re: an odd definition of our human niche...
My point is human evolution is linked to fire (and as a result CO2 production). How can you define Man without the use of fire? The use of fire was (and still is) fundamental to the survival of Man. How else could a furless mammal that wasn't so big, not so strong, not very fast, reproduced slowly with small litters, survive and compete for resources in Nature? Because early man was smart enough to use fire - and there was little competition for dead/dry wood (except for other people). Fire could be used for heat, for protection, extending periods of human activity (into the night), making tools, allowed some inedible foods to be eaten (thru cooking), and made it possible for humans to expand their territorial range from Africa.
Fire was used by early man even before the evolution of modern man (anywhere from a couple hundred thousand to over a million years ago)! Now maybe the timing is coincidence, but early man started losing his fur at roughly the same period that he started using fire (fire and furry wrists really don't mix well, you agree?). Did Man start losing his fur first, which allowed him then to use fire without becoming a furry torch, or did the use of fire and natural selection help push early man in a direction which was progressively less hairy? I don't know.
Sorry, I couldn't help myself :o) |
