SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : The Environmentalist Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: neolib who wrote (20534)2/20/2008 3:08:02 AM
From: DavesM  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 36921
 
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)