4 ms·

I don't. I can't find it now, but long ago I came across a description of a British captain and his crew landed on an island, and was confronted with the nativ

I don't. I can't find it now, but long ago I came across a description of a British captain and his crew landed on an island, and was confronted with the natives. The natives on had rocks, which they threw at them. They had the usual muskets and swords. He described the rocks as huge, accurately thrown, and a never ending deluge. While you were ducking one, another hit you from another direction. He reported they broke arms and skulls. Had he been able to put more distance between himself and the rock throwers, so a musket could reach but a rock couldn't the outcome might have been different I guess, but they had just landed on a beach. Rocks were the first distance effect weapons. The answer to "why doesn't anybody do it any more" is simply we have even better distance effect weapons now. Apes throw sticks now (not as effective as rocks), then we move onto rocks, and then slingshots, spears, then bows and arrows, and on we go. If you came from Australia, you would know of a Test cricket batsman (ie, one of the best at the game in the world in a world that has over a billion following it), who misjudged a cricket ball (made of leather and stuffing, not rock), bowled at him (ie hand thrown) that was bounced of the ground (direct throws aren't legal), it smashed through the best helmets we had to offer and killed him. https://www.bbc.com/sport/cricket/30219440 https://www.bbc.com/sport/cricket/30219440 He never regained consciousness. It wasn't some unfortunate stroke caused by some undetected aneurysm. It tore open an artery in his neck.

dalbasal 6y ago
Technology is rarely usurped entirely. I definitely agree that rock throwing in fights still exists, and people will do it when necessary. It's not, however, a primary method of warfare or 1-on-1 conflict... outside of specific circumstances like defending walls. Maybe a situation where one side has armour and swords and the other has numbers. Even then, long term, I'd wager on the the former. Hunting methods tend to perpetuate. I'm not saying that no one ever hunts birds with rocks. I'm sure many people do. I'm equally sure that very few ever fill the pot this way. For rock throwing to have shaped our arms from Habilis to Erectus, A just want to say that I'm not arguing against any core parts of the theory. Hand/thumb articulation. Shoulder biomechanics. Explosive/elastic ability. There's plenty of evidence for that. There are also plenty of alternative ways to theorize how this was useful. I think rock throwing is the popular explanation because it assumes the least behavioural complexity. It could have been more complex behaviour, like spear throwing. We only have evidence of stone tools because composition. But, I think it's safe to assume that this represents a very small part of the Erectus (even habilis) tool repertoire. If I had to accept rock throwing, my theory would be "alpha scavenger" behaviour, like brown bears. Rock throwing is be pretty useful for chasing large predators off their kill. This is an extant "hunting" method, stealing from lions. Cultures that still do this (now for cultural, more than nutritional reasons) use nothing but bravery. They walk in, projecting confidence. Lions retreat, at least temporarily. The people cut off a haunch and walk away. A crude stone knife/axe (the one tool we know was widely used) is an essential tool for this. You need to butcher super fast, before the lions regroup and try to recover the kill. That'd be an evolutionary advantage. Lions & bears do this, but it takes a lot of body mass. If a band of 50kg animals can chase off a pride of 150kg animals or a single 250kg animal... this is very efficient. Usually being alpha scavenger requires a tradeoff: large, calories consumptive body size in exchange for access to calories. Hard way to make a living, but at least plausible.
- type0 6y ago
  > more complex behaviour, like spear throwing. Possibly spear fishing if aquatic upright ape theory has any merit

dalbasal 6y ago

Technology is rarely usurped entirely. I definitely agree that rock throwing in fights still exists, and people will do it when necessary. It's not, however, a primary method of warfare or 1-on-1 conflict... outside of specific circumstances like defending walls. Maybe a situation where one side has armour and swords and the other has numbers. Even then, long term, I'd wager on the the former. Hunting methods tend to perpetuate. I'm not saying that no one ever hunts birds with rocks. I'm sure many people do. I'm equally sure that very few ever fill the pot this way. For rock throwing to have shaped our arms from Habilis to Erectus, A just want to say that I'm not arguing against any core parts of the theory. Hand/thumb articulation. Shoulder biomechanics. Explosive/elastic ability. There's plenty of evidence for that. There are also plenty of alternative ways to theorize how this was useful. I think rock throwing is the popular explanation because it assumes the least behavioural complexity. It could have been more complex behaviour, like spear throwing. We only have evidence of stone tools because composition. But, I think it's safe to assume that this represents a very small part of the Erectus (even habilis) tool repertoire. If I had to accept rock throwing, my theory would be "alpha scavenger" behaviour, like brown bears. Rock throwing is be pretty useful for chasing large predators off their kill. This is an extant "hunting" method, stealing from lions. Cultures that still do this (now for cultural, more than nutritional reasons) use nothing but bravery. They walk in, projecting confidence. Lions retreat, at least temporarily. The people cut off a haunch and walk away. A crude stone knife/axe (the one tool we know was widely used) is an essential tool for this. You need to butcher super fast, before the lions regroup and try to recover the kill. That'd be an evolutionary advantage. Lions & bears do this, but it takes a lot of body mass. If a band of 50kg animals can chase off a pride of 150kg animals or a single 250kg animal... this is very efficient. Usually being alpha scavenger requires a tradeoff: large, calories consumptive body size in exchange for access to calories. Hard way to make a living, but at least plausible.

type0 6y ago
> more complex behaviour, like spear throwing. Possibly spear fishing if aquatic upright ape theory has any merit