User Panel
|
|
Quoted: but in America men even gay men get months off for maternity leave. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: early humans, hell…..,3rd world humans right fuckin now mamasan can poop a kid out and continue to work in the RICE FIELDS MUTHA FUCKA but in America men even gay men get months off for maternity leave. Why is that a bad thing? We no longer have the tribal support systems our ancestors had, being able to take time as a family to do family things is perfectly reasonable. |
|
Ever wonder so many species have 95%+ mortality rates and try to squirt out as many offspring as they can? Even species we consider “smart” and have few offspring per cycle still have crazy high mortality rates in the wild.
humans have stopped evolving. |
|
Quoted: but in America men even gay men get months off for maternity leave. View Quote I get 6 weeks paternity leave starting Monday. But I can use it intermittently… so I can work half-time for like 3 months or 3/4-time for like 6 months. AND I work from home. Attached File |
|
|
Quoted: The real question is why they didn’t protest the critical lack of access to abortion services. Their Neanderthal bodies, their Neanderthal choice! They likely went extinct solely because they couldn’t get abortions. View Quote A documentary I saw, told of DNA research that found that Neanderthal / Homo sapien hybrids always resulted in female children due to some incompatibility. Once Homo sapien genes were introduced into a group, it would decline due to the lack of males. Add the Neanderthal behavior of swapping females among their groups, over time this hybridization would decline their population. Couple that effect over a couple of thousand years plus the volcano eruption from the volcano at Naples, Italy(forget its name at the moment) really pushed Neanderthal’s population into a terminal decline. |
|
Quoted: This. Walk through any rural cemetery. Where my parents are buried, there are lots of infant headstones, under five was not rare. A few teens, too. Most were born in the 1910’s-30’s. Almost every family lost a baby or two to disease. TC View Quote My Great-grandparents had 7 kids. Only 3 made it to adulthood. One of the infants that died was a twin. I remember my grandmother saying he was fine the night they put him to bed and dead the next morning when they woke up. I think he was about 24 months old. A few years ago I was on a rural SC backroad. I passed a large old brick church where the only thing left was the shell of the building. Someone maintained the grounds and the cemetery though. I was curious about the place so I turned around and went back, parked, and walked around. In the cemetery there were headstones dating back to the 1700's. A lot were children's/infant's. One rather large headstone caught me eye. There were 8 names and dates craved on it. From what I could tell, this family in the mid 1800's had at least 8 children that did not make it past 2 years old. |
|
Human childbirth is relatively dangerous compared to other species because of our bipedal hips and extremely large brains. It was certainly no picnic, but they got it done.
Genes that expressed as phenotypes that failed to produce milk after childbirth rapidly faded from the pool. |
|
Quoted: Pre-anesthesia, pre-cleanliness and sterile conditions, pre-vaccinations, pre-pre-natal care, and pre-antibiotics- There was a much different death rate. Like 10-20,000 thousand maternal deaths per 100,000 pregnancies from time of pregnancy to time of birth or shortly after. And that’s just pregnancy related. Even 100 years ago or so, we had that down to under 1,000. Now, it’s more like ten. And would be even less is we didn’t have a bunch of skanky junkies and druggies and poors doing stupid shit. Infant mortality used to be in the 100s per 1000 births. Maybe as high as 300 or more. One hundred years ago is was down around 100/1000. In the US, it’s now around 5/1000. And potentially, if the US had less skanky idiots, Could be around 2/1000. Prehistoric man, early Homo sapiens, early civilization man, etc. had a majority of births go without mother or baby death. View Quote Take a walk in cemetery that’s been around for 120 years or so. Notice the headstones of children who died before their first birthday and under age six. |
|
Quoted: Almost. The USA has the highest rate of mortality in child birth in the developed world. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: At the risk of being callous and pissing off some, Darwin got a lot of things right. That thingy called 'survival of the fittest' is a thing. If Mom survived her first child, and hubby provided enough food to keep her and child alive, he maybe got laid again, and mom popped out another. If the baby was strong and healthy, the cycle repeated. The weaker males sometimes didn't make it home from the hunt, or if they did, they were empty handed. Likewise, the weaker females didn't survive their first childbirth - malnutrition, disease, etc. The strong survived, the weaker ones didn't, for the most part. The strong males sought out the strong females, hoping to breed strong kids. Then liberalism happened, the weak got fed, the ill got cared for. The strong didn't want any part of breeding with the weak, so the weak bred amongst themselves, creating more weaker kids, because some of them survived, too. And so we get to today, where eventually all wimmenz that want to, can get pregnant, and with enough medical care, have a C section, and deliver a child that can, with enough medical care and baby-sitting, get old enough to have sex with some dweeb, and the cycle goes on. Today, death of either mother or child during childbirth is almost unheard of. I sometimes think that if we cheat Darwin out of his dues for long enough, some of the above 'survivors' might live long enough to climb the food chain and even become 'chiefs' or even politicians, and get into positions of power. Oh, just hang on a mother-fuckin' minute...... we're fooked. ETA As usual, beaten like a red-headed step-child while I was 2-finger pecking at the keyboard. Almost. The USA has the highest rate of mortality in child birth in the developed world. That is absolutely false, and has been debunked a hundred times over. The US is one of the safest places on Earth to have a baby. Rivaled only be specific hospitals in affluent countries attended only by the rich, and ignoring all other hospitals in those territories. |
|
Quoted: Ever wonder so many species have 95%+ mortality rates and try to squirt out as many offspring as they can? Even species we consider “smart” and have few offspring per cycle still have crazy high mortality rates in the wild. humans have stopped evolving. View Quote I don’t think you have any evidence to suggest humans have stopped evolving. The basic forces that drive evolution haven’t been altered. Darwin himself stated that it is not the strongest that survive, but the most adaptable. We have been undergoing accelerating changes in environmental pressure for about 300 years, call it 7-12,000 if you want to use agriculture as the kick starter. Those who adapt to their surroundings will survive. Those who fail will become extinct. This can be derived from first principles. |
|
Quoted: If things didn't work right they died, that's a huge part of why the life expectancy was so low until the 1900's. Sure people lived to be older, but the average was way lower because people regularly died young. View Quote When my kids were little and everyone was freaking out about nut allergies I asked a few doctor friends. I had no recollection of nut allergies growing up. Was told those kids just died and the people with allergies kind of culled themselves. As testing improved and treatment improved the culling ended. Early humans either survived childbirth or didn’t. Same for children. If a child could make to 3, they had a really good chance of making it to adulthood. But most newborns didn’t survive a year prior to 1800. |
|
|
Quoted: I don’t think you have any evidence to suggest humans have stopped evolving. The basic forces that drive evolution haven’t been altered. Darwin himself stated that it is not the strongest that survive, but the most adaptable. We have been undergoing accelerating changes in environmental pressure for about 300 years, call it 7-12,000 if you want to use agriculture as the kick starter. Those who adapt to their surroundings will survive. Those who fail will become extinct. This can be derived from first principles. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: Ever wonder so many species have 95%+ mortality rates and try to squirt out as many offspring as they can? Even species we consider “smart” and have few offspring per cycle still have crazy high mortality rates in the wild. humans have stopped evolving. I don’t think you have any evidence to suggest humans have stopped evolving. The basic forces that drive evolution haven’t been altered. Darwin himself stated that it is not the strongest that survive, but the most adaptable. We have been undergoing accelerating changes in environmental pressure for about 300 years, call it 7-12,000 if you want to use agriculture as the kick starter. Those who adapt to their surroundings will survive. Those who fail will become extinct. This can be derived from first principles. Most people have an understanding of evolution that appears, at best, to be based on some mix of X-Men comic books and Young Earth Creationist propaganda. |
|
I enjoy walking through cemeteries/graveyards because there is no better place to be reminded that this life is temporary and that some things just aren’t worth worrying about, you know?
While walking through them I pay attention to the grouping and dates of the markers. A couple of years ago I found a group of markers in a cemetery that caught my attention. I can’t remember the dates but if I remember close to right, over period of about 10 years they had 4 children. One died at birth, one the day after birth, one at 1yr, and 1 at less than 3 years. Then the wife died. The next markers showed that he remarried, they had a child which died within the first year. (Many older markers state the mothers and fathers names) The 2nd wife passed next, then the husband. It’s possible they had more children that lived long since they would not have been buried beside them. Life was much different in the early 1900’s, especially in rural areas, yet I’m sure the 1900’s were extremely advanced compared to the time of the Neanderthals. |
|
Quoted: You should be an employer, then the answer will be obvious. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: Why is that a bad thing? We no longer have the tribal support systems our ancestors had, being able to take time as a family to do family things is perfectly reasonable. You should be an employer, then the answer will be obvious. I have two employees. If one of them knocked up their girl I would offer a few weeks of leave, I took time off when I had my kids, no reason to expect that others wouldn't also need to. |
|
Quoted: But most newborns didn’t survive a year prior to 1800. View Quote That's simply not true. https://faculty.weber.edu/kmackay/history%201700_colonial%20demographics.html In the colonies 70-80% made it to a year. Around 60% made it to adulthood. https://sites.udel.edu/britlitwiki/social-and-family-life-in-the-late17th-early-18th-centuries/ The infant and child mortality rates during the late 17th century and 18th century had a serious impact on the average life expectancy. A total of 12-13% of children would die during the first year of their lives, due complications such as diseases, physical accidents, and birth trauma. Even when you look at medieval times, the best estimate of deaths during the first year is around 25%. |
|
Quoted: A documentary I saw, told of DNA research that found that Neanderthal / Homo sapien hybrids always resulted in female children due to some incompatibility. Once Homo sapien genes were introduced into a group, it would decline due to the lack of males. Add the Neanderthal behavior of swapping females among their groups, over time this hybridization would decline their population. Couple that effect over a couple of thousand years plus the volcano eruption from the volcano at Naples, Italy(forget its name at the moment) really pushed Neanderthal’s population into a terminal decline. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: The real question is why they didn’t protest the critical lack of access to abortion services. Their Neanderthal bodies, their Neanderthal choice! They likely went extinct solely because they couldn’t get abortions. A documentary I saw, told of DNA research that found that Neanderthal / Homo sapien hybrids always resulted in female children due to some incompatibility. Once Homo sapien genes were introduced into a group, it would decline due to the lack of males. Add the Neanderthal behavior of swapping females among their groups, over time this hybridization would decline their population. Couple that effect over a couple of thousand years plus the volcano eruption from the volcano at Naples, Italy(forget its name at the moment) really pushed Neanderthal’s population into a terminal decline. Well, yeah. That is the real reason, but it doesn’t contribute to or support the idea that all women in the US will die in the next 2 weeks if they can’t have an abortion. |
|
Quoted: A documentary I saw, told of DNA research that found that Neanderthal / Homo sapien hybrids always resulted in female children due to some incompatibility. Once Homo sapien genes were introduced into a group, it would decline due to the lack of males. Add the Neanderthal behavior of swapping females among their groups, over time this hybridization would decline their population. Couple that effect over a couple of thousand years plus the volcano eruption from the volcano at Naples, Italy(forget its name at the moment) really pushed Neanderthal’s population into a terminal decline. View Quote View All Quotes View All Quotes Quoted: Quoted: The real question is why they didn’t protest the critical lack of access to abortion services. Their Neanderthal bodies, their Neanderthal choice! They likely went extinct solely because they couldn’t get abortions. A documentary I saw, told of DNA research that found that Neanderthal / Homo sapien hybrids always resulted in female children due to some incompatibility. Once Homo sapien genes were introduced into a group, it would decline due to the lack of males. Add the Neanderthal behavior of swapping females among their groups, over time this hybridization would decline their population. Couple that effect over a couple of thousand years plus the volcano eruption from the volcano at Naples, Italy(forget its name at the moment) really pushed Neanderthal’s population into a terminal decline. Smithsonian article "Examining the Neanderthal Y chromosome, the researchers identified four genes that could have prevented the male sex chromosome from being passed to human/Neanderthal hybrid children. Three of the genes resemble those in modern humans that can cause a mother to have an immune reaction against a male fetus, causing a miscarriage." Pretty interesting. Kharn |
|
The Neanderthals were smarter and better at planning. They seduced or trapped the homofemales.
|
|
Quoted: During child birth now a days we have somewhat sterile rooms and equipment. We have technology to let us know if a woman needs a c-section. How did the early humans do this? What were they using a rock to cut the umbilical cord? What if the mother wasn't able to produce milk after birth? These are burning questions!!! View Quote They had better outcomes than today because they had rubber bands, toilet plungers and belt sanders back then. |
|
I see that OP realized how dumb his question was and has abandoned the thread.
|
|
A historic home nearby has this on the grounds.
Life was hard without basic medical care. It was even harder when you gave birth in the elements. Attached File |
|
It's all in the build of the baby carrier.
My wife had to have c-sections for both our boys. When we got married she was so small my thighs were larger in circumference than her waist. Still tiny compared to me. We had big baby boys. A hundred years ago she'd have died with the first one. My father-in-law always said my mother-in-laws side of the family the women were built like cows. When it was time to have the babies they'd just squat down and drop them out on the ground/floor, stand up, pick the baby up and start breast feeding them. Those women were w-i-d-e compared to the women on his side of the family. The sickly don't live long in that kind of world. People susceptible to illnesses don't survive long. People not smart enough to figure stuff out don't live long. Used to be, if you were stupid enough to go sailing in a hurricane there was no Coast Guard to risk their lives searching for you and saving your dumbass life. But today we save people like that so they can have more kids just like them. |
|
Quoted: If things didn't work right they died, that's a huge part of why the life expectancy was so low until the 1900's. Sure people lived to be older, but the average was way lower because people regularly died young. View Quote Something like 50-60% of kids in Victorian England didn’t live past age six. |
|
Quoted: early humans, hell…..,3rd world humans right fuckin now mamasan can poop a kid out and continue to work in the RICE FIELDS MUTHA FUCKA View Quote The Meaning of Life: The Third World |
|
Quoted: My wife and I have had 9 children, 7 of them born at home, and two at the midwifes house. None of them ever needed medical care, but I am very willing to admit that we were blessed in this regard, and thankful that it would have been available if needed. View Quote Now, Try that in an era of legit food insecurity, no antibiotics, no emergency surgery if anything goes wrong, no vaccinations, no clean water supply, etc. The majority of births and mothers will be fine. But overall, massive amounts of maternal and neonatal death compared to now. You were walking the high wire with a safety strap and a net. |
|
Quoted: During child birth now a days we have somewhat sterile rooms and equipment. We have technology to let us know if a woman needs a c-section. How did the early humans do this? What were they using a rock to cut the umbilical cord? What if the mother wasn't able to produce milk after birth? These are burning questions!!! View Quote |
|
How long did it take for the neanderthal baby to choose its gender?
|
|
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.