EDIT: Let’s cool it with the downvotes, dudes. We’re not out to cut funding to your black hole detection chamber or revoke the degrees of chiropractors just because a couple of us don’t believe in it, okay? Chill out, participate with the prompt and continue with having a nice day. I’m sure almost everybody has something to add.

  • SeeMinusMinus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    14
    ·
    11 months ago

    I don’t believe that fire played as big as a role in early human development that scientists claim. There are cases of modern humans eating raw rotten meat and being fine. A lot of the chemical shit that goes down when meat rots has a lot of the same effects of cooking it. There are plenty of ways to do a thing and we should view it as lots of useful things instead of one end all.

    • arquebus_x@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      11 months ago

      Do you mean early human development biologically, or early human development overall (including culturally)? Because if the latter, humans using fire to cook meat was probably significantly less important than humans using fire for heat and light.

    • fruitycoder@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      11 months ago

      I know Greek mythology is very centered on the idea of fire being a defining things that made man civilizable. From Prometheus to the sacredness around keeping hearths lit.

      Curious how many other mythos carry on those ideas tbh

    • roguetrick@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      11 months ago

      I think the answer is complicated. Homo erectus, the first homo species thought to use fire and our direct ancestors were as close to obligate carnivores as there is in the homo genus, but they focused on big animals with a lot of fat like hippos and elephants. They likely did not cook that fat, because it would store just fine without doing so.