The World and Human Advancement

Stnd w Standing Rock

Wichita, Kansas

#32

Jun 20, 2009 @ 14:58:22

@kentoo Said

When humanity took to using agriculture as a means of obtaining food they increased the area in which they could survive. Had we remained hunter gatherers,as our population grew, we would have probably exterminated nearly all other competing predators. Agriculture made it possible for a family group to live off ten acres of land .... a hunter gather population needed much more than that.

Naw! There would not have been an increase. At least not one that would remain sustainable. "Modern" humans live in a "j" shaped growth curve like fruit flies and other opportunistic organisms that tend towards parasitism. Traditional hunter-gatherers and traditional crop producing mobile peoples have a sigmoid growth curve (classic predator-prey relationship) that stays within carrying capacities. Opportunistic humans live beyond their carry capacities and must continually find new resources that will also dwinddle. The result is always the big crash.
First Nations traditionals have warned about this. We just wait the crash.

0

Salmon Arm, Canada

#33

Jun 20, 2009 @ 15:19:34

@shinobinoz Said

Naw! There would not have been an increase. At least not one that would remain sustainable. "Modern" humans live in a "j" shaped growth curve like fruit flies and other opportunistic organisms that tend towards parasitism. Traditional hunter-gatherers and traditional crop producing mobile peoples have a sigmoid growth curve (classic predator-prey relationship) that stays within carrying capacities. Opportunistic humans live beyond their carry capacities and must continually find new resources that will also dwinddle. The result is always the big crash.
First Nations traditionals have warned about this. We just wait the crash.

I think that where humanities problem lies is that we have not paid much attention to the balance of this planet, up to this point. There is a harmony in the universe and if we do not resonate with that harmony, changes will occur to regain that harmony. Some of them may not be as we have anticipated, if we anticipated at all the results of our actions.

0

Edited: June 20, 2009 @ 15:23

Stnd w Standing Rock

Wichita, Kansas

#34

Jun 20, 2009 @ 15:33:14

@kentoo Said

I think that where humanities problem lies is that we have not paid much attention to the balance of this planet, up to this point. There is a harmony in the universe and if we do not resonate with that harmony, changes will occur to regain that harmony. Some of them may not be as we have anticipated, if we anticipated at all the results of our actions.

I agree. However- simplification is rarely if ever the wrong approach.

0

auckland, New Zealand

#35

Jun 20, 2009 @ 15:40:25

if we remained as hunter gatherers then when the earth dies we would die along with it just like all the other animals.

unlike animals we have the ability to alter our environment at will(based upon our knowledge) if we survive or not is dependent upon our wisdom(so far little if any has been shown)we can develop technology as extensions of our perceptions. if we are suffiently wise then we will no doubt be able to overcome any obstacle that is before us even extinction.

0

Salmon Arm, Canada

#36

Jun 20, 2009 @ 15:57:36

@shinobinoz Said

I agree. However- simplification is rarely if ever the wrong approach.

I think agriculture made life easier for humanity. In a sense, if it had been used harmoniously, it was a simplification. I think that the Navajo and the Incas had a good approach to agriculture. They were the first to cultivate squash and potatoes.

0

Edited: June 20, 2009 @ 15:58

auckland, New Zealand

#37

Jun 20, 2009 @ 16:02:47

I think its interesting the advance from hunter-gatherer to agriculture.

I mean who figured out if you plant a seed it will grow into a plant you can harvest and eat?

It seems simplistic to us today but consider the age in which they lived.

0

Salmon Arm, Canada

#38

Jun 20, 2009 @ 16:08:39

@radharc Said

I think its interesting the advance from hunter-gatherer to agriculture.

I mean who figured out if you plant a seed it will grow into a plant you can harvest and eat?

It seems simplistic to us today but consider the age in which they lived.

It was a simplification or at the very least a convenience to have the squash patch right beside the dwelling rather than a mile or two from the encampment.
I think the seed growing into a plant was an observation rather than a deduction.

0

Edited: June 20, 2009 @ 16:13

auckland, New Zealand

#39

Jun 20, 2009 @ 16:14:30

@kentoo Said

It was a simplification or at the very least a convenience to have the squash patch right beside the dwelling rather than a mile or two from the encampment.

but all inventions are a matter of common sense or simplification, but i was just thinking what a significant thing it was to figure out what a seed was when even today there are tribes that dont know that yet, they just rely on the spirit of the plant that its going to be there.

0

Salmon Arm, Canada

#40

Jun 20, 2009 @ 16:23:32

@radharc Said

but all inventions are a matter of common sense or simplification, but i was just thinking what a significant thing it was to figure out what a seed was when even today there are tribes that dont know that yet, they just rely on the spirit of the plant that its going to be there.

Every year I see squash sprouting on the ground where unharvested plants have been left over winter. I do not think that the realization that a seed grew into a plant was a breakthrough of logic... just a simple observation.

0

auckland, New Zealand

#41

Jun 20, 2009 @ 16:30:47

your probably right but simple observation to us is a break through for primitive people, especially when they spend a lot of there time worshipping gods.

0

Salmon Arm, Canada

#42

Jun 20, 2009 @ 16:59:09

@radharc Said

your probably right but simple observation to us is a break through for primitive people, especially when they spend a lot of there time worshipping gods.

I wonder , at what point did humanity consider the possibility of a creator. That in itself could be considered a milestone. It would definitely be a step beyond observation into logic or deduction and also incorporate imagination.

0

auckland, New Zealand

#43

Jun 21, 2009 @ 01:57:50

@kentoo Said

I wonder , at what point did humanity consider the possibility of a creator. That in itself could be considered a milestone. It would definitely be a step beyond observation into logic or deduction and also incorporate imagination.

considering life was created then all it would take would be the absence of them. if life evolved by itself then where did the information come from? without events nothing can change.

0

Stnd w Standing Rock

Wichita, Kansas

#44

Jun 21, 2009 @ 14:45:41

@radharc Said

if we remained as hunter gatherers then when the earth dies we would die along with it just like all the other animals.

unlike animals we have the ability to alter our environment at will(based upon our knowledge) if we survive or not is dependent upon our wisdom(so far little if any has been shown)we can develop technology as extensions of our perceptions. if we are suffiently wise then we will no doubt be able to overcome any obstacle that is before us even extinction.

Naw! We ain't that bright and sure not that sweet. We are more than likely going to cause our own demise. You got this about 180 degrees backwards.

0