Comments on: Ancient Man May Have Used Fire 1.5 Million Years Ago

By: Al H from TX

Al H from TX — Wed, 25 Apr 2012 12:46:26 +0000

That captioned caveman picture is most clever funny thing I have ever seen in my life. Perfect analogy for nuclear power. Yeah, if they did think that we would still be running naked through the bush today, since fire is really the thing that made civilization possible.

I think you might be right though (pure speculation) that if humans lived in a small tribes and bands of families then there might have been some that accepted fire and some that rejected it, either because they feared it or because they never managed to learn how to use it and how to make it. If that was the case (probably was) the ones who were not for fire would have not done as well as the ones who were for fire and since it’s so hard to survive anyway, died out.

Maybe we could learn something?

By: Andrew Jaremko

Andrew Jaremko — Tue, 10 Apr 2012 22:31:26 +0000

Thanks all for the comments. The April 7, 2012 edition of Quirks and Quarks has an interview about the discoveries at the Wonderwerk cave:

A team led by Dr. Michael Chazan, professor of Anthropology and director of the Archeology Centre at the University of Toronto, has found new evidence that human ancestors had controlled fire a million years ago. Before this discovery, no good evidence of the human use of fire had been discovered predating the Neanderthals, so this evidence pushes back the use of fire by hundreds of thousands of years. The evidence was discovered in Wonderwerk Cave in South Africa, and was quite difficult to identify. The archeologists discovered ash from burned grasses, as well as burned bone and stone, but no defined fire pit. This suggests the possibility that Homo erectus used fire differently from later humans species, and perhaps had not learned to fully control or utilize it.

The Quirks page also has links to the published paper and more news stories. Interesting to see some national pride at work - in the US report it's a US researcher mentioned, in Canada it's a professor at one of our Universities.

By: Joel Riddle

Joel Riddle — Mon, 09 Apr 2012 23:59:08 +0000

Joel Riddle said:

Some discussion of how the Japanese and German industrial economies might evolve over the next several decades might fit in appropriately here.

And in the news this evening, 2 reactors in Japan will be re-started. Well-reasoned decision, I would say.

By: George Carty

George Carty — Mon, 09 Apr 2012 14:44:53 +0000

Haven’t some researchers suggested that Mongol conquests may have contributed to the later Little Ice Age, as their extermination of farmers led land to revert to forest?

By: John ONeill

John ONeill — Mon, 09 Apr 2012 11:33:58 +0000

It used to be said that the Tasmanians, who were cut off from the rest of humanity for 8,000 years after sea level rise formed Bass Strait, had lost the art of starting fire and had to carry if in a fire pot. Just googled that- apparently it wasn’t so, an early document describes their Boy Scout techniques.
Aboriginal use of fire to clear forest on mainland Australia is supposed to give a very clear signal in the fossil record , through vegetation changes and animal extinctions, of when they first reached the continent. It would be interesting if similar changes could be pinned down to our more remote forebears in Africa.
Some scientists also see a human fingerprint in past climate fluctuations, for example, methane from early rice cultivation causing warming, or reforestation of cropped areas after the destruction of the Aztec and Inca empires leading to reduced CO2 levels and helping bring about the Little Ice Age. Maybe the very first humans were already fiddling with the planetary air conditioning system.

By: Joel Riddle

Joel Riddle — Mon, 09 Apr 2012 11:20:49 +0000

Some discussion of how the Japanese and German industrial economies might evolve over the next several decades might fit in appropriately here.

By: L.Long

L.Long — Sat, 07 Apr 2012 20:53:24 +0000

Sorry #10 but the metaphor was not lost as I did ‘get it’.
I was answering the content of the cartoon.
Yes I do get it and it is so right as my daughter is fond of pointing out that under or present methods of discussing and being so afraid of harming someone that even aspirin would not be legal!

By: Matte

Matte — Sat, 07 Apr 2012 16:42:42 +0000

Umpossible! God created man about 6,000 years ago, so man could not have used fire that long ago!
Ergo it is all a lie, a LIE I tell you! *froth at mouth*

[//sanity on]
This is really cool, as somebody else mentioned, fire could possibly have been one of the factors that kick started development of heftier brains in our progenitors…

By: George Carty

George Carty — Sat, 07 Apr 2012 14:23:30 +0000

Russ said:

Fire: A great slave but a terrible master.

To this day the most destructive and deadly weapon of war. Fire can burn you but without it the world is cold and dark.

Fire was indeed the world’s first WMD. As ordinary people in pre-industrial times tended to live cheek-by-jowl in tiny dwellings often constructed of highly flammable materials, fire was always the most feared possibility whenever a city was besieged or sacked.

By: drbuzz0

drbuzz0 — Sat, 07 Apr 2012 06:40:10 +0000

L.Long said:

The cartoon would not have happened. The main reason is that there was no real reason.
If silly enough to misuse the fire you would be laughed at and told to use it carefully.
The run-away fires and ash disposal would not have been a real problem as there was plenty of room to get rid of ash and a run-away fire is handled by -well- running away.
Now that we have 3.5BILLION people on the planet there is no place to just ‘put the ash’ anymore.

Yes, it’s silly, but I think the metaphore has been lost on you…