Human Origins by Adam Rutherford

[@Dr10Jeeps]

These lectures at Cambridge as well as those at the Royal Institute are what make the internet so valuable. Thank you!

[@jimjames8501]

yes, for the powers that be in order to perpetuate their lies and fake history (which mind you is an oxymoron).

[@Dr10Jeeps]

@@jimjames8501 And your point is?

[@jimjames8501]

@@Dr10Jeeps my point is that you're being misled or lied to, duh.

[@Dr10Jeeps]

@@jimjames8501 Let me guess. You believe in Adam and Eve and the Garden of Eden. Oh, okay.

[@Lashovadjs]

@@Dr10Jeeps I believe he's a follower of the great God of Spaghetti

[@Keshet59]

The actual lecture starts at 4:04. Introductions do have a tendency to drone on.

[@gooddaysahead1]

I know this sounds very uncool. But, listening to a lecture like this is my idea of fun.

[@embe1]

Watching this from East Africa, not far from the rift valley with a sense of wonder.

[@StefSki71]

Hard to believe there are only 80k views for something so well presented and integral to our ourselves.

[@Theoppositesex]

Not hard to believe at all. A lot of people don't feel much curiosity about human origins.

[@philliphayden2727]

@@Theoppositesex Sadly, most people don't concern themselves with history anymore...tiktok, twatter, facebook, oh yeah.

[@maxsmith695]

@@Theoppositesex - zero evidence.

[@bradhayes8294]

I agree with you. This is very interesting and informative.

[@dionysianapollomarx]

@@maxsmith695 some evidence

[@dwightcollman4917]

This lecture is mind-blowing for most-everyone should hear it and see it

[@liamstacey419]

In many instances, individual male giraffes may gain a reproductive advantage by showing dominance during homosexual encounters, and also by keeping their libido “supercharged” for that rare opportunity to get to inseminate a female.

[@TheJamesRedwood]

42:50 Orca are a good example of cultural dissemination of information. Each different population has a particular group of prey and a particular way of hunting that isn't simply observed but actively taught from adult to young. Meerkats also create schools for their young, teaching them how to deal with scorpions, using a scaffolding method - gradually increasing the difficulty level as the students progress. Thanks again David Attenborough and the BBC natural history unit. Has any public service been more advantageous to human knowledge?

[@mmccrownus2406]

Orcs are just a conspiracy theory pushed by White Supremacy advocates. Pls don’t confuse people.

[@derekweiland1857]

Sea otters will only eat food their parents taught them is edible. So if one otter is taught to eat only clams, snails urchins and another nearby is taught to eat only mussels, abalone and crabs then they will only eat that.

[@jameswhyard2858]

Nobody ever mentions Gregor Mendel?

[@rooseveltbrentwood9654]

good job showing the slides, so many videos of lectures omit them.....

[@cernunnos_lives]

I love questioning our own humanity. And what it means to be 'human'.

[@josephshawa]

The epitome of dry humor....love it!

[@StelleenBlack]

I'm in love with two lecturers, Irvin Finkle and now Adam Rutherford 😂

[@dr.barrycohn5461]

Don't you think the title is a wee bit grandiose and misleading?

[@DaboooogA]

Very difficult topic to summarise as Adam has here, well done.

[@vadinhopsc]

Now, talking about human origins being named Adam is at least ironic... Nice lecture! Love Darwin College lectures.

[@nicholasholmes5109]

This was a fantastic lecture. Thank you for uploading!

[@b.matthewelliott8470]

Enlightening. Thanks.

[@RonJohn63]

Starts at 4:05.

[@marcopeel]

What a stiff audience...Adam is wasting bars and punchlines here. I would be cracking up ...

[@eoghancavanagh3519]

My thoughts as well!

[@akizeta]

48:00-ish I didn't get the joke about fire? Is it because I haven't listened to Radio 4 for a while, or is it something so obvious I can't see it?

[@tedgrant2]

Two flies on the ceiling... One fly says to his friend, "What makes us special ?" His friend replied, "We can walk on the ceiling !"

[@randyping6036]

The flies think that they are so cool for that.... But they were outdone by Lionel Richie.

[@tedgrant2]

@@randyping6036 Yeah and I bet he climbed the highest mountain and swam the deepest ocean too.

[@system-error]

Flies don't talk though

[@tedgrant2]

@@system-error It was a joke. With a deep meaningful lesson. I guess it just went over your head. Buzz.

[@system-error]

@@tedgrant2 is the lesson that flies can't talk? That's what I took from it

[@fahmidayeasmin4780]

I started to follow Dr. Rutherford after his appearance in Dr. Sean Carrol's podcast, read his books, very refreshing to follow and he is very handsome too ☺

[@Seekerofknowledges]

Fahmida Yeasmin Girrrrrl

[@merryjane7558]

He must dodge so many panties...

[@mrjourneyman]

Haha glad I’m not the only one… 😂

[@Hakltz]

Nicely done. The answer to the origin of life is really the foundation to these discussions yet the answer becomes more and more difficult the more we lead. 🤔

[@DulceN]

Maybe not, there are very recent and interesting discoveries about proteins that seem to shed a light on the origins of life.

[@system-error]

The bigger mystery is why did dinosaurs have such tiny arms? What possible point do these dinky little arms serve, on a T-Rex. I mean they don't even reach his mouth. They're a joke.

[@couerl]

Good lecture, thanks.

[@maxsmith695]

I am writing a book on the language of bigfoot. It is 1000 times more advanced than English.

[@paxanimi3896]

Evangelics are crawling all around this documentary. Amusing!

[@deeliciousplum]

Wonderful talk. It has been a while since I have listened to a talk on evolution. Adam shared in some new ideas and observations which I had not known of. Thank you to the Darwin College Lecture Series for making these talks accessible to the public. 🌱🦒

[@PLASKETT7]

Anything is a creed if people adhere to it even in the face of contradictory or merely compromising data. The big problem with Adam' s creed is the improbable Maths of selecting from accidents. But let's leave DNA aside for a moment and consider proteins. Proteins are chains of amino acids, often dozens or hundreds long, and all organisms have them. Only 20 of the many known types of amino acid may form a protein. And each has to occupy exactly the right spot otherwise the protein cannot fold properly and so will not function. So it´s twenty to one each time. Okay? To get to amino acid number six the odds are 20 x 20 x 20 x 20 x 20 x 20. That´s 64 million to one. And that isn´t even one third of the length of the shortest known protein. So one is surely entitled to harbour DOUBT that Adam's neo-Darwinian creed of selecting from accidents could have caused even one protein to assemble. A perfectly REASONABLE DOUBT.

[@markbricklin3096]

Great speech!!

[@amparo665]

Very funny and interesting lecture , thank you !

[@uvwuvw-ol3fg]

Agreed, a lot of funny cognitive biases and social constructs also weren't forgotten about.

[@rdf098311]

Giraffes do eat leaves up high/top. Plenty of footage of it. Don’t know what he is talking about when he says th3y don’t do it.

[@smartcatcollarproject5699]

Yes, maybe it was some kind of joke, but he doesn't sounds like it... Not a true biologist ;-)

[@maxsonthonax1020]

@@smartcatcollarproject5699 Not even close.

[@BrianSmith-gp9xr]

Why was is carved ? A gift. Human behavior.

[@nilohermi664]

Great lecture, thx for uploading.

[@puccaso]

that's YOUR science. 6:01

[@vincentanguoni8938]

Sulawesi!! The greatest adventure of my life..

[@lesleyhahn8682]

I paused this video to post on FB about the giraffes then I unpause and feel rather attacked for that lmao.

[@AtheistEdge]

The year 2020 is the end of a decade, not the beginning. Decades, centuries, and millennia begin on years ending in 1.

[@migranthawker2952]

You are absolutely right!

[@garyliu6589]

The fosils across the 200ky time range, where the genomes comparison were obtained, are they of the same species? Is the out of Africa theory concluded by comparing genome of different human species, or by comparing modern human to ancient ape? Given the same result, will you still draw the same conclusion if the comparison is made to, say, a fish, instead of an ape? The out of Africa conclusion is it not based on senseless comparison?

[@bobaldo2339]

How is spear fishing not both a taught and a learned behavior? Monkeys show their young how to crack nuts with rocks. There are many other such cultural transmission examples among primates, and even birds.

[@system-error]

My dad cracks them with his teeth, he tried to teach me and I said no I will use the nutcracker thanks, you animal.

[@madyjules]

Brilliant!! fantastic dovetailing of knowledge and valuable entertainment thank you for sharing

[@cavendar24]

That Incredibles movie quote is probably my favorite movie quote. It was spoken by Syndrome not Dash, fyi.

[@SerendipityChild]

So charming a speaker

[@stevenakey7145]

I suggest reading ANCIENT SHOCK for much more information about Nean-Sapiens hybrids over the past 5,000 years.

[@Rico-Suave_]

Great video, watched all of it

[@garymacmillan]

Thank you Adam for clealy stating that we do not know the evolutionary pathway. Frankly, all the branched diagrams purporting in some way to offer fragments of evolutionary history are bunk.

[@jupiterthesun3217]

So fluent and enlightening, I will never look at animals with my previous mindset again.

[@lucasgssilveira]

Informative and entertaining as always (I missed a bit Hannah Fry's sense of humour, so I'll listen to an episode of their podcast :)

[@CV_CA]

4:08

[@Zeegoku1007]

Thank you good sir 😎

[@joduyt]

Thanks so much

[@alfredjaniten1648]

Has any another animal change its blood type as Ape Blood to Human Blood?

[@HardHardMaster]

All of them

[@cathyb5871]

Brilliant! I absolutely loved it. Really well presented with some very interesting findings and ideas.

[@hasanbesneli]

A wonderful lecture. Anyone listening through a religious filter will be frustrated. Denial of science is running out of time.

[@masada2828]

Hasan Besneli - Religion does not deny Science.

[@tylerpedersen9836]

There's no real conflict. The popular narrative that there's some irreconcilable spat between science and religion is fallacious. I'd suggest Alvin Plantinga's "Where the Conflict Really Lies" for a demolition of this secularist myth.

[@yahyamohammed637]

That's fine, but so would anyone listening through a 'secular humanism as objective moral truth' filter as well.

[@jaredskeen6986]

The Bible doesn’t contradict any science, it’s origin story is within its pages.

[@gerardvila4685]

"We have been a technological species for 2 million years" (after explaining that Homo Sapiens appeared 300 000 years ago). "Our genus is defined as a tool using species". I'm absolutely sure you know what you're talking about, but perhaps you should be a bit more careful in your use of words. If you confuse "genus" and "species", then both words become pretty well meaningless. I speak as an interested layman.

[@andersforsgren3806]

Yes he seem to mix more recent findings with the orthodox view that humanity is relatively recent as a species. I never accepted that orthodox view since evolution don't go that fast - and have quite firm proof from genetics. (Not human ones, but many species seem to be much older than previously thought. So why would Homo sapiens be any different?) The last word is not said yet, but the findings on Balkan and China are surprisingly old and seem to suggest we've had several species living side by side (and not only the Neanderthal) so several of those other humanoid species are other branches and not our direct ancestors.

[@jvincent6548]

@@andersforsgren3806 I think it's fair to assume that species Homo sapiens didn't evolve as a separate species before 300 KYA, and though new 'evidence' emerges infrequently this date will be revised back but it isn't going to jump back by much more. It's also fair to accept the evidence that another Homo species was around as Homo sapiens began to migrate around the world. Whether the other Homo variants found in Europe, ME, Asia etc. are variant descendents of Homo Erectus (Neanderthals, Denisovans etc.) is still subject to debate and revision.

[@andersforsgren3806]

@@jvincent6548 Thank you Vincent for an excellent reply. You advocate the idea that have a wider acceptance. And that's all good, it's the safest bet. While I do not work on the development of homo sapiens at all, I tend to side with the smaller group who claim that we must be older as a species than previously claimed. The facts of this thinking can be expressed in simple words in benefit for none pros who might read this: Since many other species have turned out to be older than previously thought, why should humans be any different? And also the fact that Homo sapiens then would have evolved like a race horse, even without the benefit of predator pressure? Yes, there might have been some other factor in play, but until that one is found I will keep a healthy scepticism on the 300ky claim. =)

[@jvincent6548]

@@andersforsgren3806 Yes. I can agree with you. There must have been an ancestor of Homo sapiens and therefor that ancestor is older than 300,000 or so years. The question then is how 'alike' was that ancestor to sapiens? What were its chief characteristics and how close were they to ours now? They must have been quite close if that common ancestor produced sapiens, neanderthals etc.

[@jvincent6548]

@@andersforsgren3806 And yes - i quite often think that modern science is icremental in that we assume that findings and conclusions established earlier are factutal, and true. We then build incremental conclusions based on those accepted assumptions. But what if one of those earlier conclusions was erroneously made? Would that not call into question all subsequent conclusions made with that false assumption used as an input? I think this is quite possible. In this example it calls into question how separate was sapiens from other species. Not that separate if we interbred with Neanderthals who were around from 500,000 years ago until around 40,000 years ago.

[@midlearth09]

What exactly is absurd about hallucinatory drugs and what's the idea of fear of snakes ??

[@AeonAxisProductions]

It wasnt dash i thought it was syndrome "When everyone's super, no one will be"

[@mayj257]

interesting yes , but in a way, who cares what he has to say, just nice to watch a sophisticated, handsome guy talk

[@federicobenincasa9827]

I am at minute 10 and this guy has not yet said anything, but advertising his books

[@maxsmith695]

purpose of video !

[@pablosound]

Ali G's question on giraffes hits differently now

[@lisasimpson4574]

I wasnt realy listening to what he was saying,. I just spent the time looking at him 😍😎

[@ConnorMcCoy2008]

Great lecture

[@murphy4trees]

it would be nice to have a little more explanation of what we actually DON'T KNOW... what are the mysteries.. What new discoveries are still unexplained. Where do the ice ages come in. What about the mystery species? How about all the archeological anomalies? I think that all might be more interesting than explaining what we do know, and how other animals use fire and tools, and gay girraffes. We need to ask ourselves the right questions around "what don't we know?" more than pat ourselves on the back for everything we do know.

[@stucody]

That’s for another lecture

[@system-error]

I'm so tired of biologists trying to do gymnastics to show humans aren't special. It's like, you're never going to convince me guys, just give up, give it a rest. Humans are special. The very fact that humans take all this data from the natural world and say, 'Look we're not special' is just more ongoing evidence of how special humans are. No other animal does that, and these biologists need to face facts: the animals that biologists care about, don't care about the biologists the way the biologists care about the animals. PS how about those aliens, huh! Those flying chaps that have now been proven to exist. Now that is funny, UFOs being real. That must REALLY annoy all these privileged academics, SO badly. And the biologists. Now THAT is how you show that humans aren't special! Ha ha!

[@jvincent6548]

12 minutes in and still doing an introduction. Good God man, stop waffling and get on with it !

[@maxsmith695]

It is about selling the books. LOL.

[@danielvazquez7482]

Seems reasonable to me that if you wanted to hunt with the least amount of effort and most amount of success you’d try and blend in with the animals; so why not dress like one they appear not to be afraid of? As an extension to capture (when possible) alive and in numbers. The obvious creativeness of the art reflects imagination, creativity, cunning, desire...

[@ytinformes2]

In a couple of years, in post pandemia days, this will become a nostalgic moment. We will watch when we could get a few hundreds homo sapiens together and listen to someone in person talk to them. I feel like I am in a catastrophe Tom Cruise movie when he clings to some past artefacts of a long gone era.

[@jaymarbreguera591]

what about the extinction of many species? i'm just wondering why those species haven't evolve to survive and could still be here in our time. are those species the least fit to survive. as there is a statement which says "survival of the fittest".

[@peejay6930]

All survival of the fittest means is, whatever had the best fit to survive changes, If a sailor takes cats to an island that has no cats the animals too slow to evade the cats won't pass genes on in the same numbers as those who can outrun a cat, even if the "slow" animal is the best fit for the island's food resources and habitat, The cat has become an agent in the evolution of that island, This could be caused by rats floating to the island on a log, a bird dropping a snake, or a bird "passing" seeds that grow into a plant that takes over the habitat of a plant that a certain species depends on

[@simongiles9749]

They did evolve to survive, which is why they don't look like they used to.

[@shnoogums1]

That “Neanderthal” painting is one of the most beautiful I’ve ever seen. Nearly brought a tear to my eye

[@system-error]

You must not have seen a lot of paintings.

[@shnoogums1]

@@system-error what a stupid thing to say

[@system-error]

@@shnoogums1 Not as stupid as what you just said.

OK for Darwin. But note Adam Smith's observation: we sympathize most with those closest to us. And that's (not) only human.

[@KennethHaineskbh]

No discussion of our small talent for killing at a distance? Any feelings about the possible descent form aquatic apes?

[@amreshyadav2758]

excellent stuff.

[@ElonTrump19]

How do you account for the mathematical impossibly of the successful genetic mutation over such a short period of time? Also, the complete lack of genetic compatibility between the different species?

[@spatrk6634]

there is no mathematical impossibility. stop listening to ID advocates who only lie and missinterpret science what do you mean by "complete lack of genetic compatibility" all living things share same dna to different degrees. more closely related two species are, more similar the dna. evolution isnt one species interbreeding with another species and thus making a third species. evolution is small and gradual incremental changes that accumulate over generations in population of species. basicaly descent with modification, yes evolution is adaptation. no there are no changes in "kinds" there is no one species giving birth to another species, because changes are so small each generation. like how languages evolve, there was no first french speaker amongst latin speakers.

[@maxsmith695]

You realize they just make up wild assumptions and declare them dogma. You must believe, and evidence is not needed.

[@maxsmith695]

@@spatrk6634 - How did the rock become a pig ? And how did the pig become a human ? ROLFMAO.

[@spatrk6634]

@@maxsmith695 it didnt. pig is Artiodactyl, human is Primate they are different kinds

[@maxsmith695]

@@spatrk6634 - But how can one little fishee turn into a snake and the little fishee sibling become a beaver. Will a tractor left alone in a field, become a dinosaur one day.

[@StelleenBlack]

The newest research is indicating that we did not come from modern apes, but that they came from us.

[@Element-oe8hn]

Yawn.

[@wendyjomendy]

Bologna, dear professor the cat's out of the bag he screamed very loud and someone heard him!

[@Tester-sh1mn]

Rutherford? Is he in anyway related to that other Rutherford?

[@owl6218]

Actual, working scientists give more engaging lectures, without the need to use bad language to make it sensational.

[@UncleZhou49]

Agree. I prefer lectures by real scientists than science journalists/entertainers.

[@maxsonthonax1020]

I found myself wondering why I was listening to this guy: quickly realised he was no scientist, not even by inclination.

[@LeonWagg]

@@maxsonthonax1020 He literally got a PhD in genetics from University College London, one of the best universities in the world, especially in biology and life sciences. He was also part of a research team that identified the first genetic cause of childhood blindness. So wtf are you guys talking about him not being a real scientist? Lol

[@LeonWagg]

@@UncleZhou49 If having a PhD in genetics from UCL, studied under Steve Jones, and being part of a research team that discovered a cause of childhood blindness doesn't make you a “real scientist,” then I don't know what is.

[@bcast9978]

@@LeonWagg The people posting above you have PhDs in fatuity.

[@kotyto]

Can human evolution be expeited?

[@Rob02138]

Not really a ground breaking lecture is it? Some dates have been clarified but the overall gist is the same story we all have known for decades now.

[@lepidoptera9337]

When science is settled, it's settled. There can be small second order corrections to the zeroth and first order explanations, but they are not changing the broad picture.

[@TheJamesRedwood]

1:10:40 Cook was late eighteenth C. 1770s.

[@ascgazz]

Thanks for that 🙌🏻

[@ArnoldvanKampen]

According to the caloric surplus narrative, there are 2 ways to achieve this. More input or lowering the cost, the energy drain. I believe there is evidence today that mankind is driving down the cost factor in terms of efficiency in a way that is almost pushing it to the brink of extinction. Motto: 'humans need not apply..'. Or, the most energy efficient state is being dead. Total uselessness, unless we can keep ourselves busy with riddles, gossip and puzzles or mind games or social chit-chat. On the positive side, this could mean a regression down to 19th century aristocratic behavioural patterns.

[@MauriatOttolink]

I frequently listen on BBC Radio 4 to Mr Rutherford. He's always spellbinding. Hardly surprising with a name like Rutherford.

[@cserpakbalazs6342]

Some good jokes fell flat here. Shame on the audience :)

[@chcknpie04]

This guy is wasted in the halls of academia 😂

[@sparkyy0007]

The only enigma is why we would allow people mathematically unqualified (first year calc and introductory stats) to be scientists in charge of studying the most complex machines in the universe. Truth is in Ivy leage institutions, a B.S in economics or basic engineering degree leaves with more mathematical training than a PhD in biology, yet we somehow tout them as authoritive. The language of science is mathematics, pure and simple. If it cannot be quantified, it's not science. The mathematical competence of a PhD biologist wouldn't even qualify him to design a passenger seat mounting bracket to code on a Lada.... and that's a fact. Don't believe it, look it up.

[@lepidoptera9337]

Says the guy who can't even do long division. ;-)

[@briemills9209]

Very informative but a little heavy on the sex stuff. It really doesn't add much to the lecture.

[@chrisnicholson2609]

A most interesting overview of recent thinking on the journey to Modern Man. I have a little concern over the bon homme finshing quotes of Darwin and the presnter as Man is presented as rationally assessing the positives of knowledge and social advancement as the principle motives for cultural and numerical advancement. Perhaps an equal or greater consideration would be Man assessing the negatives. I say this in the light of Mr Sapien and his most recent ancestors ethnically cleansing (for the most part :-) ) their tribal neighbours. As societies grew in technological advancement we see the process continued with Indo-europeans replacing earlier Man for example. We then see Yamnya Man replacing earlier Man such that in Britain the Beaker people replaced the folk who built Stonehenge. They in turn would be replaced by the Celts, and the Celts in England be replaced by the Anglo-Saxons. Our ancestors view of their neighbours was clearly very different from the human rights and respect culture promoted in our Western laws today. It seems to me the ethical environment for most of Mr Sapiens history would have him making judgements within an ethos dominated by a healthy portion of Darwinian fear. I think we do well to keep this in mind for fear of seeing these ancestors of ours with rose-tinted glasses as happy-go-lucky hippies. As you might have gathered by my comments I see the cultural changes that we have undergone in the last Millennia or so as changing our ethics or values-set upside down as few of us in the West have experienced a fear-based upbringing or even real hunger. We are in effect under an umbrella, thankfully!, in a cultural bubble quite different I beleive from that evidenced from the fossil and Man's historical genome world. I get the impression as I look at societies around the world, and i have lived in 4 two-third's world countries for 12 years, that most societies are held together more by fear than of actual attraction. John Bossy wrote on the social transformation, change in values, that took place amongst the perrenially warring Anglo-Saxon tribes at the beginning of the Middle Ages and recorded by the first English historian, the Venerable Bead. In a similar vein, sociologist Larry Siedentop's 'Democracy in Europe' points to initiatives in Europe to Centralise power identifying a kind of grand law of centrapetalisation (hang in there :-) ) where societies naturally, I use the word cautiously, become dominated by elites using tools of fear, cultural layering requiring denied education to the masses to accommodate social mobility. Both conclude that the ethos that prevails in the West today do not have their basis in the survival-of-the-fittest mantra...but elsewhere. That is why I beleive there is a huge disconnect between the observed ferociousness of Man's genomic history, ethnic cleansing is a norm that seems to be brushed under the carpet of academic affability. You might not be surprised at this point that my own position, and, lets face it, like it or not, we are all coming from a position, is I beleive that the sublime calling asked for by Western Human -rights respect culture with its values is not rooted in simple survival culture but elsewhere ....that Human right culture is especially evident in that most gorgeous of traditional English dwelling environments, Cambridge. It was my namesake Colonel Nicholson in Bridge over the river Kwai whose last moment was to question what his life's labour's were about...he hadn't considered what his pride and joy project was doing to the bigger picture... Great subject, provocotive talk. Love to all Salut to all

[@amarforest]

Perfect...it is though the males who are replaced, the females overwhelming continue....only in very modern times do you see extinction of whole groups...but yeah...

[@maxsmith695]

You are taking this way too serious. Evolution is nonsense, dressed up as science to debunk God and the bible firstly, and secondarily, to allow societies to normalize barbaric treatment of others.

[@casteretpollux]

Yes and no. Both fear and community cohesion and ability to make new links account for us. And also the impact of importing viruses into remote populations who have no immunity. Easter Islands population almost wiped out by Europesn diseases. The Irish Book of Invasions days the early farmer people were wiped out by an epidemic.

[@nwogamesalert]

@@maxsmith695 The bible is also a product of evolution.

[@maxsmith695]

@@nwogamesalert - totally wrong.

[@TheGodlessGuitarist]

It wasn't Dash who provided the quote in the Incredibles but Syndrome!

[@Miriboheme]

confused about the jab at asc studies in your opening remarks. there is a robust, diverse, and decades-deep body of academic work on the subject. i feel that you mischaracterized this study and used it in an inappropriate context. no asc scholar would contend that hallucinogenic drugs "made humans human." they might rather say that a propensity for altered states of consciousness dramatically enhanced social cohesion and was a factor in the development of ancient and modern cultural behaviours.

[@smartcatcollarproject5699]

Maybe because it's not a human only behavior, animals eat ripe fruits and get drunk too, just to be eaten by predators. BTW, I suspect that's the origin of the forbidden fruit story...

[@Xanadu2025]

Fascinating!!!

[@timburch2462]

If you are going to give talks on Human Origins you should consider changing your name to Adam Evers.

[@vmcla]

I watch a lot of lectures online and this probably one of he worst I’ve seen. Rutherford is clearly in love with himself. His constant references to his book and how he would do things… rather than deliver a compelling and unified narrative of his work, makes for poor viewing and listening. Incredibly, he winds up asking, “how much time do I have left” after wasting so much of it on things about him, rather than his topic. Also, I didn’t hear any original research at all. He merely repackaged what is well described then attached his idea “that humans are not special” to this knowledge. To say nothing of the question about the unique nature of humans… so obviously redundant. An unfortunate waste of time for such a forum. #fail

[@hmgrraarrpffrzz9763]

What unique nature?

[@vmcla]

@@hmgrraarrpffrzz9763 What? You need someone to explain the unique nature of humans? GTFO

[@hmgrraarrpffrzz9763]

@@vmcla So you waste your time write a comment but not answer my question? Why? Do you have no answer?

[@vmcla]

@@hmgrraarrpffrzz9763 because you asked a stupid fucking question that can’;t possibly be serious. If you’re are serious, you’re too dim to have any of my time.

[@hmgrraarrpffrzz9763]

@@vmclaThe only thing you achieve right now is the impression that you lack the maturity to deal with your inability to contribute anything of value.

[@CuteCritters]

NEEEEERRRRDDDDDDSSSSS❗️❗️❗️

[@watleythewizard2381]

You betcha

[@holeman1]

Thanks for an informative and interesting session!

[@michaelwilliams2212]

Start at 13:10

[@scottbrower9052]

I don't believe that you truly understand what "obligate" means, either in the general sense or with respect to anthropology/zoology.

[@caine7877]

Come on Adam. You really don't know that the delphine doesn't sleep? Parts of their brain sleep, when they play for example. I don't know how well it is that explained today, but you will not come across snoring delphine. I would love to have that system. Parts of there brains sleep, when they do different things. We sleep 8h. They can hold the breath for very long. But not that long. Shark is an awesome creature. It never stops. If it will stop moving, it will die from the lack of oxygen.

[@desiderata8811]

13 comments, 3 sad religioutards. Yet, the video is super interesting, and based on investigation.

[@desiderata8811]

Ant B. Well said

[@rdf098311]

Name calling doesn’t help your cause

[@philliphayden2727]

@@rdf098311 Or anyone's, it's entirely silly.

[@Element-oe8hn]

@@rdf098311 Descriptive.

[@larryhoward7296]

I like to know HOW, WHEN and WHO built all the megalithic structures found round the world 🌎

[@laza6141]

ancient civilizations.

[@macawism]

Tasmania became an island around 10,000 years ago!

[@sergef.7822]

Speaks too fast, but do not pronounce well enough for me. I have to give up after 3mn.

[@Imaginose]

He was Soooo impressed to be there He wore his very best flannel shirt.

[@funkygerbil2530]

Members of congress are required to wear a suit and tie. It doesn't seem to make them any better people or better at their job. Personally I have an innate mistrust of anyone wearing a tie.

[@stucody]

Got the popcorn ready for when those pesky creationists come along and dazzle us with their creationist science counter arguments

[@mmccrownus2406]

One strawman countering Darwinian absurdities doesn’t mean Darwin’s long discredited ideas hold water. This fool thinks out of Africa is real

[@stucody]

@@mmccrownus2406 Back your claim with evidence

[@simongiles9749]

They're heeeeere......

[@jimfoard5671]

Here is what I see has happened to many who have been seduced by Darwinism. You were taught certain fundamental truths as a youth. You were instructed in the sciences, in mathematics, physics, geography, history and biology by teachers whom you respected as a youth, whom you admired and looked up to. And because as an impressionable youth you admired, respected and looked up to these people, and much of what they taught you was true, when they introduced the Darwinian theory of evolution to you, sort of slipping it in with algebra, chemistry, biology and astronomy - the classical sciences, then you accepted it also without reservation, you didn't question it, you swallowed it whole since these people were your mentors and you trusted them, almost revered them. Usually it was introduced to you in science class with some Disney like animation showing lightening striking an ancient pond, then cells emerging, then fish swimming in a sea before they crawled out onto land and lost their scales and became amphibians that became reptiles that became birds and mammals that became monkeys that became humans. It was all very skillfully done, and there was usually very little actual science involved; you were told a story, much like a Sunday school Noah's Ark story, only this story left out God of course, and because it was in science class it must have been true. It never occurred to you that your teachers who told you that evolution was a fact as real as the Laws of Gravity might have themselves been deceived in their youth when they were in science class, and then they introduced that very same deception into your life, all with the very best of intentions. So you accepted evolution as being as legitimate as all of the other sciences, your teachers certainly wouldn't lie to you, and then over the course of time it became your Weltanschauung. As time progressed and you grew older, a sort of intellectual pride clouded your worldview, and also affected, or more precisely infected your understanding of earth's history, of man's origin; and you became too sophisticated to believe in the straight, literal truth of Genesis. In your youthful hubris you substituted Darwin for Moses. Over the course of time Darwinism became more entrenched in your mind. It became a dogma; it was your world view through which you interpreted reality. Part of this springs from Hellenism, the Greek philosophy that is the cornerstone of much of modern thought.

[@lepidoptera9337]

Yes, that was a lot of bullshit. Now stop drinking. You certainly had enough. ;-)

[@gerardvila4685]

If we have the complete genome of Denisovans and Neanderthals... doesn't that mean that we might be able to recreate actual living Denisovans and Neanderthals by synthesizing their DNA (and swapping that DNA with that of a human egg, and implanting that egg in a human)? Come to think of it, I read an SF story about this (I forgot by whom, sorry). No doubt there would be ethical concerns - but wouldn't it be MORE unethical to refuse to de-extinguish these people? And it would teach us a lot about ourselves, which we couldn't find out by any other means.

[@gerardvila4685]

The only thing that seems to make sense IMHO is to say that modern humans, Denisovans, and Neandertals are all the same species. Like different breeds of dogs (which are called "races" in French). This would make an European, e.g., the equivalent of a Cavapoo or a Labradoodle.