31. DD is one of those "any religion is better than no religion" people who would tolerate God (sorry Allah) knows what from any kind of crackpot religion...as long as they worship some kind, any kind of God.

The man is delusional ("pounding" athiests?) where, when, what debate? It's a true miracle that he has a forum, some kind of paycheck and a daily blog on aol.

He's getting help from somewhere but it ain't God.

Oh and re Muslims. How about asking any of those "real" Muslims how they feel about Israel, Jews, gays, women's rights...how about even asking them what their view of an ideal United States would be? Go ahead, ask...then after you have actually researched something come back and write your silly, silly, blog.

Davidg at 8:33AM on Apr 23rd 2008

32. brian,

I see you still have not learned anything. What a terrible waste.

You are the one who said on here, that "you don't know any Muslims", yet you feel free to speak for them.

How ignorant of you.

Botts at 8:41AM on Apr 23rd 2008

33. DD can't even accurately state CHRISTIAN theology. How in the name of all that's holy can he accurately say what MUSLIMS think. DD, get a clue or buy one for $1. You are ignorant when it comes to religion. BTW, I am an Eastern Orthodox Priest.

Father John at 7:40PM on Apr 23rd 2008

34. botts,

good morning. i see your up to "show mercy" early. what i said is true. . i have said nothing un-true. if i have please enlighten. the liberal left is bring this country down. the liberal left is not all of the dmeocratic party but they are the ones in charge of the party at this time. jerry had a great post.do yourself and others a favor and read it. this is exactly what i oppose.

and today botts please show your mercy to someone else. i know your game. you have no mercy. you have judgement in your heart and you need to repent. i forgive you and your mis-guided notion of spiritualism. when you wake up and see your deception you will understand. you need a few more years. but you will get there. the problem is what to do about the divided states?the divided culture, the divided values? these are the right qustions.not your "show mercy" no mercy mentality

brian at 8:47AM on Apr 23rd 2008

35. DD,

Some good points... but on the wholle i prefer Robert Spencers reading of the situation rather than yours. Having said that - as a strategy - its MUCH better to assume that your are right and take the view that this fairly recent problem of Islamic terrorism can be solved by driving a wedge between the majority of traditional muslims and the small but growing number of radical muslims.

Imagine if George Bush, after 09/11, said "the problem is Islam" and not "islam is a peaceful religion" . It would have led to world war if he said the former! We would have been at war with 1.2 billion people!

The difference in method between you and Spencer is that you base your arguments mainly on tradition and practise, ie what have muslims being doing over the last 1300 years and how do traditional muslims behave? Whereas Spencers arguements are based on exegesis of the Koran.

The problem is: Muslims (like Christians) are "people of the book". If Bin Laden can appeal to texts in the Koran that support his position, he will keep winning people to his side. It wouldnt really matter what Muslims have been doing... and it wouldnt matter "what a million muslims really think".

Question is: what does Koran say?

I think in the short term, its good to drive a wedge so that more and more traditional muslims are do not get radicalised. But in the long term the verses in the Koran which people quote that justifies violence needs to be re-interpreted.

kumar at 8:58AM on Apr 23rd 2008

36. Dinesh, You need to read more history. Islam was never a religion of peace. Mohammad promised his followers all the loot they could carry and all the women they could rape, and all the slaves they could manage. Don't forget all non-Moslems were required to wear an identifying tag...shades of NAZI Germany. Read the history of Moslems recruited into the SS during WW2. Read Physics Today (August 2007) to see where Islam went wrong. Their credo is, "Fight the unbelievers near you." Of course after conquering a country there were unbelievers across the border in the the next country. Thank Charles Martel for stopping them at the Battle of Tours in 732AD. And thank the Poles who helped the Austrians repulse them at the Gates of Vienna, As for me, I will never submit. I will never surrender. I will never kneel to Mecca.

Jack Rennscheidt at 2:35PM on Apr 23rd 2008

37. brian; if you don't know any muslims, how do you know this is a true statement?

"...muslims detest and hate and want to readicate the west over is the immoral and decadent lifestyle our brothers who are liberal live and APPROVE OF".

No, you just want something to support your hate of liberals and brown people. So you'll believe anything.

Ryan Anderson at 8:52AM on Apr 23rd 2008

38. 5. Well at least we know that Christianity was NEVER BASED on PAGAN MYTH'S and LEGENDS.

THE MYTH THAT CHRISTIANITY IS BASED ON MYTH
http://blog.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendID=60763520&blogID=341187070

http://tektonics.org/copycat/osy.html

http://www.tektonics.org/copycat/copycathub.html

It is great that we have science and the historical record to back it up.
---

One, please stop spamming. No-one, except maybe brian little b, is fooledy by your name changing.

Second, Christianity (modern Christianity at least) is a fusion of various beliefs, most of them pagan. It's because of the Roman Empire. Let me explain:

The Romans used religion as a tool to assimilate people. When they conquered them, they absorbed their gods into the Roman pantheon. That's why the Roman and Greek gods are almost exactly the same. When the Romans conquered various Celtic peoples, they incorporated parts of Celtic mythology into their religion. When Constantine backed Christianity, and later Emperors were even more zealous in their support, they changed the orginal Christianity by merging it into their pre-existing melting pot of religions.

Hope you have a great day, and bother to do some research before you post!

Jacob at 8:57AM on Apr 23rd 2008

39. So in the long term Hirsi Ali and other liberal muslims may come in handy, though i totally agree with you that they have no (or hardly any) following in the muslim world.

kumar at 9:03AM on Apr 23rd 2008

40. Chapter Two

The Food Gatherers


“Man’s most human characteristic is not his ability to learn, which he spares with many other species, but his ability to teach and store what others have developed and taught him.”

Margaret Mead (1901-1978) American Cultural Anthropologist



Within the dense emerald forests of eastern Africa, our primate ancestors could consume an area’s food supply within a matter of a few days. Hence they were always on the move looking for readily accessible food and water. Their way of life dictated no less, as they were trapped within a world of where their existence was based upon what Mother Nature could provide them. Surrounded by prowling predators with very little sunlight penetrating the deep layers of vegetation, they formed their own unique roaming communities or rather groups so as to ensure their survival. Comprising of ten to eighty individual apes, these separate groups developed a rigid social hierarchy, very few skills, and literally nothing in terms of economic surpluses. However as a species, they were extremely successful, so long as the forests continued to expand.
While spending the majority of their time among the towering trees, our pre-Australopithecus ancestors weren’t actually bipedal (walking upright) creatures. In fact when they did move around on the ground, it was always in a crouching uncoordinated manner. But they were extremely agile for their size. Standing about four feet tall and weighing close to one hundred pounds, they had a pair of long powerful arms that enabled them to glide through the tallest trees with the greatest of ease. They also possessed a sloping forehead, a large set of ring-shaped ears, a protruding wide jaw, and a pair of feet that were almost as nimble as their hands. Literally covered with a thick coat of dark wiry hair, their bodies were supported by a pair of bowed legs and knobby knees. And much like many other mammals, they were born either left-handed or right-handed, depending upon which side of their brain controlled their motor skills.
As diurnal creatures, they spend approximately thirty percent of the daylight hours on the ground, where they could use both their arms and their legs for propulsion. Under normal circumstances, the males were expected to protect the group at all times, since they were physically bigger and stronger (sexual dimorphism) than their female counterparts. This sexual dimorphism probably arose as a consequence of a species’ sexual selection process, which results in the bigger and stronger males’ monopolizing a group’s mating practices, and thus directly passing on their dominate genetic traits to their sons.
By and large, the forest’s interlocking trees were a convenient refuge for them. Whenever, they felt threatened or unsure of the situation, they could always scurry up a limb within a matter of seconds. Yet it was the ground that provided them with the substances of living. It was not only a place where they could find the most nutritious meals, but it was also a place where they could mate and satisfy their thirst for water. Unfortunately though, it was also a place of immense danger and death. Predators lurked behind almost every tree just waiting to catch one of them out in the open. Thus in order to survive and function on the ground effectively, they had to begin to widen their communication and organizational skills at a very early stage of their development, so as to become a cohesive group.
On any given day, their groups could roam up to eight to ten miles in search for a specific food. But generally speaking, their daily movements were very leisurely and short in range. After breaking up into smaller bands that were composed of three to ten individual apes, they spend their days either lazily grooming each other, mating, or inspecting and tasting the surrounding plant life. Not too surprisingly, they could identify every plant within the forest by its sight, taste, or smell. They even knew what type of food was available and where it could be found during a particular part of the season.
These pre-Australopithecus apes didn’t possess an actual government per se, but their bands were organized into pecking orders. Within each of them, a dominant alpha male ruled over the other apes with the assistance of several beta lieutenants. He wasn’t a supreme ruler in the sense of an absolute leader, but he usually had his own way whenever he so desired it. Since primates emotionally express themselves through their actions and sounds, he communicated with his band in many different ways. At any given moment, he could employ a series of barks, grunts, yelps, and shrieks in order to express his disposition. Also hand gestures, body movements and postures, and facial expressions were used as a way of getting his message across. But whatever the method of communication, the dominant male ruled in accordance with his distinctive personality.
As the leader of the band, his position of authority could be challenged at any time by the other male apes. This challenge was usually carried out between two individuals in the manner of a physical demonstration. Under normal circumstances, the ape that could scream the loudest and demonstrate the longest would be acknowledged by the others as the leader. It was only on rare occasions that these conflicts produced physical harm. However once a new leader had emerged, he usually led the band for about ten years, before eventually being ousted by a much younger, stronger ape. Ranging in ages from thirty to forty years old, the alpha male commanded the trust and respect of the band’s females. It was from his status as the major procreator and protector of the band’s females that he could project his authority over the others. Thus it was only after many years of maturing before the more assertive apes were expected to step forward and fulfill a leadership role.
The band’s authority structure was based upon a patriarchal system. It was a system where the males dominated the females by virtue of their greater strength and size. Still, the females also had their own dominant individual. Similar to the males, this dominant alpha female was usually an older, larger, and more experienced ape. She primarily received her special status by the large number of offspring she had successfully produced and by her overriding temperament. Normally, she could dominate everyone within the band except for the mature males. Yet within her peer group and to the younger beta apes, she was the master of her own surroundings. Unfortunately, the omega females who happened to be barren and small in stature could expect a life of very little attention and even less recognition by the other apes.
Much like the other primates in the forest, the primary group would establish their own particular territory within a certain geographic location, which they continuously marked as a private possession with the scent of their urine trails. Sometimes this territory could cover up to twenty square miles, depending upon the number of apes. In spite of the fact that they were always on the alert for unwanted intruders, these anthropoid apes would stop to leisurely eat a variety of different foods. Insects, nuts, flowers, fruits, bird’s eggs, honey, seeds, bark, roots, stems, leaves, and even meat were all consumed as a part of their diets.
As accomplished food gatherers, their eating habits were based upon what the different seasons of the year had to offer them. Hence many of their annual movements through the forest were inspired by their desire to reach a particular food before it was out of season. Their routine consumption of bark, leaves, berries, nuts, roots, and stems was just a temporary substitute, until the more desirable foods became available. However, once a desirable food had come into season, they gorged themselves as if it was their last meal. This feeding frenzy could last for days on end, because the best tasting foods were hardly available on a year round basis.
On a much darker side, our distant relatives were not only meat-eaters, but they also revealed a tendency towards cannibalism. They probably didn’t start out as consumers of their own flesh. With the slow decline in the size of the enormous forests, they were almost certainly forced to consume any available nutrition during the times of intense hardship. Survival was tough and without question it was rewarded to those who were prepared to change their eating habits.
But whatever the circumstances, it wasn’t beyond them to suddenly attack a small child of their own group and consume it right there on the spot, while the poor mother watched in horror. This type of unimaginable ruthlessness isn’t an oddity within the animal kingdom. Many other mammals like bears, lions, pigs, otters, and opossums will also devour their young, along with many types of birds, insects, and fish. Nonetheless, if one considers the cold, stark nature of survival, it shouldn’t be surprising to anyone that many species can’t distinguish the difference between eating the flesh of their own species or that of another animal. Within their highly competitive environment, a meal would be considered just another meal.
It should be noted that our primate predecessors also possessed almost every altruistic quality displayed by today’s modern humans. As loving parents and companions, they could exhibit a whole array of behaviors that aren’t all that rare within the animal kingdom. Almost on a daily basis, individual apes could be observed caring for the sick and their children, displaying stalwart loyalty to others, and mourning their dead. And just like many human beings, some of them would forgo their immediate needs to assist others, protect and comfort the weak, or demonstrate the highest quality of all, the sacrificing of their own lives for the sake of their families and companions.
However, there was one particular characteristic our primate ancestors displayed that was handed down to us, which might be a very unique quality among the species of the world. Today’s philosophers and historians have occasionally written about it, but only as an afterthought. In terms of our sheer survival, it is probably the most admirable and instinctual trait that we possess. In essence, we as a group are always at our best, when things are at there worst. It appears that the very noble qualities of self- sacrifice, unselfish cooperation, and the total commitment to others are the most prevalent within our species, whenever we find ourselves in direr straits.
As emotional, curious, and shrewd creatures, our ancestors had the capacity of expressing an astonishing degree of joy or sadness, confidence or uncertainty, loathing or affection, bravery or cowardliness, and deceit or openness. They were capable of crying when they grieved, laughing when they played, and yawning when they got bored. Yet their incredible range of behaviors didn’t stop there. As a member of a group and defined by that group, the individual ape was continuously being judged in their social behavior by the others. Their reliability or untrustworthiness, selflessness or generosity, apathy or curiosity, timidity or assertiveness, and finally their forgivingness or resentment was all character traits noticed and remembered by the other apes. As a matter of fact, it was the frequency and the depth of these individual behavioral traits that helped define their social identity and status within the group. Although, our distant primate relatives could be quite brutal and violent, they were also emotionally vibrant, consciously devoted, and mentally resilient.
Throughout the entire year, the primary group would divide itself into different bands in order to look for food. Since they were a patriarchal community, the male apes usually remained within their own particular band. As individuals, they were expected to assist the alpha male in protecting the band. However, the females were always free to go from one band to another as they pleased. In this manner, the group or the community always remained genetically flexible in spite of the males’ restrictive movements.
To say that we evolved from one of the most sensuous and sexually inclined creatures on this planet would be a profound understatement. Similar to today’s humans, they participated in many different types of foreplay or physical intimacy before they actually had intercourse. Kissing, hugging, tickling, teasing, and even the oral fondling of each other were widespread behaviors that heightened the moment and strengthened their mutual pleasure. Undoubtedly, their sexual relationships were an extremely important and time-consuming aspect of their lives.
In fact, our early relatives were probably the only known creatures who had copulated all year round for reasons other than procreation. They routinely mated with each other for a multitude of different reasons. Besides copulating as a form of entertainment, it was quite common for the females to sexually reward a male for grooming them, watching over their children, or for bringing them food. But even more amazingly, their sexual activities were also used to punish an individual out of petty jealousy or even as a form of retribution by excluding him or her as a participant.
As a patriarchal society, the males controlled much of the band’s sexual routines. When the females were in heat, they could expect to be mounted from behind by more than two males per hour, especially during the morning hours. Appearing as an unrestrained orgy at times, the beta males would literally ravage the females that the alpha males hadn’t claimed as their own. The sexual excitement was almost unbearable. For when the males weren’t copulating, they were usually masturbating while awaiting their turn. On occasion during moments of extreme anguish, the males and females would look to their own gender for immediate satisfaction and acceptance. They weren’t really homosexuals in the modern sense of the word, but their behavior could be labeled as such.
This type of sexually hyper-active behavior was consistent with our predecessors’ biological need to reproduce in great numbers. Coinciding with the eventual disappearance of the females’ oestrus, it was one of the reasons why they were able to survive and eventually evolve into Homo sapiens. The males’ desire (libido) to regularly reproduce was imperative for enlarging and maintaining their territory so that they could successfully compete with the other primates. The extinction of any primates within the great forests would have occurred to those species that were incapable of occupying an area with a substantial number of their offspring. Competition was harsh and the most bountiful territories were actually battlefields between those in contention.
Able to move from band to band, the females attracted the other males with their unique scents and body movements. Ovulating every thirty-six days, there was a period of six or seven days in which they were fertile. Due to their hyper-sexual inclination, the majority of the females spend their lives either pregnant or about to be pregnant. Similar to the rest of the females in the animal kingdom, they bore the burden of giving life. Once she had become impregnated, the rest of the apes shielded her from the surrounding dangers. Then seven or eight months later, she would move into the nearby bushes for protection and give birth to her child.
Conceiving a child every three or four years, a female reared her children until they reached the age of six or seven years old. It was during this long period of child rearing that they would form a special relationship. Cradled in the mother’s arms and finding nourishment from her beasts, the child became irreversibly dependent upon her for the needed food, warmth, and protection in order to survive. Until it was time for the child to venture out into the world, they were inseparable. Yet amazingly and unlike many other species, if something happened to the mother and the child became an orphan, the other females within the band would raise the child as their own.
Contrary to popular belief, this deep relationship between the mother and her children isn’t a pair bonding relationship. Instead, it is a maternal relationship based upon their biological/emotional dependency upon one another. The actual forming of a pair bonding relationship between an unrelated male and a female did not exist among our primate ancestors. Though, it would eventually emerge, once we had become true nomads and began to form our family units. But in the beginning, our sexual relationships were basically a cenogamy or rather a fission-fusion arrangement, where the individual was free to breed with any and all available mates within the group. The children didn’t really know or even care, which male had actually fathered them. As long as the mother was present, they were assured a place of warmth and security.
Undeniably, the relationship between a mother and her child is the most powerful relationship that exists between human beings. Biologically inspired and emotionally maintained, a mother and her offspring will find themselves eternally tied to each other. As a result, their relationship is so unique and everlasting for the child that many of today’s psychological theories of behavior are based upon its internal dynamics. Modern children may love and respect their fathers, but under normal circumstances, they will almost always hold a binding devotion and a special place in their hearts for their mothers.
As well as their individual identities, each group of apes possessed their own unique way of life. Call it their cultural traits or call it their unique customs, whatever the description, there were several subtle differences between the groups in how they lived, reacted towards each other, and how they basically functioned. Their choice of foods, their preferred methods of communication, their approach to undertaking certain tasks, and even the way they used tools were all examples of their group differences. Not unlike the wide variety of human cultures that can be viewed in today, the different groups of our ancestral apes were able to establish and maintain their own unique subcultures through the efforts of educating their children towards their own way of life.
For the offspring, their education started as soon as they left their mother’s womb. The maze of jungle plants, wonderful colors, unusual sounds, and unforgettable aromas would come alive and become imprinted upon their very consciousness. Before long, they were able to distinguish between the distinctively different characteristics of sights, sounds, and odors. By observing and adolescent mimicking the other apes around them, they would begin to imitate the different calls, gestures, postures, and most importantly their behaviors. Comparable to all humans, the older apes acted as invaluable mentors or role models for the younger ones in passing along important knowledge.
Associating the different visual and auditory sensations with their daily encounters, their physical and social environments soon became familiar landmarks as they began to learn how to communicate with the others. Along with successfully expressing their own needs, these youngsters were quite capable of recognizing their mothers’ moods, signals, routines, and different calls. Thus it wouldn’t take long before they became accustomed to the limits of their behaviors. While participating in the customary activities with the other apes, they were constantly learning which behaviors were permissible and which ones were not. Naturally, the rewards and punishments handed out to them by the adults were a significant part of their everyday lives.
As they slowly ventured farther and farther away from their mother’s protection, they learned how to recognize and deal with the different circumstances through trial and error. In many situations, it wasn’t out of the ordinary for them to learn from their initial failures and mistakes. The hazards of scaling a brittle tree, wandering away from the band, or attempting to play with a dangerous animal were invaluable moments in their early years for acquiring needed information. Throughout their adolescence, they were taught the many different needed skills for survival. The building of a nest, the wrestling with their peers, the observing of what type of plants to eat, and the mimicking of the grown ups in their behavioral patterns were all experiences that eventually helped them form their own unique personalities.
Our primate ancestors didn’t possess the higher cognitive skills of modern humans, but much like the present day chimpanzees, they still displayed a surprisingly rich and diverse mental capacity. In addition to the ability to remember and classify objects according to their properties (e.g. size, color, smell, and shape), they could also recall and learn from their past experiences by reacting to a similar situation in a completely different fashion. For instance, they could actually come up with a totally different plan or strategy for overcoming a particular type of prey or for fording a raising stream. Furthermore, they even understood the medicinal value of certain plants; whereas they would eat a specific plant in order to treat a particular illness. But most astonishingly of all, the children not only played with toys, but they also devised and then played games. This incredible aptitude for remembering earlier events and images, classifying data, planning strategies, creating activities, and learning from their past mistakes was indicative of their ability to solve problems.
Without question, this fundamental problem solving ability was directly related to the growing use of their hands and legs. As a way to adapt to their changing environment, they were physically capable of stretching their imaginations. Along with their increased consumption of animal protein, which helped nourished the brain; their unique set of physical abilities had over time helped them develop their complex reasoning skills. In effect, the more animal protein they consumed, the more they were incline to use their arms and legs to obtain that protein.
Ultimately all the necessary mental, physical, and dietary ingredients for eventually learning how to synthesize and analyze information were present within our earliest kin. Therefore, it was just a matter of time before we began to utilize a logical and sequential approach to any particular problem. However being highly emotional and credulous creatures, sometimes those emotions would interfere with our ability to clearly reason.
These early primates weren’t actually the makers of tools. They didn’t construct an assortment of different objects into another type of instrument (e.g. spears, axes, etc.), nor did they construct a tool with another tool. But in the beginning, they did use the surrounding branches, leaves, and rocks, to their own benefit. With the development of their hands, they were able to actually seek out other sources of food. Thus they could be called the users of nature’s tools.
As they searched for food among the thick jungles, it was quite common for them to strip the leaves from a small twig and use it to catch insects. This was accomplished by poking a bare twig into the hole of an ant or termite mound, until the insects had become sufficiently aroused. Aggravated by the intrusion, the insects would then begin to crawl up the twig into the ape’s possession. However, they soon discovered that the most rewarding method for using a stick was when they employed it to dig into the ground, so as to obtain the plentiful and nutritious larvae, worms, and insects. It wasn’t a hardy meal by any means, but it did provide them with a way of supplementing their diets.
Besides trapping and digging for insects, they also used a variety of leaves and branches to construct their own temporary nests or beds. Usually, these beds could be found high in the trees, supported by the sturdy branches. Due to the height of the trees, these beds weren’t just haphazardly thrown together. Instead, they were constructed in such a fashion as to ensure that the apes didn’t fall through them or roll off the edges during a sleep-filled night. Undoubtedly, the construction of these temporary havens was well thought out beforehand, which was indicative of their growing intelligence.
But the most important and intriguing skill that they possessed was their ability to open fruits and nuts by beating them with a rock or a piece of wood. Oddly enough, it was this simple skill that would enable our early ancestors to change their economy and eventually revolutionize our species’ evolution. Because once they had learned to use a hand-held rock to obtain food from the surrounding plants, it not only ignited their imaginations on the possibilities of using it for other purposes, but it also gave them the means to become scavengers. Employed as our first known tool, the rock would additionally become our first and most reliable weapon. Of course later as nomads, the rock would evolve into the hand-held axe or cleaver, but in the beginning our ancestors used it as a hand-held missile. And without the use of weapons, we could have never moved from continent to continent.
In terms of our physical evolution, these anthropoid apes had already developed a bowed spine, bend knees, collarbones, and a set of grasping hands and feet. In time, their later descendants would develop a broad pelvis, locking knee joints, elongated heel bones, and a lengthened set of big toes. Some of these characteristics evolved as a consequence of them living in the trees, while the others would come about as a result from them living on the ground. Thus one of the main differences between our ancestral apes and the other apes in the forest was that our hominid kin began to progressively move towards the ground and eventually learn how to dwell there with the other animals. This simple shift towards living on the ground had a profound impact upon our evolution. For it not only helped us to become more erect in our posture, while freeing up our hands for other uses, but it also assisted us in becoming more carnivorous in our feeding habits.
After organizing themselves into small bands, our ancestors actually consumed an assortment of different kinds of animals. Of course, they weren’t capable of hunting the larger game, but they did kill and eat a variety of baboons, wild hogs, bushbucks, and monkeys. During the actual kill, the tactics that they employed were very unique within the animal kingdom. As a close-knit band of unlikely meat-eaters, they didn’t resort to hunting down and directly attacking the intended prey. Instead, they sat in the trees and waited for an animal to stumble into a prearranged ambush. It was an ambush unlike any other in the animal kingdom. In terms of psychologically confusing a particular victim, it was an uncommonly effective and devious method.
When an animal did happen to walk into their trap, one band of apes would start screaming at the top of their lungs as they were shaking the branches of the surrounding trees, thus producing a very chaotic situation. By creating a frightful scene of total mayhem, it was their intention to confuse the unfortunate animal, until the ambush was completely set. Meanwhile, another band of apes had already moved onto the ground and began dancing around the prey in circles. During all of this commotion, a couple of the circling apes would start running directly at the animal, only to slightly nudge it as a prelude to the real attack. Then at the very moment the prey had become paralyzed with fear and bewilderment, several of the larger apes would suddenly and terrifyingly pounce upon it, thus tearing it apart from limb to limb. Almost immediately afterwards, the meat was divided on the basis of their unique social hierarchy, whereas the males were expected to eat first and the females and their children last.
The strangest aspect about their mode of hunting was that before the anticipated encounter with each prey, they all quietly sat in the trees for hours on end in a “silent display.” During this solemn prelude, some of their facial expressions were especially menacing and foreboding, while many others displayed a resolute disposition. Much like a modern soldier praying before going into battle, it was almost as if they were mentally and emotionally preparing themselves for the upcoming kill.
Amid the abundant plant life, our ancestors did more than just run from the predators, kill their intended prey, or cared for their young. They actually came to rely upon the other animals around them for their survival. After concluding a feeding frenzy, several types of species (e.g. birds, monkeys, squirrels, and small carnivores) would begin to feed upon the scraps left behind by the different bands of apes. Forming a mutual relationship, these animals not only became dependent upon those scraps of food, but also upon the security provided by the band itself. Within the dark confines of the jungle, they routinely followed the band from area to area in much the same manner as our domesticated pets follow us around the house today. As a consequence, our ancestors quickly became aware of the many benefits of living along side the other creatures of the world.
Living in a state of constant danger, these birds, monkeys, squirrels, and other smaller animals exhibited certain behaviors or emitted various sounds as a form of communication. Used as an early warning system, our pre-human ancestors made it a habit to listen and to watch them for any signs of unusual sounds or behavior. Employing a series of barks, chirps, screams, shrills, or becoming overly restless, these companions of the forests would alert the band of any approaching dangers, such as predators, forest fires or overflowing rivers. What’s more, our ancestors soon discovered that by observing the animals, many of them could be used as a form of direction finder in locating water or certain desirable plants. What the band didn’t know about a particular area, the other animals could help them discover it. In fact, some creatures became so accustomed to the individual apes that they would actually lie down among them and clean the parasites off of their bodies, thus forming an inseparable bond of companionship.
While our ancestral apes were still living in the tropical forests of eastern Africa, they initiated the close relationships that we enjoy today with our domesticated pets. Other animals have formed mutual bonds between each other, but not nearly as profoundly as we have bonded with them. The reasons for this are quite simple. We learned very early in our evolution that animals can be feared, hated, ignored, or even eaten --- but that they can also be life savers, good companions, and very beneficial to our welfare. Due to this special bond that was established between our earlier ancestors and the other animals in the forests, it is by no mere coincidence that we were able to emulate their hunting skills as nomads and even domesticate several of them at a later date. At that point, it had already become second nature with us to seek out their company and employ their talents.
As territorial and aggressive creatures, it wasn’t uncommon for our early ancestors to invade and then occupy another group of ape’s territory. Nor was it unusual for them to actively defend their part of the forest. Sometimes, this situation would lead to an agreed buffer zone between the two communities, much like a modern day demilitarized zone.
Of course, this unwanted intrusion into another’s territory wasn’t accomplished peacefully. Due to social pressures brought about by either the disappearance of their food supply or by their overpopulation, several bands of males along with the more aggressive females would enter another group’s territory in attempt to alleviate their hunger. But instead of directly attacking another band of apes in one big confrontation, the intruders would attempt to individually ambush the male apes in the hopes of either slowly killing them off or by intimidating them enough to leave their territory. Sometimes, it would take days for them to set up a proper ambush, depending upon the layout of the terrain. However, once the ambush had been sprung, the intruders would pounce upon the lone ape by jumping up and down upon him with such force that the victim was either horribly hurt or killed within a few minutes.
Astonishingly once the attack had concluded, the intruders would perform an ecstatic victory dance around the corpse. Forming a semi-circle, they would beat their chests and make strange guttural sounds, while dancing to the beat of some inner cadence. Easing the physical and mental tension created by the violent encounter, the dance probably signified a combination of personal exaltation for overcoming a foe and the relief of surviving the fight.
This bloody scenario would occur almost daily, until the intruders had systematic killed off the larger males or at least forced the disheartened and defeated band to move to another territory. Afterwards, the victors would move their main group of apes from their old territory and into the new one, and thus enjoy the fruits of their aggression.
Many modern scientists and scholars believe that this is where the human race propensity towards warfare first showed its ugly head. And there isn’t any doubt that our latter-day nomadic, agrarian, and industrial societies have also exhibited the same inclination towards conquering their neighbors over any number of territorial, political, religious, ethnic, and economic reasons.
Nevertheless, this early type of warfare along with the warfare of today was based upon a group’s economic imperatives, instead of their genetic makeup or their social norms. We aren’t the only creatures on earth that will forcibly invade our own species’ territory in an effort to occupy a richer area. Species of fish, birds, insects, and other mammals will also attack their neighbors, all in the name of territorial and economic necessity. Throughout time, the act of war by a species has always been a distinctive alternative to starvation and the possibility of extinction, which has made it almost instinctual in regards to our own behavior.
As an economy, food gathering was very limited in its scope and depth. Yet it was an economy that eventually helped physically and culturally mode us into the species we are today. While developing the use of our arms and legs and increasing their animal protein consumption, our ancestral apes would begin to further develop their physical and mental capabilities to the point where they could eventually move out into the barren savannas. It was during this time that they also began to culturally change from a semi-organized tree creature to a highly organized ground creature. Still, those physical and cultural changes were able to come about because of how they had initially developed in the deep forests of Africa. In a very real sense, we can look upon the towering trees around us as not only our first shelters, but also as the birthplace of our species.
It should also be noted that in some of the most remote parts of the world, food gathering remains to this day a viable economy. In fact, the people who live along the many isolated river systems of central Africa, Asia, and South America have always gathered food for a living. Moreover, the natives who inhabit the islands among the world’s oceans still continue to reap the rewards of nature’s bounty. From generation to generation, food gatherers have fished the oceans and rivers, hunted the small game, collected the fruits and nuts from the forests and jungles, gathered eggs, or dug for roots to satisfy their daily nourishment. Besides being the first human economy, it is also the only human economy that hasn’t significantly changed in the last several million years.

gshort3011 at 9:03AM on Apr 23rd 2008

41. I guess Islamic terrorism has nothing to do with Israel?

Ryan Anderson at 9:05AM on Apr 23rd 2008

42. As usual, Dinesh delivers a huge shart, and as usual, brian laps it up, smiling and nodding.

Ho hum. Another day...

brandon at 9:12AM on Apr 23rd 2008

43. PROFESSOR X
prfssrx
FORMER ATHEIST
HORACIO MATTESA
Micah Jones
THOMAS QUINN
Bill Jacobs
RICHARD DAWKINS
KING HAIKU
MAJOR WILLIAMS
GRACIE JOWERS
Frank Lungsford
DOUCHEBAG
...

I knew the guy was a nutter, but now he even uses his made-up handles to have conversations with himself!

Mokele Mbembe at 9:18AM on Apr 23rd 2008

44. I find it vaguely amusing then the neocons on this blog begin bashing Fundementalist Islam, when they themselves are mostly Fundementalist Christians.

At least DD can recognize that not all Muslims are terrorists. If only he could stop all his stereotypes.

As some people have already observed, Liberalism 2 is merely an extension of Liberalism 1. Liberalism 1, created by John Locke, orginated in the 1600s, the age of absolute monarchs. Liberalism 2, the "1960s liberalism" is merely liberalism adapted for the modern world.

Conservatives, Christian and Muslim, are opposed to liberalism because it encourages progress and free though, while minimizing the role of religion in public life.

Jacob at 9:22AM on Apr 23rd 2008

45. brandon,
No thank you for that imagery.

gshort3011,
What is it with you and shamefully log cut-and-past posts?

Mokele Mbembe at 9:21AM on Apr 23rd 2008