[B][IMG]http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/77653000/jpg/_77653778_77653777.jpg[/IMG]
A major study suggests that killing among chimpanzees results from normal competition, not human interference.
[/B]Apart from humans, chimpanzees are the only primates known to gang up on their neighbours with lethal results - but primatologists have long disagreed about the underlying reasons.One proposal was that human activity, including destroying habitats and providing food, increased aggression.But the new findings, [URL="http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nature13727"]published in Nature[/URL], suggest this is not the case.
[IMG]http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/77647000/jpg/_77647074_1ngogo-males.jpg[/IMG]
Source:
[URL="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-29237276"]BBC News[/URL]
BRB, murdering someone.
Does this mean mass murder would make you some kind of ubermensch?
[editline]23rd September 2014[/editline]
This is old news anyway. Chimp genocide has been talked of for years
Huh, I guess that explains why my Raichu has been trying to strangle me.
This just in: [I]Animal behavior may be connected with evolution.[/I]
You know who was right all along
If few weaker chimps team up and kill a big healthy alpha male, aren't they stopping the evolution, because now the weaker will get the chance to mate and spread weaker genes ? Also fast forward that 200 000 years and we have assholes ruling the world like we see today.
[QUOTE=AntonioR;46057990]If few weaker chimps team up and kill a big healthy alpha male, aren't they stopping the evolution, because now the weaker will get the chance to mate and spread weaker genes ? Also fast forward that 200 000 years and we have assholes ruling the world like we see today.[/QUOTE]
No because if the ape died it was technically weaker in some way, either mentally or physically.
[QUOTE=AntonioR;46057990]If few weaker chimps team up and kill a big healthy alpha male, aren't they stopping the evolution, because now the weaker will get the chance to mate and spread weaker genes ? Also fast forward that 200 000 years and we have assholes ruling the world like we see today.[/QUOTE]
Evolution isn't all about being bigger and stronger, it's about having the traits that help you survive the best. If being the strongest chimp makes you a big target for all the weaker chimps and therefore gets you killed, stronger chimps are essentially being naturally selected out as the traits they have make them less survivable.
Don't make the mistake of assuming that natural selection always favours being big and strong.
[QUOTE=AntonioR;46057990]If few weaker chimps team up and kill a big healthy alpha male, aren't they stopping the evolution, because now the weaker will get the chance to mate and spread weaker genes ? Also fast forward that 200 000 years and we have assholes ruling the world like we see today.[/QUOTE]
Evolution can't "stop". In that case, natural selection would select against the alpha males who can't defend themselves, and would select for weaker chimps who can coordinate to take down a larger opponent.
And I don't think "asshole" is a term that comes up in evolutionary theory.
Evolution isnt concerned with whats the best, just what works.
[QUOTE=AntonioR;46057990]If few weaker chimps team up and kill a big healthy alpha male, aren't they stopping the evolution, because now the weaker will get the chance to mate and spread weaker genes ? Also fast forward that 200 000 years and we have assholes ruling the world like we see today.[/QUOTE]
The weaker ones will kill one another over females anyway, leaving the strongest weakest around. Who will then die because he was too weak to survive and doom his species.
[QUOTE=AntonioR;46057990]If few weaker chimps team up and kill a big healthy alpha male, aren't they stopping the evolution, because now the weaker will get the chance to mate and spread weaker genes ? Also fast forward that 200 000 years and we have assholes ruling the world like we see today.[/QUOTE]
Nope. If this scenario unfolded, it would mean that the big alpha chimp hadn't made alliances in his group and so the weaker chimps were able to use their social skills to overcome his strength.
The title makes me think of that virgin killer asshat from 2012 that chronicled all his shit up until the end that I found out about yesterday for some reason.
[QUOTE=AntonioR;46057990]If few weaker chimps team up and kill a big healthy alpha male, aren't they stopping the evolution, because now the weaker will get the chance to mate and spread weaker genes ? Also fast forward that 200 000 years and we have assholes ruling the world like we see today.[/QUOTE]
You call team player chimps weak. But the team work has let them survive and allowed them to spread their genes, while the antisocial "alpha" chimps are out of the game.
Ah ha! Murder is evil, so that means Evolution is a product of Satan! [I]Checkmate Atheists! We have you now...[/I]
[QUOTE=proch;46057937]You know who was right all along[/QUOTE]
he who must not be named
Everything about natural selection went out the window when we created explosives.
[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;46058340]Everything about natural selection went out the window when we created explosives.[/QUOTE]
This is a fallacy. We might call what humans do 'artificial selection,' but that's honestly a more conceited term for our own influence in natural selection.
People who die to explosives don't enter the gene pool, those that use them do. Simple logic and still constitutes under natural selection.
[QUOTE=ForgottenKane;46058385]This is a fallacy. We might call what humans do 'artificial selection,' but that's honestly a more conceited term for our own influence in natural selection.
People who die to explosives don't enter the gene pool, those that use them do. Simple logic and still constitutes under natural selection.[/QUOTE]
Survival of the fittest doesn't mean shit when a man with the strength of 10 men can be killed by a sterile cripple with a handgun.
[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;46058537]Survival of the fittest doesn't mean shit when a man with the strength of 10 men can be killed by a sterile cripple with a handgun.[/QUOTE]
"Fitness" in an evolutionary sense is not defined as physical strength; it is the capacity to survive. Guns just make it more random.
[QUOTE=Mr. Someguy;46058537]Survival of the fittest doesn't mean shit when a man with the strength of 10 men can be killed by a sterile cripple with a handgun.[/QUOTE]
Say that in a million years when we're bulletproof.
All murders in the name of god were because of evolution.
Checkmate Christians.
Say that to this:
[url]http://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1426455[/url]
[QUOTE=cathal6606;46058064]Evolution isnt concerned with whats the best, just what works.[/QUOTE]
As the saying goes, "In a world of tortoises there is no benefit in being a hare, just the fastest tortoise".
Actually "better" traits without necessity are often have a net negative affect on species. Pronghorns in North America are negatively affected by the metabolic costs of their unnecessarily high speed because the predators that once hunted them were wiped out by humans.
[QUOTE=imptastick;46058886]Actually "better" traits without necessity are often have a net negative affect on species. Pronghorns in North America are negatively affected by the metabolic costs of their unnecessarily high speed because the predators that once hunted them were wiped out by humans.[/QUOTE]
Slow and steady wins the race. In this case.
It is easy to see how killing outsiders can have a evolutionary benefits. It limits resource competition and reduces extra pair matings by your partner. I imagine it similar to the forces that drive infanticide in lions and other such animals.
[QUOTE=Kardia;46058905]Slow and steady wins the race. In this case.[/QUOTE]
I am reading "The wildlife of our bodies" by Rob Dunn, and it has examples of some very interesting side affects of evolution and extinction. For example many digestive diseases (like crohn's) are more common in countries which have eradicated intestinal worms. Our bodies adapted to produce better immune systems to keep them in check. After removing the worms our system may be too active and attack itself. Evolution is full of little quirks like that.
[QUOTE=kidwithsword;46058030]Evolution can't "stop". In that case, natural selection would select against the alpha males who can't defend themselves, and would select for weaker chimps who can coordinate to take down a larger opponent.
And I don't think "asshole" is a term that comes up in evolutionary theory.[/QUOTE]
Theres also a misconception that alpha chimps maintain dominance via violence and being bigger than the others. They are often mediators in disputes between chimps lower on the social hierarchy. Interestingly, a behavior also seen in humans.
[QUOTE=proch;46057937]You know who was right all along[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Hellsten;46058203]he who must not be named[/QUOTE]
[img]https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/30693265/stache.jpg[/img]
the dark lord
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.