Viewer support is the mon-key to our success at MinuteEarth! Want to become our Patreon or member on TH-cam? Just visit www.patreon.com/MinuteEarth or click "JOIN". Thanks!
Well, NordVPN always sponsors everyone, and they pay a ton of cash, so if it gives them money, they’re fine with it, even if the actual service is crap.
And it is nice that MinuteEarth gets money and makes videos. I think my issue is, someone who has not read the news sees the advertisement, signs up for nordVPN and then gets compromised. And it is worse because the advertisement adds a perception that MinuteEarth endorses the product. Now, I could be scaremongering. Maybe nordVPN changed their ways after the belated disclosure? On the other paw, I have also not heard of them firing anyone nor hiring a Privacy Officer on the back of this compromise; so maybe not so much.
I remember learning about this in Physical Anthropology class in college. Also, it seems to kind of apply to gorillas too (though whether it was to an extent that they speciated is iffy) - the ones in chimp territory eat more fruit and are a bit more on the feisty side, while the ones who live off on their own in the deep jungle are, to paraphrase my professor, "basically living in a giant salad bowl" and are a bunch of chill leaf munchers.
On a similar note: when they asked if the gorillas or the food made the bigger difference, I figured it's probably the food. Gorillas aren't usually aggressive so I can't imagine having to fight gorillas would be a strong evolutionary pressure.
@@marcopohl3236 Yeah, it seems it's less about having to fight them directly so much as the chimps having to fight each other for resources that are scarcer due to the much larger gorillas also taking them up.
@@marcopohl3236 I think the competition for food is more why the gorillas would be a problem more than fighting, a gorilla population is just naturally gonna need a lot more food than a chimp population
@@marcopohl3236What they meant was more about competition for food than the gorillas being aggressive. Yes gorillas are usually peaceful, but it’s not like they would just surrender their food, plus a gorilla population will require a lot of food
Yeah also one seems to prefer expanding territories while the other doesn't which explains why the chimpanzees are more evolutionarily successful seeing as how I'm nature the species with the bigger stick tends to be more successful especially when combined with intelligence
@@1810jeff Bacteria are microscopic, single-celled organisms that exist in their millions, in every environment, both inside and outside other organisms. The oldest known fossils are of bacteria-like organisms. Bacteria can use most organic and some inorganic compounds as food, and some can survive extreme conditions.
1810 Jeff what's interesting is you can see parallels between chimps' warlike, expansionary, territorial nature and human behaviour, yet also see bonobos' always down to fuck nature in human's all-year round openness to mating (unlike most mammals with breeding seasons a few months in a year).
@@godzilla964Of course you can see it. Bringing irrelevant politics nobody asked for into a conversation like that? You can see it because literally no one wants you around either.
If you Live In The North There would be less food and Not Many Good thing and also A Dictatorship and secret can execute u if u Citizen them If you live in the South K pop Many food and good thing also Democracy and a good justice Law
There was a group (tribe/gang?) of chimps I read about once, they had an outbreak of a disease which by some chance affected the more aggressive members of the troop (that's the one) more than the rest and they died off. The survivors were less aggressive and over following generations they became much less aggressive overall.
Yes. A baboon troop. They were located near a human settlement would scavenge easy pickings from garbage. Aggressive males would eat first and in abundance, resulting in their death. The remaining less aggressive males would develop a more peaceful 'culture' for subsequent generations. In fact when new aggressive males enter from outside they are also 'taught' that this troop works differently, and subsequently their behavior changes.
@@richardchavarriaga I remember hearing the males at the top ate first, and the troupe found poisoned bait, thus the males at the top got killed off and for some reason the rest of the troupe didn't eat it. Maybe there wasn't enough or something. it's been awhile though, so I could be way off.
I read about another story: a population of chimpanzees settled near humans and started to worsen human activity by breaking things etc. Humans were soon to shoot the most initiative chimpanzees (they are simultaneously the most aggressive) and soon enough the population became much more chill, preferring cuddling each other over fighting (even among males!). Maybe those were of another species, but human violence did make those monkeys chill and loving.
This reminds me of how different those is ancient Egypt was compared to those is Mesopotamia. Ancient Egypt had extremely fertile soil and the Nile River was extremely predictable with its flooding they could use to have more food and as natural protection from the outsiders. Meanwhile those is Mesopotamia had severe unpredictable flooding and more famines they became more aggressive and fought a whole lot more with those Around them while Egypt had time, energy, and an abundance of resources to survive and build giant pyramids with no outside conflict and hardly ever any internal conflict either
"No outside conflict and hardly any internal conflict" is a massive exaggeration- based on what I know about Old, Middle and New Kingdom Egypt, but it is an interesting theory that I'd like to look into more.
Knowing that egypt are heavily populated by the natives and those natives wouldn't fight each other Meanwhile mesopotamia have different ethnic groups and they would fight each other to established thier own ethnic realms
What happened with Egypt was absolutely same with India. In case of India, we were so peaceful, we actually couldnt deterr foreign invaders, tho we also had defence in our blood, a whole different story. Main point is, we were quite too peaceful cuz of abundance of resources, same reason we were a target, an easy one.
Chimpanzee 1: She's got plants and she's nice. Chimpanzee 2: Not "plants, but still nice." She's nice because she's got plants. Hell, if I had all these plants. I'd be nice, too!
Why the slight censorship at the end guys? I'd say it's pretty common knowledge that Bonobos do...much, MUCH more than "cuddle" to resolve conflict. And for just about everything else. I, personally, would love a vid from y'all about why sex has a totally different purpose for them than most species. If such vid already exists, my bad, just throwing it out there.
I’m doing it because I rewatched the Planet of the Ape series which has a chimp hero and a bonobo villain. So wanted to learn more about their nature to better understand the irony
Chimps and Bonobos are so closely related to Humans, as opposed to our other great ape brethren, that for a short time some scientists argued that hominids should be classified as a type of chimpanzee.
This is a perfect illustration of why humans on different continents advanced so differently. Slight differences in the ecologies where we found ourselves radically altered the course those nodes of our species took. It had nothing to do with who was more "primitive", society was largely a result of access to resources without which we'd all still be in small groups fighting over parcels of hunting land like the rest of the animal kingdom. Luck plays a bigger role in our success than anyone wants to admit. There was lots of hard work involved, but you can do everything right and still fail if the world wasn't ready for you. Such is life.
Yes. An example is the lack of any minable deposits of iron anywhere near any of the native civilisations inthe Americas. How far could they have got with the metals they did have? Without iron how much longer would they have needed to develop technologically to a comparable level to that which Europe and East Asia were at at the time of the 'voyages of discovery'?
@@carelgoodheir692What happens is that the natives had a worldview that was friendly to nature as they were totemic, and they also had a pacifist vision of not messing with others unless they messed with you. Unlike the civilizations of Eurasia that had a vision in which they were above nature and conquest was a goal to achieve.
This is another point towards one basic truth - remove the needs by providing them to everyone and you solve almost all problems in the world. Scarcity breeds conflict.
This seems to be true in theory but we also see tons of animal species working together due to scarcity! Mutual aid is an evolutionary factor as well and we should be careful of making these statements about the past.
Yes because some teachers show these videos and tiny kids don't know what the intention of the big cat is and plus some people are deaf so its a good thing they added it
Snipers should envy them too. Tigers are capable of sitting perfectly still for hours waiting for their target or for wind direction to change and then they can be very fast and energetic in an instant...
Another fun fact: 1) they instinctively bite such that their teeth go between the bones of the spine. That requires adaptations in spli-tseconds! 2) they are apparently too dumb to count to 5. For instance, if they drag their children from one location to the next, they go back one last time after they carried their last cub, because they can't count! 3) They are apparently also quite bad at judging size. They seem to consider us large prey and thus as potentially dangerous despite us being so much lighter and weaker. However, what they seem to see instead is only that were taller... That's why Tigers avoid attacking humans who look at them. Smaller, slow prey would not make them wait until they can sneak up.
@@edi9892 Us humans may not be physically larger or stronger than tigers, but attacking us definitely are much more dangerous to them than to us. Humans are pack hunters, very social, and very resourceful. Humans are capable of massive destruction. Even when a tiger managed to take down an individual human, the rest of the tribe would come back with revenge. Attacking a human is just not worth the trouble for tigers, they didn't misjudge the size of our danger.
Although geographic isolation almost certainly contributed to the divergent behaviors of chimps and bonobos, bonobos aren't as peaceful as they're portrayed. From what I understand, bonobos still engage in violent in-fighting like chimpanzees. The kind of fighting that leaves individuals with missing fingers and toes. It's mostly a result of enforcing social hierarchies, which both species have. The major difference is that bonobos don't fight with other *groups*, while chimps will hunt other groups down.
While it's cool to learn about our evolutionary history it's also nice to hear about the evolutionary history of chimps and bonobos after splitting from our lineage some 4-5 million years prior to this.
That same river also splits Congo in two with north Congo being Congo-Brazzaville who speaks french and south Congo being Congo-Kinshasa who speaks dutch.
Oh well you’re partly right. Congo Kinshasa doesn’t have Dutch as its own official language, it has the heavy and strong Belgian dialect of French as its official language.
Also it's an east/west divide, not a north/south divide. Congo-Brazzaville (ex-French colony) is on the west and the DRC (ex-Belgian colony) is on the east.
This is definitely interesting but I have my doubts about the “big mean gorillas” having much if anything to do with it so I’m glad that he mentioned the researchers having doubts too.
From what I gathered from the college course I was in, it was less of an issue of them being a bunch of brutes so much as it was an issue of their being great big leaf-munching machines which left fewer leaves for the chimps to eat, leaving them to turn to other food sources like fruits and monkeys.
Gorillas aren't mean by default, but remember, the big issue here is competition over food. Even the nicest gorilla still has to eat, and if it came to blows over food, they'd completely body even the toughest chimpanzee. It wasn't about direct species-to-species combat, but the additional pressure it put on them to compete for resources.
@@42Fossy Gorillas are the only primates that can digest cellulose so their diets are actually VERY different from chimps'. For example Gorillas don't get any of their protein from their diet, it all comes from the bacteria in their guts that break down the cellulose-rich plant matter they consume. So even when they live in the same place they aren't competing for the same foods.
Gothead420 Evolution is accepted by anyone willing to reason. However, the method of which is debated and is very complicated. Right now, when we refer to evolution, we refer to evolution by natural selection, however, some people say that other methods of evolution may be taking place, perhaps complex systems exist that influence what is passed down beyond who’s offspring and who doesn’t. Of course this requires the manipulation of genetic and epigenetic factors. You see, the current method is rather simple and could be many times complex, though the current theory hasn’t had any major holes in it for long, meaning it is pretty good for now.
Which group of people denying evolution do you mean? Those who dislike idea that we had common ancestor with those chimpanzee a few million years ago? Those who dislike idea that our specie diverged as well and there are some genetically derived behavioural differences between our populations?
@@useodyseeorbitchute9450 So, Arabs/Africans/Caucasians are prone to violence because of their genetics? Could you indulge on showing us scientific evidence for such a claim? Oh wait, that's just the good 'ol _evolution=racism_ strawman...😑
@@Gothead420"evolution=racism strawman" Well, "evolution" would suggest "evolution in the last 70k" years, which should lead to at least some subtle differences, that make some people uneasy. I see such denial of evolution more often than actual creationists. Generally speaking impact of having a low active MAO-A gene variant and anti-social behaviour (and to be fair other issues as well) is a well documented issue. And while there are controversies concerning exact distribution (seems there are many variants with different level of activity), the idea of recent divergent evolutionary pressure does not seem to be contested: www.researchgate.net/publication/11554457_Evidence_for_positive_selection_population_structure_at_the_human_MAO-A_gene
@toaritok From the article I read... "Furthermore, sexual interactions among bonobos occur in every possible partner combination regardless of age or gender with the *_notable exception incest among siblings."_*
@W0Y4K It should be noted that while sexual play is very common among bonobos, there are no recorded cases of anal penetration, presumably because deforestation and poaching has all but destroyed the ancestral bonobo lube trade routes.
Not at all. The biggest assholes I've met where raised like a princess/prince and think the world belongs to them. They lack any form of empathy because humans only served them. The kindest people went through a harsh environment and developed empathy because of it. Some obviously got fucked up and turned into psychopaths but the thing is. They are only visible criminals. How many rich people commit crimes but aren't criminals because of their money?
It'd be interesting to know if something similar happened to humans, and if we are the more aggressive or the more social species, because I could see both
@@aaaa-uc1ot hello, liberal buddy. I used to be on the liberal side to, still am to a large degree. So here's what I think. Any human behavior is a matter of both environment(initiatives, risk factors, opportunities) and genes(urges, impulse control, ability). Moreover, genes influence environment (extended phenotype) and environment influences genes (selection). Let's consider the case of Europe since 1300s. Environmental forces in Europe created pressures that punished violence. By removing a small portion of the most violent people from a population you remove a significant number of "violent" genes instances from the gene pool. By doing it over many generations you create an evolutionary change. Consider now that there were approximately 1600 generations between 1300 and 1700, which is plenty for a change to be noticeable. There was also a feedback loop between intelligence creating better environment and environment selecting for higher intelligence. Undoubtedly, environmental differences influence violence. High risk high reward situations, for example, create initiatives for violence. Different people, however, will act differently in such environments depending on their predispositions. So the environment will reward and punish accordingly, as was the case with chimps and bonobos. When you equalize the environmental factors, however, most of the remaining variance will necessarily be due to genetics. I would argue, that the environment in the United States is pretty meritocratic compared to most places and times in history. When you control for IQ, black and white people in the same positions receive the same wage, for example. This makes the United States a good place to study the influence of genetic differences between groups of people. Despite being only 50% of the population, males commit 96% of murders. This is a strong argument for a genetic explanation.
@@aaaa-uc1ot It's easy to train kids to have high IQ scores, but by the time they become adults they usually return to around their genetic baseline. In the US, the correlation of intelligence scores of identical twins reared apart is 0.76. Nutrition can definitely be a factor in development, but A) most kids live in environments created by their parents with genes, and b) education, nutrition and healthcare during early childhood, are not huge factors in the US. As for the poverty and capitalism, meritocracy might play a key role in creating the inequality. With a meritocratic system, you remove talented people from lower classes, depriving the poorer people of those high quality genes. So you create a situation, when all the smart people are at the top, and poor people are left behind. Add to that the fact that reproductive success is negatively correlated with IQ and you have a recipe for a disaster. Poor people depend on the infrastructure that requires a lot of brainpower to maintain, and people with the brainpower go up to die off. But as the matter stands, talented a black person have just as much opportunity to succeed as a white person. Racism and past oppression are just coping mechanisms at this point. As a rule, a smart hard working man comes to the US and becomes well-off in a generation or two. Eurasians started differentiating from Africans long before 1300s. But a rapid change in the gene pool of Europeans has definitely happened since then. Consider the birth rates and survival rate of rich people and their downward mobility in Europe of the middle ages. The punishment for crime has became less severe as a consequence of society becoming more polite and tolerant without those highly violent individuals of the dark ages. Bonobos and chimpanzees are different species, black and white people are different races. The more time you give it, the more difference you get. White people can be violent because they are adaptive. But white people tend to build politer societies where they don't have to be as violent. I can't comment on your specific case and circumstance.
We fought countless wars when we only could have more taking land from others. Now it's time to be the friendlyest and ensure that everyone gets the minimum resources, because now we get more and more by developing science and innovation, the more minds fed and applied to research and working (and not starving or fighting curable diseases) the merrier. Solving problems around the world is ensuring development!
Later, the Northern chimps sought to expand their territory. They had generations of practice with war/conflict as well as the advantage of larger herbivore mammals being on the Northern territory that eventually got domesticated ans used for agriculture/war. The Southern Bonobos had no such advantage and were naively docile when the Northern chimps came to explore their land. Eventually the Northern chimps crushed and subjugated all the Southern Bonobos taking their land and resources. At a certain point the Northern chimps allotted specific pieces of land where some remaining Bonobos could live. Many generations later, violence has ceased but there is still some level of resentment to this very day. What can we learn from this allegory? Well....I suppose thats for you to decide.
Zeitgeist is also shown to be incorrect. Because if they were correct, the chimpanzees wouldn't live in scarcity, seeing that there is no secret conspiracy that causes it for nefarious reasons.
Toefoo100 bullshit. All of the greatest human inventions that were industrial game changers were developed by an elite leisure class with money, free time, other surplus resources (talent, ingenuity, etc) to dedicate to idea/prototype development. All scarcity ever did was make people struggle. You cant be contemplating the possibilities of life if you're starving.
It's important to note studies & observations from 2018 found bonobos are also likely to engage in bullying, dominance-seeking behaviors, and they're more likely to prefer bullies than helpers.
Have you ever heard about the river war? Two tribe who lived on opposite sides of the same river in Africa; absolutely hated each other. They would murder each other for stepping foot into another's territory. They waged war continuously for god knows how long. The violence only stopped under colonialism when a stronger power made them behave. As soon as the Europeans left the tribes went back to chopping each other up. When asked what led to the conflict in the first place. The chiefs said it's been so long they dont know. They forgot. But they must fight. And the kicker is; they are both genetically identical people. Completely indistinguishable from one another. They even speak the same language.
You reminded me of fantasy games where the peaceful kingdom is usually in a nice grassy land. The evil invading kingdom is usually from the harsh desert.
Bonobos and chimps are not monkeys. They're apes. Primate is probably the general term you're looking for. Monkeys, apes, lemurs, tarsiers, galagos, lorises all fall into that category. I think simeans or something like that is a general term for the lesser dudes that are not lemurs, but I'm not sure.
So, in short: Aggressive behaviour is in your DNA. Seen from the other side: It is not your personal fault. This would be interesting in court and for behaviour modification therapy.
It's called Evolution. Little bits of genetic code mutate and amalgamate with the offspring. Little is noticeable for quite a few generations but over a lengthy period of time you will see some gradual changes to the organism. This video explains how it worked out with these 2 apes.
The interesting thing is that evolutionarily the common chimpanzee and it's subspecies are way more successful since their territories have way more range and about 6 times the population of bonobos.
And viruses are "super-evolutionarly successful" as there's - a scientific term incoming - a shit ton of them all over the planet. The successful strategy is to not have a brain. Or organs. Or anything really. Just a comfy little protein chest and a some"one" to put you into it.
Its almost as if tough material conditions require a more competitive and dangerous lifestyle, I wonder if this relates to human soc- oh wait poor people commit more violent crime
So that confirm that right now us as humans are just being stupid by fighting for everything, when we can share and help everyone much easier than before, because we have more resources than we thought, we just are using it badly
Sort of the reason why British and Europeans conquered all the equatorial and tropic regions while places in the tropics where bountiful and rarely invaded other regions
Nope. As far as mammals go, we're unusually peaceful. We just don't seem that way because we are a whole lot better at destruction than anything else we know of. But we're also a whole lot better at cooperation. To transmit these two messages, cooperation between individuals was needed so wide and so complex it puts any other animal community to shame. A small portion of that is used for destruction, which is still way worse than most things in the history of life (except first autotrophes - those outdo us still - and maybe trees).
nah you can see how our bodies look - do you think even strongest human in the world has a big chance against fully grown gorilla? i dont think so. (without weapons ofc)
@@wojtekpolska1013 Yes, it will be very difficult. But Gorillas has only a few advantages: super strength and lightning-fast reflex. But Humans have many things to cover these: we can kick in many directions and from longer distance. No other ape can kick and no other species can kick in every direction as us. We can punch the heck out of any other animal. On one, not a single species on earth can make a punch. We can grapple really well. Any animal is at gr8 disadvantage against our chocks and locks and jammings. Most importantly we can plan. Yes! you plan various micro strategies even during a fight. Equipped with all these, a 120Kg MMA player can beat the heck out of a Gorilla.
Hey minute earth I have a question that's been going around in my head for a few days which is " why aren't all months equal" like surely they could have put one day towards February I would greatly appreciate if my question gets answered luv you guys
It's because the year can't be evenly divided into twelve sets of days. I don't know if it can be evenly divided into any number of days actually. This is why we do add a day to February every four years
The difference with humans is: We can make our own stuff. With our problem-solving abilities. Having few resources shouldn't be an issue. Egoism may be advantageous in nature. But in the human world, it hampers our ability to keep things going.
And the "third chimpanzee" group (i.e. humans) kind of found a balance between the two extremes. While we largely find ways to mediate conflict through de-escalation and familial ties (i.e. my son will marry your daughter and we can stop killing each other over the good hunting grounds and access to the good water sources), we are still capable of large-scale internecine violence when resources become too scarce. Honestly I think this is our main advantage - behaviorally we can adapt to suit the situation and do not have to rely on either violence or social bonding for conflict resolution but can have a bit of both.
We are not the so called third chimpanzees group we split from them long before chimpanzees and bonobos where a thing and we are not part of the line of chimps and bonobos
@@joj4096 I don't know why some feel the need to place humans in the split mentioned in the video whilst they made it clear we are not. The split between us and chimps happened much earlier.
@@randomkinkajou5747 I'm aware and agree, (although your comparison of urine to DNA was a little arbitrary) but how much DNA we share does not necessarily indicate when our common ancestor which chimpanzees actually lived. There are more important cues and factors, including the fossil record, which in my opinion indicates quite an early split-off between 8-13 million years ago.
@@koba763 I was actually agreeing with you. People seem to think that humans are chimpanzees, but we are much much farther than people actually think. I used the water and urine analogy, because I found it random.
@@joj4096 And saying we solve conflicts with violence is honestly pretty misleading as well. We don’t primarily fight to solve disputes. We’re just REALLY good at making it a fight to remember, so we ignore the 57 times we went halfsies on the cookie jar
Same thing happened with Cro Magnon humans from Africa and Neanderthals in Europe and Asia. Neanderthals were more like bonobos with the Cro Magnon being more chimp like.
@Cyril Check out the research of Stan Gooch. It's true that Neanderthals had a long period of hunting megafauana like mammoths, but analysis of the contents of their teeth and microbiomes show that they also did quite a bit of foraging and plant eating (evidence of them making teas, super early) There's also evidence in Spain that they're the first hominids to have buried their dead AND created art. To call them "hypercarnivores" is a gross mischaracterization given these recent findings. But they did hunt. And re: them being out-competed due to weapons tech...the "directionality" of the mating between other hominids and Neanderthals would explain that. There was something about Neanderthal men mating with other hominids females which didn't work, at the biological level. So that fact alone would've significantly limited their ability to blend/assimilate as the majority population.
@Cyril I didn't claim they were more peaceful than humans, but there's no hard evidence to support a claim one way or the other, because there is no such thing as a Neanderthal culture we can currently study. However, their "bonobo-like" qualities have certainly been studied from recent phenotypic analysis of their DNA and microbiome contents. Read up on Gooch's research, already? That was fast.
Yeah, I'm not sure how the Gorillas really affect the situation but the limited food definitely causes more competition within and without the same species
I have no idea how this bell notification thing is supposed to work, I clicked it ages ago when they first rolled it out and it took TH-cam 3 weeks to show me this in my subscriptions. Super cool video though!
Debatable. It's only good or bad for you as an individual who is competing w' others for limited resources. But it doesn't make more resources, it doesn't help the species as a whole, it just makes your offspring less likely to be the one in the group who dies first of starvation (but some other monkey will still die).
@@roidroid well, it *does* make the species better because the more apt survives and while it doesn't create more resources, it does eliminate consumers of said resources. Of course, it all depends on what you mean by "the species" Is it the current members alive? Is it the survival of the species as genes?
when it's the species trying to survive against itself tho, that can be a troublesome selector. It's like when you get those beetles with huge weird horns, or apes with gigantic red arses, it's not actually useful for the species as much as it's just natural selection (or often times sexual-selection) going a bit mental.
@@joj4096 actually yeah look at places with less resources and more poverty leads to an increase of sociopathy and stinginess due to less resources and in places with more resources people are more likely to be generous and empathetic like look at war torn countries and then look at first world countries
Viewer support is the mon-key to our success at MinuteEarth! Want to become our Patreon or member on TH-cam? Just visit www.patreon.com/MinuteEarth or click "JOIN". Thanks!
make a channel like this, Chinese version
new year, new things ne?or Japanese version
Is nordvpn really the best sponsor to find? They have had a few issues with security and (more importantly) disclosure in 2019.
Well, NordVPN always sponsors everyone, and they pay a ton of cash, so if it gives them money, they’re fine with it, even if the actual service is crap.
And it is nice that MinuteEarth gets money and makes videos. I think my issue is, someone who has not read the news sees the advertisement, signs up for nordVPN and then gets compromised. And it is worse because the advertisement adds a perception that MinuteEarth endorses the product. Now, I could be scaremongering. Maybe nordVPN changed their ways after the belated disclosure? On the other paw, I have also not heard of them firing anyone nor hiring a Privacy Officer on the back of this compromise; so maybe not so much.
I remember learning about this in Physical Anthropology class in college. Also, it seems to kind of apply to gorillas too (though whether it was to an extent that they speciated is iffy) - the ones in chimp territory eat more fruit and are a bit more on the feisty side, while the ones who live off on their own in the deep jungle are, to paraphrase my professor, "basically living in a giant salad bowl" and are a bunch of chill leaf munchers.
That is one chill prof
On a similar note: when they asked if the gorillas or the food made the bigger difference, I figured it's probably the food. Gorillas aren't usually aggressive so I can't imagine having to fight gorillas would be a strong evolutionary pressure.
@@marcopohl3236
Yeah, it seems it's less about having to fight them directly so much as the chimps having to fight each other for resources that are scarcer due to the much larger gorillas also taking them up.
@@marcopohl3236 I think the competition for food is more why the gorillas would be a problem more than fighting, a gorilla population is just naturally gonna need a lot more food than a chimp population
@@marcopohl3236What they meant was more about competition for food than the gorillas being aggressive. Yes gorillas are usually peaceful, but it’s not like they would just surrender their food, plus a gorilla population will require a lot of food
One that solves conflicts with fighting, and another that solves them with fu- eerrr... Cuddling
Yeah also one seems to prefer expanding territories while the other doesn't which explains why the chimpanzees are more evolutionarily successful seeing as how I'm nature the species with the bigger stick tends to be more successful especially when combined with intelligence
@@1810jeff dude he was talking about the F word
XD wow
Or...... In other words.... Reproducing
@@1810jeff Bacteria are microscopic, single-celled organisms that exist in their millions, in every environment, both inside and outside other organisms. The oldest known fossils are of bacteria-like organisms. Bacteria can use most organic and some inorganic compounds as food, and some can survive extreme conditions.
1810 Jeff what's interesting is you can see parallels between chimps' warlike, expansionary, territorial nature and human behaviour, yet also see bonobos' always down to fuck nature in human's all-year round openness to mating (unlike most mammals with breeding seasons a few months in a year).
""""cuddling""""
Yes..... verrrryyyyy intimate cuddling
Cuddling-Gus
You gotta keep it family friendly, and everyone old enough to know what he means knows what he means
Mr. Black not really, just people who have seen some stuff about bonobos before, a lot of people in the comments didn’t realize the truth
@@MrBlack0950 scoodilipooping
I love how the ape family are embracing yet glare at each other like they don't want to be there. It's like a birthday party or something.
MANETIT Naj
That’s not a valid conclusion to draw.
NO THEY JUST ARE PRACTICING FOR THE INTERNACIONAL STARE CONTEST
It's a family reunion where all the members hate each other like we're all thinking how am I related to him
I can see something like that happening in conservative families.
@@godzilla964Of course you can see it. Bringing irrelevant politics nobody asked for into a conversation like that?
You can see it because literally no one wants you around either.
for some reason, this reminds me so much of north and south korea
Same O.O
Some how It is
Did you just call the Manchurians, gorillas?
Becuase thats apesist
True
If you Live In The North There would be less food and Not Many Good thing and also A Dictatorship and secret can execute u if u Citizen them If you live in the South K pop Many food and good thing also Democracy and a good justice Law
There was a group (tribe/gang?) of chimps I read about once, they had an outbreak of a disease which by some chance affected the more aggressive members of the troop (that's the one) more than the rest and they died off. The survivors were less aggressive and over following generations they became much less aggressive overall.
Yes. A baboon troop. They were located near a human settlement would scavenge easy pickings from garbage. Aggressive males would eat first and in abundance, resulting in their death. The remaining less aggressive males would develop a more peaceful 'culture' for subsequent generations. In fact when new aggressive males enter from outside they are also 'taught' that this troop works differently, and subsequently their behavior changes.
@@richardchavarriaga I remember hearing the males at the top ate first, and the troupe found poisoned bait, thus the males at the top got killed off and for some reason the rest of the troupe didn't eat it. Maybe there wasn't enough or something.
it's been awhile though, so I could be way off.
Where did you read about this?
I read about another story: a population of chimpanzees settled near humans and started to worsen human activity by breaking things etc. Humans were soon to shoot the most initiative chimpanzees (they are simultaneously the most aggressive) and soon enough the population became much more chill, preferring cuddling each other over fighting (even among males!).
Maybe those were of another species, but human violence did make those monkeys chill and loving.
Like COVID on humans
1:25 That ape just saved he's friend's life, that's a top tier wing man for sure
then he stole his friends gf
@@blahbleh5671 ?¿
@@blahbleh5671 Considering what we know of bonobos, there's no such thing as affairs. Everyone's in an open relationship.
@Zahin Shahazad Why?
@Zahin Shahazad open relationships aren't gross you mud licking shrimp humping chimpanzee.
This reminds me of how different those is ancient Egypt was compared to those is Mesopotamia.
Ancient Egypt had extremely fertile soil and the Nile River was extremely predictable with its flooding they could use to have more food and as natural protection from the outsiders. Meanwhile those is Mesopotamia had severe unpredictable flooding and more famines they became more aggressive and fought a whole lot more with those Around them while Egypt had time, energy, and an abundance of resources to survive and build giant pyramids with no outside conflict and hardly ever any internal conflict either
"No outside conflict and hardly any internal conflict" is a massive exaggeration- based on what I know about Old, Middle and New Kingdom Egypt, but it is an interesting theory that I'd like to look into more.
Yet Mesopotamia was alot greater and more influential because they had to be innovative and competitive
Knowing that egypt are heavily populated by the natives and those natives wouldn't fight each other
Meanwhile mesopotamia have different ethnic groups and they would fight each other to established thier own ethnic realms
What happened with Egypt was absolutely same with India. In case of India, we were so peaceful, we actually couldnt deterr foreign invaders, tho we also had defence in our blood, a whole different story. Main point is, we were quite too peaceful cuz of abundance of resources, same reason we were a target, an easy one.
@@IdunnoWhoIAm429 hm peaceful
Also india (chola) proceed to invade southeast asia and destroyed everything
*How this River made Chimps Violent:*
1. A Man was pushed into the River in Lego City
that meme must die!
@@guy3nder529 Why?
Hey!!!!
@@emirk.andluisak.4542 because its bad
@@guy3nder529
you are bad
"Be careful here: this is Donkey Kong Country." -Luigi (from one of my favorite fan-made shows of all time, Super Mario Warfare)
I love Mario warfare
This is probably the most intelligent and enlightening examination of the difference between chimps and bonobos, and why, that I've ever encountered.
th-cam.com/video/-Sr1KI2OXuk/w-d-xo.html
Chimpanzee 1: She's got plants and she's nice.
Chimpanzee 2: Not "plants, but still nice." She's nice because she's got plants. Hell, if I had all these plants. I'd be nice, too!
Is that a "parasite" movie reference lol
Plants make everyone nicer
Why the slight censorship at the end guys? I'd say it's pretty common knowledge that Bonobos do...much, MUCH more than "cuddle" to resolve conflict. And for just about everything else.
I, personally, would love a vid from y'all about why sex has a totally different purpose for them than most species.
If such vid already exists, my bad, just throwing it out there.
Ooh - interesting video idea!
@Elder One why?
I'd be interested in that too. Sex has become a communication tool in a lot of species. It would be cool to explore what it means in other animals.
Anyone else going on a binge watch of bonobo content because of how cool and interesting they are? No? Just me?
Yep, just you.
I AM ALSO
The Wikipedia page is cursed
sounds sus...they like to..uhm-
I’m doing it because I rewatched the Planet of the Ape series which has a chimp hero and a bonobo villain. So wanted to learn more about their nature to better understand the irony
Chimps and Bonobos are so closely related to Humans, as opposed to our other great ape brethren, that for a short time some scientists argued that hominids should be classified as a type of chimpanzee.
Maybe YOU should be.
This is a perfect illustration of why humans on different continents advanced so differently. Slight differences in the ecologies where we found ourselves radically altered the course those nodes of our species took. It had nothing to do with who was more "primitive", society was largely a result of access to resources without which we'd all still be in small groups fighting over parcels of hunting land like the rest of the animal kingdom.
Luck plays a bigger role in our success than anyone wants to admit. There was lots of hard work involved, but you can do everything right and still fail if the world wasn't ready for you. Such is life.
My thoughts exactly
Yes. An example is the lack of any minable deposits of iron anywhere near any of the native civilisations inthe Americas. How far could they have got with the metals they did have? Without iron how much longer would they have needed to develop technologically to a comparable level to that which Europe and East Asia were at at the time of the 'voyages of discovery'?
We're still fighting over resources like other animals. Constantly. Scarcity isn't objective. It's in our mind.
@@carelgoodheir692What happens is that the natives had a worldview that was friendly to nature as they were totemic, and they also had a pacifist vision of not messing with others unless they messed with you. Unlike the civilizations of Eurasia that had a vision in which they were above nature and conquest was a goal to achieve.
Arguably our success is entirely down to luck.
This is another point towards one basic truth - remove the needs by providing them to everyone and you solve almost all problems in the world. Scarcity breeds conflict.
Well, the universe is inherently scarce, so I'm not sure how valuable this "basic truth" is.
This seems to be true in theory but we also see tons of animal species working together due to scarcity! Mutual aid is an evolutionary factor as well and we should be careful of making these statements about the past.
Ah yes, which explains why some of the worst and most devastating problems plaguing us today are caused by the richest people in the world.
Abandon reason! Know only war!
If you make more than $30,000 a year you are the one percent of the world's population, so you are part of the problem too.
Does that leopard really need to be holding a fork for us to know what its intentions are?
Yes because some teachers show these videos and tiny kids don't know what the intention of the big cat is and plus some people are deaf so its a good thing they added it
Yes
@@ethanblalock145 Subtitles.
Yes. What if he wants to cuddle em.
@@rainbowthedragoncat6768 TH-cam subtitles are trash honestly
Yeah, "cuddling". *Waggels eyebrows*
( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)
Ah minute earth. Bite sized and interesting videos with visuals that I love. Never change ❤️.
Random fact: Tigers’ skin is actually striped, just like their fur. Also, no two fur patterns are alike. 🐯🐯🐯
Random fact: Human Woman skin is also actually striped. Great video by Veritasium
Wow! Bengal Tigers are actually native to my nation, and still, I didn't know this fact. Shame on me.
Snipers should envy them too. Tigers are capable of sitting perfectly still for hours waiting for their target or for wind direction to change and then they can be very fast and energetic in an instant...
Another fun fact:
1) they instinctively bite such that their teeth go between the bones of the spine. That requires adaptations in spli-tseconds!
2) they are apparently too dumb to count to 5. For instance, if they drag their children from one location to the next, they go back one last time after they carried their last cub, because they can't count!
3) They are apparently also quite bad at judging size. They seem to consider us large prey and thus as potentially dangerous despite us being so much lighter and weaker. However, what they seem to see instead is only that were taller... That's why Tigers avoid attacking humans who look at them. Smaller, slow prey would not make them wait until they can sneak up.
@@edi9892 Us humans may not be physically larger or stronger than tigers, but attacking us definitely are much more dangerous to them than to us.
Humans are pack hunters, very social, and very resourceful. Humans are capable of massive destruction. Even when a tiger managed to take down an individual human, the rest of the tribe would come back with revenge.
Attacking a human is just not worth the trouble for tigers, they didn't misjudge the size of our danger.
Although geographic isolation almost certainly contributed to the divergent behaviors of chimps and bonobos, bonobos aren't as peaceful as they're portrayed.
From what I understand, bonobos still engage in violent in-fighting like chimpanzees. The kind of fighting that leaves individuals with missing fingers and toes. It's mostly a result of enforcing social hierarchies, which both species have.
The major difference is that bonobos don't fight with other *groups*, while chimps will hunt other groups down.
They're peaceful relative to chimps
Well they do fight but unlike chimp ones no fatal injuries result from most of these fights, and it's mostly from male to male not entire wars.
While it's cool to learn about our evolutionary history it's also nice to hear about the evolutionary history of chimps and bonobos after splitting from our lineage some 4-5 million years prior to this.
2:00 chimps actually really use sharpened spears to hunt ( other primates)
They can even hunt us
That same river also splits Congo in two with north Congo being Congo-Brazzaville who speaks french and south Congo being Congo-Kinshasa who speaks dutch.
Oh well you’re partly right. Congo Kinshasa doesn’t have Dutch as its own official language, it has the heavy and strong Belgian dialect of French as its official language.
Also it's an east/west divide, not a north/south divide. Congo-Brazzaville (ex-French colony) is on the west and the DRC (ex-Belgian colony) is on the east.
This is definitely interesting but I have my doubts about the “big mean gorillas” having much if anything to do with it so I’m glad that he mentioned the researchers having doubts too.
From what I gathered from the college course I was in, it was less of an issue of them being a bunch of brutes so much as it was an issue of their being great big leaf-munching machines which left fewer leaves for the chimps to eat, leaving them to turn to other food sources like fruits and monkeys.
Gorillas aren't mean by default, but remember, the big issue here is competition over food. Even the nicest gorilla still has to eat, and if it came to blows over food, they'd completely body even the toughest chimpanzee. It wasn't about direct species-to-species combat, but the additional pressure it put on them to compete for resources.
@@42Fossy Gorillas are the only primates that can digest cellulose so their diets are actually VERY different from chimps'.
For example Gorillas don't get any of their protein from their diet, it all comes from the bacteria in their guts that break down the cellulose-rich plant matter they consume.
So even when they live in the same place they aren't competing for the same foods.
Competition is an important factor that drives evolution.
How can deluded people _still_ doubt evolution with these *adorable* animations, that make this topic so _very easy_ to understand?
Gothead420 Evolution is accepted by anyone willing to reason.
However, the method of which is debated and is very complicated. Right now, when we refer to evolution, we refer to evolution by natural selection, however, some people say that other methods of evolution may be taking place, perhaps complex systems exist that influence what is passed down beyond who’s offspring and who doesn’t. Of course this requires the manipulation of genetic and epigenetic factors. You see, the current method is rather simple and could be many times complex, though the current theory hasn’t had any major holes in it for long, meaning it is pretty good for now.
Which group of people denying evolution do you mean? Those who dislike idea that we had common ancestor with those chimpanzee a few million years ago? Those who dislike idea that our specie diverged as well and there are some genetically derived behavioural differences between our populations?
@@useodyseeorbitchute9450 So, Arabs/Africans/Caucasians are prone to violence because of their genetics? Could you indulge on showing us scientific evidence for such a claim?
Oh wait, that's just the good 'ol _evolution=racism_ strawman...😑
@@Gothead420"evolution=racism strawman" Well, "evolution" would suggest "evolution in the last 70k" years, which should lead to at least some subtle differences, that make some people uneasy. I see such denial of evolution more often than actual creationists.
Generally speaking impact of having a low active MAO-A gene variant and anti-social behaviour (and to be fair other issues as well) is a well documented issue. And while there are controversies concerning exact distribution (seems there are many variants with different level of activity), the idea of recent divergent evolutionary pressure does not seem to be contested:
www.researchgate.net/publication/11554457_Evidence_for_positive_selection_population_structure_at_the_human_MAO-A_gene
Bonobo parents "cuddle" with their offspring too.
Just a friendly reach around among friends... It's not like pedophilia in humans. For bonobos sex is like shaking hands.
@W0Y4K i thought those are chimpanzees the closest relative
@toaritok From the article I read...
"Furthermore, sexual interactions among bonobos occur in every possible partner combination regardless of age or gender with the *_notable exception incest among siblings."_*
@W0Y4K It should be noted that while sexual play is very common among bonobos, there are no recorded cases of anal penetration, presumably because deforestation and poaching has all but destroyed the ancestral bonobo lube trade routes.
Ala-bonobo-bama
Bonobos: *gets hit* HEY MAN WTF IS YOUR PROBLEM????
Also Bonobos: wanna just fuck it off? ;)
Proof hunger is the root of most violence
If the northern chimps ever learn to build bridges, the southern chimps are doomed.
Brandon Schleifer why wait let’s build this bridge for our good friends the chimps
the south chimps would breed with their woman, and soon, their differences would be forgotten.
Southern chimps build bigger, more nified groups. idk
@@GunSpyEnthusiast the male ones will NOT like that😭
@@GunSpyEnthusiastWomen? They’re gonna breed the guys, lil bro.
If you meet someone being a jerk 24/7, chances are they are raised from a very harsh environment.
not true
Not at all. The biggest assholes I've met where raised like a princess/prince and think the world belongs to them. They lack any form of empathy because humans only served them. The kindest people went through a harsh environment and developed empathy because of it. Some obviously got fucked up and turned into psychopaths but the thing is. They are only visible criminals. How many rich people commit crimes but aren't criminals because of their money?
Thats still technically a harsh environment because it is not natural and healthy to be "Spoilt ROTTEN"
1:40 chimps wearing pith helmets and fighting with spears. Hahaha. Whatever happened to them anyway?
Gorilla City.
Broken hearts just in time for Valentine’s Day
This takes product of environment to whole other level
It'd be interesting to know if something similar happened to humans, and if we are the more aggressive or the more social species, because I could see both
Look up violent crime statistics by race for the answer.
@@aaaa-uc1ot hello, liberal buddy. I used to be on the liberal side to, still am to a large degree. So here's what I think.
Any human behavior is a matter of both environment(initiatives, risk factors, opportunities) and genes(urges, impulse control, ability). Moreover, genes influence environment (extended phenotype) and environment influences genes (selection).
Let's consider the case of Europe since 1300s. Environmental forces in Europe created pressures that punished violence. By removing a small portion of the most violent people from a population you remove a significant number of "violent" genes instances from the gene pool. By doing it over many generations you create an evolutionary change. Consider now that there were approximately 1600 generations between 1300 and 1700, which is plenty for a change to be noticeable. There was also a feedback loop between intelligence creating better environment and environment selecting for higher intelligence.
Undoubtedly, environmental differences influence violence. High risk high reward situations, for example, create initiatives for violence. Different people, however, will act differently in such environments depending on their predispositions. So the environment will reward and punish accordingly, as was the case with chimps and bonobos.
When you equalize the environmental factors, however, most of the remaining variance will necessarily be due to genetics. I would argue, that the environment in the United States is pretty meritocratic compared to most places and times in history. When you control for IQ, black and white people in the same positions receive the same wage, for example. This makes the United States a good place to study the influence of genetic differences between groups of people.
Despite being only 50% of the population, males commit 96% of murders. This is a strong argument for a genetic explanation.
@@aaaa-uc1ot It's easy to train kids to have high IQ scores, but by the time they become adults they usually return to around their genetic baseline. In the US, the correlation of intelligence scores of identical twins reared apart is 0.76. Nutrition can definitely be a factor in development, but A) most kids live in environments created by their parents with genes, and b) education, nutrition and healthcare during early childhood, are not huge factors in the US.
As for the poverty and capitalism, meritocracy might play a key role in creating the inequality. With a meritocratic system, you remove talented people from lower classes, depriving the poorer people of those high quality genes. So you create a situation, when all the smart people are at the top, and poor people are left behind. Add to that the fact that reproductive success is negatively correlated with IQ and you have a recipe for a disaster. Poor people depend on the infrastructure that requires a lot of brainpower to maintain, and people with the brainpower go up to die off.
But as the matter stands, talented a black person have just as much opportunity to succeed as a white person. Racism and past oppression are just coping mechanisms at this point. As a rule, a smart hard working man comes to the US and becomes well-off in a generation or two.
Eurasians started differentiating from Africans long before 1300s. But a rapid change in the gene pool of Europeans has definitely happened since then. Consider the birth rates and survival rate of rich people and their downward mobility in Europe of the middle ages.
The punishment for crime has became less severe as a consequence of society becoming more polite and tolerant without those highly violent individuals of the dark ages.
Bonobos and chimpanzees are different species, black and white people are different races. The more time you give it, the more difference you get.
White people can be violent because they are adaptive. But white people tend to build politer societies where they don't have to be as violent.
I can't comment on your specific case and circumstance.
We fought countless wars when we only could have more taking land from others. Now it's time to be the friendlyest and ensure that everyone gets the minimum resources, because now we get more and more by developing science and innovation, the more minds fed and applied to research and working (and not starving or fighting curable diseases) the merrier. Solving problems around the world is ensuring development!
Later, the Northern chimps sought to expand their territory. They had generations of practice with war/conflict as well as the advantage of larger herbivore mammals being on the Northern territory that eventually got domesticated ans used for agriculture/war. The Southern Bonobos had no such advantage and were naively docile when the Northern chimps came to explore their land. Eventually the Northern chimps crushed and subjugated all the Southern Bonobos taking their land and resources. At a certain point the Northern chimps allotted specific pieces of land where some remaining Bonobos could live. Many generations later, violence has ceased but there is still some level of resentment to this very day.
What can we learn from this allegory? Well....I suppose thats for you to decide.
Conclusion: harsher environment puts useful evolutionary pressure that at some moment starts to give a genetic edge.
Zeitgeist was correct. Scarcity is at the root of our social ills.
It's also the source of all human progress
Zeitgeist is also shown to be incorrect. Because if they were correct, the chimpanzees wouldn't live in scarcity, seeing that there is no secret conspiracy that causes it for nefarious reasons.
Toefoo100 bullshit. All of the greatest human inventions that were industrial game changers were developed by an elite leisure class with money, free time, other surplus resources (talent, ingenuity, etc) to dedicate to idea/prototype development. All scarcity ever did was make people struggle. You cant be contemplating the possibilities of life if you're starving.
You wouldn't want to meet a person born in a post scarcity environment. You wouldn't be able to recognize them as human.
@@Toefoo100 like the renaissance?
Oops
It's important to note studies & observations from 2018 found bonobos are also likely to engage in bullying, dominance-seeking behaviors, and they're more likely to prefer bullies than helpers.
This is video is wrong in many ways
Still their not as violent compared to chimps.
This is absolutely fascinating.
Have you ever heard about the river war? Two tribe who lived on opposite sides of the same river in Africa; absolutely hated each other. They would murder each other for stepping foot into another's territory. They waged war continuously for god knows how long. The violence only stopped under colonialism when a stronger power made them behave. As soon as the Europeans left the tribes went back to chopping each other up. When asked what led to the conflict in the first place. The chiefs said it's been so long they dont know. They forgot. But they must fight. And the kicker is; they are both genetically identical people. Completely indistinguishable from one another. They even speak the same language.
You reminded me of fantasy games where the peaceful kingdom is usually in a nice grassy land. The evil invading kingdom is usually from the harsh desert.
I love monkeys and learning about evolution so I think this was very cool, interesting, and fun to watch! 😁
Bonobos and chimps are not monkeys. They're apes. Primate is probably the general term you're looking for. Monkeys, apes, lemurs, tarsiers, galagos, lorises all fall into that category. I think simeans or something like that is a general term for the lesser dudes that are not lemurs, but I'm not sure.
Faz - NOT MONKEYS.
Bonobos be like: "WHAT A WONDERFUL DAAAAAAY!!!!"
imagine if there is a reunification of the two species
Frakking awesome summary - big thank you.
Are you saying the Monolith wasn't involved in this? It didn't teach one group how to be violent?
I just want to say how much I love your Channel😁❤️ (i’ve been watching for a couple of years now)
So, in short: Aggressive behaviour is in your DNA. Seen from the other side: It is not your personal fault. This would be interesting in court and for behaviour modification therapy.
Look up "Monoamine oxidase A" gene. And later look up that it's distribution among different ethnic groups.
No because modern apes are not our ancenstors
Bonobos are still aggressive though. They're just aggressively fucking rather than aggressively fighting.
This sound more like a myth than a fact for some reason
It's because of the overly simplistic tone and explanation.
Humans are more likely to believe "someone did it" than "it happened randomly".
It's called Evolution. Little bits of genetic code mutate and amalgamate with the offspring. Little is noticeable for quite a few generations but over a lengthy period of time you will see some gradual changes to the organism. This video explains how it worked out with these 2 apes.
cause this vid is cartoonish
This remembers me of spore and the different paths that you can take
does this river also make the frogs gay?
I'm pretty sure bonobos are a lot more likely to be bisexual
Weird comment but maybe
The interesting thing is that evolutionarily the common chimpanzee and it's subspecies are way more successful since their territories have way more range and about 6 times the population of bonobos.
And viruses are "super-evolutionarly successful" as there's - a scientific term incoming - a shit ton of them all over the planet.
The successful strategy is to not have a brain. Or organs. Or anything really. Just a comfy little protein chest and a some"one" to put you into it.
Its almost as if tough material conditions require a more competitive and dangerous lifestyle, I wonder if this relates to human soc- oh wait poor people commit more violent crime
So that confirm that right now us as humans are just being stupid by fighting for everything, when we can share and help everyone much easier than before, because we have more resources than we thought, we just are using it badly
This is North and South Korea in a nutshell
Amazing video thank you for making it!
Nice how they changed the title to the exact opposite thing
Edit:And they changed it back
The leopard with the fork was hilarious afff 😂😂😂
Evolution is very interesting :D
First title: how this river made chimps violent.
Second: how this river made bonobos cuddly
Third: first title
This used to be called "How this river made the bonobos super "cuddly""
Ye
Yep.
(Bonobo hands chimp a flower)
Chimpanzee: Get a job, hippie!
How the Congo River made chimps violent is cool and all, but have you heard of Dota 2?
Sort of the reason why British and Europeans conquered all the equatorial and tropic regions while places in the tropics where bountiful and rarely invaded other regions
And I thought the violent one became Human!
Nope. As far as mammals go, we're unusually peaceful. We just don't seem that way because we are a whole lot better at destruction than anything else we know of. But we're also a whole lot better at cooperation.
To transmit these two messages, cooperation between individuals was needed so wide and so complex it puts any other animal community to shame. A small portion of that is used for destruction, which is still way worse than most things in the history of life (except first autotrophes - those outdo us still - and maybe trees).
They did.
cue 2001 a space odyssey.
nah you can see how our bodies look - do you think even strongest human in the world has a big chance against fully grown gorilla? i dont think so.
(without weapons ofc)
@@wojtekpolska1013 Yes, it will be very difficult. But Gorillas has only a few advantages: super strength and lightning-fast reflex. But Humans have many things to cover these: we can kick in many directions and from longer distance. No other ape can kick and no other species can kick in every direction as us. We can punch the heck out of any other animal. On one, not a single species on earth can make a punch. We can grapple really well. Any animal is at gr8 disadvantage against our chocks and locks and jammings. Most importantly we can plan. Yes! you plan various micro strategies even during a fight. Equipped with all these, a 120Kg MMA player can beat the heck out of a Gorilla.
Great episode, really enjoyed it! Very interesting
Hey minute earth I have a question that's been going around in my head for a few days which is " why aren't all months equal" like surely they could have put one day towards February I would greatly appreciate if my question gets answered luv you guys
It's because the year can't be evenly divided into twelve sets of days. I don't know if it can be evenly divided into any number of days actually. This is why we do add a day to February every four years
@@liammarshall-butler3384 shhhh let em answer
@@farahrathore3135 that reply lol 😂
The difference with humans is: We can make our own stuff. With our problem-solving abilities. Having few resources shouldn't be an issue.
Egoism may be advantageous in nature. But in the human world, it hampers our ability to keep things going.
I thought the last line would be "No this is not actually Gorillas we are talking about , it's the 2 Koreas "
South Korea not an hippie monke
Thank you for your contribution.
And the "third chimpanzee" group (i.e. humans) kind of found a balance between the two extremes. While we largely find ways to mediate conflict through de-escalation and familial ties (i.e. my son will marry your daughter and we can stop killing each other over the good hunting grounds and access to the good water sources), we are still capable of large-scale internecine violence when resources become too scarce. Honestly I think this is our main advantage - behaviorally we can adapt to suit the situation and do not have to rely on either violence or social bonding for conflict resolution but can have a bit of both.
We are not the so called third chimpanzees group we split from them long before chimpanzees and bonobos where a thing and we are not part of the line of chimps and bonobos
@@joj4096 I don't know why some feel the need to place humans in the split mentioned in the video whilst they made it clear we are not. The split between us and chimps happened much earlier.
@@koba763 Humans only share about 99% of our DNA with chimpanzees. That may seem like a lot, but remember that urine is 95% water. (Me smort 🤤)
@@randomkinkajou5747 I'm aware and agree, (although your comparison of urine to DNA was a little arbitrary) but how much DNA we share does not necessarily indicate when our common ancestor which chimpanzees actually lived. There are more important cues and factors, including the fossil record, which in my opinion indicates quite an early split-off between 8-13 million years ago.
@@koba763 I was actually agreeing with you. People seem to think that humans are chimpanzees, but we are much much farther than people actually think. I used the water and urine analogy, because I found it random.
this video is so complicated yet so simple
Its like north korea and south korea lol
yep
chimps scream and throw poop at you, while bonobos are just wholesome
Not sure if "Wholesome" is the right term.
In case you were wondering, humans belong to the group of monkeys that solve conflicts by fighting
we split long before chimps and bonobos where a thing...................
and where apes not monkeys
Humans are not monkeys
@@joj4096
And saying we solve conflicts with violence is honestly pretty misleading as well. We don’t primarily fight to solve disputes. We’re just REALLY good at making it a fight to remember, so we ignore the 57 times we went halfsies on the cookie jar
just the beginning of the random chimp event
“Cuddling”
Same thing happened with Cro Magnon humans from Africa and Neanderthals in Europe and Asia. Neanderthals were more like bonobos with the Cro Magnon being more chimp like.
@Cyril Check out the research of Stan Gooch.
It's true that Neanderthals had a long period of hunting megafauana like mammoths, but analysis of the contents of their teeth and microbiomes show that they also did quite a bit of foraging and plant eating (evidence of them making teas, super early)
There's also evidence in Spain that they're the first hominids to have buried their dead AND created art. To call them "hypercarnivores" is a gross mischaracterization given these recent findings. But they did hunt.
And re: them being out-competed due to weapons tech...the "directionality" of the mating between other hominids and Neanderthals would explain that. There was something about Neanderthal men mating with other hominids females which didn't work, at the biological level. So that fact alone would've significantly limited their ability to blend/assimilate as the majority population.
@Cyril I didn't claim they were more peaceful than humans, but there's no hard evidence to support a claim one way or the other, because there is no such thing as a Neanderthal culture we can currently study. However, their "bonobo-like" qualities have certainly been studied from recent phenotypic analysis of their DNA and microbiome contents.
Read up on Gooch's research, already? That was fast.
Of course, this does not apply to humans. It's all socioeconomical factors.
Yeah, I'm not sure how the Gorillas really affect the situation but the limited food definitely causes more competition within and without the same species
I just saw the noti, and now i'm here. So... Notification gang?
I have no idea how this bell notification thing is supposed to work, I clicked it ages ago when they first rolled it out and it took TH-cam 3 weeks to show me this in my subscriptions. Super cool video though!
The moral of the story?
Being nice or being violent is good or bad depending on the context
Debatable. It's only good or bad for you as an individual who is competing w' others for limited resources. But it doesn't make more resources, it doesn't help the species as a whole, it just makes your offspring less likely to be the one in the group who dies first of starvation (but some other monkey will still die).
Moral of the story is that everyone in the world knows about chimps and almost no one knows about bonobos.
@@roidroid well, it *does* make the species better because the more apt survives and while it doesn't create more resources, it does eliminate consumers of said resources.
Of course, it all depends on what you mean by "the species"
Is it the current members alive?
Is it the survival of the species as genes?
when it's the species trying to survive against itself tho, that can be a troublesome selector.
It's like when you get those beetles with huge weird horns, or apes with gigantic red arses, it's not actually useful for the species as much as it's just natural selection (or often times sexual-selection) going a bit mental.
@@roidroid hmm. Food for thought
This also explains the differences between countries.
No
@@joj4096 actually yeah look at places with less resources and more poverty leads to an increase of sociopathy and stinginess due to less resources and in places with more resources people are more likely to be generous and empathetic like look at war torn countries and then look at first world countries
That explains humanity...
But which river should we blame?
@@0topon North
The part that this video leaves out is that the monolith appeared north of the river
Actually natural selection.
First known instance of a random chimp event.
Canada vs the United States.
Interesting, this makes me wonder if ending world hunger, thirst, etc. could bring world peace as well.
I like how the bonobos has the pansexual flag headband
No wonder their scientific name is Pan paniscus
Bonobos be doing a lot more than cuddling!
South Side is the best Side.
Bohemian Simians is a great name for a band.
Love u 😍
Advanced Happy valentine day 🤭
Minute Earth: Bonobos are peaceful.
Koba says hi.