RSS
In the late 2000s there was a lot of talk about how the Tasmanian devil was going to go extinct because of devil facial tumor disease. I expressed the thought that we need to be really cautious thinking that disease could drive the devils to extinction. This was not based on detailed knowledge of the biology of the devils. It was based on the fact that complex organisms are often subject to disease, and populations do crash, but it is clear that even if census size gets rather small, unless a population is very small and restricted disease itself and alone probably won’t eliminate an organism because there will be an evolutionary response. That’s one of the main arguments for why complex organisms tend to be predominantly sexual lineages despite the process’ two-fold cost. From what I recall many of the researchers expressing alarmist sentiments were ecologists, who often do not have evolutionary responses foremost in their mind.
But, there are reasons to be worried. The devil went extinct on the mainland ~3,000 years ago. The reason was probably the same as with the Tasmanian tiger: competition with the introduced dingo dogs. Probably more dangerous to the long term viability of the devil is that it is now restricted to an island the size of the Republic of Ireland (and much of the habitat on Tasmania is not devil optimal), where it is subject to habitat loss, and competition with introduced species.
Mind you, I am somewhat worried about the possible loss of the devil. But I thought it was frankly somewhat sensationalistic to assume that the devil’s disease was sui generis, and we just happened to be living at the time when the whole species was going to go down after persisting in Tasmania for ten thousand years despite various ups and downs. Diseases come and go. What is sui generis is the terraforming inclinations of our own species. We are the necessary and often sufficient condition.
A new open access paper suggests I may have been on the right path, Rapid evolutionary response to a transmissible cancer in Tasmanian devils:
Although cancer rarely acts as an infectious disease, a recently emerged transmissible cancer in Tasmanian devils (Sarcophilus harrisii) is virtually 100% fatal. Devil facial tumour disease (DFTD) has swept across nearly the entire species’ range, resulting in localized declines exceeding 90% and an overall species decline of more than 80% in less than 20 years. Despite epidemiological models that predict extinction, populations in long-diseased sites persist. Here we report rare genomic evidence of a rapid, parallel evolutionary response to strong selection imposed by a wildlife disease. We identify two genomic regions that contain genes related to immune function or cancer risk in humans that exhibit concordant signatures of selection across three populations. DFTD spreads between hosts by suppressing and evading the immune system, and our results suggest that hosts are evolving immune-modulated resistance that could aid in species persistence in the face of this devastating disease.
Again, we need to be cautious about these results. They’re preliminary. Just as we needed to be cautious about the original extreme claims.
English
Arabic
Chinese (Simplified)
Dutch
French
German
Hebrew
Hindi
Italian
Japanese
Korean
Persian
Polish
Portuguese
Russian
Spanish
Swedish
Turkish
Vietnamese
The incident makes me think about what sort of evolutionary responses humans could muster in the face of some apocalyptic event like an out of control biological warfare agent of some kind.
we could survive biologically. issue with humans is that our cultural complexity requires critical mass. we could easily persist with a 99.99% mortality rate in terms of being a biological species. depending on spatial distribution it wouldn’t even be much of a bottleneck if at all. (~1 million out of ~10 billion) but civilization would go and we’d probably be hunter-gatherers.
That would give us peasants the chance to make a direct comparison and we could then decide if we wanted to help bring back complex societies or not.Replies: @Anonymous, @John Massey
The Black Death is usually thought to have caused a mortality in 14th century Europe of about 67%.
Native American populations declined dramatically between end of the 15th and the later dates when European type governments began to conduct counts, but there multiple epidemics, and lots of enemy action that destroyed or degraded native institutions. Further, the exact scale of the catastrophe is truly obscure. It might have been on the scale of the Black Death, but, it might have been as much as 95%. Read the discussion in Apendix I to "Conquest: Cortes, Montezuma, and the Fall of Old Mexico" by Hugh Thomas
https://www.amazon.com/Conquest-Cortes-Montezuma-Fall-Mexico/dp/0671511041
The historiography is head spinning.Replies: @Razib Khan, @Douglas Knight
“Devil Facial Tumour Disease” would be a great name for a metal band.
but civilization would go and we’d probably be hunter-gatherers.
That would give us peasants the chance to make a direct comparison and we could then decide if we wanted to help bring back complex societies or not.
With careful selection of location, sedentary hunting/fishing/gathering plus small scale vegetable and grain farming should be possible, + maybe a few sheep for meat and wool, and offer the comforts of a small but well made house to live in, bed to sleep in, with clean water supply and sanitation. I think that would pretty much do it for me. The farming element could be a village scale cooperative.Replies: @iffen
Fortunately every probe we’ve sent to Mars can’t find anyone named Marvin.
Is there any precedent for a 99.99% death rate form any single disease cause within a limited time frame. I.e., not including the fact that in the long run the mortality rate is 100% and areas affected by sudden events of great violence.
The Black Death is usually thought to have caused a mortality in 14th century Europe of about 67%.
Native American populations declined dramatically between end of the 15th and the later dates when European type governments began to conduct counts, but there multiple epidemics, and lots of enemy action that destroyed or degraded native institutions. Further, the exact scale of the catastrophe is truly obscure. It might have been on the scale of the Black Death, but, it might have been as much as 95%. Read the discussion in Apendix I to “Conquest: Cortes, Montezuma, and the Fall of Old Mexico” by Hugh Thomas
The historiography is head spinning.
not to my knowledge.
That would give us peasants the chance to make a direct comparison and we could then decide if we wanted to help bring back complex societies or not.Replies: @Anonymous, @John Massey
Even if all the survivors decided that complex society was a bad idea the tragedy of the commons would put us right back on track again.
That would give us peasants the chance to make a direct comparison and we could then decide if we wanted to help bring back complex societies or not.Replies: @Anonymous, @John Massey
Low level, maybe. Being nomadic is physically arduous and uncomfortable (cold, hot) and you can never carry all the stuff you need.
With careful selection of location, sedentary hunting/fishing/gathering plus small scale vegetable and grain farming should be possible, + maybe a few sheep for meat and wool, and offer the comforts of a small but well made house to live in, bed to sleep in, with clean water supply and sanitation. I think that would pretty much do it for me. The farming element could be a village scale cooperative.
I am under the impression that the more successful nomads didn't worry so much about carrying a lot of stuff, they just helped themselves to whatever was in the settled societies' cupboards.Replies: @John Massey, @John Massey
The tasmanian devil has a future, probably… in Looney Toones cartoons.
With careful selection of location, sedentary hunting/fishing/gathering plus small scale vegetable and grain farming should be possible, + maybe a few sheep for meat and wool, and offer the comforts of a small but well made house to live in, bed to sleep in, with clean water supply and sanitation. I think that would pretty much do it for me. The farming element could be a village scale cooperative.Replies: @iffen
you can never carry all the stuff you need
I am under the impression that the more successful nomads didn’t worry so much about carrying a lot of stuff, they just helped themselves to whatever was in the settled societies’ cupboards.
If you are an HG, the best thing you can do is disappear into the shrubbery and stay lost, and avoid contact with civilisation at any cost.
There were some rather successful and comfortable sedentary hunter gatherers, e.g. the Jomon in Japan before the Yayoi rice farmers turned up, and the Native Americans of the Pacific north west. I could live on salmon, no problem.Replies: @iffen
I think Razib is right and that agriculture was inevitable which made complex societies inevitable. Western Civilization’s empowerment of the flourishing of the individual (all individuals) is a one-off and has reached an unsustainable end point. The success and maximizing of the individualist creed for everyone has destroyed the umbrella group that enabled it to flourish.
Peace.
Somebody gets it…everything in moderation, eh?
Peace.
The Black Death is usually thought to have caused a mortality in 14th century Europe of about 67%.
Native American populations declined dramatically between end of the 15th and the later dates when European type governments began to conduct counts, but there multiple epidemics, and lots of enemy action that destroyed or degraded native institutions. Further, the exact scale of the catastrophe is truly obscure. It might have been on the scale of the Black Death, but, it might have been as much as 95%. Read the discussion in Apendix I to "Conquest: Cortes, Montezuma, and the Fall of Old Mexico" by Hugh Thomas
https://www.amazon.com/Conquest-Cortes-Montezuma-Fall-Mexico/dp/0671511041
The historiography is head spinning.Replies: @Razib Khan, @Douglas Knight
Is there any precedent for a 99.99% death rate form any single disease cause within a limited time frame
not to my knowledge.
But do the Looney Tunes have a future in PC America? Pepe le Pew and Speedy Gonzalez are hurtful stereotypes, Elmer Fudd and Yosemite Sam aren’t allowed to have guns anymore, and any sort of slapstick involving explosives is strictly verboten because it promotes terrorism.
I am under the impression that the more successful nomads didn't worry so much about carrying a lot of stuff, they just helped themselves to whatever was in the settled societies' cupboards.Replies: @John Massey, @John Massey
The unfortunate outcome of that was that it gave them access to foods, alcohol and tobacco that really do them no good at all, healthwise, plus brought them into painful and frequently fatal contact with a totally different legal system and concept of personal vs collective ownership. And that’s not mentioning things like sniffing of petroleum products and glue.
If you are an HG, the best thing you can do is disappear into the shrubbery and stay lost, and avoid contact with civilisation at any cost.
I am under the impression that the more successful nomads didn't worry so much about carrying a lot of stuff, they just helped themselves to whatever was in the settled societies' cupboards.Replies: @John Massey, @John Massey
The more successful nomads that benefitted from raiding the sedentary folks were herders rather than hunter gatherers. But that just eventually turned them into the people they were raiding.
There were some rather successful and comfortable sedentary hunter gatherers, e.g. the Jomon in Japan before the Yayoi rice farmers turned up, and the Native Americans of the Pacific north west. I could live on salmon, no problem.
The generalizations remain the same.
The lower strata were better off under H&G and pastoralism than in the sedentary hierarchal societies.
It was inevitable that “civilization” would replace both worldwide.
I guess we should give a shout out to the Sentinelese as an exception.Replies: @John Massey
There were some rather successful and comfortable sedentary hunter gatherers, e.g. the Jomon in Japan before the Yayoi rice farmers turned up, and the Native Americans of the Pacific north west. I could live on salmon, no problem.Replies: @iffen
Yes, I realized that I should have said herders or pastoralists instead.
The generalizations remain the same.
The lower strata were better off under H&G and pastoralism than in the sedentary hierarchal societies.
It was inevitable that “civilization” would replace both worldwide.
I guess we should give a shout out to the Sentinelese as an exception.
You only have to see the sorry state that other Andaman Islanders have ended up in to realise that the Sentinelese are doing the right thing, even if they do not have full awareness of what it is they are doing, or at least of why they are doing it.Replies: @iffen
You may or may not post this. But I was reading something Irish and obscure and a thought popped: I imagined this one passage as you winking at me. Strange, but funny. Checked your blog and took it to be a sign, when you said little devils like the size of the island I love. Irish Catholics can’t joke about the Devil, because he likes us too much. Proselytizing is really not my style at all, I’d rather be arrogant about what I’ve seen and the sacraments I’ve received. But I’ve mentioned these things before and figured I’d dare you to examine them and conclude their hoaxes. With the lights in the sky, do this, I’m serious: on a clear night survey the stars, and look for the one or ones that really do twinkle, they’ll stand out brightly and slight twinkle. Stare at that star. If you don’t see it start to move then maybe I’m just that lucky. Cause they been out there every night for me since the first. The only scripture that accounts is of course what brought the three wise men to the baby Jesus; yes they followed a star in the sky. All the best, I will say a St. Patrick prayer for you. And tame those fuckin side burns you geek!
http://www.rense.com/general47/thund.htm
The generalizations remain the same.
The lower strata were better off under H&G and pastoralism than in the sedentary hierarchal societies.
It was inevitable that “civilization” would replace both worldwide.
I guess we should give a shout out to the Sentinelese as an exception.Replies: @John Massey
Yes, absolutely. The Sentinelese, for all that they might seem somewhat repulsive, in more sense than one, are actually doing the right thing in being totally savage and outright rejecting any contact with the outside world; that is unless they become too inbred (probably enough of them not to become a problem) or suffer some kind of major disaster which leaves them decimated and needing external assistance (but they seemed to weather the 2004 tsunami perfectly OK – when people tried to check on them by helicopter after the event, they shot arrows at the helicopter; which I guess is one way of telling people you are OK and do not need their interference).
You only have to see the sorry state that other Andaman Islanders have ended up in to realise that the Sentinelese are doing the right thing, even if they do not have full awareness of what it is they are doing, or at least of why they are doing it.
You only have to see the sorry state that other Andaman Islanders have ended up in to realise that the Sentinelese are doing the right thing, even if they do not have full awareness of what it is they are doing, or at least of why they are doing it.Replies: @iffen
But they will never get to sit in a recliner and watch Naked and Afraid. 🙂
There was a movie made about the search for the so-called Tasmanian Tiger:
It stars Willem Dafoe, and I liked the movie a lot, but I am a sucker for hunting movies.
The Black Death is usually thought to have caused a mortality in 14th century Europe of about 67%.
Native American populations declined dramatically between end of the 15th and the later dates when European type governments began to conduct counts, but there multiple epidemics, and lots of enemy action that destroyed or degraded native institutions. Further, the exact scale of the catastrophe is truly obscure. It might have been on the scale of the Black Death, but, it might have been as much as 95%. Read the discussion in Apendix I to "Conquest: Cortes, Montezuma, and the Fall of Old Mexico" by Hugh Thomas
https://www.amazon.com/Conquest-Cortes-Montezuma-Fall-Mexico/dp/0671511041
The historiography is head spinning.Replies: @Razib Khan, @Douglas Knight
I was once told that there had been a Caribbean sea urchin epidemic that killed 99.99%. But looking now, I can’t confirm that figure. I suspect it was about the 1983 die-off of Diadema antillarum, which wikipedia puts at 97%, and others at even lower. This says that Lessios found that it was as high as 99.9% in some places, but maybe nowhere 99.99%.