Did early man have a rudementary understanding of EVOLUTION?

This is purely a stream of consciousness and not based on any scientific articles or publications.



I've got a cat that bugging the shit out of me today. He won't leave me alone. He follows me around the house everywhere. If I'm reading he'll rub himself up on my leg and meow until I want to choke him. But I don't choke him ofcourse--I pet him. Because he craves it.

But then I looked down at him this morning and thought to myself, "What an utterly stupid animal. It craves attention from humans (something any animals should fear). Moreover, being a 'senior citizen' in cat years, it has lost none of that childlike craving--the damned thing just never grows up. It sleeps all day. It plays with string and a little chew toy that's basically a small bean bag with feathers sticking out of one side. If locked outside the house by accident, it meows wildly so that if we were out in the country or in the jungle, it would have been preyed upon by larger animals with little effort thanks to the stupid ting advertising it's presence with such vigor.
It's just a really stupid animal. One whose basic ergonomic design is elegant--even beautiful. But, one whose natural propensity for human companionship goes against natural survival instincts as I understand them.

So I asked myself, how the hell did this mutated creature come about? It's not like Mother Nature decided to fart a cat out of her ass one day. And you weirdo creationist don't have any answers either--there are no major 'pet' modern cat breeds that go all the way back to the days on the muddy banks of the Mesopotamia river valley. Indeed all major modern dog breeds don't go back more than 6 or 7 thousand years and many no more than a couple hundred years. Thus it wasn't a creature of genesis or creation.

These things were bred with specific features humans found desirable. The process was very much deliberate. Perhaps, early man must have had scavenger animals hanging out near a kill or food source, and the friendlier/least threatening ones were allowed to stay around or breed. After several generations, you end up with an animal whose personality traits become conducive to 'taming' for the purposes of 'loyalty', 'protection', and finally 'companionship'.

I remember seeing an old episode of a science show on Public Television called NOVA. Breeders of foxes for their fur conducted an experiment to see if they could change the behavior of these foxes to make them easier to handle before slaughter--much like how we've dumbed down chickens, cows, and pigs over time.
Foxes have two distinct stages in life when it comes to behavior--the phase before puberty, and then the life after puberty. Before they reach adolescence, foxes are docile, sometimes playful or trusting. After adolescence they become much more aggressive, nervous, and shy of humans--not easy to handle especially if you want to round them up for slaughter.
In this controlled experiment, after the foxes reached puberty, the breeders observed the behaviors of each fox taking note of how quickly each coward in the cage when approached, how nervous the fox was, how aggressive it appeared, etc.
They then chose the ones with the least 'extreme' personality features, and allowed those to breed. They continued this process, and in just 6 generations they ended up with a breed of fox that actually craved human attention. The animals weren't even required to be caged anymore as the new 'pet-like' foxes had no desire to escape, rarely leaving the side of the breeders. The drawback to the experiment though was that their fur also progressively became less desirable with each generation, and the foxes could not be used for slaughter.

Our ancestors must have had , if not an understanding of evolution, at least a rudimentary understanding of the principle of adaptation. Because they did the exact same thing to all manner of animals.
They've even created hundreds of varieties of fruits and veggies that didn't exist before. For example, carrots used to be purplish in color, until just a couple hundred years ago, someone started to experiment with creating orange colored carrots.



ok, before I just go on babbling, am I in the wrong here? There had to be some kind of understanding of evolutionary principles to apply them the way our forefathers did.

I know in the west we paint a picture of Religion vs. Science in the argument of Darwinism, but I don't think such concepts where of much concern to humans who wanted to find a way to tame their meat.

.
[
[Edited 10/16/09 19:08pm]

C:\Otaassk~.exe


Post# 20 / My best ever: http://prince.org/msg/7/324509

vivid is my new boo!

short answer: yes.

Well we figured out breeding animals for bigger better ones early on, so why not ourselves. Cats by the way were breed to be pretty not smart.

Actually, domesticated cats are not that different from those in the wild. Much, much less adapted than, say, dogs. And domesticated cats can easily survive if abandonded. Their hunting instincts remain so strong they have no problem finding food. Dogs can't say the same.

CarrieMpls said:

C:\Otaassk~.exe


Post# 20 / My best ever: http://prince.org/msg/7/324509

vivid is my new boo!

Imago said:

I haven't got a clue about the evolutionary angle, but I think you give your cat too little credit.

Cats have cleverly adapted to our method of conversation because we fail to understand theirs. They use body language, facial expression, scent and (to a lesser extent) sound. Domesticated pussies use sound with humans more than with other cats as they have learned that this is a way of getting what they want.

Is that evolution? Well, it clearly shows a great degree of intelligence on their part. The other option if for you to get on all fours and stick your asshole in the air, or spray up against your own wall.

Yay for the cat! I know it didn't even come close to answering your question, but I lightly skimmed it concentrating on the pussy cat stuff.

thebumpsquad said:

C:\Otaassk~.exe


Post# 20 / My best ever: http://prince.org/msg/7/324509

vivid is my new boo!

I think cat's seem smart because their owners become progressively dumber through kitteh ownership. I mean, how does one explain this:




I mean, it's the only way to walk a cat, those selfish bastards!



[Edited 10/16/09 18:41pm]

C:\Otaassk~.exe


Post# 20 / My best ever: http://prince.org/msg/7/324509

vivid is my new boo!

For shame. The next time that cat goes outdoors, he's gonna get his ass whooped by his buddies for that.

Is your avatar morphing into something? I swear it looked like a little cum stain the other day, now it's almost a sploodge.
[Edited 10/16/09 18:55pm]

thebumpsquad said:

For shame. The next time that cat goes outdoors, he's gonna get his ass whooped by his buddies for that.

Is your avatar morphing into something? I swear it looked like a little cum stain the other day, now it's almost a sploodge.
[Edited 10/16/09 18:55pm]

C:\Otaassk~.exe


Post# 20 / My best ever: http://prince.org/msg/7/324509

vivid is my new boo!

Imago said:

I think cat's seem smart because their owners become progressively dumber through kitteh ownership. I mean, how does one explain this:




I mean, it's the only way to walk a cat, those selfish bastards!



[Edited 10/16/09 18:41pm]

The articifical evolution seen in a short period of time as regards varying dog, cat, pigeon breeds etc at the hands of humans should leave no doubt for the creationists on what could be achieved over billions of years. But hey they don't believe in billions of year old universe/earth either to make their story fit.
[Edited 10/17/09 1:28am]