence is ancient. The 9,000-year-old Kennewick Man, from North America, has a spear point embedded in his pelvis. The 10,000-year-old Nataruk site in Kenya documents the brutal massacre of at least 27 men, women, and children.

[Maxleod]

Thanks for the news Duka... Have you watched 2001 A Space Odissey?

[mrswdk]

Why does any of this make them assholes?

Also you said erectus, he he.

[NomadPatriot]

[NomadPatriot]

[jimboston]

Early Homo Sapiens didn’t kill all members of these species.

He fucked some too.

[NomadPatriot]

Early Homo Sapiens didn’t kill all members of these species.

He fucked some too.

Assuming the gender of early homo sapiens is not very progressive..

sounds Transphobic.

[2dimes]

Early Homo Sapiens didn’t kill all members of these species.

He fucked some too.

...married..

[jimboston]

Early Homo Sapiens didn’t kill all members of these species.

He fucked some too.

...married..

...bred...

[2dimes]

I am not farmiliar with that.

So, if there are four choices you add bred?

[NomadPatriot]

Early Homo Sapiens didn’t kill all members of these species.

He fucked some too.

...married..

...bred...

at least someone did it..

Words related to bred

produced, raised, cultured, trained, cultivated, refined, educated, propagated, reared

[Dukasaur]

Why does any of this make them assholes?

Also you said erectus, he he.

Exterminating your relatives doesn't seem assholish to you?

[2dimes]

He seems more likely to prefer breeding over extermination. No?

You know? A lover not a fighter.

[Dukasaur]

He seems more likely to prefer breeding over extermination. No?

You know? A lover not a fighter.

Hasn't his generation been trained to wear raincoats at all times, even at dinner?

[mrswdk]

Why does any of this make them assholes?

Also you said erectus, he he.

Exterminating your relatives doesn't seem assholish to you?

No, although your article doesn't suggest that these guys killed their relatives.

[2dimes]

Well, I'm unsure if I stand corrected or not.

[Dukasaur]

Why does any of this make them assholes?

Also you said erectus, he he.

Exterminating your relatives doesn't seem assholish to you?

No, although your article doesn't suggest that these guys killed their relatives.

Seems to suggest it to me.

Like language or tool use, a capacity for and tendency to engage in genocide is arguably an intrinsic, instinctive part of human nature. There’s little reason to think that early Homo sapiens were less territorial, less violent, less intolerant – less human.

Optimists have painted early hunter-gatherers as peaceful, noble savages, and have argued that our culture, not our nature, creates violence. But field studies, historical accounts, and archaeology all show that war in primitive cultures was intense, pervasive and lethal. Neolithic weapons such as clubs, spears, axes and bows, combined with guerrilla tactics like raids and ambushes, were devastatingly effective. Violence was the leading cause of death among men in these societies, and wars saw higher casualty levels per person than World Wars I and II.

[mrswdk]

It doesn't specify but that sounds more like groups fighting other groups to me.

[Dukasaur]

It doesn't specify but that sounds more like groups fighting other groups to me.

Yes, other groups of related species. In other words, their relatives.

[TA1LGUNN3R]

How close is 'related species' to you?

[mrswdk]

It doesn't specify but that sounds more like groups fighting other groups to me.

Yes, other groups of related species. In other words, their relatives.

I was using the dictionary definition of relative (someone in your blood or marriage family), not your new definition that makes all 7 billion humans on the planet relatives of each other.