"Many were increasingly of the opinion that they’d all made a big mistake in coming down from the trees in the first place. And some said that even the trees had been a bad move, and that no one should ever have left the oceans." - The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy
im pretty sure that humans got out of the trees because the climate at the time became dry and the trees died, if we would be doing so good in the trees then why would we leave?
Yeah, as I lay in my comfortable bed in my air-conditioned room enjoying an ice cold beverage from my refrigerator, I often wish humanity was still scrounging for food in the jungle.
For ten thousands years slaves and serfs working on fields in miserable conditions were saying. - I have it bad now, but I am so happy Jack shall have air conditioning and internet porn in the future.
@Rick Random Yes, thank you, Rick Random, for taking a moment to remember their sacrifice by leaving a YT comment with your modern electronic device. I'm sure they really appreciate it.
@@dolekanteel2178 I am guessing this is from someone who has never hunted and gathered for any period of time. It is hard work, and starvation is a way of life. Hunting animals requires a lot of energy, and you're competing against every other human and large predator animal for the same food resources. In late Spring and Summer it is easier to hunt animals, but in Autumn and Winter, even if you successfully hunt an animal it is very difficult to find with any fat on them.
You spend some time out in nature, I'm talking legit a few weeks and just the bare essentials, and you'd be shocked at how amazing you feel. In just a few days you're failing asleep easier and waking up right before the sun comes up without any alarm feeling refreshed. It's amazing how easy it is to just focus on the task you are doing instead of worrying about a million other things. It truly is a peaceful way of life and we'd be foolish to think that what we have doesn't take it's toll on our body. Do we go hungry no yet depression, suicide rates, and drug abuse steadily climb higher. Regardless of where this debate goes I think we can all agree that we are not made for this chaotic of a lifestyle.
@David Whitehouse Well currently you get into a car accident and break your arm so the doctor prescribes you pain killers, because heaven forbid people feel any amount of pain. Then you 6 months later you're addicted to opiods and buying whatever you can get from some shady drug dealer. From there you're either stuck trying to get sober, you're a full blown addicted that can't hold down a job, or you OD and die. I've literally seen that exact scenario play put multiple times. I didn't even talk about the medical debt that can bankrupt you or the risk of losing your job. Don't act like we live in some wonderful paradise. Also most bears are not going to eat you. Grizzly bears might, polar bears definitely will. Black bears, which are what is most common, are like giant raccoons and are honestly very pleasent to watch. Just don't mess with their cubs.
I think I agree with this idea. Maybe like migratory birds and mammals, we were supposed to constantly move. Like the nature of our habitat (Earth). I think we defy what's designed for us, and now we're facing the consequences.
@@tomwh1993 evolution does shape our genome and u can call that a form of design. by evolutions design we are nomadic creatures meant to hunt and gather
@@the1shrubbery You can call that design if you want but you'd be wrong. Design implies planning and an endpoint, evolution has neither of these things. The changes in the way that humans live since we transitioned from hunter gatherers to today is astronomically fast in evolutionary time frames because we do have the capability to design, plan etc. We've left evolutionary pressure behind really and are now something else. Whether or not this turns out to be a good thing for humanity is too early to say, its complicated. The only thing we do know is that its impossible to go back now we've started on this path. You might have heard of it but Yuval Noah Harari's book Sapiens goes into this in more detail, I'm probably just misquoting it here
@Martin Pospisil Yeah i grasp that.I say that people after neothelitic revolution maybe earlier become childlishness , because of traditions and psychoviral cultures
This reminds me of a cartoon: two guys sit in a cave. One says to the other: the water we drink is pure, the air we breathe is clean, all the food we eat is organic, we get plenty of exercise, so how come nobody lives past thirty?
Lemme play Devil’s advocate for the fun of it. Maybe in those 30 years, they enjoyed more pleasure than most of us can in 70 long years now-a-days. Conceivable? Possible? Debatable? They’d have purer water and air presumably. Not once or twice, but 24*7, presumably. Maybe not as much social conservatism. Idk. Worth pondering the pros and cons certainly.
... meaning to say that even big catastrophies are sometimes started by good intentions. Humans only wanted to have plenty of pancakes for breakfast, but ended distrying their only planet.
Historically Peoples behaviour changes to give them a competitive advantage. The fact that it was not a perfect trade does not mean it was not a good trade.
yet, this trade is the one that threatens our very existance. because of agriculture, our population exploded and led to unregulated industry and pollution and global warming.
This transition from nomadic life style to sedentary is just a theory based on observations in a few archaeological sites. It does not prove that humans in other parts of the world made same transition. You can find today hunter gatherers in other parts of the world like the Amazon, parts of Africa and other places. Also like the chicken and the egg is not certain if the hunger, diseases and growth of population and technology were caused by the transition or were the cause for the transition.
People just want what their believe is true , people have prejudice and judgment . Evolutionary psychology. Farmer and majority support farming . That’s all .
Answer: no, no it wasn't humans biggest mistake. The main idea is progress not perfection, the amount of amazing human triumphs that this change brought on is undescribable. To say anything else is just puzzling
Our modern progress has been stolen at the price of impoverishing most of our own population and stealing resources and labor from the rest of the world.
These Wealth redistributors aka -Communists disguised as scientists- will stop at nothing to convince us that their world view is the only one that counts.
@@letsgobrandon987 Except that what is really happening is the opposite, trolls and shills and sock-puppet bots like you are paid or programmed to spout garbage like your post and worse, so it is really the oligarch thieves that seek to destroy the government and provoke division that are the problem. The polarity of the wealth redistribution today is that the rich are sucking up more and more of the value streams and companies, and then paying think tanks to think of stupid dishonest ways to justify it - like your bass-ackwards comment.
I am a hunter and gatherer, as soon I left behind all these agricultural minded people my life changed and I found a true potential partner. Insane how clear this is to me now.
As Ian Welsh says: “Hunter-gatherers are, generally speaking, healthier than agriculturalists and pastoralists. They live longer, suffer less from disease, are taller, the women have wider hips and suffer less from childbirth, they have better dentition and so on. The societies, again with some exceptions, are more egalitarian than most agricultural societies (though very early agricultural societies are more egalitarian than late hunter-gatherer societies, again, in general). They also have vastly more free time than agriculturalists.” “Basically, being a hunter-gatherer is about as good as it gets for most of human existence.”
And If you need guidance on how to meditate or achieve spiritual goals and you are between beginner and beginner-intermediate, Ian may be able to help for his standard fee of 150 dollars an hour
Think about it in terms of an ecosystem, if the things that sustain our population are not sustainable the reality is we are experiencing a boom and bust. The more we ignore the signs by kicking the can down the road the more potential and momentum our bust will have when the time comes. Climate change does not pose much threat to our planet, earth has seen many such events. it does how ever pose a huge threat to our current way of life. Our greed could mean our demise if we do not find a way to continue our growth and expansion without causing more harm. Remember this point,, our current civilisation model represents an absolutely tiny fragment of time.
yeah, hopefully with the passage of time as more women become educated the population can start to decrease. we can only hope that human ingenuity can solve global warming and keep global temperate from raising past the 4 degree point
I think farming & settled existence probably was the product of necessity rather than choice. Ie: climatic changes/excessive populations/other environmental pressures led to famines & that led to a much more intense reliance upon grains. It's quite possible that the mechanisms of plants growing from seed were already known, but of limited use to mobile peoples..
@@Alternativewayforlife starts with one...thats what im doing anyway. Chucked the whole urban bullshit routine, bought an old 3ton truck/rv conversion with solar etc, and just stopped paying a mortgage/rent/power/gas/water/...its a long list. Been doing this 2yrs now and well settled into it. Im parked up on the driveway of an empty block of flats that was trashed by squatters in melbourne. It must be heritage listed - itd be 1920s..amazn spot. And i live as simply as possible. My carbon footprint is miniscule bcoz i dont indulge in convenience (+pollution). Its really that simple at end of day..for me at least..
People are easily led. A surplus of resources allows a parasite class of Narcissists and Psychopaths to emerge. Most people are apathic sheep and follow them rather than themselves
@@Isochest Couldn't have been said better. We have the ability to heal, it's only a matter of when we start. In fact, I think most of us don't even know where to start. I think we need to find a way to exist with nature in a relationship where all things benefit.
@@user-gs3pt1uf1g progress. The word. Hence Henry George wrote a book called Progress and Poverty. This highlights the quest of monopolists to enslave humanity for their own personal gain.'
Hey guys, I highly recommend Yuval Noah Harari's Sapiens, he has explained it so perfectly how Agriculture actually domesticated Mankind and he objectively proves that quality of life has steadily been declining ever since we started farming, from a purely species point of view it was a success because it allowed us to reproduce massively and become the dominant species, that was evolution at work but the suffering of the individual has only increased he has explained it quite well, it would take pages to explain it here.
Clearly ... hierarchy, slavery, rape, war, famine, all came from this change ... but it was not a conscious choice. If your neighbors attack you, you are stuck, what else can you do but adapt so you can attack them back or defend yourself by deterring further attacks.
Very false. Especially about hirachy. Strong groups of tribes are very hirachacle. And theres nothig wrong with that. All strong families need a clear hirachy to be strong and sustainable.
Actually it's a good point. It does sound out there in this video, but if you read the Sapiens trilogy you would know that this question has so much more to it
@@knotkool1 Yuval Noah Harari. There is some evidence that suggests hunter gatherers had bigger brains than their neolithic counterparts. Agriculture opened up niches for unremarkable water carriers to pass on their unremarkable genes.
“The average forager had wider, deeper, and more varied knowledge of her immediate surroundings than most of her modern descendants. There is some evidence that the size of the average Sapiens brain has actually decreased since the age of foraging. Survival in that era required superb mental abilities from everyone. When agriculture and industry came along people could increasingly rely on the skills of others for survival, and new ‘niches for imbeciles’ were opened up. You could survive and pass your unremarkable genes to the next generation by working as a water carrier or an assembly-line worker. . . . -Yuval Noah Harari, Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind (2018)
I think when humans went from Hunter Gatherer to Farming that was nor bad. It was the development of states (countries) which I think was worse. We could have all been living in farming communities without the need to form into countries.
Agreed. Mostly. Local areas each have their own character and identity but national identity is a highly destructive construct that leads to war and entrenches the power of the few over the many. (Feudalism, where land is owned or controlled by an elite and farmed by serfs isn't any better though. Nor is common ownership of land because most find change threatening and so innovation is stymied.) The other mistake was the invention of the corporation in its current form. It certainly facilitated economic exploitation but this was at the cost of any sort of social obligation or responsibility. The earth can't support a hunter gatherer population of any size. Hunter gatherer numbers were limited because of the limit on resources. But given an efficient trade and communication network, and a ban on corporations, there's no completely insurmountable reason why people couldn't voluntarily choose to live in communities that fostered various specialisations, not merely food production. It would favour widespread cooperation between both individuals and different communities. There would be major hurdles but it might be better than what we've got now.
Humanity's biggest mistake is treating agriculture as though it's humanity's biggest mistake. Think for a minute if we acted on that and tried to undo agriculture.
#bbc reel, i like to listen to these vids as podcasts, playing in the background. and wehn sumting comes up interesting, i then look at the screen. it would be nice to have everything audible in english as well.
bunk..... if the hunter gatherer life style was in anyway superior then they would not be having this conversation right now. Clearly these people have never spent a day in the wilderness with only a rock and stick for protection from the elements.
If you look at the sole purpose of life and evolution from a biological point of view, it's always that you live and propogate your species without dying out. Looking where we are at now, it doesn't look like a bad decision till we overpopulate and start dying of hunger and even out in an equilibrium. Even then we'd be multiple times the strength of the Neolithic age.
A cold beer, warm tasty food and snacks and a choice of clothing tells me that I am happy living in the Post Neolithic Age 😀 Add my happy pets as well 🐕🐱 Greetings from Germany...🍺🖐
Earth's population would not have grown to the poportions it has today, as birth rates would have been less and death rates would have been greater. What we have today is a natural progression of mankind from subsistance living to a more consistantly sustainable means of feeding a population - aka: agriculture. It was inevitable.
You have no clue how easy the modern hunter gatherer would be without farmer and industrial people destroying ecosystem and aniamls . They probably get foods like 20 mins .
Spoiler, it was not a mistake as without it that lady wouldn’t be sitting there having the technology to know about the past to start with (look at Australia)
6 in one hand, 1/2 a dozen in the other. There is good & bad in BOTH societies. The difference between humans & other species is that we can think, instead of just using instinct. Which is good & bad.
Oddly enough, there are theory's about early agriculture which stipulates that the apple eve ate was actually a fig, which were one of earliest cultivated plants, and its was the women, I.e. eve who discovered/developed agriculture originally as a means to provide extra support to the hunters during the hard times of the mini ice age (younger drias). Inadvertently causing humanity problems for thousands of years to come as we became reliant on our grain stores and domesticated animals.
The Turkish people of today migrated to Anatolia from central Asia some time in the middle ages. They have absolutely nothing to do with the neolithic revolution at all.
Neolithic & Paleolithic are incredibly cleaver terms. Not only do they denote that the agricultural and livestock revolution was a significant event in human history, but they are constructed as old stone (paleo lithica), and new stone (neo lithica)? Just to give the layman such as myself enough context to realize they are both still in the stone age, this way I can see where the periods fit in the ages. Thank you cleave science people (presumably paleontologist) from long ago, you've coined beautiful terminology.
Of course, it's an issue of tradeoffs -- EVERYTHING in life is an issue of tradeoffs. The idea that we should have remained hunter-gatherers is just stupid. There are over 7 BILLION people on earth. There are not enough wildebeests to support us all.
The biggest mistake was when fish evolved to live on land. No, wait, it was the emergence of multicellular organisms. Or the emergence of life. It was so nice when everything was barren rock and empty ocean
Australian aborigines lived pre Neolithic lifestyle. Like a couple of hundred families of Macoys in eternal feud these hunter gatherers lived as individual nations with unique language’s and customs whilst ever moving.
This is an evolutionist argument that reinforces prejudices and ethnocentric views about different human cultures, specifically those of the peoples commonly thought off as "hunter-gatherers". Even though they might be saying "civilization is bad", the core of the argument is still the same as that of the old "savage barbarian civilized" point of view, in the sense that "civilization" is still being conceptualized as the telus (the finality or end), although maybe a bad one. Some important points: 1- The change from hunter-gathering to farming did not happen only once in history, it has happened many times, and there are also cases of people moving the other way (from farming to hunter-gathering). 2- Not all farming is the same. 3 - It's not at all proven that farming leads to the formation of State (but the contrary seems to be true: State requires farming). The data actually supports Rousseau's point of view: there maybe indeed a mistake, but it's not at all farming: it's the acceptance of inequality. Concentration of land and wealth comes with it, to sustain that inequality, and some forms of farming are really efficient at this. But it's not at all farming that "unknowingly" led us to this.
The solution lies not in going back to hunter-gatherer based societies altogether; but more on being close to nature in our day to affairs & practicing the yoga-vedanta way of life enmasse.
Agricultural led to the question of inheritance, which led to wars and whatever came in between. But we can’t take away the blessings of the time we are in because of the decisions our ancestors made. I can imagine living like the croods in a cave. But we should have a more inclusive and egalitarian society for the future generations.
If it was 'mistake,' we can now at least discuss the question globally, via tchnology, as to whether reverting back to being small groups of hunter-gatherers would be better for us, on balance.
Again, a very Eurocentric view of the world. Any study of Australian First nations people reveals that during the drought conditions of the last Ice Age around 20,000 years ago, their population shrank and became concentrated in smaller areas, where they developed and used seeds as a vital food source, developing the first grinding stones and the baking of bread. With fire-stick farming they cultivated seed rich plants, for the first time anywhere in the world. "Agriculture" was a reaction to severe conditions, not some benign blossoming towards "civilisation," as Eurocentric researchers often claim (perhaps because they rarely stray outside their own narrow focus of research or outside certain geographic comfort zones) and as it is often portrayed in popular imagination. In fact, it took place from desperate necessity, as people cleverly adapted their diet to cope with harsh conditions. It's notable, that once climate conditions improved between 16-10,000 years ago, Australian first nations people more or less abandoned labour intensive grain harvesting and went back to managing the animal and plant resources of their vast estate across the entire continent, which provided them far more extensive, less labour intensive and far more varied food types, still retaining the knowledge of cultivation, but no longer needing to practice it. The term "hunter-gatherer" contains a pejorative Eurocentric connotation of peoples not practising certain forms of "agriculture" somehow being less developed, incapable or ignorant about how to manage or command the environment to suit their needs. This term - along with "neolithic" - should be revised and re-thought.
It was not the domestication of plants and animals that was a mistake, it was the invention of private property concepts, soci--economic classes (“complex societies”) and hierarchically organized states.
With more and more people,I think that the resources that could sustain a hunter gatherer lifestyle would eventually become depleated.It seems that people had no choice.
Ur right but our current way won’t last forever either we’re already having shortage of land for agricultural reasons. We’re running out of space to farm
The biggest mistake was that we evolved from a simple organism into humans. Thats when all the problems begun. Life is compicated. Mayby life itself is a mistake.
Consider the Middle East when watching this. Boundaries were drawn Post WW1 which fundamentally changed the lives of Nomadic people who had lived in the region for millennia without geographic restrictions.
It wasn't a mistake if solely for the possibility to listen to the music presented. If we could go back to a simpler life, I'd be first in line. But I often think I'm willing to forgive all the shortcomings and atrocities of civilization, just because it led to the orchestra.
The funny thing is that exactly thanks to agriculture that some people can waste their lives doing this kind of pointless research. Soon they'll probably be asking themselves if math and medicine also ruined humanity.
Your post was pointless. The pros and cons of Neolithic revolution was clearly outlined in the video and the views of those scientists were very balanced. Only you cherry picked what you disliked and posted your pointless rant.
@@rjnbonif3603 You just proved his point. The nomadic dont need to progress further they are self sufficient and self sustaining. They dont need speedy progression, they are content and successful. Our current global world system that you even mention is too heavy based on "forward progression' or as its termed, Growth. Which isnt something you can do in a finite world. We need to revert
@@samthewham6671 Until you fell and broke your leg, or bitten by an insect and you got a fever and died or cutting yourself on a sharp rock and it got infected, yea, you're right we wouldn't need Medicines ...
It wasn't the technology that made life worse for people. The dawn of civilization was sparked by a change in mindset. We stopped seeing ourselves as part of the world, and instead saw ourselves as the rulers of the planet. We also came to believe that there's only one right way to live and all humans must live that way. This led to the development of a unique style of agriculture that not only aimed to eliminate competition (increasing yield, thus increasing population), but also to spread to all four corners of the earth through conquest. Everyone who watches this should read the Ishmael series by Daniel Quinn, who discusses this very thoroughly and rationally: 1) Ishmael, 2) The Story of B, 3) My Ishmael, and 4) Beyond Civilization. Civilization will collapse eventually. It has always been unsustainable and always will be. (That that mindset or cultural vision assures it.) When that end comes, people need to have abandoned civilization's cultural vision if there will be any hope for our species.
Thank GOD they learned agriculture and practiced with all their hearts and minds. Foraging and hunting is a horrible way of ensuring food for the masses, while fighting other tribes not to invade your hunting and foraging grounds.
a mistake? did greed, envy, pride, lust, power, murder, etc.. develop because of agriculture? without agriculture, you wont be setting there reading my comment.. you would be out there chasing some birds for your next meal. agriculture gives you the freedom to become what you want to be. you call that a mistake?
I think that it is highly likely that a change from wild meats, grubs, tubers, leaves, berries, etc to wheat (or Einkorn) ....complex carbohydrate types of food, as a much larger part of diet took its toll on human bodies which did not evolve to process these newer and more easily available carbohydrate foods. Even today there seems to be a lot of diseases which can partially trace their origin back to wheat and sugars.
We lived for to many years world wants us to die and even if we can survive our leaders arent fair i dont care if i die but we made the earth that way that it is now
Doesn’t matter, one way street: “Until about the third millennium BC, there was no noticeable change in social patterns on any time scale measured in less than centuries. Around that time, the first permanent settlements that we’d recognize as towns arose, facilitated by the discovery of agriculture. With them appeared writing and codified law and the rudiments of government. “From that time on, there was no turning back. An agricultural civilization can support far more people in a given area than a hunter-gatherer lifestyle- but the transition from a hunter-gatherer society to agriculture is strictly a one-way process. If you try to reverse it, most of your people will starve to death: they simply won’t be able to acquire enough food. This was the first of many such one-way processes in the historical record. Arguably, it’s the existence of these one-way transitions that gives rise to the appearance of inexorable historical progress; it’s not that reversals are impossible, it’s simply that after a reversal there’ll be nobody left to keep a written record of it.” - Charles Stross, Introduction: After the Future Imploded, from Toast, p. 10.
If the life of the hunter-gatherer is so much better, why then were the greatest bottlenecks in human existence from way before agriculture was a thing?
Every change has a cost, but this idea in the video is not the biggest mistake. The biggest mistake was the implenentation of the medical system beyond damage repair like stitching wounds and setting bones. That is the biggest source of all the current ills we currently face.
@@justgivemethetruth most ailments are largely based in or a response to genetic sequences, some sequences are better than others, the ones that are not are most often the cause of sickness. The medical system preserves the not so good traits, allows them to spread. Up until now everything the medical system saves has been a slow build up to what will be a critical point that causes a really bad problem on a societal level, the advent of rna vaccines is the beginning of more rapid consequences. What was once a minor scoped problem is now much larger today, continued support and use of the medical system as it is will only increase the scope and severity. The problem that bothers me the most is the ones who will have to bear this will not e the ones who chose to, they will be lied to and they will pay for the choices of the ones before them. Natural selection is the only way forward, it has been proven far longer than the so called human species has existed.
@@howtoappearincompletely9739 with as corrupted as the people are that are in control of that, i would not rely on that at all. Those people are lying to you all now as it is and they have no incentive to change that at all.
@@patryn36 Well, if it's a choice between that and the species-wide abolition of medicine, so that people can live their "nasty, brutish, and short" lives "like Nature intended", I think I'll choose the gene therapy and the shadowy forces who control it.
The diabetes and obesity epidemics are modern problems, and not necessarily part of a natural progression of dietary changes on the macro level. Viral and bacteriological Epidemics however are absolutely linked to humans living to closely with animals.
I think that the development of densely populated mega cities is not sustainable. They demand that all food be produced somewhere else and delivered there. Somewhere between the best of hunters gatherers, and the worst of massive urban centers, is more people spread out across the land, involved in some types of agrarian processes. Small and mid sized communities so that no one is far from the soil and the forests.
If we had stayed as hunter gatherers, we never would have achieved the Renaissance, enlightenment, or scientific revolution. Yes the Neolithic brought numerous problems, but they are not unfixable. And last I checked, hunter gatherers do not have space programs :). Let’s aim as high as possible.
Why do we even need any of that though? Both humanity and the Earth were healthier when we lived the way we were always designed to live. On an individual level we were much happier when we saw ourselves as an extension of the Earth and not as the rulers of it, now the average man is a miserable wage slave who can barely get by and the biosphere is being utterly ravaged. Nothing of what you mentioned is objectively good, we don't *need* it, we never did.
@@Threezi04 Food was't plenty and Humans are shitty hunters compared to other carnivorous. How happy can you be when you have to worry about finding food within the next 2 days.
@@Psi-Storm exactly? Why are these people acting like living as hunter gatherers was heavenly and peaceful? Do they not realise the challenges they face. Everything was a life and death situation. Life expectancy was of 31 years
@@Psi-Storm Shitty hunters? Humans had to be nomadic because if they stayed in one area too long they would completely obliterate all animal life there. Prey and predator alike.
"was this humanity's biggest mistake" ....2 words. *Soap* *Medicine* (no, not hemp seeds wrapped in mint, Medicine). ...without one of these, all of us die, very young. So.. yeah, if only had Neolithic in 100,000 BCE
I guess I'm not the only one who thinks the story of Cain and Abel is a criticism of that transition. God accepted the sacrifice of the herd but rejected the sacrifice of the harvest.
![[Live] : ONE FIGHT NIGHT 26 วันนี้!! “คริสเตียน vs อาลิเบก”](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/UlIiZ3t8nHQ/mqdefault.jpg)
"Many were increasingly of the opinion that they’d all made a big mistake in coming down from the trees in the first place. And some said that even the trees had been a bad move, and that no one should ever have left the oceans."
- The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy
sad loss that man, thanks for all the fish...
DAMN, I literally clicked on the video just to leave the same comment. You’re awesome Carolyn 😄
Haha, this Douglas Adams quote was the first thing I thought of when I saw the video title.
DON'T. PANIC!!!
im pretty sure that humans got out of the trees because the climate at the time became dry and the trees died, if we would be doing so good in the trees then why would we leave?
"Humanity" have NEVER acted all together in anything. Start with
ONE group, somewhere.
10,000 years ago they had no clue that farming grain and livestock would lead to the madness we have now.
Especially anasthesia. Sheer madness.
true
If they had been shown a DVD of the future they were setting their descendants up for, they might have done a U-turn immediately.
@@TwobirdsbreakingfreeRight 😂
The switch over to agriculture was a foregone conclusion after beer-making from grass seeds was established.
It's hard to hunt when you're drunk.
It could certainly be argued that the real reason why grains were farmed was to make beer and not bread. Yeast of course, is the common ingredient.
Yeah, as I lay in my comfortable bed in my air-conditioned room enjoying an ice cold beverage from my refrigerator, I often wish humanity was still scrounging for food in the jungle.
10 years of liveable climate
For ten thousands years slaves and serfs working on fields in miserable conditions were saying. - I have it bad now, but I am so happy Jack shall have air conditioning and internet porn in the future.
@Rick Random Yes, thank you, Rick Random, for taking a moment to remember their sacrifice by leaving a YT comment with your modern electronic device. I'm sure they really appreciate it.
@@dolekanteel2178 They also ate their kids when times got tough and the herds of wild animals weren’t available. Wake up.
@@dolekanteel2178 I am guessing this is from someone who has never hunted and gathered for any period of time. It is hard work, and starvation is a way of life. Hunting animals requires a lot of energy, and you're competing against every other human and large predator animal for the same food resources. In late Spring and Summer it is easier to hunt animals, but in Autumn and Winter, even if you successfully hunt an animal it is very difficult to find with any fat on them.
You spend some time out in nature, I'm talking legit a few weeks and just the bare essentials, and you'd be shocked at how amazing you feel. In just a few days you're failing asleep easier and waking up right before the sun comes up without any alarm feeling refreshed. It's amazing how easy it is to just focus on the task you are doing instead of worrying about a million other things. It truly is a peaceful way of life and we'd be foolish to think that what we have doesn't take it's toll on our body. Do we go hungry no yet depression, suicide rates, and drug abuse steadily climb higher. Regardless of where this debate goes I think we can all agree that we are not made for this chaotic of a lifestyle.
"Convenience"....alla those inventions that made life easier are..well..inconvenient in the end!
…and then you break your arm, and starve to death or die from complications, with no medical services. Or a bear eats you.
@David Whitehouse Well currently you get into a car accident and break your arm so the doctor prescribes you pain killers, because heaven forbid people feel any amount of pain. Then you 6 months later you're addicted to opiods and buying whatever you can get from some shady drug dealer. From there you're either stuck trying to get sober, you're a full blown addicted that can't hold down a job, or you OD and die. I've literally seen that exact scenario play put multiple times. I didn't even talk about the medical debt that can bankrupt you or the risk of losing your job. Don't act like we live in some wonderful paradise.
Also most bears are not going to eat you. Grizzly bears might, polar bears definitely will. Black bears, which are what is most common, are like giant raccoons and are honestly very pleasent to watch. Just don't mess with their cubs.
Where did you spend those few weeks?
@@adanderson8211 they’ll slap any word as long as it sells
I think I agree with this idea. Maybe like migratory birds and mammals, we were supposed to constantly move. Like the nature of our habitat (Earth). I think we defy what's designed for us, and now we're facing the consequences.
Nothing was designed
@@tomwh1993 okay but what is your idea with the video?
@@tomwh1993 evolution does shape our genome and u can call that a form of design. by evolutions design we are nomadic creatures meant to hunt and gather
@@the1shrubbery You can call that design if you want but you'd be wrong. Design implies planning and an endpoint, evolution has neither of these things. The changes in the way that humans live since we transitioned from hunter gatherers to today is astronomically fast in evolutionary time frames because we do have the capability to design, plan etc. We've left evolutionary pressure behind really and are now something else. Whether or not this turns out to be a good thing for humanity is too early to say, its complicated. The only thing we do know is that its impossible to go back now we've started on this path. You might have heard of it but Yuval Noah Harari's book Sapiens goes into this in more detail, I'm probably just misquoting it here
@@tomwh1993 Show me an evolutionary disaster then mr wall of text
BBC Reel's recommendation to avoid epidemics: We should have remained a hunter and gatherer society
Return to Monke
& climbing trees
@@longyu9336 You are retained your childlishness
@Martin Pospisil Yeah i grasp that.I say that people after neothelitic revolution maybe earlier become childlishness , because of traditions and psychoviral cultures
@Martin Pospisil Theese three people up , think like that
This reminds me of a cartoon: two guys sit in a cave. One says to the other: the water we drink is pure, the air we breathe is clean, all the food we eat is organic, we get plenty of exercise, so how come nobody lives past thirty?
Lots of people lived past 30 ... the reason average lifespan is thought to be so low is infant mortality.
Exactly!
Lemme play Devil’s advocate for the fun of it. Maybe in those 30 years, they enjoyed more pleasure than most of us can in 70 long years now-a-days. Conceivable? Possible? Debatable?
They’d have purer water and air presumably. Not once or twice, but 24*7, presumably. Maybe not as much social conservatism. Idk. Worth pondering the pros and cons certainly.
@@FarhanAmin1994 brute force is the ultimate socially conservative one.
Right but the capitalists would have you believe it is a choice between that and Monsanto
The greatest contribution of the Neolithic period to society was the introduction of the farmer's daughter.
I think all changes brings consequences. It is only hindsight which determines good or bad. And by then they are both moot?
🤣
... meaning to say that even big catastrophies are sometimes started by good intentions. Humans only wanted to have plenty of pancakes for breakfast, but ended distrying their only planet.
Historically Peoples behaviour changes to give them a competitive advantage. The fact that it was not a perfect trade does not mean it was not a good trade.
yet, this trade is the one that threatens our very existance. because of agriculture, our population exploded and led to unregulated industry and pollution and global warming.
This transition from nomadic life style to sedentary is just a theory based on observations in a few archaeological sites. It does not prove that humans in other parts of the world made same transition. You can find today hunter gatherers in other parts of the world like the Amazon, parts of Africa and other places. Also like the chicken and the egg is not certain if the hunger, diseases and growth of population and technology were caused by the transition or were the cause for the transition.
People just want what their believe is true , people have prejudice and judgment . Evolutionary psychology. Farmer and majority support farming . That’s all .
You know, without the neolithic we wouldn't have the Garand or the Shrek movie.
We wouldn't have idiocracy
The Garand? You mean the rifle?
Answer: no, no it wasn't humans biggest mistake.
The main idea is progress not perfection, the amount of amazing human triumphs that this change brought on is undescribable.
To say anything else is just puzzling
thats just the click bait, within the first seconds she says no, its a trade off.
Our modern progress has been stolen at the price of impoverishing most of our own population and stealing resources and labor from the rest of the world.
These Wealth redistributors aka -Communists disguised as scientists- will stop at nothing to convince us that their world view is the only one that counts.
@@letsgobrandon987
Except that what is really happening is the opposite, trolls and shills and sock-puppet bots like you are paid or programmed to spout garbage like your post and worse, so it is really the oligarch thieves that seek to destroy the government and provoke division that are the problem. The polarity of the wealth redistribution today is that the rich are sucking up more and more of the value streams and companies, and then paying think tanks to think of stupid dishonest ways to justify it - like your bass-ackwards comment.
@@justgivemethetruth Get some therapy comrade. Marxism is not what people want.
I am a hunter and gatherer, as soon I left behind all these agricultural minded people my life changed and I found a true potential partner. Insane how clear this is to me now.
As Ian Welsh says:
“Hunter-gatherers are, generally speaking, healthier than agriculturalists and pastoralists. They live longer, suffer less from disease, are taller, the women have wider hips and suffer less from childbirth, they have better dentition and so on. The societies, again with some exceptions, are more egalitarian than most agricultural societies (though very early agricultural societies are more egalitarian than late hunter-gatherer societies, again, in general). They also have vastly more free time than agriculturalists.”
“Basically, being a hunter-gatherer is about as good as it gets for most of human existence.”
And If you need guidance on how to meditate or achieve spiritual goals and you are between beginner and beginner-intermediate, Ian may be able to help for his standard fee of 150 dollars an hour
Unless the climate changes, your prey starts to die out, and there are no more berries.
Once civilization falls we will probably go back to this way of life.
as if somebody planned all this, we just evolved. There are still hunter gatherers out there, not everyone can.
Think about it in terms of an ecosystem, if the things that sustain our population are not sustainable the reality is we are experiencing a boom and bust. The more we ignore the signs by kicking the can down the road the more potential and momentum our bust will have when the time comes. Climate change does not pose much threat to our planet, earth has seen many such events. it does how ever pose a huge threat to our current way of life. Our greed could mean our demise if we do not find a way to continue our growth and expansion without causing more harm. Remember this point,, our current civilisation model represents an absolutely tiny fragment of time.
yeah, hopefully with the passage of time as more women become educated the population can start to decrease. we can only hope that human ingenuity can solve global warming and keep global temperate from raising past the 4 degree point
Fossil fuels are a need of mans life. Until nuclear power, no alternative
I think farming & settled existence probably was the product of necessity rather than choice. Ie: climatic changes/excessive populations/other environmental pressures led to famines & that led to a much more intense reliance upon grains. It's quite possible that the mechanisms of plants growing from seed were already known, but of limited use to mobile peoples..
Want to gather people to live the simple life like them in small group , withdraw from industrial pollution of our foods body and soul freedom.
@@Alternativewayforlife starts with one...thats what im doing anyway. Chucked the whole urban bullshit routine, bought an old 3ton truck/rv conversion with solar etc, and just stopped paying a mortgage/rent/power/gas/water/...its a long list. Been doing this 2yrs now and well settled into it. Im parked up on the driveway of an empty block of flats that was trashed by squatters in melbourne. It must be heritage listed - itd be 1920s..amazn spot. And i live as simply as possible. My carbon footprint is miniscule bcoz i dont indulge in convenience (+pollution). Its really that simple at end of day..for me at least..
Necessity for the egos of “chieftains”, warlords and “priests”
@@adanderson8211 what is your job ? Your income?
@@adanderson8211 your food source and shelter ?
Crawling out of the sea is where it all started to go wrong.
Kind of sad that every step we take forward to be a more civilized species we end up having to take two steps back.
People are easily led. A surplus of resources allows a parasite class of Narcissists and Psychopaths to emerge. Most people are apathic sheep and follow them rather than themselves
@@Isochest Couldn't have been said better. We have the ability to heal, it's only a matter of when we start. In fact, I think most of us don't even know where to start. I think we need to find a way to exist with nature in a relationship where all things benefit.
Peogress - every step forward brings unforseen side effects, some annoying, some humiliating, some deadly.
@@user-gs3pt1uf1g progress. The word. Hence Henry George wrote a book called Progress and Poverty. This highlights the quest of monopolists to enslave humanity for their own personal gain.'
we were far more civilized when we lived in caves.
Hey guys, I highly recommend Yuval Noah Harari's Sapiens, he has explained it so perfectly how Agriculture actually domesticated Mankind and he objectively proves that quality of life has steadily been declining ever since we started farming, from a purely species point of view it was a success because it allowed us to reproduce massively and become the dominant species, that was evolution at work but the suffering of the individual has only increased he has explained it quite well, it would take pages to explain it here.
Mankind had already been domesticated before agriculture
Clearly ... hierarchy, slavery, rape, war, famine, all came from this change ... but it was not a conscious choice. If your neighbors attack you, you are stuck, what else can you do but adapt so you can attack them back or defend yourself by deterring further attacks.
Everything you said in that first sentence sounds stupid.
Very false. Especially about hirachy. Strong groups of tribes are very hirachacle. And theres nothig wrong with that. All strong families need a clear hirachy to be strong and sustainable.
@@Treckorz
that's just not true, and very poor spelling to boot.
Actually it's a good point. It does sound out there in this video, but if you read the Sapiens trilogy you would know that this question has so much more to it
by whom?
@@knotkool1 Yuval Noah Harari. There is some evidence that suggests hunter gatherers had bigger brains than their neolithic counterparts. Agriculture opened up niches for unremarkable water carriers to pass on their unremarkable genes.
@@WilliamBarker water carriers?
@@davidregi7571 Assembly line workers = menial unskilled repetitive labor (It's a quote from the book)
“The average forager had wider, deeper, and more varied knowledge of her immediate surroundings than most of her modern descendants.
There is some evidence that the size of the average Sapiens brain has actually decreased since the age of foraging. Survival in that era required superb mental abilities from everyone. When agriculture and industry came along people could increasingly rely on the skills of others for survival, and new ‘niches for imbeciles’ were opened up. You could survive and pass your unremarkable genes to the next generation by working as a water carrier or an assembly-line worker. . . .
-Yuval Noah Harari, Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind (2018)
I think when humans went from Hunter Gatherer to Farming that was nor bad. It was the development of states (countries) which I think was worse. We could have all been living in farming communities without the need to form into countries.
Agreed. Mostly. Local areas each have their own character and identity but national identity is a highly destructive construct that leads to war and entrenches the power of the few over the many. (Feudalism, where land is owned or controlled by an elite and farmed by serfs isn't any better though. Nor is common ownership of land because most find change threatening and so innovation is stymied.) The other mistake was the invention of the corporation in its current form. It certainly facilitated economic exploitation but this was at the cost of any sort of social obligation or responsibility. The earth can't support a hunter gatherer population of any size. Hunter gatherer numbers were limited because of the limit on resources. But given an efficient trade and communication network, and a ban on corporations, there's no completely insurmountable reason why people couldn't voluntarily choose to live in communities that fostered various specialisations, not merely food production. It would favour widespread cooperation between both individuals and different communities. There would be major hurdles but it might be better than what we've got now.
Television journalism would be our second biggest problem then
Humanity's biggest mistake is treating agriculture as though it's humanity's biggest mistake. Think for a minute if we acted on that and tried to undo agriculture.
#bbc reel, i like to listen to these vids as podcasts, playing in the background. and wehn sumting comes up interesting, i then look at the screen. it would be nice to have everything audible in english as well.
bunk..... if the hunter gatherer life style was in anyway superior then they would not be having this conversation right now. Clearly these people have never spent a day in the wilderness with only a rock and stick for protection from the elements.
It's anti-western CCP propaganda, literally.
If you look at the sole purpose of life and evolution from a biological point of view, it's always that you live and propogate your species without dying out. Looking where we are at now, it doesn't look like a bad decision till we overpopulate and start dying of hunger and even out in an equilibrium. Even then we'd be multiple times the strength of the Neolithic age.
Life is purpose. There no purpose beyond life
Humanity is still an illusive utopian idea in a cosmological timeline! We were never there in written history.
Why do the voice-overs stop? You are forced to choose: either read the sub-titles, or look at the images.
A cold beer, warm tasty food and snacks and a choice of clothing tells me that I am happy living in the Post Neolithic Age 😀
Add my happy pets as well 🐕🐱
Greetings from Germany...🍺🖐
Because you rich
I’m trying to imagine with today’s population large tribes roaming around for resources. I don’t think it would work out so well.
Earth's population would not have grown to the poportions it has today, as birth rates would have been less and death rates would have been greater. What we have today is a natural progression of mankind from subsistance living to a more consistantly sustainable means of feeding a population - aka: agriculture. It was inevitable.
You have no clue how easy the modern hunter gatherer would be without farmer and industrial people destroying ecosystem and aniamls . They probably get foods like 20 mins .
Spoiler, it was not a mistake as without it that lady wouldn’t be sitting there having the technology to know about the past to start with (look at Australia)
This is the template of what is called a stupid comment.
I'm looking at Australia .. now what?!
@@paulryan2128 the aborigines didn’t transition, didn’t workout great at the end
There is no better account of this subject than that presented in "The Ascent of Man" (book and TV series) by Jacob Bronowski in 1973.
thank you. but it does not convey any negativity to the schism. which is the subject of this video.
That was an incredible show. I wish someone would sponsor Peter Jackson to remaster it ...
@@edwardfletcher7790 The TV series is on 16 mm film, so if scanned and restored using modern methods could be reproduced at very high quality (1080p).
Nice to see someone remember that ... it was a great series.
I once read, that a neolitic used about 1 1/2 hours a day on getting food. Few works that litle now.. ;o)
6 in one hand, 1/2 a dozen in the other. There is good & bad in BOTH societies. The difference between humans & other species is that we can think, instead of just using instinct.
Which is good & bad.
Humanity' biggest mistake is ... RELIGION!
So, we traded harmony for possession. Sounds like a deal with the devil. The Neolithic Period was when we were kicked out of the garden?
Oddly enough, there are theory's about early agriculture which stipulates that the apple eve ate was actually a fig, which were one of earliest cultivated plants, and its was the women, I.e. eve who discovered/developed agriculture originally as a means to provide extra support to the hunters during the hard times of the mini ice age (younger drias). Inadvertently causing humanity problems for thousands of years to come as we became reliant on our grain stores and domesticated animals.
Ah yes, the harmony of the hunter/gatherer. Kill your food before it kills you...
The Turkish people of today migrated to Anatolia from central Asia some time in the middle ages. They have absolutely nothing to do with the neolithic revolution at all.
The Book "Sapiens" by Yuval Noah Harari really lays that out very well
Neolithic & Paleolithic are incredibly cleaver terms.
Not only do they denote that the agricultural and livestock revolution was a significant event in human history, but they are constructed as old stone (paleo lithica), and new stone (neo lithica)? Just to give the layman such as myself enough context to realize they are both still in the stone age, this way I can see where the periods fit in the ages. Thank you cleave science people (presumably paleontologist) from long ago, you've coined beautiful terminology.
🤣🤣🤔🤥
is this meant to be satire?
@@muzammilibrahim5011 no, English is not native to everyone... can't a non-native speaker marvel at how it interplays with Latin?
@@Ichihiro36 Strictly speaking, these terms are Greek in origin, not Latin. But you're right that these are well-coined terms.
Of course, it's an issue of tradeoffs -- EVERYTHING in life is an issue of tradeoffs. The idea that we should have remained hunter-gatherers is just stupid. There are over 7 BILLION people on earth. There are not enough wildebeests to support us all.
It is my hope that the BBC Reel speaks to a society that values Scientific endeavors and Understanding. Carry ON!
The biggest mistake was when fish evolved to live on land. No, wait, it was the emergence of multicellular organisms. Or the emergence of life. It was so nice when everything was barren rock and empty ocean
We're talking about humans ie homo sapiens.
Australian aborigines lived pre Neolithic lifestyle. Like a couple of hundred families of Macoys in eternal feud these hunter gatherers lived as individual nations with unique language’s and customs whilst ever moving.
"Hunting and Gathering" never stopped. The "Transition" to Agriculture wasn't a transition but merely an addition.
Interesting video, but would have been nice to be able to switch off the captions so I could actually see the thing.
Funny, their jobs as researchers would be impossible in a nomadic society.
This is an evolutionist argument that reinforces prejudices and ethnocentric views about different human cultures, specifically those of the peoples commonly thought off as "hunter-gatherers". Even though they might be saying "civilization is bad", the core of the argument is still the same as that of the old "savage barbarian civilized" point of view, in the sense that "civilization" is still being conceptualized as the telus (the finality or end), although maybe a bad one. Some important points: 1- The change from hunter-gathering to farming did not happen only once in history, it has happened many times, and there are also cases of people moving the other way (from farming to hunter-gathering). 2- Not all farming is the same. 3 - It's not at all proven that farming leads to the formation of State (but the contrary seems to be true: State requires farming). The data actually supports Rousseau's point of view: there maybe indeed a mistake, but it's not at all farming: it's the acceptance of inequality. Concentration of land and wealth comes with it, to sustain that inequality, and some forms of farming are really efficient at this. But it's not at all farming that "unknowingly" led us to this.
The invention of religion has done more harm than the transition to agriculture.
The solution lies not in going back to hunter-gatherer based societies altogether; but more on being close to nature in our day to affairs & practicing the yoga-vedanta way of life enmasse.
The volume levels are off, otherwise an interesting video!
Humanity does not make mistakes…it just grows, migrates and evolves in no direction at all. It is…….
Totally disagree with that hypothesis. It was a natural progression with all actions.
A viable human population of hunter gatherers caps at about a hundred million so it would certainly be better for the health of the planet as a whole.
What's the name of the music at 0.22 ?
Nocturne op 9 no 2 Chopin
Does anyone knows the music at 0:28 ?
Agricultural led to the question of inheritance, which led to wars and whatever came in between. But we can’t take away the blessings of the time we are in because of the decisions our ancestors made. I can imagine living like the croods in a cave. But we should have a more inclusive and egalitarian society for the future generations.
If it was 'mistake,' we can now at least discuss the question globally, via tchnology, as to whether reverting back to being small groups of hunter-gatherers would be better for us, on balance.
Again, a very Eurocentric view of the world. Any study of Australian First nations people reveals that during the drought conditions of the last Ice Age around 20,000 years ago, their population shrank and became concentrated in smaller areas, where they developed and used seeds as a vital food source, developing the first grinding stones and the baking of bread. With fire-stick farming they cultivated seed rich plants, for the first time anywhere in the world. "Agriculture" was a reaction to severe conditions, not some benign blossoming towards "civilisation," as Eurocentric researchers often claim (perhaps because they rarely stray outside their own narrow focus of research or outside certain geographic comfort zones) and as it is often portrayed in popular imagination. In fact, it took place from desperate necessity, as people cleverly adapted their diet to cope with harsh conditions. It's notable, that once climate conditions improved between 16-10,000 years ago, Australian first nations people more or less abandoned labour intensive grain harvesting and went back to managing the animal and plant resources of their vast estate across the entire continent, which provided them far more extensive, less labour intensive and far more varied food types, still retaining the knowledge of cultivation, but no longer needing to practice it. The term "hunter-gatherer" contains a pejorative Eurocentric connotation of peoples not practising certain forms of "agriculture" somehow being less developed, incapable or ignorant about how to manage or command the environment to suit their needs. This term - along with "neolithic" - should be revised and re-thought.
It was not the domestication of plants and animals that was a mistake, it was the invention of private property concepts, soci--economic classes (“complex societies”) and hierarchically organized states.
With more and more people,I think that the resources that could sustain a hunter gatherer lifestyle would eventually become depleated.It seems that people had no choice.
Ur right but our current way won’t last forever either we’re already having shortage of land for agricultural reasons. We’re running out of space to farm
@@nathanhyde2946 I agree but it's lights out anyway when the last star sputters out.
The biggest mistake was that we evolved from a simple organism into humans. Thats when all the problems begun. Life is compicated. Mayby life itself is a mistake.
Consider the Middle East when watching this. Boundaries were drawn Post WW1 which fundamentally changed the lives of Nomadic people who had lived in the region for millennia without geographic restrictions.
It wasn't a mistake if solely for the possibility to listen to the music presented. If we could go back to a simpler life, I'd be first in line. But I often think I'm willing to forgive all the shortcomings and atrocities of civilization, just because it led to the orchestra.
All the atrocities of humanity arrived thanks to the "civilization"
The funny thing is that exactly thanks to agriculture that some people can waste their lives doing this kind of pointless research.
Soon they'll probably be asking themselves if math and medicine also ruined humanity.
Your post was pointless. The pros and cons of Neolithic revolution was clearly outlined in the video and the views of those scientists were very balanced. Only you cherry picked what you disliked and posted your pointless rant.
We wouldn't really need medicine with a daily life of physical activity, diverse food and non existence of chronic stress though.
@@sodalitia If the hunter and gathering is better why didn't succeed???? Why every nomadic society in the world did stuck in time?
@@rjnbonif3603 You just proved his point. The nomadic dont need to progress further they are self sufficient and self sustaining. They dont need speedy progression, they are content and successful. Our current global world system that you even mention is too heavy based on "forward progression' or as its termed, Growth. Which isnt something you can do in a finite world.
We need to revert
@@samthewham6671 Until you fell and broke your leg, or bitten by an insect and you got a fever and died or cutting yourself on a sharp rock and it got infected, yea, you're right we wouldn't need Medicines ...
song name at 0:30??
It wasn't the technology that made life worse for people. The dawn of civilization was sparked by a change in mindset. We stopped seeing ourselves as part of the world, and instead saw ourselves as the rulers of the planet. We also came to believe that there's only one right way to live and all humans must live that way. This led to the development of a unique style of agriculture that not only aimed to eliminate competition (increasing yield, thus increasing population), but also to spread to all four corners of the earth through conquest. Everyone who watches this should read the Ishmael series by Daniel Quinn, who discusses this very thoroughly and rationally: 1) Ishmael, 2) The Story of B, 3) My Ishmael, and 4) Beyond Civilization. Civilization will collapse eventually. It has always been unsustainable and always will be. (That that mindset or cultural vision assures it.) When that end comes, people need to have abandoned civilization's cultural vision if there will be any hope for our species.
Thank GOD they learned agriculture and practiced with all their hearts and minds. Foraging and hunting is a horrible way of ensuring food for the masses, while fighting other tribes not to invade your hunting and foraging grounds.
They think the Earth belongs to them and they want the useless eaters gone from their property. What do you think the great reset is?
The existence 'masses' is a consequence of agriculture, tbf.
@@organicfarm5524 and hallelujah for that.
They were just tribes not masses
This is probably when humans began fighting over land and resources.
a mistake? did greed, envy, pride, lust, power, murder, etc.. develop because of agriculture? without agriculture, you wont be setting there reading my comment.. you would be out there chasing some birds for your next meal. agriculture gives you the freedom to become what you want to be. you call that a mistake?
Your sound levels are all over the place!
I think we should've never come down from the trees in the first place
Short answer no, long answer also no.
I think that it is highly likely that a change from wild meats, grubs, tubers, leaves, berries, etc to wheat (or Einkorn) ....complex carbohydrate types of food, as a much larger part of diet took its toll on
human bodies which did not evolve to process these newer and more easily available carbohydrate foods. Even today there seems to be a lot of diseases which can partially trace their origin back to
wheat and sugars.
What was the average lifespan of a hunter/gatherer?
The music is really incongruous in this clip.
1 mans poison is another mans passion.
Humanity's biggest and enduring mistake was the creation of religion.
Literally saved the world
The biggest mistake is when a fish trying to get on land
Just skip to 1:53 and a researcher points out the importance of animals and cereal grains.
We lived for to many years world wants us to die and even if we can survive our leaders arent fair i dont care if i die but we made the earth that way that it is now
Ponderous. Thanks!
This is NOT about morals. Its about HUMAN RIGHTS! Remember them?! They used to matter just like facts and science used to matter.
Doesn’t matter, one way street:
“Until about the third millennium BC, there was no noticeable change in social patterns on any time scale measured in less than centuries. Around that time, the first permanent settlements that we’d recognize as towns arose, facilitated by the discovery of agriculture. With them appeared writing and codified law and the rudiments of government.
“From that time on, there was no turning back. An agricultural civilization can support far more people in a given area than a hunter-gatherer lifestyle- but the transition from a hunter-gatherer society to agriculture is strictly a one-way process. If you try to reverse it, most of your people will starve to death: they simply won’t be able to acquire enough food. This was the first of many such one-way processes in the historical record. Arguably, it’s the existence of these one-way transitions that gives rise to the appearance of inexorable historical progress; it’s not that reversals are impossible, it’s simply that after a reversal there’ll be nobody left to keep a written record of it.”
- Charles Stross, Introduction: After the Future Imploded, from Toast, p. 10.
If the life of the hunter-gatherer is so much better, why then were the greatest bottlenecks in human existence from way before agriculture was a thing?
We as humans have evolved to be aware of our suffering....fantastic..😮😅
Every change has a cost, but this idea in the video is not the biggest mistake. The biggest mistake was the implenentation of the medical system beyond damage repair like stitching wounds and setting bones. That is the biggest source of all the current ills we currently face.
Explain wha you mean please, but don't really see your point?
@@justgivemethetruth most ailments are largely based in or a response to genetic sequences, some sequences are better than others, the ones that are not are most often the cause of sickness. The medical system preserves the not so good traits, allows them to spread. Up until now everything the medical system saves has been a slow build up to what will be a critical point that causes a really bad problem on a societal level, the advent of rna vaccines is the beginning of more rapid consequences. What was once a minor scoped problem is now much larger today, continued support and use of the medical system as it is will only increase the scope and severity. The problem that bothers me the most is the ones who will have to bear this will not e the ones who chose to, they will be lied to and they will pay for the choices of the ones before them. Natural selection is the only way forward, it has been proven far longer than the so called human species has existed.
@@patryn36 Isn't gene therapy a solution to our species-wide accumulation of maladaptive traits?
@@howtoappearincompletely9739 with as corrupted as the people are that are in control of that, i would not rely on that at all.
Those people are lying to you all now as it is and they have no incentive to change that at all.
@@patryn36 Well, if it's a choice between that and the species-wide abolition of medicine, so that people can live their "nasty, brutish, and short" lives "like Nature intended", I think I'll choose the gene therapy and the shadowy forces who control it.
The diabetes and obesity epidemics are modern problems, and not necessarily part of a natural progression of dietary changes on the macro level. Viral and bacteriological Epidemics however are absolutely linked to humans living to closely with animals.
BIGGEST MISTAKE: observing the media in any way.
I think that the development of densely populated mega cities is not sustainable. They demand that all food be produced somewhere else and delivered there. Somewhere between the best of hunters gatherers, and the worst of massive urban centers, is more people spread out across the land, involved in some types of agrarian processes. Small and mid sized communities so that no one is far from the soil and the forests.
Can't rule out cannibalism amongst the Hunter Gatherers - other competing tribes would have been fair game when you're starving....
If we had stayed as hunter gatherers, we never would have achieved the Renaissance, enlightenment, or scientific revolution. Yes the Neolithic brought numerous problems, but they are not unfixable. And last I checked, hunter gatherers do not have space programs :). Let’s aim as high as possible.
Why do we even need any of that though? Both humanity and the Earth were healthier when we lived the way we were always designed to live. On an individual level we were much happier when we saw ourselves as an extension of the Earth and not as the rulers of it, now the average man is a miserable wage slave who can barely get by and the biosphere is being utterly ravaged. Nothing of what you mentioned is objectively good, we don't *need* it, we never did.
@@Threezi04 Food was't plenty and Humans are shitty hunters compared to other carnivorous. How happy can you be when you have to worry about finding food within the next 2 days.
@@Psi-Storm exactly? Why are these people acting like living as hunter gatherers was heavenly and peaceful? Do they not realise the challenges they face. Everything was a life and death situation. Life expectancy was of 31 years
@@Psi-Storm Shitty hunters? Humans had to be nomadic because if they stayed in one area too long they would completely obliterate all animal life there. Prey and predator alike.
Lol according to some religious books we were asked to leave the buffet.....
Sa le multumim stramosilor nostri pentru cea ce stim!
"was this humanity's biggest mistake" ....2 words.
*Soap*
*Medicine* (no, not hemp seeds wrapped in mint, Medicine).
...without one of these, all of us die, very young. So.. yeah, if only had Neolithic in 100,000 BCE
I guess I'm not the only one who thinks the story of Cain and Abel is a criticism of that transition. God accepted the sacrifice of the herd but rejected the sacrifice of the harvest.
These doctors don't look like being able to hunt animals.
The flute playing was such that I couldn't continue with this video, How some people get professional positions is beyond me.