Scientists on 3 continents now have evidence: Some chimps have entered the Stone Age.

I just saw something about an orangutan that had been released to the wild from a zoo. He watched some locals spear fishing, then was seen doing it himself regularly after that. Using natural elements as tools is impressive enough, but fashioning tools from raw materials, now matter how primitive, is very impressive.

originally posted by: schuyler
Chimpanzees have been observed using "tools" for half a century. Jane Goodall made her name in anthropology over her observations of this. In other words, it isn't new. Secondly, it only works if you stretch the definition to include the most elementary modification of an object to turn it into a "tool." It's not like they are making Solutrean projectile points out of flint or obsidian.

When chimpanzees start making campfires at night to ward against the cold and cook their meat, let us know, but this isn't really too much to get excited about.

they are starting at the same place humans started.

a reply to: abe froman

If Chimps are entering the stone age then humans can't be far behind!
We might even catch up.

Bah, the orangutans are way ahead of the chimps. They learned to use boats! (if not how to make them)

www.youtube.com...

originally posted by: InMyShell
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

But why as you say it grow exponentially while other do not. Why do other ape species exist while they evolved in the same environment?

Yes those are the things we are meant to do but the intelligence and expertise we possess go way beyond anything in our world.

There are many species that have existed long before us yet they remain at hunter gather.

Is it to be expected that we had a unique acceleration in our intelligence?

No. We have the tools for intelligence. They do not. at least, not to the degree that humans have. we have a much larger frontal cortex, a brain that is far denser in neurons, even more dense in glial cells, and is 7 times larger than a chimps when compared by ratio to body mass.

ETA: i think the misconception is that we "came from" apes. Thats not the case. Modern apes and modern humans have, somewhere back along the way, a shared ancestor. We also have a shared ancestor, somewhere along the line, with almost every other mammal on Earth. So the chimps you see today...they will never "be human". They lack the tools for it. Perhaps somewhere down the line enough critical mass of genetic mutation will occur where we will see a divergence of the species. But that won't be in any of our lifetimes. although it is possible that we are seeing a part of this process with bonobo's and chimps.

Similarly, we may see individuals with special gifts in any species (see the above heron video). But gifted individuals don't really impact a species.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Yes I as well as the majority of people know this is why we are more intelligent. Also it is through our intelligence we have been able to be come creators of intelligent tools.

But what I'm asking is why have we developed a much more neuron dense brain than every other species.

There is no reason offered as to why and how this has happened

originally posted by: InMyShell
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Yes I as well as the majority of people know this is why we are more intelligent. Also it is through our intelligence we have been able to be come creators of intelligent tools.

But what I'm asking is why have we developed a much more neuron dense brain than every other species.

There is no reason offered as to why and how this has happened

Because we lived in larger social groupings? This seems to be the currently prevailing theory, although there are others.

But humans are geared toward social interaction. Look at how we have come to use the internet....its all social media. Thats what people like. Our TV..."reality" shows showing the social lives of others.

Our brains have developed to accomodate the larger social group, and the need to process the enormous amounts of information that derive from this (remembering faces, names, etc, recognizing subtle social cues in large groups). Our safety was in numbers, our power was in numbers. Still is.

Seems as good a theory as any.

Something to consider: wolves will kill pups who howl at the wrong time. It puts the entire group in danger as it gives away position. so a pup who keeps screwing up is gotten rid of.

There are several parallels between wolf packs and feral humans. Its likely that "natural selection" in a way described above could have help driven the increasing neural/glial mass. It wouldn't be the only part of our body designed to handle the way humans have come to interact. Human faces are built to handle being punched in the face. The bones are formed/butressed in a way that keeps them from collapsing in when punched.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

I understand what you say with the social thing. But again it's just a theory and can also be applied to other species.

The idea that fire has allowed our species to evolve is valid in theory. To harness fire has allowed our species more time to socially interact as we spend less time eating uncooked food.

But how and why are we the only species to harness fire?

a reply to: InMyShell

Who knows.

Why are tiger shrimp the only species able to clamp their claws together so fast it breaks the sound barrier and emits a photon? Its what is the basis of what is a species: the unique differences that can define it. We are, by our species name, defined by our one obvious trait: we are aware, and we are aware of being aware.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

The bones are formed/butressed in a way that keeps them from collapsing in when punched.

Impresseve knowledge indeed and a great word.

Nice post!

originally posted by: Vroomfondel
I just saw something about an orangutan that had been released to the wild from a zoo. He watched some locals spear fishing, then was seen doing it himself regularly after that. Using natural elements as tools is impressive enough, but fashioning tools from raw materials, now matter how primitive, is very impressive.

Interestingly it was copied. I wonder who "we" copied?

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

So basically you don't know?

There is a massive difference between clamping claws and human intelligence. There is no real difference in the tiger shrimps powerful claw and the amazing sight of a hawk.
The difference is we as a species have come to the speciality stage of hunting and gathering and then moved on to social interaction and search for knowledge.
Why havent any other species overcome this barrier? Every other species masters their hunting techniques etc but no species can overcome this barrier to be able to create and dominate.

"For instance, chimpanzees will often deliberately opt for particularly large and heavy stone hammers, between 1kg and 9kg, while humans prefer to use stones that weigh 1kg or less. Many of the 4300-year-old stone tools weighed more than 1kg, suggesting they were used by chimpanzees."

that's very clever. maybe we will find some chimp bones nearby or maybe even a nest some day.

originally posted by: InMyShell
a reply to: Logman

It's a lot easier to laugh off a question than to answer it. Well done.

Just offer me an explanation of why only the human species has evolved to a level of space travel while every other remain even though some existing longer.

If it's so easy and not insulting your superior intelligence.

It seems to me most of the official science relies on things like nebulous genetic changes which gave rise to the success of ancient hominins (human primates) aka. natural selection. Like how standing upright may have benefited us in various ways. Or how getting out of the jungle gave us better access to rocks (the beginning of stone age). Even very small changes over tens of thousands of years could have import.

But I think conservation of energy affected it too. I believe the ancient primates warred, both human and non-human. The human primates won. And I believe after these wars occurred the non-human primates continued to be corralled and thwarted by the human primates everytime they attempted to encroach on their territory. This meant any genetic changes which might have benefited the non-human primates were stopped dead. So they never developed the intelligence our ancient hominin brethren did. They were like caged animals. Not much different today, except now they don't present a threat and have substantially fewer resources available to them.

The question is whether domesticated animals have gained intelligence? IF we could prove dogs and cats and cows and other domesticated animals have gained intelligence through natural selection over the past 40,000 years it'd be interesting to say the least. However, there probably hasn't been enough time to conclude this. I think most people assume domesticated animals should get dumber, not smarter. They aren't free and any kind of intelligence they gain is subject to our permission.

I'm arguing this:
1) Fewer available space/time resources to a given species means it gains intelligence slower--especially creatures existing today
2) Domesticated animals either become dumber, gain intelligence very slow, or don't gain intelligence naturally

So wild creatures with less and less resources shouldn't get smarter. Even if they by chance observe a much smarter species on rare occasions. For example, I can argue there're fewer and fewer resources available to dolphins because of AGW and overfishing and pollution. These resource holes more than remove any benefit dolphins might gain by observing humans, even if said observations COULD improve intelligence.

EDIT: The emergence of bipedalism isn't disputed, wha'ts disputed is why:
www.smithsonianmag.com - Becoming Human: The Evolution of Walking Upright...

a reply to: jonnywhite

Thanks for your answer. It makes sense when you put it like that. But it still doesn't fully cover other species who had little interaction with human apes.

The idea of domestication appears to be the natural progression from the wild. It seems the direct movement from exposed and wild to closed in and less exposed. Even in today's world we are seeing this with communities closing in away from the dangers of different cultures especially in times of war.

a reply to: InMyShell
What other creatures are you talking about that didn't have contact with human apes? You mean dolphins, for example? Or ants, maybe? There're certain lots of ants, so why aren't they intelligent?

I don't have all hte answers. I'm only offering conservation of energy is a factor in the capacity of a species to become intelligent.

I believe, for example, this planet can't afford to have two widely different species as intelligent as modern day humans living together. I believe many millions of years and billions of individuals (or more) are required to produce an intelligent species. There just isn't enough room on the planet for two competing widely different intelligent species. Either they war and one becomes a victor and holds down the other or one of them somehow escapes into another living space and is protected.

Now dolphins aren't sharing the same space as hominins, at least they weren't millions of years ago. So why didn't they become more intelligent than they're? I don't know. If life started in the oceans, why wouldn't intelligence start there? But I think dolhpins wouldn't become as intelligent as us without first competing with us and either defeating us or one of us escaping into a different living space.

originally posted by: InMyShell
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

So basically you don't know?

There is a massive difference between clamping claws and human intelligence. There is no real difference in the tiger shrimps powerful claw and the amazing sight of a hawk.
The difference is we as a species have come to the speciality stage of hunting and gathering and then moved on to social interaction and search for knowledge.
Why havent any other species overcome this barrier? Every other species masters their hunting techniques etc but no species can overcome this barrier to be able to create and dominate.

Im not sure there is a "barrier". There certainly isn't a "stage". All of this requires an egocentric view that is typical to the human mindset. But nature exists outside of the human mindset.

No one knows how or why one of the apes decided to walk upright, lose its body hair, start using language, and begin dreaming about the stars. But it happened.

originally posted by: InMyShell


Can anyone explain to me why only the human species has evolved a lot more quickly than every other species.

We haven't.. We just evolved differently and anyway, Gorilla's haven't been around forever either. They themselves evolved from their own ancestors during the same time we were evolving from ours. Humans and Gorilla's share a common ancestor from around 7 million years ago.