[Cyberyeti]

I forget who said "anybody who quotes the bible as fact has already lost the argument". Please can we get this anti-semitic bigotry out of the thread and get back to our original discussion.

Christianity has had a massive effect on the world (particularly the Western world), some of it good, some of it not so good, some of it downright evil.

You can't travel through southern France without becoming aware of the crusade against the Cathars for example which was a series of atrocities.

[32519]

Cyberyeti, on 2014-February-20, 18:21, said:

I forget who said "anybody who quotes the bible as fact has already lost the argument". Please can we get this anti-semitic bigotry out of the thread and get back to our original discussion. Christianity has had a massive effect on the world (particularly the Western world), some of it good, some of it not so good, some of it downright evil. You can't travel through southern France without becoming aware of the crusade against the Cathars for example which was a series of atrocities.

Vampyr, on 2014-February-20, 17:48, said:

325, the OP started this thread to discuss an issue he or she was interested in. He asked you if you would be kind enough to post this religious stuff in another thread. Yet this is the second screed you have posted since he made that request. Can you not respect others' wishes?

Lets scrutinise these two posts a little closer:
This is what the OP says –

onoway, on 2014-February-16, 06:45, said:

The question came up as a result of insomia but still...What events for which humans were responsible has had (is having, will have) the most profound effect on world history? It started out as one event but that seemed to be impossible to decide so allowed for a couple more. I was wondering if anyone else would come up with the same events as I did.

I have copied this part of the OP for emphasis…
What events for which humans were responsible has had (is having, will have) the most profound effect on world history?

In post 6 I was replying to others who had introduced religion into the thread. Religion possibly has had/will have the most profound effect on world history. The actions of humans has DELAYED the outcome which the Elohim of the Jews has GUARANTEED!

In post 29 I replied to Onoway’s post 24, maybe a bit sick but not entirely off-topic.

Post 41 is off-topic and has now been deleted to keep all of you happy.

In post 54 I was replying to your post 52.

In post 58 I was replying to your post 55.

I stand by them all. All of them are on-topic, “What events for which humans were responsible has had (is having, will have) the most profound effect on world history?”

New evidence keeps on surfacing that humans were involved in a well orchestrated campaign to denounce Yehoshua as the Messiah. When that failed, new evidence keeps on surfacing that humans were involved in corrupting the original message. If Yehoshua was a false messiah as claimed, all these humans needed to do was to ignore him altogether. Anything that is false inevitably dies alongside the creator thereof. Few live past the age of 90. By simply ignorning this new religious fanatic, the sect he was creating would have died within the space of 90 years. Now 2000 years later, humans are responsible for annexing many of the originators teachings, panel-beating their own version and interpretation out of those teachings, before re-launching them as a new sect. One of those sects is labelled Christianity (in whatever disguise it is advertised, be it Roman Catholic, protestant, Baptist etc). Another off-shoot is Islam. All three (Judaism, Christianity and Islam) have their roots from the Jews, who are humans.

For emphasis, I have copied this part of the OP a second time…
What events for which humans were responsible has had (is having, will have) the most profound effect on world history?

The actions of humans (as outlined above) has resulted in unnecessary religious wars and the deaths of who knows how many millions? All still on-topic and nothing to do with religion in isolation.

[Vampyr]

barmar, on 2014-February-18, 15:25, said:

I'd say:

Development of spoken language
Invention of written language
Agriculture

These, and also the invention of the concept of zero mentioned elsewhere, are really important but are more the result of a long process and were, perhaps, inevitable.

The most important event is perhaps too obvious to mention, but I will anyway : the collision with an asteroid that caused the extinction of the dinosaurs. If dinos were still around, we mammals would still be shrew-like creatures, hiding in burrows during the day and scurrying around at night foraging seeds and insects.

[sfi]

Since humans didn't cause it this doesn't fit the original criteria, but the evolution of wheat was crucial to the development of early agricultural societies and the subsequent development of civilisations.

[Vampyr]

sfi, on 2014-February-21, 06:51, said:

Since humans didn't cause it this doesn't fit the original criteria, but the evolution of wheat was crucial to the development of early agricultural societies and the subsequent development of civilisations.

Yes, forgot about that part of the OP!

[Zelandakh]

sfi, on 2014-February-21, 06:51, said:

Since humans didn't cause it this doesn't fit the original criteria, but the evolution of wheat was crucial to the development of early agricultural societies and the subsequent development of civilisations.

Is the current theory not that the domestication of animals was the most important step in early agriculture, allowing larger more static communities to develop, etc?

[kenberg]

Vampyr, on 2014-February-21, 07:26, said:

Yes, forgot about that part of the OP!

Yes, I had missed it as well. And, most fortunately, this makes all events such as women being impregnated by gods off topic! Whew!

[barmar]

sfi, on 2014-February-21, 06:51, said:

Since humans didn't cause it this doesn't fit the original criteria, but the evolution of wheat was crucial to the development of early agricultural societies and the subsequent development of civilisations.

The article is about the evolution of domesticated wheat. So humans did cause it.

I listed as "agriculture" in my response, to encompass this with all the other changes to flora and fauna as a result of domestication. All the animals and plants that go into human food have evolved dramatically in the past 10K years. And humans have also evolved along with them -- early humans couldn't digest milk after weening, and I assume domesticated cows produce far more milk than their ancestors did. We've also evolved in response to other technologies, e.g. our jaws are not as strong as other primates, and our digestive system is simpler, because we learned to cook food before eating it.

[Vampyr]

kenberg, on 2014-February-21, 10:37, said:

Yes, I had missed it as well. And, most fortunately, this makes all events such as women being impregnated by gods off topic! Whew!

Otherwise, of course, the story of Leda and the Swan would be right up there, since this union produced Helen, and she...

[dustinst22]

onoway, on 2014-February-17, 21:28, said:

One thing nobody has mentioned that is most decidedly on my list is the allowing of patents on living GMOs. It's an insidious thing which is already having a profound (and unfortunately in the short term apparently positive but in the long run highly detrimental) impact on agriculture, both the quality of the food we eat and the environment. It's leading into a future for which we are not only absolutely unprepared but which may be impossible to repair.

It's an interesting subject for sure, but unfortunately this subject is being sensationalized by the media and people are buying into it. The general consensus amongst the scientific community is that food from GM crops poses no greater risk than conventional food. I think it's far too soon to predict what the long term affects of GMO's will have on food production.

[sfi]

Zelandakh, on 2014-February-21, 09:30, said:

Is the current theory not that the domestication of animals was the most important step in early agriculture, allowing larger more static communities to develop, etc?

I haven't heard that theory, but it wouldn't seem to be enough. Crop agriculture requires much less space to produce food, which means communities can be physically smaller and don't need to follow the good grass during the year. This then leads to a central point where items of value (food) can be stored, which means they can be stolen, which means they now need to be defended. And thus civilisation changed markedly.

However, since I haven't really looked into this more than watching Bronowski's documentary (70s?) on it, I could be relying on outdated or biased viewpoints. But it sounded pretty convincing.

[Fluffy]

Vampyr, on 2014-February-21, 06:15, said:

The most important event is perhaps too obvious to mention, but I will anyway : the collision with an asteroid that caused the extinction of the dinosaurs. If dinos were still around, we mammals would still be shrew-like creatures, hiding in burrows during the day and scurrying around at night foraging seeds and insects.

One cannot know of course, but I think humans climbed on the chain over wolves and lions due to smart tactics and tools (weapons), I would think that we would get over dinossaurs as well, if we ever got to exist.

[aguahombre]

kenberg, on 2014-February-21, 10:37, said:

Yes, I had missed it as well. And, most fortunately, this makes all events such as women being impregnated by gods off topic! Whew!

Not entirely off topic. The point where women stopped believing those guys were actually gods is quite relevant.

[onoway]

barmar, on 2014-February-21, 11:06, said:

The article is about the evolution of domesticated wheat. So humans did cause it.

I listed as "agriculture" in my response, to encompass this with all the other changes to flora and fauna as a result of domestication. All the animals and plants that go into human food have evolved dramatically in the past 10K years. And humans have also evolved along with them -- early humans couldn't digest milk after weening, and I assume domesticated cows produce far more milk than their ancestors did. We've also evolved in response to other technologies, e.g. our jaws are not as strong as other primates, and our digestive system is simpler, because we learned to cook food before eating it.

Actually a whole lot of humans still cannot digest milk..some in various cultures are unable to digest it at all, others lose the capacity gradually or otherwise after maybe the age of 2 or so, as their bodies stop producing the enzyme which allows them to handle it. Quite a lot of people have found as they grow older that removing milk and milk products from their diets also removed such things as arthritis.

Another point is that the current theory is that possibly as many as 1 out of 100 are actually also allergic to wheat or at least gluten to one degree or another. Some dramatically so with celiac disease and others with a low level which leads to inflammation and again such things as arthritis.
http://www.health.ha...-out-the-gluten


However, some suggest sometimes it isn't actually just the gluten proteins that are the problem. In the past the problem proteins and enzymes were apparently neutralized by the fermentation which took place as the harvested grain was fermented slightly in stooks before threshing. That fermentation no longer takes place and some theorize that's what's leading to the growing numbers of people having problems with wheat and sometimes other cereals as well.

As a side note, I was interested when I found out about this as if you feed horses hay which has just been baled, and not let age or ferment for just a few days after being baled (and this is after it's dry enough to bale) you are very likely to have horses with severe digestive issues, which for horses are frequently fatal. Humans rarely have such dramatic reactions unless clearly allergic, but many theorize that arthritis and other autoimmune problems arise from a sort of low level continuous allergic response to "something" and more and more the "something" appears to be the food we eat.

As another side note, the old forms of wheat, emmer and such, contained up to 30% protein, most modern wheats are down to about 12-16%. Again, some theorize that that's a partial cause of obesity, as diminished nutritional values in the quest for production and "travelability" is a very common trend in all modern foods, so people have to eat a lot more of them to get the same nutrition. Combine that with a decreased capacity to absorb the nutrients that are there...

To get back to harping about GMO's this is one of the frightening things about it; humans have NOT evolved as much as we think we have in terms of coping with environmental stress, certainly we are kindergarteners in that race vs the Olympians such as bacteria and insects. We have no idea what the long term affect of deliberately ingesting minute quantities of poison daily is actually doing to us, nor to our children. Well, not true, actually, we do have quite a good idea through a whole lot of studies, and none of them are good news, but they are not widely publicised.

Our brains have apparently evolved faster than either (the rest of) our bodies or our emotional capacities to understand and respect our limits, or even to push the limits with a degree of caution. This has led to wonderful things such as the eradication of smallpox, but also the development of such things as flesheating disease.

Nevertheless, the development of agriculture is certainly deserving of being on the list. In my view this means grains, as that's what got people stuck in one place rather than travelling with animals so they had forage -which is a sort of agriculture but doesn't have the same sort of impact. Certainly open to opinion though.

[onoway]

Vampyr, on 2014-February-21, 06:15, said:

The most important event is perhaps too obvious to mention, but I will anyway : the collision with an asteroid that caused the extinction of the dinosaurs. If dinos were still around, we mammals would still be shrew-like creatures, hiding in burrows during the day and scurrying around at night foraging seeds and insects.

Important without question but hardly something for which (as far as we know) man was responsible. Or maybe those stone "astronaut" heads in Mexico are indicative of a totally unexpected/unknown bit of history..

[blackshoe]

Two things- we don't drink small beer as much as we used to, and a friend of mine was recently diagnosed as lactose intolerant. She's 54. Her comment: "do you know how many things I have to give up now?!"

[Vampyr]

Fluffy, on 2014-February-21, 15:21, said:

One cannot know of course, but I think humans climbed on the chain over wolves and lions due to smart tactics and tools (weapons), I would think that we would get over dinossaurs as well, if we ever got to exist.

We would not 'get to exist', would we. Evolving into great apes would have been impossible for mammals spending their lives fleeing/hiding from dinosaurs.

[blackshoe]

Vampyr, on 2014-February-22, 10:39, said:

We would not 'get to exist', would we. Evolving into great apes would have been impossible for mammals spending their lives fleeing/hiding from dinosaurs.

Possibly velociraptors or some other breed of dinosaur would have developed intelligence absent that catastrophic event. It would be a very different intelligence from ours, I suspect. IAC we'll never know.

[Vampyr]

blackshoe, on 2014-February-22, 11:42, said:

Possibly velociraptors or some other breed of dinosaur would have developed intelligence absent that catastrophic event. It would be a very different intelligence from ours, I suspect. IAC we'll never know.

Something I find interesting about this is the question of what adaptive purpose "intelligence" serves. If the oceans had, for millions of years, been impossible to cross, would "intelligence" have evolved in a non-ape animal outside of Africa? This has happened to some extent IN the oceans.

So long, and thanks for all the fish.

[mikeh]

The main problem with answering the OP is the somewhat ill-defined nature of 'event'.

The development of agriculture, whether we mean the domestication of animals or plants, was almost certainly something that arose very gradually. For example, farming probably started by people shitting seeds, in combination with the development of the concept of a latrine or preferred area, close to a temporary settlement (nomads frequently reuse sites). Humans, by selecting attractive looking grains from wild plants, unintentionally selected for plants that gave rise to large ears or other edible parts. By community shitting, they created areas that had fertilizer and selected seeds, and so gradually came the domestication of grains. Wolves likely evolved into dogs because human middens would be good scavenging areas, and wolves that had relatively low fear or anxiety about humans would tend to be more successful at scavenging such sites. Add to that the notion that some pups might be 'adopted', and that those that were most comfortable with humans would be the ones that thrived, and soon enough one has dogs.

But are any of these 'events'?

Here's another one, and one that I find fascinating.

The development of the bicameral mind.

This idea argues that until about 3000 years ago homo sapiens was intelligent but lacked consciousness. I don't have time to set out my layman's understanding of this idea, but google the bicameral mind and you will find that the notion, although it sounds weird, cannot be (or at least has not yet been) shown to be incorrect, and it explains a very great deal about ancient literature and beliefs, as well as affording a possible explanation for such things as schizophrenia.

Now, even if true, it is far from clear that the development of consciousness, to the arguably limited extent that we are conscious, is an 'event' either, rather than a development.