Somebody got it. Hehe
Agreed, entirely. The corollary therefore may well be that to get jacked, we need to do very much the opposite of our typical lean and swift ancestors, and keep volume and frequency of effort low. Getting jacked makes no sense in evolutionary terms unless we act like atypical humans.
The issue is that itās not necessary for SURVIVAL. We have literally zero need to physically overpower our prey, nor the biological tools to do so, aside from our brain ā which leads me into my next point; humans spent all our evolutionary skill points on our brain, which allowed us to make tools and then better tools and then even better tools.
Youāre not going to force an evolutionary adaptation on humanity by lifting weights. The body will still think, āI donāt need thisā, and try to ditch it.
If, for some reason, we started having to wrestle our food to the ground and rip it apart with our bare hands, then MAYBE it would happen over ages and ages.
2 Likes
Animals have different fiber types too. For fast twitch, humans have IIa, IIx and hybrids. Mice have IIa, IIb, IIx, and hybrids.
2 Likes
Iām not suggesting we are still evolving. I was referring to how we might once have been evolving, that would make muscle development dependent on a rare set of conditions.
Iām not sure why youāre not suggesting this, weāre still evolving.
2 Likes
This thread and virtually every follow up response:
5 Likes
Itās a crushing indictment of the education system.
Evolution is change in the heritable characteristics of biological populations over successive generations. Some people, myself included, might find it amusing to be contentious with regards to the question āare we still subjected to evolution by natural selection?ā. And while we certainly still are, modern medicine and technology have changed some of the pressures that previously dictated what āfittestā is with regards to āsurvival of the fittestā.
And any educational system that teaches evolution, evolution by natural selection, and still has graduates that question why we donāt evolve traits that would simply be convenient to have has failed to instill the core principles of that model. And this is sad.
3 Likes
Very good point. Weāre almost at the point where we are permissive of devolution in the strictest sense. physical traits that would have caused death in harsher environments are simply an inconvenience now, and people with them are perfectly able (and entitled, this isnāt some genocidal cleansing rant lol) to breed, passing on those traits.
1 Like
This was expressed quite well in the first few minutes of āIdiocracyā. Fair warning: the first few minutes are far, far better than the rest of the film.
Or that believes that historical humans where ever āApex predatorsā
Well, the definition of an āapex predatorā is a predator at the top of a food chain, with no natural predators. Humans, as a group, are certainly at the top of the food chain. As individuals, not so much. But, both lions and orcas are considered apex predators, and they hunt in groups ā so, we shouldnāt exclude humans based on our predatory abilities as individuals. And so by that token, we may very well have been apex predators since before we became homo sapiens.
Certainly, other apex predators are capable of coming into small human settlements and killing humans - but a lion can be snagged by a crocodile without it invalidatating us labelling them as apex predators either, soā¦ 
Weāre able to hunt prey without tools, simply by running them down and exhausting them and with a tool such as a spear we are able to defend ourselves ā even as individuals ā against some pretty gnarly beasts.
We are now, historically we havenāt been. And as a side note, it wasnāt our physical abilities that made us Apex predators.
True. As very well stated in another post above, it was our intelligence and our ability to make and use tools and weapons. Never really our physiques.
Also well stated above is that the drivers for evolution, i.e. surviving long enough to procreate and being fit enough to create and raise health offspring, have probably now changed. There is far less culling of weaker traits now, and less preference for traits that would make use a better fit, since plentiful food and medicine have intervened.
But this has nothing to do with my, admittedly rambling, original post. Early man would only ever have had reason to, and could only ever have afforded the energy to grow large amounts of muscle, if he could relax a lot, and occasionally do something with maximum exertion.
It might be best to move this stuff to Drunks Corner or Trumps Third Year or someplaceā¦Paul C is definitely going to ban me for lifeā¦
So what youāre saying is that to get big and strong we need to do something that taxes our muscles (like lift weights), then rest to recover from it?
1 Like
What do you mean historically? Are you, with regards to the term āhumanā, also considering archaic humans such as the homo erectus?
If you go back really far we have ancestry that had teeth such that they probably were unable to eat meat. These proto-humans are certainly not apex predators.
But āhumansā seem to have used tools since the stone age, millions of years ago. Tamed fire, hundreds of thousands of years ago.
As I mentioned, without anyone caring to specify more clearly how they are interpreting the terms then it is possible to argue that humans have been apex predators throughout our entire history (if you equate human to homo sapiens). Without being specific, itās impossible to have any meaningful discourse on the matter.
1 Like
What, after the sycophantic adoration you gave him in the original post? I think you have ābiggest fanā status for life.
I jest but threads go off topic all the time, and its not like hes invested any time in this one specifically so it hasnt cost him anything.
1 Like
Thatās by way of seeking forgiveness in advanceā¦