Saturday, May 1, 2021

Why Now?

Asking the question about whether there could have been a more advanced civilization of humans that was eliminated in a catastrophe, or related questions, leads to some deeper ones. Why did intelligent humans evolve at the time they did? Why didn't we evolve into city-living, culture-appreciating, educated, adept, clever humans two hundred thousand years ago? What delayed our approach? Why weren't we delayed another hundred thousand or two years? Why now?

One way of looking at this is to examine the preconditions for the final leap of evolution, to thinking brains and everything they required, and see when they arose for the first time. The simplistic solution is to just make a list, accurate as possible, of what steps led to humans and see why one of them couldn't have happened earlier.

One detail needed to follow this approach is to decide just where on the taxonomy of animals intelligence could have arisen. The pat answer is that we needed thermally regulating bodies so our brains didn't turn off in the winter. Why is this true? What about evolving in a region with fairly constant temperatures over the year? Perhaps it is a day/night temperature difference that excluded reptiles from becoming intelligent. Suppose some lizard had a complex brain, but could only think during the day when temperatures were warmer; why is this an impossibility? During colder temperatures only the lower brain stem, which is what today's reptiles have, was working. That part would allow the reptile to live like other dumber reptiles, except when temperatures got warmer, and then it could think great thoughts.

If we cannot determine some incontrovertible reason why reptiles couldn't have become more intelligent, the boundary of time when intelligence could have started is pushed back, hundreds of millions of years, when, supposedly, reptile species ruled the entire planet. We should ask: what good would being able to think more complex thoughts do for a reptile? Their ability to survive and reproduce depends on their visual skills, their speed, their ability to recognize hiding places, their ability to capture prey using body and head muscle linkages with eye coordination, and perhaps a few other things. Nowhere in this list is anything that a complex thought might help. Compare that with chimpanzee-like species which could begin to use found objects and then shaped objects as tools. Tool-using elevated species from chimpanzee level to human level. Current eptiles don't have the physiology for that.

So, could we have reptiles of millions of years ago, those who were living in forests, take an evolutionary jump to climbing trees and developing opposing thumbs and dextrous hands? If evolution could do this, why not, over another million years of evolution, could they not develop thermal regulation to some extent? Thermal regulation requires energy, and could reptiles become better hunters or more complete omnivores, and simply follow the pathway to intelligence that proto-chimpanzees would follow millions of years later? Why weren't the steps needed for intelligence, whatever they might have included, completed long ago, in the millions of years scale.

Perhaps evolution couldn't make the total number of jumps needed for this, simultaneously. Was the jungle many millions of years ago more hostile to the growth of intelligence that the forests of a few hundred thousand years ago? What about hands? Some animals climb trees using their claws, which penetrate into the bark or catch on irregularities in the bark of trees, and evolve so that this method improves, as opposed to developing grasping hands, which is a totally different evolutionary path.

Without grasping hands, evolution couldn't take one of its sideways steps. A sideways step in evolution is when a species either mutates its genome by moving one section to another place, perhaps copying it there, which then allows the species access to some new capability, not related to the one for which the genes had evolved for. We can think of the software side of evolution, which is what happens when one generation imparts some wisdom to the next one, which allows the newer generation to use its mental and physical capabilities in a task that it wouldn't have, without the training.

What else in evolutionary pressure serves to force hands to develop? If the species lives on fruits and other pickable objects, hands might be useful here. Alternately, if the animal simply eats leaves and flowers for nourishment, then hands don't play much of a role and wouldn't be selected for in the evolutionary process. Fruit provides more concentrated nourishment that leaves, as do seeds and some roots. Was food selection the problem that kept reptiles from becoming intelligent millions of years ago?

This doesn't sound correct. Why couldn't reptiles evolve to eat fruit and seeds, if primates could? Were there fruits around millions of years ago in the equivalent of forests?

Perhaps the question should be asked in a completely different way. How do we know that some lizard species did not develop intelligence of some sort two hundred million years ago? Would there be anything detectable this many years after they became extinct? Perhaps the intelligent lizards lasted a million years and build cities. What kind of rubble lasts two hundred million years? Do we know how to do excavations to figure out the answer to this question?

One thing we do have is fossils. Fossils occur when some animal does some stupid thing and gets caught in some mud and dies and then the mud turns to stone. Because of some perversity of nature, braincases are not often found in fossils. But recently some have.

To be intelligent, one needs a large brain, measured in terms of brainweight to bodyweight. Some recent finds of reptiles raises the possibility that some of them may have larger brains that has been expected by the earlier-discovered fossils. If we assume that civilized reptiles two hundred million years ago managed to largely avoid getting stuck in mud pits and turned into fossils, then their absence in our dinosaur skeletal displays in the different natural history museums around the world is understandable.

What else might be left behind from a civilizatin of intelligent creatures that lived for a million years and died out two hundred million years ago? What might get buried and refound that would last two hundred million years? For early human civilizations, we look at burial mounds. These are put together in the first few thousand years of civilization, and then everybody stops doing it. Inside these burial mounds there are gold ornaments and jewels, which might be contenders for enduring the forces of nature for millions of years. Would a civilization that lasted much longer not simply collect these things from their own archaic burial mounds and put them in a museum? And since the Earth changes its profile in much shorter times that two hundred million years, moving dirt and rock and lava and water and any materials around on the planetary surface, how could we expect anything from an ancient city to survive. Maybe they invented materials that were more durable than concrete? Concrete might be good for tens of thousands of years, if no earthquake or flood gets to it. What is left after a short time such as a hundred thousand years? Rubble. Maybe there might be some chemical test to see if some rubble we find has some unique features? Rubble near the surface probably wouldn't stay in one place, however.

One thing we can detect for long periods, in very unique situations, is the materials embedded in layers of rock. That is how we suspect a large asteroid hit the planet some 65 million years ago, from the thin layer of iridium-rich deposits all around the world. Would the lizard civilization have put something into their air which would be detectable? It is very hard to think of any possibilities in this area.

The conclusion is beginning to look inescapable. There is no way to tell if we are the first intelligent species to emerge on Earth. All the hubbub that goes on about aliens on other planets coming to visit us might be expanded to ask if there were some 'aliens', of the homegrown variety, right here already. If it could have happened once, maybe it could have happened twice or more times. All of these things would leave no evidence. One result of realizing we might be the tenth intelligent species on Earth rather than the first is that we really don't have a good understanding of evolution yet. Maybe there are clues buried in the genomes of the organisms of Earth that indicate something intelligent was around a very long time before us. It is certainly not clear how this might happen, but we need to grasp at straws to answer this question.

4 comments:

  1. Thank you for your blog! This is exactly the topic that occupied my mind for the recent year. Just yesterday I had a discussion with my partner on the same subject, with the same conclusion about the unknowable possibility of previous civilizations. But, I proposed a series on single-celled civilizations at the beginning of life and their catastrophic dying out as the selection pressure for the development of life that doesn't easily produce new civilizations. Incidentally, I found your blog when I researched the intelligence of beavers...

    I think I have some food for thought for you. Tell me if you want me to share a few ideas.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I appreciate very much your comment. I am not sure about the unknowability as science uncovers things that have been hidden for aeons. Please feel free to send any thoughts you have in this comment line and I will try to make good use of them.

      Delete
    2. I'll try to be brief.

      My hypothesis was mainly inspired by the following sources:
      - The Great Courses (TGC): Cities of the Ancient World
      - The Enigma of Reason by Hugo Mercier and Dan Sperber
      - Louder Than Words by Benjamin K. Bergen
      - The Selfish Gene and discussions of memetics and the signaling theory on the Internet

      At first glance, the obvious differences of humans from animals are hands, language, tool making, brainpower, but I think we can go deeper, beyond outward features to how they functionally change us. Human behavior is more predicted by learned culture than by biology; we might be too subjective to judge that, but we can also measure it by the effect different human societies (cultures) have on the environment, such as their climate change contribution: different cultures are functionally very different. In regards to beliefs, behavior, and information, we are a conformist species: we're sponges for the beliefs and behaviors (i.e. culture) of our social environment, even if these behaviors harmful to us. Even when we reason, we pretty much use the templates available in our environment--and we have to if we want to be convincing. This informational exchange and iterative progress has given rise to our technological civilization, but this might just be a side effect of the evolution of memes if 99% of what we believe and do is selected from our social environment.

      I propose this to be the criteria of a civilization and not the intelligence: a civilization is a system of rapid informational evolution that causes change in behavior and the natural environment much faster than biological evolution. It doesn't matter if the civilized species has hands to do it, or language to communicate, or even awareness. If ants or computers would exhibit change and complexity in their behavior and measurably shape the natural environment, I'd call it a civilization that we didn't yet learned how to communicate to.

      Delete
    3. Now, obviously being a rapidly progressing civilization is a great biological strategy for our species. Human genes have dispersed all over the globe as a result of that--we're a success story. Any species that would pair conformism with cultural drift would create the environment for the next-stage evolutionary process that's much faster and less limiting than biological evolution. Under the natural selection pressure, it would push the species inevitably to rapid success. It doesn't matter if the species has hands: the evolution of memes can arrive at a useful way to affect the natural environment much faster than the biological evolution. What ants have evolved in 100 mya, humans have achieved in a few 100 000s.

      But I just can't see what could be so unique in human natural history that didn't happen to any other species. I thought maybe it was a bottleneck event that would allow the OCD trait, something usually selected against, to propagate to the whole species. But all extinct (and many extant) species went through a bottleneck.

      My latest thinking is this. Maybe civilizations evolve easily. All you need is a species whose behavior would be mostly determined by copying, with a drift, it's conspecifics behavior (i.e not by the genetic program). The behavior would need to be open-ended, but the complexity may arise from the artificial environment created by the species. It doesn't have to be fully contained in a single creature. A single-celled species driven by conspecifics' evolving signals could build itself a Calcium-based "city" of increasing complexity whose pathways, like a computer chip, would drive the more and more complex behavior of the colony.

      But, I propose that civilizations, as defined by rapid development affecting the environment, not only collapse before they can evolve enough to stop, but also cause a global extinction event. And if civilizations really do evolve easily, then the beginning of life may have seen hundreds of such collapses. Which is in itself a type of evolutionary pressure. Maybe Earth life has started and restarted many times until a life evolved that didn't easily evolve civilizations. I don't know what preventative measure could have emerged. Maybe a chemistry that doesn't have use chemicals required for the quickest path to civilization or even a life that preys on the life that do use them. But, it took billions of years to find a loophole and evolve another civilization (us).

      Thank you if you read all that %) I'm here to discuss that if you want.

      Delete