"There is no such thing as 'modern-day
people': we are our ancestry, who and what we were"
---Mystery Dance, by Margulis and Sagan---
CAUTION:
The story I have told below cannot be justified without intense calculus, precise
measurements and dating of direct fossil evidence, reams of data drawn from
years of monitoring chimp behavior, and a time machine; it is only a hypothesis,
but it's yet to be refuted by any other theory.
(BTW, Creationism is NOT a theory, it cannot be disproven)
- micah
The genus Pan
This genus was thought to carry only one species, Pan troglodytes (the
common chimp), until a second chimp species, Pan paniscus (the bonobo),
was finally recognized this century by scientists taking a closer look. These
two species are isolated from one another in the wild, but genetic studies have
concluded that they both share more genes with each other and with humans (98%)
than with any other species. If chimps and bonobos are our closest relatives,
this means we diverged from them more recently than from any other species.
Genetic studies of relatedness show that around 5mya (million years ago), our
ancestral species became separated into two populations, one of which became
chimps and bonobos while the other became our human ancestral species.
After we had split off from the chimp population, it separated again around
2.5mya, creating the bonobo and chimp populations. A comparison of the
societies of these two "fellow" chimp species to our own is quite
revealing of our "Darkened Past", and has led author Jared Diamond
to consider us to be The Third Chimpanzee.
The society of the common chimpanzee
Chimpanzee society is patriarchal, meaning it consists of troops of several
males, all closely related, and a few females, none of which are significantly
related. The sons of the males in the troop will become the fathers, while the
infant females will disperse from the group upon maturity. Male chimps
are able to tell when females in their troop are ovulating (receptive) because
their bottoms swell and they release pheromones. Males will therefore
compete with other males to gain sexual rights to females during the few
days when the females are ovulating. Since the males are related to one
another, they are reluctant to fight, so they gain mating rights by exhibiting
"displays" of aggression such as running through water and dragging
around branches they've broken off from trees (often injuring females in the
process). Males also exhibit sperm competition, which occurs when there is positive
selection for males to produce more sperm per copulation than their competitors
(this is why chimps have the largest testicle:body size ratio of any of the
apes). To avoid being killed or injured while ovulating, a female
will solicit a male who can protect her and any offspring during her ovulation;
often, she will leave the troop for a few days with this male before she starts
ovulating, mate peacefully with him, and then return back to the troop.
Chimps (and no other species but ours) regularly practice the organization
of male bands for the sole purpose of warfare, raiding, and hunting. If
another chimp or species of monkey enters into a troop's territory, it will
be chased until it is killed, and the males will share the meat. Additionally,
a male will silently lead the males of his troop into the territories of
neighbouring troops. If they see a large number of males in the neighboring
troop, they will quickly retreat. But if this raiding party stumbles across
a solitary male they will beat him to death (females are rarely attacked, they
are instead abducted). If a troop succeeds in killing all of the males
of a neighboring troop, they will integrate that troops' females into their
own group unharmed, and mate with them.
SOUND FAMILIAR?
The society of the Bonobo
Bonobo society is matriarchal, meaning the troop will be inherited by the daughters
of the adult females currently in the troop, while infant males will leave the
troop upon maturity. The main difference between chimp and bonobo societies
lies in the relationships between the members in a troop: they're strong among
both related and unrelated bonobo females, while males are mostly unrelated
and thus do not form very strong social bonds with other males. Whether
by relation or familiarity, females associate with each other more than they
do with males, and more than males do with one another. This often occurs
in the form of genito-genital rubbing (G-G rubbing), where two females face
one another and rub their genitals against the other's. This act creates
strong ties among bonobo females and relieves stress and aggression which they
might experience from inevitable competition for resources. This also prevents
males from acting aggressively towards females, since the females will cooperate
to violently punish any male which does so.
When two bonobo troops meet at their territorial boundaries, they will often
peacefully mate and forage together. Unlike common chimps, bonobos even look
into one another's eyes while copulating.
Bonobo society is probably like this because males are physically unable to
determine when females are receptive, and therefore can't know when to keep
other males from mating with them (no male can aggressively guard a female 24-7
and not starve to death).
However, the dynamics of bonobo society are primarily due to their isolation
from common chimps: the 2 are separated by a large river which appeared 2.5mya.
This river also isolated bonobos from gorillas: on the bonobo side of the river,
an empty niche remains which both chimps & gorillas must share on
the other side of the river. This leaves more food for bonobos, allowing
for larger groups (since their food resources are less scarce relative to common
chimps, who must form smaller groups). Because a larger food supply is a stable
food supply, groups are also stable, providing bonobo females with more time
to socialize and develop stronger relationships than chimp females can... thus,
female power forms the core of the bonobo group.
Simply, a generous food supply has resulted in the creation of a generous species.
Even if a troop of bonobos decided to begin raiding other troops, they
would prove unsuccessful since bonobo groups are extremely cohesive: the solitary
feeding commonly seen in chimps (which puts them in risk of being helplessly
attacked) is rendered unnecessary due to the relative lack of food competition.
The relevance to humanity
The main characteristics of chimp society includes imperialist warfare,
patriarchy, aggressive male competition for sexual rights to females, and scarce
food resources. People evolved from ancestral chimps before bonobos
did, allowing chimps and humans to share a society which bonobos left behind
when they discovered abundant food across the river. Humanity seems to
have directly inherited the behaviors the common chimpanzee exhibits today,
but subliminally supresses them. If you look hard, and for long enough, you'll
see the chimp in us.
A New Food
The beginnings of humanity probably occurred during a long drought in Africa
5mya (date supported by both the fossil and geological records), when chimp
populations became isolated into small patches of forest which shrinked as the
drought intensified. Eventually the fruit in these patches ran out, and
the forest thinned and was replaced by savannah. To survive, the chimps
living in them needing to forage greater and greater distances as time went
on in order to be able to survive. One population was so scarce of food that
it had to turn to a new food source: roots and tubers. These are extremely
nourishing, occur richly throughout dry habitats, and currently serve as the
main staple for savannah baboons today. But with savannah comes herbivores
and their predators, so to survive on this new food source, a chimp population
would have to be able to carry its food back to defendable shelter, which meant
commuting many kilometers each day to find food. Under such conditions,
bipedality (walking on two feet only) is more efficient and was thus selected
for. These first chimps to begin walking on two legs were the Australopithecines
(they were the dominant species of people from 4.5-2.5mya), and are now believed
to have frequently retreated up into trees for safety.
A New Food 2
This ancestral diet of roots and tubers demanded constant group splitting
to find enough food: such imbalances forced the formation of extremely small
foraging groups. It was at this time that people may have started living
in one-male units (consisting of only one male, his female harem, and their
young offspring), just as baboons feeding on the same diet do. Evidence
of this comes from strong sexual dimorphism found in Australopithecine fossils
(sexual dimorphism is strongly correlated with polygyny across all primate species):
males were on average much larger than females.
In the process of learning how to quickly dig up food and retreat home before
becoming prey to carnivores, Australopithecines began to use tools (chimps also
use tools such as sticks to retrieve termites from mounds) for defense. Eventually,
or perhaps simultaneously, Australopithecines realized they could scavenge meat
off of carcasses left by other carnivores. When this became habitual, the rich
protein of a meaty diet provided the raw energy supply for human brain expansion
to begin, allowing further advances in tool technology, which resulted in even
better scavenging techniques (and more food!). Prior to this point, Australopithecines
had brains no larger than a chimp's.
Brains and Tools
During a cold period around 2.5mya (also supported by fossil record), Australopithecines
evolved into at least several new species of people: two vegetarian species
are recognized today (one in the south of Africa, one in the north), as well
as at least one species which began the Homo lineage.
The Homo lineage was characterized by larger social groups, making them
increasingly able to begin coordinating hunting so that they could take down
live (and larger) prey. This in turn led to an increased brain:body size ratio.
With the improvement of tool technology (tools have been found dating back to
this time which were stone blades that could be thrown at an animal to injure
it), hunting became much easier, opening a cornucopia of food supply which then
allowed larger group formation due to the decline in food scarcity. It
was at this time that people experienced their first reduction in canine tooth
size, probably as a result of the use of their teeth being replaced by their
tools. This advent of technology marked our first, although at this time
harmless, long but direct path away from nature. The Homo lineage
later became recognized as Homo erectus, named so because it was the
first human to expand its range out of Africa, into Eurasia, and eventually
as far as Indonesia.
Around 750,000 years ago the descendents of H.erectus, a much larger-brained
group of humans, appeared out of Africa and began spreading across the old world.
Almost certainly through methods of genocide, this species, now known as Homo
sapiens, wiped out all previous species of humans, leaving us with today's
genepool.
Here are several images which illustrate the above:
1) A Family Tree of the Apes
(with dates of speciation)
2) A Family Tree of Ancestral Species
of People
(for each image, note changes over time in each species' brain size, prominence
of brow ridges, and prognathism of teeth)
3) Comparison of Australopithecine,
Homo sapiens, and Homo erectus skeletons (note stature and climbing
ability)
4) Comparison of Australopithecine,
Homo erectus, and Homo sapiens skulls
(note changes in skull)
The Connection
Both human and chimp males act in a manner which suggests NOT that they actually
enjoy killing/hunting/raiding, but instead strive for pride. Pride
comes from being part of a group, team, club, The Marines, or in the case of
chimps, the raiding party. True pride is a case of Us vs. Them... hate of others
or that which is different, a.k.a. xenophobia. But feeling pride is a subconscious
strive for reproductive success: when a male does something which makes him
feel better about himself (sports, awards, degrees, killing), he becomes less
reluctant to approach a female. And why do so many females want to marry
doctors, CEO's, presidents, etc? All of these titles infer status and
rank of the individual's capacity, both of which are valued by our culture.
As a result, status has come to be the trait most females look for in males, serving
as an indicator of genetic quality. This value system seems to have replaced
physical qualities much like our tools replaced our canine teeth.
Divine Creation, or Just Glorified Apes?
There has never been a truly peaceful human society. Regardless of how
many have been portrayed, unfortunately there has always been war wherever there
has been people. The majority of this stems from the desire females have for
males who are possessive of them. The males who usually agree to this
often do so in a manner which is violent towards other males who might fertilize
"his" female. As long as possessive males are tolerated by females,
their reproductive success will be greater than males unlike them. Therefore,
most offspring bear the traits of the possessive male as well as the female
desire and tolerance of it. Recorded history has shown possessive aggression to
be the typical behavior amongst males, as political groups have always been
patriarchal and acting in the interest of men alone. Thus the inheritance
of pop-culture admiration for football/boxing/OJ types, whom by no surprise
are often regular abusers... this admiration perpetuates aggressive males in
all of us. "The main problem is that political power is based on
physical power (war, imperialism), and physical power is ultimately the power
of violence or its threat: 1) Since traditional human political power is personalized,
the physical power remains unrestrained since it's not regulated through
institutions. 2) Men have been temperamentally shaped to use violence effectively,
and will therefore find it hard to stop." **
Females can break these rules by supporting each other and by influencing males,
but this leaves them vulnerable to losing what they want: the investment
and protection of the most desirable men: there is competition between women
for the best men, which can break apart female bonding. Females are the
limiting resource of society; ultimately, they are what men strive
for. Why then do females bother with the makeup, lingerie, leg-shaving/waxing?
They have all the power to choose their males with a bold YES or NO!
Instead, females today are left optimizing between protecting themselves from
abusive males and maintaining long-term relationships... females don't seem
to leave abusive men, because in their subconscious they desire them: thus,
women as a group can't unite because so many females unite with males.
They shouldn't.
Why has it taken 4,000 years for females to finally begin to achieve equality
in society? One reason alone: our culture. "Human
society, largely in the hands of men, has countered by drafting laws to punish
female infidelity: the treatment of marriage as a promise to 'obey', and the
observance of rules and punishments which are stricter on women than on men.
Women are to remain 'virgins' who are thought of as 'pure.' These laws
all stink of a male desire to reclaim control over female bodies (the hymen
was likely selected for as a result of male preference for a seal of certainty)...
Sperm competition has come to be reflected in political, legal, and social institutions
that repress human females. Today there are far more societies which are
polygynous rather than polyandrous." ** As a result, what cultures
define as "evil, wrong, or bad" behaviors are really only actions
which deviate from the male control over females. These "morals"
are largely descended from religious doctrines which have sprung up throughout
history, coincidentally at the time that civilizations began: once there was
power to be had, males began to fight over control of it so as to heighten their
pride, and thus their reproductive success. Unfortunately, male power is today
dangerously coupled with both technology and religion. So, our leaders
not only believe in Armageddon and that heaven is a better place, but they also
possess nuclear weapons!!!
Conform or die
As a result of my completion of Daniel Quinn's book "Ishmael", I have
become aware of many new ideas (please read it!). While in the above paragraph
I attributed the basis of society to religious doctrine, I now believe it is
instead what Quinn called "taker" culture: the perspective of
the civilizations which appeared 10,000 years ago when agriculture began. At
this point, humans, without actually knowing the laws of nature, began to create
the rules for a single way to live. This is strongly parallel
to early aviators who designed airplanes without knowing the laws of aerodynamics:
they enjoyed the few moments of bliss before their craft (culture) crashed into
extinction, but they were too enthralled with being in the air to realize their
altitude was rapidly dropping. With agriculture at the heart of their arrogance,
the humans of our culture increased dramatically in numbers as they wiped out
all other forms of life save for that which sustained them (and that which sustained
what sustained them). People all over the ancient world were forced to either
incorporate agriculture into their cultures, or face execution by their outnumbering
oppressors. This is the actual origin of the story of Cain & Abel in the
Bible, which is a metaphor for the two prevalent cultures of the time: agriculturalists
and pastoralists. We all know who won in the end, and how he won: he
killed his brother. The dominant cultures which we have in the world today are
descendants of the agriculturalists of long ago, and the rules of our society
(our beloved "historical" culture) is actually based upon the glorification
of human dominance over the world through expanding populations fed by agriculture.
Will we ever be able to admit we were wrong, and that we don't REALLY live by
the laws of nature ( = diversity of life)?
** Borrowed from:
Demonic Males, by Wrangham and Peterson
Mystery Dance, Margulis and Sagan
I recommend the above two books, as well as:
The Story of B, Daniel Quinn
Guns, Germs, and Steel, Jared Diamond
The Future Eaters, Tim Flannery
Primate Societies, Smuts et al.
The Third Chimpanzee, Jared Diamond
