Whodunit: What Killed Off Our Ancestors? Part Two

“Who Is Killing the Great Chefs of Europe?” was one of those top-notch mystery comedies from 1978. Who killed the ancestors of modern day humans isn’t quite so funny, but it’s still a top-notch mystery. I propose one rather unconventional answer, our creator ‘gods’, the extraterrestrials.

Modern humans (Homo sapiens) evolved from other primates, most probably from chimpanzee stock in Africa when DNA relationships are analysed. We have a 98% compatibility with chimpanzee DNA. However, there was a long chain of in-betweens twixt chimpanzees and modern humans, the two key transitions being a bipedal gait (Australopithecus) and tool use (Homo). The interesting things are that while all the in-betweens have gone extinct, the ancestral primate stock didn’t; the transition to modern humans was so fast that it reeks of artificial selection, not natural. Are the in-between extinctions and the extremely rapid transition to modern humans linked? 

Continued from yesterday’s blog…

Conveniently enough each species of Australopithecus and Homo lasted long enough to give rise to the next species of Australopithecus or Homo before going ‘poof’. Now to paraphrase Ian Fleming’s James Bond adversary Goldfinger, ‘Once is happenstance; twice is coincidence; three times [or more] is enemy action’. Now one or two, even three in-betweens – those in-between ancient chimpanzees stock (roughly 8 to 6 million years ago) and modern man - that went the way of the dodo might be explainable. That EVERY such in-between species went ‘poof’ is begging for a natural explanation, an explanation that I find lacking.

Over an up to eight million year period, from initial evolution to eventual extinction, all those parental links in our ancestral chain and kissing cousin branches has had that eventual going kaput scenario happen to them. As far as any one of them is concerned, that cradle to grave history was over a fairly short timeframe as geological eras go. I mean many species exist for millions of years; some for tens of millions; even some for hundreds of millions.

Lots of species, say of ants, tuna, frogs, snakes, bears, felines, monkeys, etc. coexist, share common territory, yet of all the hominoid species, Australopithecus and Homo, there remains now just one. Only one currently exists as that lone species, that of course being Homo sapiens – how very odd. Why should modern humans, and modern humans alone, having this long chain of in-betweens leading up to us, yet which no longer exist, be the ‘last man standing’ as it were?

If any and all links in the chimp – modern human chain evolved naturally (the standard model), then you’d expect those adaptations that evolved in the first place to last a spell. The African continent (action city and ground zero for the most part) and African environment wasn’t fluctuating that drastically that no sooner had you evolved to fit in with that environment than it did a total flip-flop and rapidly somersaulted back and forth again and again causing endless extinctions (no species could survive for long under such circumstances) and new opportunities for our next generation of ancestors (soon to go extinct in turn). Alas, that doesn’t wash since other animal species made it continuously through that up to eight million year period, in that same environment, without a care in the world, including, other primates, like the chimpanzees, while apparently a dozen or so of their naturally evolved descendent species were in constant strife! That’s all the more puzzling because all of these links in the chain leading to Homo sapiens were “smarter than the average bear” and chimpanzee too. Even if Africa were a killing zone, how come the same scenarios played out in Asia and Europe too?

Clearly modern humans, responsible for what’s been termed the most recent mass extinction event (of modern flora and fauna), didn’t exterminate their ancestors since modern humans weren’t around for most of that transition period. All Australopithecus and most Homo species went extinct before modern humans came on the scene. Did the next generation in the line of descent kill off the previous generation, in a manner akin to speculation that modern humans exterminated their kissing cousins, the Neanderthals? 

Something’s fishy. In fact physical anthropology texts just note that hominoid species W, X, Y & Z have gone extinct since they are clearly nowhere to be found alive on Earth today, but they can only speculate as to why – they don’t know. They have not the foggiest clue why the Neanderthals don’t walk the Earth today, so they just guesstimate possibilities. 

Perhaps it’s time to scrap the standard model for an alternative and highly un-standard scenario. Might there be a third party behind things? The key is that while modern humans are but one species, there are many breeds.

Once upon a time, a very, very long time ago, an extraterrestrial intelligence, by design (they detected Earth’s bio-signatures like an oxygen atmosphere) or accident, discovered and arrived on Terra Firma, and for some reason(s) or other set up shop. Maybe it was for scientific purposes; maybe a good spot for R&R; maybe as an outpost or home away from home; maybe as a colony.

Now being a high-tech sort of culture (well they did get from there to here after all), and of a curious and scientific yet practical bent, thought it a grand long-term idea to get the native earthlings to serve them, in much the same way we get some animals to serve us – horses, camels or donkeys/mules for transport; seeing-eye dogs for the visually handicapped; guard dogs to, well guard things; canaries in the mines as an early warning system for toxic gases; cats to rid the farm of grain-eating mice; birds to eat the insects; and so on. Of course, in order to get animals to serve us, it not only helps to domesticate or quasi-domesticate them, but to artificially improve on their natural abilities or looks. And so guard dogs become larger and fiercer; horses for racing purposes are bread to become faster; and aesthetics aren’t overlooked either so we breed animals to look this way or that way just because it pleases us to do so; etc. And so many a domesticated animal now comes in breeds; just like humans come in breeds – see the connection? 

One trait we employ animals for is labour – oxen pull the plough, etc. Well, perhaps our extraterrestrials had the same thoughts way back then. But of course the basic stock with which they had to work with could always be improved, like humans breeding faster horses.

The most useful traits aliens would work on or with would be things like intelligence; dexterity; a free pair of appendages with which to manipulate objects; binocular vision; all useful things masters want in their slaves. You don’t employ horses or dogs or cats or even monkeys to plant and harvest cotton – you ‘employ’ Negroes back in the golden pre Civil War days of the Deep American South. Ditto the British Navy – you shanghaied the great unwashed to serve as your basic lowest-of-the-low seamen.

Alas, way back then, the best of the best on offer were the primates. To get them up to the required standard demanded by the aliens required a bit of not natural, but artificial selection. Call it bio-engineering; genetic engineering, the goal was to engineer a life form of greater use to them.

So you start with the original best prime stock available (chimpanzees) and artificially breed and manipulate and select and alter them until you arrive at the modified next or second generation. The original stock, in this case the chimps have served their prime purpose and are of no further use, but since they were already in existence and well adapted to their surroundings and natural environment, their stock continued on, as it does to this day.

The next or second (now slightly modified) generation in turn is artificially manipulated to produce the third generation. Once the second generation has served its purpose its cast adrift and left to fend for themselves but they are NOT well adapted to their surroundings and natural environment, and their stock did NOT continue on but whether quickly or slowly but surely, went extinct.

The third generation gives rise to the fourth generation and thus the third generation go kaput as well, an artificial creation unadapted to the natural world. And so on and so on it goes until you hit the Nth generations – Homo erectus (good, but not great) and modern humans (ideal). Homo sapiens finally possessed nearly all the required attributes the extraterrestrials required, intelligence, opposable digits, bipedal gait that freed up those digits, etc. Even so, the aliens had to give modern humans a boost – the sudden arrival of human culture; the sudden transition from nomadic hunter-gatherer to settler and city dweller.

Clearly Homo erectus and Homo sapiens were the two success stories, but did they migrate out of Africa or were they transported out to selected sites by their creators, the aliens. If the former, you might expect a clear-cut fossil trail outlining and along the migration routes, especially as undirected nomadic wanderings only make progress in terms of steady distances covered over many generations. Alas, the fossil trail that should clearly delineate migration routes just isn’t. The fossil sites are so few and far between that actual migration routes have to be inferred. Transport of Homo erectus and Homo sapiens to these sites would be just as compatible with the actual fossil evidence. The aliens, having achieved artificially selected/genetically engineered species that suited their needs would clearly transport them to where they could be put to good use.

One more clue to the reality of this scenario is the extremely wide and anomalous gap between modern humans and our now nearest chimpanzee ancestors when it comes to rather basic traits. In just eight million years: we’re ‘civilized’; they’re not. We’re bipedal; they’re not; we’re a ‘naked ape’; they’re a ‘hairy ape’ (as are the rest of the primates). We’re very high up in IQ; they’re not. We come in breeds (races); they don’t. We have a sense of, as well as a culture; they don’t. Those are gigantic differences, and all in eight million years, probably less. Eight million years is just 0.2 % of Earth’s geological time – actually slightly less than that. Those are BIG differences compressed into a tiny timeframe.

In other supporting ‘evidence’ I offer up the fact that in mythologies around the world, the ‘gods’ (i.e. – aliens) created humans, including, obviously, Biblical mythology.

The ‘gods’ in nearly all mythologies ultimately give the gifts of civilization or those required for civilization in the accepted use of the term. This also helps to explain the relative sudden transition of many peoples and cultures from a nomadic hunter-gatherer existence to fixed settlements and agriculture. Nearly every culture has a deity of agriculture who gave that skill to that culture.

Mythologies around the globe speak of and illustrate all manner of hybrid creatures, both animal-animal (like the dragon or griffin) and animal-human (like the centaur or sphinx). Such creatures, if real, are either extraterrestrial, or genetically engineered from terrestrial species.

In modern times we have both the animal mutilation and the UFO abduction phenomena, both linked with ongoing alien genetic manipulation of all things terrestrial and maybe extraterrestrial too.  

Now I know what some of you must be thinking – what about all those sightings of Bigfoot or Sasquatch, the Yeti and similar hairy hominoid bipeds of unknown origin? The answer for the here and now to that is when and if these reported beasties acquire the same sort of documentation as reality-based animals, like lions and elephants, then revision will be in order. Until then speculation remains just that, speculation.

Another objection would be if aliens needed domestic manual labour why not just construct and use robots! Ah, it’s not just labour and getting others to do the work. When you think of, for example, the Biblical creation, what does God want? A prime goal of God and all those other gods is being worshiped, sort of like what we expect and take pleasure from in our pets’ adoration or their ‘worshiping’ of us – even if it’s only Fido the dog wagging his tail when you come home, or Fluffy the cat purring and rubbing against your leg. There’s no gain or self-satisfaction in programming a machine to bow and scrape unto you.

In summary, that’s my scenario as to who killed off the great ancestors of modern humans and why. It wasn’t deliberate genocide on the part of the creators, just Mother Nature culling those species that weren’t suited to their natural environment. Why they weren’t suited is, again, because our ancestors were artificially created, so when cast adrift, well the rest as they say is history.

Our Post Biological Evolution

A well worn staple of science fiction is travel to the stars – ‘boldly going’ to borrow the tag phrase from one well known science fiction staple, “Star Trek”. Unfortunately, what’s easy to do in the pages of sci-fi literature, or show on the small or big screen isn’t anywhere as simple in reality. But, just because something isn’t simple doesn’t mean it isn’t possible. Most solutions focus on new cheaper, better, faster rocket propulsion technology. I got a better idea!

A well known SETI (Search for ExtraTerrestrial Intelligence) scientist recently made the following statement.

“The real question to me isn’t why ET isn’t everywhere, but why ET’s machines aren’t everywhere.”*

The standard thinking, that basic point being made is that it’s dangerous and costly to boldly go anywhere out there in person relative to staying at home. But sending out unmanned probes instead, probes which might be sophisticated enough to not only explore but reproduce themselves using resources discovered while exploring would like a cancer spread out more and more until they have covered every cubic mile of space. Maybe there’s just one ET; zillions of ET’s machines.

Perhaps ET and ET’s machines are one and the same. Even if there is but one ET race or civilization, there could be an abundance of ET’s machines (that’s standard thinking noted above), but all containing not just ET but lots of ET (that’s not standard thinking). Translated, if you want to ‘boldly go’ (i.e. interstellar travel), it may make more sense to be an actual part of the spaceship instead of just being a passenger. Better rocket propulsion might prove to be fairly irrelevant.

Premise: Exploring is in our very makeup. Humans do not want surrogates to do their exploring for them. It may be necessary, but it’s never enough. A photograph of Paris isn’t good enough – I want to see the Eiffel Tower for myself.

While a robotic probe discovered the location and wreck of the RMS Titanic, humans had to go to the time and trouble and cost to see and explore the shipwreck in person.

We don’t send an unmanned robotic rover to climb Mount Everest; we do it ourselves, even though it’s a very dangerous activity to life and limb.

I’m sure the scientists who guide the unmanned rovers on Mars are happy little campers; they would be even happier if they were on Mars in person.

Sending Pioneer 10 & 11; Voyager 1 & 2 out into interstellar space is all fine, well and good but wouldn’t you want to travel to, say the star Tau Ceti, in person? An unmanned probe (a descendent of Pioneer or Voyager) exploring Tau Ceti and sending you back data doesn’t generate quite the same thrill as being there up close and personal.

However, it’s difficult to get you to Tau Ceti. Your life span isn’t long enough to last the trip at projected interstellar velocities achievable in the foreseeable future, and in any event, you’d need massive life support infrastructure which adds lots of additional mass requiring lots of extra energy and thus cost to your journey. All up, too much mass, too much energy, and too much cost.

But, what part of you really needs to get to Tau Ceti? Does your big toe need to go? Does your liver need to get up close and personal with Tau Ceti? No. The only part of you that really needs to encounter Tau Ceti is your ‘inner you’, your mind, not the physical body part of you apart from that which houses the mind – your brain thingy. Alas, even your mind, your wetware, is part of your physical body (your brain) and it won’t last the distance from Earth to Tau Ceti.

Now let’s pause to consider the following interlude. Somewhere around the time of humanity’s transition from a hunter-gather lifestyle to a life of domestic settlement and leisure, even if not always domestic bliss, there was a remarkable but hardly remarked upon revolution. There was a slow but sure transition from Darwinian natural selection and evolution to artificial selection and evolution.

So how does artificial selection come into play? What useful role is it? Well, we now augment enough of our natural abilities with some sort of non-biological technology to allow us ultimately to produce offspring that otherwise would not have been produced. Reproduction is ultimately the name of the game; no reproduction, no selection, no evolution, natural or otherwise.

That transition to a post biological humanity probably all started when the first human used a long stick as a prop; as a cane to help him support himself and walk easier, instead of lying helplessly on the ground as prey for a saber-tooth cat! That stick could further serve as a prosthetic and be used to fend off the cat or hit it and drive it away. We are now in control, or at least better control over our fate. Clearly, like the stick-cane, we’ll continue to use artificial means – technology – to better our existence and defy the odds Mother Nature throws our way.  That path has already been well and truly started down. Since the stick-cane we’ve added eyeglasses and hearing aids and dentures and artificial joints and drugs** to help us with our sex lives and to breed and we’re talking about using nanotechnology nanobots to circulate through our blood stream seeking out nasty cancer cells from the inside and destroy them while unclogging our arteries, plus various prosthetics that increase our strength, etc.

There are in addition to non-biological technology those other sorts of means to achieve artificial selection, as in genetic engineering techniques for improving the human lot, like DNA splicing and manipulating the structure of our genes, etc., but I want to stick with biological plus non-biological integrations (bioengineering), like human-computer interfaces often used to immerse yourself in virtual reality simulations or games. 

We’ve come a long way in applying artificial selection technologies since those hunter-gather days. Now where does it all end? And how might artificial (as in technology) selection help us, and by analogy ET, boldly go?

Fast forward say 500 years. Might it not be possible to transfer the ‘inner you’ contained in your wetware, the brain thingy of yours, and transfer it into software and hardware made of more durable non-organic stuff like silicon and steel? If so, you’re now onboard, but as part of the electronics, the computer, that’s onboard. You and the ship have merged.

Of course your wetware, once downloaded or transferred into a software package, could be transferred again and again into many different computers, sort of like an endless  ‘copy and paste’ operation, each copy of you on a ship headed to some other interstellar destinations. In fact, everyone could explore anywhere and everywhere they wanted. If a lot of ‘people’ (could we still call ourselves ‘people’?) wanted to go to Tau Ceti, that’s as easy as if just one wanted to go since presumably there’s room on the ship for many ‘brains in the electronic vat’. Maybe everyone is headed everywhere. Eventually everyone experiences everything, but not quite at the same time of course.

I mean You #1 goes to Tau Ceti, while You #2 heads off to say the star Sirius. However, You #1 and You #2 don’t share your separate experiences even if you both communicate them to each other. Each is a surrogate to the other. But of course You #1 could go to Tau Ceti and then go on to Sirius; You #2 goes to Sirius and then on to Tau Ceti. Both ‘copy and paste clones’ get both experiences.

Regardless of those variations on the theme, your lifespan has increased by orders of magnitude. There’s little if any real ‘life’ support needed. There might even be a ‘sleep’ switch to turn you off while the light years slowly tick by. [That alone, by the way, takes care of the ‘they (aliens) can’t get to here from there’ argument, often used as a debating point against the UFO extraterrestrial hypothesis.] And, when you reach Tau Ceti, there will be mechanical devices, rovers or robots on board you can download into and thus explore the Tau Ceti environment – in person!

Post-biological development or bioengineering is our ticket to the stars, even if the big toe has to stay at home! So, I wouldn’t be surprised if each and every one of ET’s machines didn’t actually contain ET or ET’s entire population for that matter!

Of course some real extraterrestrials might not have to resort to the ‘brain in the electronic vat’ to get from there to here, but it’s one way of doing it.

And as to why we don’t see ET or at least ET’s machines, since they (the machines) are supposed to be everywhere, well perhaps our scientist hasn’t heard of UFOs, or perhaps taken the time to study the subject. If s/he did, well perhaps s/he wouldn’t have raised the issue in the first place since ‘everywhere’ obviously includes here.

There is some interest in the morals or ethics of wetware to software transfer and cloning of that resultant software. From an ethical or moral point of view, the ‘inner you’ transfer from wetware to software would probably happen just prior to your natural death. The body would be buried or cremated in the normal way. Or, you might sign a consent form authorizing the transfer at any time after you reach the legal age. The body would still be treated as if it had died since it obviously must do so if there’s no longer any wetware running it. Oh, since this is a copy-and-paste arrangement, there could be one copy of the ‘inner you’ as software; two copies of you; 20 copies of you; 200 copies, etc. Think of a video game with a character in the game. Now recall that there are thousands of copies of the game in existence, therefore thousands of copies or clones of the character - Same distinction.

Each version of the ‘inner you’ would probably regard itself as the real ‘me’ but it makes no sense to distinguish between them as an outsider. Each version wouldn’t really care about the other versions. Even though you no longer have a flesh-and-blood body, your consciousness will be where it always has been – part and parcel of your wetware. Only now it’s cloned and exists as software not wetware – one copy per how many copies of the software you now are part and parcel of. But from the point of cloning onwards, those clones of your consciousness diverge depending on the various career paths taken by the various software versions of you.

*Impey, Chris (Editor); Talking About Life: Conversations on Astrobiology; Cambridge University Press, Cambridge; 2010; page 325.

**In fact all your pharmaceutical drugs and over-the-counter medicines are technological fixes designed to help you beat the odds.

Human Evolution: By Natural or Artificial Selection? Part Two

If you’re reading this, I’d be 99.99% sure you’re human. That being the case, you probably are aware that humans evolved from our primate ancestors, most likely the chimpanzees, starting many eons of time ago in deep, darkest, equatorial Africa. From that point of origin, humans colonized the globe, including whatever part of Planet Earth you currently call home. That’s the be-all-and-end-all of the origin, evolution and colonization of and by the human race. Well, I think there are some flies in that ointment, especially the bit about our evolution.

Continued from yesterday’s blog…

Now humans are smart. We’re top of the ‘food chain’ when it comes to IQ. We have very large brains relative to our body size. We have very complex brains. But all that size and complexity has a cost. An infant’s head has to be pretty soft and squishy and malleable and hence very vulnerable in order to fit through the birth canal, and even then it’s a struggle and a pretty dicey part of an infant’s and mother’s life.

Another high IQ evolutionary drawback is that it takes a lot of energy from the food we consume to power the brain and brain functions/activity, including thinking and processing thoughts. Higher IQ translates into the need to consume more calories. In the ancient world that took additional time to find or harvest food; in the modern era, it costs you more, say pound for pound to feed you vis-à-vis your lower IQ companion animals. 

Now intelligence, the ability to figure things out, must have a degree of natural survival value. Cats and dogs and pigs and many wild birds and dolphins and the humble octopus and our primate cousins aren’t dumb. Again, unlike the universal vertebrate backbone, rib cages, and skulls millions of vertebrate species have (or had) only one has excelled – top-of-the-pops – in IQ. BUT, we’re not just a little bit more advanced in the IQ department. We’re massively more advanced.

One might expect, based on natural selection, that if our average IQ was 100, perhaps our primate relations might have an average IQ of say, 90. That’s not the case. Most of the mammalian kingdom is clustered around a relatively narrow range of IQ way lower than ours. A dog isn’t a 100 times smarter than a cat or vice versa. But, humans are a 100 times smarter than our mammalian (and all other vertebrate) relations. Why? What natural evolutionary pressure did we face than thousands of other vertebrates, especially mammals, and especially, especially the primates, didn’t? Some human-only evolutionary pressure drove up our IQ levels to such extraordinary heights, but what evolutionary pressure?

You’d be hard pressed to think of any other terrestrial bipedal, high IQ species that could build the pyramids – in fact the answer is no other terrestrial species could.  Again, why were humans so blessed? And if we’re not so blessed with a high IQ by natural selection, then perhaps it must be by artificial selection; selection by, or genetic bioengineering by, the ‘gods’?

Moving on down the line, as each step in the ‘gods’ enforced artificial evolution of humans was achieved, slightly more upright posture; slightly higher average IQ, the previous lot – the less advanced hominoid species – were left to their own fate – extinction. There’s a lot of extinct hominoid species (for example, Homo habilis, Gigantopithecus or the Neanderthals) that are evolutionary links separating us from our primate ancestors, most probably chimpanzees, now our closest modern kissing cousins. 

When the ‘gods’ had at last achieved a reasonable facsimile of their objective, they gave us the gifts of knowledge (the basics anyway) and helped kick-started us on our road to civilized society. At some point or other we probably – ungrateful twerps that we tend to be – pissed them off and they packed their bags and left, perhaps leaving behind a token presence (UFOs) to monitor us to ensure we don’t ever become a threat to them and reverse the roles of slave and master.

Are there any other bits and pieces that set humans apart that might be suggestive of us getting some sort of special evolutionary treatment, translated artificial evolutionary treatment?

Since all humans are one species because we can all breed with one another, and since we presumably originated from small beginnings (population wise) in Africa, all humanity must have been akin to one not-quite-so-big melting pot.  We were a uniform cup of coffee – one species; one race. Then we started spreading out throughout the world (minus Antarctica) and for some unexplained reason diverged into different breeds or ethnic classifications or races. The Big Question is - as Big Questions always tend to be – WHY?

And here I want to focus on facial features. What’s so different or unique about the Asian environment(s) so as to evolve in humans’ typical Asian facial features, say vis-à-vis the Australian environment and her indigenous aboriginals who also have distinguishable but different facial features versus Europe, the European environment and Caucasian facial features vis-à-vis Polynesia and Polynesian facial features, etc. Something is screwy somewhere!  I can’t see how this aspect of human biology can be accounted for by Darwinian natural selection.

But what if human breeds – one species, now different races – were created or manufactured in the same way we artificially select and create different cat breeds, or cattle breeds or different plant varieties like the many varieties of roses or orchards?

Just like cats and cattle; roses and orchards – one general species; many created breeds or varieties – so too for humans – one interbreeding species now existing as many (artificially selected?) breeds all capable of interbreeding. Darwinian survival-of-the-fittest natural selection can not explain this. There’s no explaining the breed differences in racial facial features other than to resort, IMHO, to artificial selection, and the only beings capable of doing that were the ‘gods’ – the extraterrestrials who have this thing for advanced bioengineering genetics!

Now if you have a species, and that population gets separated by some geographic barrier, then over time the two split halves will slowly evolve into I guess first two separate breeds (that in theory can still interbreed), then eventually two separate species that can no longer breed and produce viable offspring. But, if you postulate that the one-species, one-breed humans scampered out of Africa and migrated around the globe without undo hindrance, then presumably there were no insurmountable geographic barriers big enough to then keep the various migrating clans or tribes or human herds forever and ever apart and thus prevent any interbreeding. Yet the one-breed one-species became multi-breeds, one-species as if there were now in place geographic barriers and isolation between the clans, tribes, herds; whatever. At least this alleged isolation of the tribes only lasted until the ‘modern’ age of travel and exploration and then all manner of human tribes discovered all manner of other human tribes. That’s of course if you accept the traditional view of things. But the question remains – why no barriers in getting from A to B, but once at B, not being able to get back to A again. I repeat that there’s something’s screwy somewhere.

Perhaps a more far-out but ultimately better or more plausible explanation is that the extraterrestrial ‘gods’ genetically engineered or designed the various human breeds in the African ‘laboratory’ and then transported the various types of human races to various locations throughout the world. The Asian-looking human population were transported, not surprisingly, to what we call today Asia! And thus the various human breeds, located in their separate abodes having been transported over natural geographic barriers by ET, where they had to pretty much stay put, came up with their own unique cultural and ultimately mythological variations or versions of their ‘creator’ god’s creations having been pretty befuddled by all the super technology that really ‘created’ them. And so in mythology we have universal tales of the gods (or IMHO ‘gods’) creating humanity, with individual cultural variations on that theme.

In a similar way, other things associated with the ‘gods’, say their pets or other entities, there being more than one type of ET present, translated into some of the near uniform and near universal mythologies surrounding say dragon-lore and dragons (pets) or fairy-folk (another variety of ET).

Something I find puzzling is why did humans, the Neanderthals and later the Cro-Magnons, choose to live in the harsh conditions of Ice Age Europe 30,000 to 60,000+ years ago? Presumably the human population was low enough back then that there would have been ample room for all in more pleasant climates. Why not follow the Sun and migrate south? Perhaps if my way out ideas are true, they were transported there by the ‘gods’ and couldn’t leave!

Anyway, why would the ‘gods’ create and transport different human breeds to different geographical locations – why do it this way? Two possible reasons suggest themselves. ET is the ‘farmer’ and they have, say, ten fields. They can plant one corner of one field (say a part of Africa where their ‘lab’ is) and wait for Nature to spread the seeds around to the rest of that field and hence to the other nine fields, or, they could plant parts of all of their ten fields at one go. That’s the same crop in all ten fields. But perhaps it’s better to have diversity. The second scenario is that you plant one crop (human breed) in one field (say Africa), another (human breed) in another (say Asia), a third human breed in the field called Europe, and so on though all ten. Why do this?

If Nature doesn’t take her normal course – if humans don’t spread out, if all the fields don’t naturally produce crops, then all isn’t lost by taking the above action. By deliberately planting a diversity of ‘crop’ breeds in all ten fields you’ve maximized your return on your investment by not putting all your eggs in the one-species, one-breed in Africa basket. 

It’s doesn’t strike me as being a natural state of affairs to naturally have way back when just Black Africans in Africa; Caucasians in Europe;  Asians in Asia; Aborigines in Australia, etc. That’s because it’s not as if Asians can’t survive and thrive in Europe; Caucasians can and do live okay in Australia; Black Africans have made the USA home as Afro-Americans. Every human breed can find a successful biological niche in every geographic area, so why the initial geographic separation when human traffic could presumably go both ways, and segregation and evolution into breeds or races, if one assumes a natural state of affairs, puzzles me. Something is indeed screwy somewhere!

Human Evolution: By Natural or Artificial Selection? Part One

If you’re reading this, I’d be 99.99% sure you’re human. That being the case, you probably are aware that humans evolved from our primate ancestors, most likely the chimpanzees, starting many eons of time ago in deep, darkest, equatorial Africa. From that point of origin, humans colonized the globe, including whatever part of Planet Earth you currently call home. That’s the be-all-and-end-all of the origin, evolution and colonization of and by the human race. Well, I think there are some flies in that ointment, especially the bit about our evolution.

We come in breeds. The proof of that pudding stares you in the face everyday as you observe the racial variety of people around you. I don’t recall anything in Genesis that explains this, so maybe God had nothing to do with this – assuming the existence of a bona-fide supernatural creator God of course in the first place – though I stand to be corrected on the lack of a Biblical explanation by appropriate authorities.

But if the Bible doesn’t explain the origin of the various breeds of humans neither does Darwin’s natural selection, in the same way that natural selection didn’t create, and doesn’t explain our dog breeds. Survival of the fittest didn’t produce the French Poodle – we did that! But who (or what) created our diversity of breeds or races?

To quell the immediate curiosity of the reader, my answer comes down solidly in favour of our evolution by ‘artificial selection’, which detracts not one jot from the Darwinian principles of evolution via natural selection. The difference between the two is that artificial selection is selection deliberately guided by intelligence; natural selection is, well natural, and not by design.

Humanity, mankind, human beings, however you label us, are collectively made up of breeds just like our own domesticated and bioengineered (artificial bred) animals (companion, farm or other) and plants (crops or garden varieties). The key words are ‘domesticated’ and ‘bioengineered’. We’ve been domesticated and bioengineered too, but we didn’t domesticate and bioengineer our own human breeds like we domesticated and bioengineered our domesticated plants and animals. Somebody or something else will take that credit.

Now I’m not really talking here about the so-called scientific phrase now substituted for creationism – ‘intelligent design’. Intelligent design has the philosophical baggage of having a supernatural creator, a God, behind the design. Alas, in the case of the human being, if God designed us from scratch; from the ground up, well He really failed Bioengineering 101. The various aches and pains and ailments we suffer because of bad biological design testify to that!

No, I’m referring here to the sort of artificial selection we humans employ when we breed dogs or cats or cattle or drought-resistant crops or whatever for our particular real (or imagined needs). I’m just turning the tables here a bit in what’s good for the goose is good for the gander. As we do, so has it been done to us! The question again is, done unto us by whom? 

To further quell the immediate curiosity of the reader, the ‘who’ collectively are the mythological gods, who aren’t really mythical, nor are they supernatural, but flesh-and-blood extraterrestrials who happen to have a special interest in, and abilities toward, genetics.

The basic premise, as expounded upon by universal cultural mythologies, is that the gods created humans, creating humans to relieve the gods of, and do the hard work instead, and to also serve the gods – and I don’t just mean by kneeling and prayer and building edifices to them. Translated, in more modern terminology, the flesh-and-blood extraterrestrials, which came upon Planet Earth many hundreds-of-thousands, perhaps millions of years ago, set up shopkeeping. Eventually known, if not loved, as the gods, these ‘gods’ genetically engineered humans from primate stock with again the ultimate goal of making the ‘gods’ life easier and more rewarding. Because of genetic similarities to our modern selves, that initial primate stock more likely as not were the chimpanzees.

One of those ‘more rewarding’ bits; one of the ‘gods’ tricks in their genetic engineering experiment, a design element designed to appeal to the ‘gods’ was to ensure humans were sexually compatible with them, and by Jove, did they ever make use of that engineered compatibility – at least if you take at face value and believe what transpired according to the mythological tales. Not suitable reading for the kiddies!

Now, the initial question is, if the overall intention of the extraterrestrial ‘gods’ is to create slaves to do the housework for the ‘gods’, and to serve the ‘gods’ (sexually or otherwise), and all you have to work with is terrestrial life (minus humanity), what sort of traits do you need to select for in order to get a life form that can build the pyramids and monumental structures that are constructed in order to serve the purpose of worshiping you? Clearly only humans can build a pyramid, so what skills or attributes do we have now that all other terrestrial life forms didn’t have then?

Two particulars stand out. One is that in order to build a pyramid, etc. one needs a free pair (or more) of appendages in order to manipulate stuff. How do you get a free pair of appendages? Well, you have got to go from a quadrupedal stance to a bipedal stance, thus freeing up two appendages (i.e. – arms). From a Darwinian point-of-view, that’s a problem. There’s a cost. Now we’re clearly bipedal. But will a bipedal posture be selected for naturally? Not usually, for again, there’s a price to be paid.

The second particular is that you need some degree of smarts! Translated, to build a pyramid you need a relatively large and complex brain. Many animals might be strong enough to build a pyramid, but they just don’t have a high enough IQ to pull it off. However, again from a Darwinian perspective, a high IQ comes at a high cost. Will high intelligence be selected for naturally?

Though there are some limited advantages to standing upright (apart from freeing up two arms to do things with like grab forbidden fruit slightly higher up in the trees)  – you can see farther; wade slightly deeper waters, in general a bipedal stance comes at a considerable cost. Two limbs now have to take up all the body weight instead of four legs (or six - if you’re a bug; or eight – if you’re a spider). If one of those two limbs fails, you’re in deep poo. However, survival is more probable if you have four (or six or eight) legs and one fails.

Further, if you’re bipedal, your centre of gravity shifts, making you way more prone to losing your balance and falling over. Also, bipedal animals tend to run slower than a quadrupedal one. Most dogs whose backbones are at my knee height or more, and cats, can easily outrun me. The same goes for alligators, even with their splayed out limbs when they’re going full tilt. The upshot of all of that is that in the animal kingdom, only birds (and their ancestors, the theropod bipedal saurischian dinosaurs) are (or were) bipedal – for fairly obvious reasons. Two of their four ‘legs’ have evolved for flying. Humans have no such fallback since we can’t flap our arms and fly.

You don’t have to be a professional zoologist or expert in anatomy to realise that any creature going from a quadrupedal gait to a bipedal one has to have a massive amount of anatomical alterations to its basic structures. Bone and muscle lengths and widths will change; there must be alterations to the various joints, nearly all muscle attachments to the bones will alter; support structures for many internal organs will need rethinking, etc. Imagine the anatomical changes you’d have to make in your dog or cat or horse for that animal to walk in the same manner you do; imagine the changes that would have to be made in your anatomy for you to walk like a dog, cat or horse. It’s a big ask of natural selection to go from quadrupedal to bipedal without some clearly defined survival advantage(s); perhaps not so much of an ask if the shift is artificial selection; guided by an intelligence using bioengineering or genetic engineering techniques.

Now various animals can, and do, for brief periods, stand upright, say prairie dogs, chipmunks, bears, etc. Some animals can be taught to briefly stand up like circus elephants. Kangaroos, wallabies and related are usually bipedal, but they hop, not walk or run. Not even our primate relations routinely walk around on two legs although many can and do so for brief periods.

I think the advantages of a bipedal way of posture and locomotion are overstated, otherwise way more animals would have evolved that posture; you’d expect our cats and dogs to not so much as sit-up and beg but stand-up and beg for special treats. Out of millions and millions of vertebrate species that have existed over the past 300 or so million years of geologic history, only a relative tiny handful have adopted the bipedal mode of lifestyle. It’s not proved to be exactly an evolutionary success story unlike the more universal backbones and rib cages and skulls all vertebrates have.

Overall, in the biological scheme of things, we’re not just a little bit more advanced in a bipedal way, we’re WAY MORE advanced. The question is, why? Again, why are humans so obviously bipedal? And if we’re not so inclined to be bipedal by natural selection, perhaps then we’ve been so evolutionary inclined by artificial selection – by the ‘gods’ to free up our upper limbs, a useful trait if the ‘gods’ put us to work.

To be continued…