Skip to main content

Last Man Standing


For anyone interested in human evolution as I am, and the enduring question of why modern humans survived and Neandertals did not, the new book by anthropologist and retired Penn State professor Pat Shipman is an essential read. While the last few years have seen a number of excellent books on the question published, The Invaders: How Humans and Their Dogs Drove Neanderthals to Extinction, brings a new perspective to a diverse array of evidence from ecology, paleoanthropology, and beyond.

Shipman begins with her assertion that modern humans are best viewed as the most successful invasive species that our planet has ever seen. Using the reintroduction of wolves to Yellowstone National Park as an example, she relates the science of what happens to an ecosystem when a new top predator is introduced. Not only does this new species increase competition for limited resources, these invaders often deliberately target their closest competitors, as wolves did with coyotes in Yellowstone. Fossil evidence suggests that this might also have been the case as modern humans moved into Europe, where competing predators like cave bears, cave lions, and ultimately Neandertals themselves, disappeared not long after our arrival. 

The most interesting portion of the book, and in line with previous work by the author, is the discussion of the central importance of our relationship with dogs to our ultimate success as a species. While determining accurate dates for these events remains a complex endeavor, and it is highly possible that Neandertals were already extinct by the time we domesticated dogs, the partnership of humans and dogs gave us a competitive advantage that other predators lacked. Shipman argues that this partnership, unique among the animals, allowed for more effective hunting, provided protection, and was a source of labor that freed up time and energy for other concerns, ultimately cementing our dominance over other predatory species. 

A compelling read, written in language accessible to the non-specialist, The Invaders presents a convincing argument about the final triumph of humans as a species. Whether the hypothesis will hold up in light of future discoveries remains to be seen. If the work of the past ten years is any indication, even after nearly two centuries of studying human evolution, we are still only at the beginning of understanding our own past. 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

"Unanswerable Questions" for Evolution Part One

Creation Ministries International has launched a new initiative, which seems a lot like all the other creationists blitzkriegs before it. With the wonderfully creative tagline of "Question Evolution", CMI intends to challenge "evolutionists" and their "indoctrination" of high school students with the supposed dogma of evolution. They also aim to  cut the population of atheists by half , presumably by challenging the "faith" that every atheist (and only atheists, no "real Christians") is supposed to hold in Darwin's great idea. The main thrust of this is a tract with fifteen "unanswerable" questions for evolutionists. I'm done putting quotation marks around the word, evolutionists; from here on out I ask my readers to recognize that it is a creationist term that is about as silly as calling someone a general relativist (accepts general relativity) or germist (for accepting germ theory). Regardless, CMI seems just as i...

What Creationists Don't Understand

There are quite a number of concepts that one could successfully argue that creationists fail to understand; whether this is out of a simple lack of knowledge or willful ignorance is hard to say and certainly can't be generalized to every creationist. Some, the everyday creationist, I would like to think simply haven't been exposed to the evidence. Others, the holders of Ph.D's in various fields, especially in the sciences, who happily reject evolutionary theory are willfully ignorant (John Whitmore comes to mind). But I think there is one idea that creationists of all stripes simply fail to understand; evolution is based on solid, visible evidence. Evolution is not some tenant of a "science religion" that descended down to Darwin from on high, it is an explanatory framework based on quite a lot of facts and mountains of evidence. It is evidence that leads to the conclusions of evolution, that life changes over time and, given the long history of the earth, all ...

The Absurdity/Agony of War

Science writer Mary Roach is never one to shy away from parts of science that verge on the absurd, as anyone who has read any of her books surely knows. I'd read two of her previous books, and been enchanted enough by Roach's unique combination of endless curiosity and a wry sense of humor that I rushed to lay my hands on her newest book. Grunt: The Curious Science of Humans at War will not fail in living up to the expectations that fans of her work will bring. Those who have never read her before will be hard-pressed to put down a book that I finished in a few short days.  The real joy of reading something by Mary Roach is her talent for seeking out strange areas of science that a reader might never have known about. As an investigator, she answers questions you never knew you had. Her newest work   is no exception. We discover, for instance, how the military tests the ability of a fighter jet to survive a mid-air collision with a large bird--by firing a dead chicken...