• Philharmonic3@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    75
    ·
    2 days ago

    Why is the first wheel always shown as stone? Surely a log would have lent itself to the discovery of rolling much more readily

      • ronl2k@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        According to Google, what we call The Stone Age also included the use of wood products. They were often used together.

        • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          2 days ago

          Lies.

          Next thing you will try to convince us we were still using copper in the iron age.

          • ronl2k@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            18 hours ago

            Everything invented before the copper age is considered to be part of the stone age.

            • Stone age: ends 5000 BCE
            • Copper age: 3500 - 2300 BCE
            • Bronze age: (tin+copper alloy): begins 3300 BCE
            • Iron age: begins 1200 BCE
    • deltatangothree@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      I would guess logs don’t lend themselves to the historical/fossil whatever record as well as stone does. The oldest wheels we’ve found are stone because any potential log ones deteriorated, and this was all before written records.

      • marcos@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        2 days ago

        That entire idea is so absurd I had to check.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wheel

        Looks like the first transportation-related evidence of wheel we have was made of clay (probably because it was a toy). The first transportation-related actual wheel that we found was made of wood. The first wheel-shaped object we found wasn’t used for transportation and was made of wood.

        Stone is just a really bad material for making wheels. But I wrongly expected to see some metal ones on the list.

      • Jankatarch@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        Imagin if logs were actually perfect material for designing that one shape that produces infinite energy, food, and research.

    • BigBenis@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      2 days ago

      Do you see any trees in that drawing? It seems cavemen existed exclusively in barren volcanic wastelands.

    • betanumerus@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 days ago

      When it was on TV, the Flintstones cartoon made it to everyone’s mind.

      Rolling logs is something even beavers have probably been rediscovering over the eras.

      • UncleMagpie@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        The Flintstones fascinated me when I was a kid because everything had already been invented but it was just made out of rocks and wood instead of metal and plastic. So for example they had a stone dishwasher appliance powered by a bird or something.

    • crimsonpoodle@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      2 days ago

      Might have been grinding wheels for wheat; don’t have to be replaced as often and if in a stone track don’t have to worry as much about breakage. But that’s just a theory…. A history theory… or at least a history conjecture

  • ekZepp@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    “Volcanic eruptions are a scam! Ofk we must build on top of hot smooky mountain!”

    “MAKE NEANDERTHAL GREAT AGAIN”

            • ricecake@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              16 hours ago

              It undercuts their dignity. If people think you’re a joke, they don’t do what you say when you say to do something awful.
              We’re dealing with fascists. They’re a violent, angry pack of buffoons. We shouldn’t cater to their feelings.

              For reference, see the works Chaplin, and Moe, Larry and Curly.

            • potoooooooo ☑️@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              18
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              2 days ago

              Disagree. With Trump, for example, it’s one of the proven ways to get under his skin. It’s useful to know how to goad people who otherwise have no capacity for empathy, regret, etc…, in my opinion.

              • plyth@feddit.org
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                7
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                2 days ago

                Don’t shit where you eat. Trump is not reading this post, not even MAGA people.

                • potoooooooo ☑️@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  7
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  2 days ago

                  I’m not. I’m eating where I shit, which is still acceptable under the rules and, as a friendly aside, wildly efficient.

              • SLVRDRGN@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                2 days ago

                Trust me, I love the idea of getting under Trump/MAGA’s skin. But if we have to become the shitpeople to beat the shitpeople, do we really win?

        • Pup Biru@aussie.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          2 days ago

          especially considering neanderthals were made extinct largely because of things like violence with homo sapiens, disease introduced by homo sapiens, the relationship (or lack thereof) with dogs, and climate change whilst the competitive advantages around social and cognitive development are relatively slight

          • ronl2k@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            2 days ago

            Neanderthals went extinct because they couldn’t survive the ice age of 40,000 years ago. Unlike homo-sapiens, they never learned to sew, so they couldn’t make tighter-fitting fur clothing to keep warm. They mostly wore loose-fitting animal hides.

            • plyth@feddit.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              2 days ago

              Ice wasn’t everywhere. The sewing can’t be the only reason but interesting nevertheless.

              • ronl2k@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                18 hours ago

                Ice wasn’t everywhere.

                The last ice age of 40,000 years ago covered everywhere Neanderthals lived, and no Neanderthals survived it. The last Neanderthals went extinct from exposure in a cave in Spain, which was affected by the last ice age.

                No sewing equipment has ever been found with Neanderthals. They died of exposure in spite of being more cold-hardy than homo-sapiens, who by the last ice age had mastered sewing tighter-fitting clothing with leather and fur. That’s why we survived the last ice age, and the Neanderthals did not.

    • bulwark@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      35
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      I first read it as neanderthals are less aggressive so they must focus now on weapons. I’m pretty sure the intention is that the guys working on the wheel have to stop because the current leadership are neanderthals.

      I think neanderthals were less war-like than humans because humans eradicated all of them, but I’m probably reading too much into it.

      • zloubida@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        32
        ·
        2 days ago

        I think neanderthals were less war-like than humans because humans eradicated all

        Akchually, Neanderthals were humans and we don’t know why they disappeared. The idea that homo sapiens eradicated them all is probably a wrong one; their decline begun before the arriving of homo sapiens.

        • purplemonkeymad@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          26
          ·
          2 days ago

          The most recent suggestion I saw is that there were just more sapiens when they started interacting. Interbreeding must have happened, but with new groups of sapiens continuously arriving from the middle east, the neanderthal DNA just got more and more dilute. Eventually “pure” neanderthals no longer existed.

          • GreenMartian@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            2 days ago

            with new groups of sapiens continuously arriving from the middle east, the neanderthal DNA just got more and more dilute

            I can’t tell if you’re being serious, or making fun of the great replacement theory conspiracy…

            • Mirror Giraffe@piefed.social
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              16
              ·
              2 days ago

              It is considered true but the"replacement" took place over thousands of years and the neanderthal population was very small in comparison to the ones they were bedding.

        • VindictiveJudge@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          2 days ago

          Europeans and Asians also have roughly 2% Neanderthal DNA on average, so it’s likely we absorbed a significant chunk of their population into our own.

          • raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            11
            ·
            2 days ago

            Pretty sure those 2% refer to the subsection of the genome that is unique to homo sapiens. We have >98% shared DNA among all great apes (including humans)

      • Jesus_666@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        We also might simply have outbred them. Remember that modern humans have what appears to be detectable Neanderthal DNA so interbreeding has apparently occurred; we might simply have diluted them into perceived extinction. Besides, there doesn’t seem evidence for large-scale war.

        Of course that’s all speculation.

        • Revan343@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 days ago

          Neanderthals were also comparatively expensive, which is great when food is plentiful, but gave us the edge when food was scarce

      • garbagebagel@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        2 days ago

        Huh I never thought about Neanderthals that way, but it makes sense. Crazy that now we refer to them as “less civilized” or more “savage”, considering what war is.

    • DragonTypeWyvern@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      2 days ago

      The current scientific reality is what we know about Neanderthals implies that you probably wouldn’t have noticed much of a difference in either direction.

      They were fully aware cousins with art, music, and ritual behavior, and they were closely related enough to interbreed.

  • bricklove@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    Wheel no good on rough ground. Wheel need road network and specialized labor. Befriend animal. He carry.

    • snooggums@piefed.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      What is innovation and improvement anyway?

      It isn’t like we research things that already exist!

    • iegod@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      2 days ago

      That’s not how research works. We’re still advancing wheel tech for adaptability and use in different environments and conditions.

  • Caveman@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    30
    ·
    2 days ago

    The wheel is overrated historically. You need paved roads for a wheel to be useful while a donkey train climbs mountains.