Transcribe
Translate
Spaceways, v. 4, issue 6, whole no. 29, 1942
Page 11
More information
digital collection
archival collection guide
transcription tips
SPACEWAYS 11 DEVOLUTION by NILS. H. FROME Many theories have been advanced to explain the mysterious process by which man emerged from his primitive ape-like ancestors. One is that our ape forebears lived in a forest land which lay to the north of the Himalayas before the Ice Age, and, as the Ice Age advanced and the forests moved southward, were unable to cross with them because of the natural barrier of the Himalayas, and were forced at last to take to the ground. While this might explain part of the enigma, how man became adapted to a life on the ground, it does not throw much light on the most important part: how man developed into a thinking being; nor does it explain why man no longer has the hair we know our ancestors had; nor why we are so woefully deficient in many ways to our cousins in the rainforests of the tropics--even to the more primitive members of our own species today. Why didn't the anthropoid ape, who is almost exclusively a ground animal, develop intellect, after having served his apprenticeship in the trees at the same time as man did? What is there about an existence confined to the ground after having been adapted from a tree life which should exert such a powerful influence for selection that all the survivors of these apes should be completely transformed physically and mentally? One such radical change would be enough to strain one's credulity, much less both. Nor does this switch from a tree life to a ground existence seem to have been very beneficial physically for the species as the natural selection theory demands. Another theory simply ignores the necessity of scientific, logical explanations, instead of trying to stretch scientific explanations to the breaking point on a thing obviously a size or two too large for them--that man is the ultimate end of a constantly upward-working evolution, or at least well on the road to the ultimate of evolution. Many authors of so-called scientific fiction frequently use this latter cut-and-dried theory. It is anybody's guess, and here is mine--that our much vaunted in telligence is indirectly the result of physical degeneration of our ape forebears. When man was an ape, some individuals fell below the physical standards demanded by the life led by their race. Perhaps they were not so agile as their brothers and sisters; could not swing into the trees so easily when in danger; their bone structure deteriorated, causing dental decay and subsequent difficulty in getting enough food; had a deficiency of hair and became cold; or developed an increased susceptibility to disease.
Saving...
prev
next
SPACEWAYS 11 DEVOLUTION by NILS. H. FROME Many theories have been advanced to explain the mysterious process by which man emerged from his primitive ape-like ancestors. One is that our ape forebears lived in a forest land which lay to the north of the Himalayas before the Ice Age, and, as the Ice Age advanced and the forests moved southward, were unable to cross with them because of the natural barrier of the Himalayas, and were forced at last to take to the ground. While this might explain part of the enigma, how man became adapted to a life on the ground, it does not throw much light on the most important part: how man developed into a thinking being; nor does it explain why man no longer has the hair we know our ancestors had; nor why we are so woefully deficient in many ways to our cousins in the rainforests of the tropics--even to the more primitive members of our own species today. Why didn't the anthropoid ape, who is almost exclusively a ground animal, develop intellect, after having served his apprenticeship in the trees at the same time as man did? What is there about an existence confined to the ground after having been adapted from a tree life which should exert such a powerful influence for selection that all the survivors of these apes should be completely transformed physically and mentally? One such radical change would be enough to strain one's credulity, much less both. Nor does this switch from a tree life to a ground existence seem to have been very beneficial physically for the species as the natural selection theory demands. Another theory simply ignores the necessity of scientific, logical explanations, instead of trying to stretch scientific explanations to the breaking point on a thing obviously a size or two too large for them--that man is the ultimate end of a constantly upward-working evolution, or at least well on the road to the ultimate of evolution. Many authors of so-called scientific fiction frequently use this latter cut-and-dried theory. It is anybody's guess, and here is mine--that our much vaunted in telligence is indirectly the result of physical degeneration of our ape forebears. When man was an ape, some individuals fell below the physical standards demanded by the life led by their race. Perhaps they were not so agile as their brothers and sisters; could not swing into the trees so easily when in danger; their bone structure deteriorated, causing dental decay and subsequent difficulty in getting enough food; had a deficiency of hair and became cold; or developed an increased susceptibility to disease.
Hevelin Fanzines
sidebar
