Slashdot Mirror


Your Hands Were Made For Punching According To New Study

They are capable of delicate surgery, creating beautiful works of art, and comforting someone feeling down, but according to a new study your hands evolved to smash someone in the face. From the article: "Human hands evolved so that men could make fists and fight, and not just for manual dexterity, new research finds. The study, published in the Journal of Experimental Biology, adds to a growing body of evidence that humans are among the most aggressive and violent animals on the planet. 'With the notable exception of bonobos, great apes are a relatively aggressive group of mammals,' lead author David Carrier told Discovery News. 'Although some primatologists may argue that chimpanzees are the most aggressive apes, I think the evidence suggests that humans are substantially more violent.''"

240 comments

  1. Not for jacking off? by colinrichardday · · Score: 5, Funny

    Not for jacking off?

    1. Re:Not for jacking off? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      If God didn't want us to masturbate, he wouldn't have given us such long arms.

    2. Re:Not for jacking off? by colinrichardday · · Score: 5, Funny
    3. Re:Not for jacking off? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, the summary DID mention bonobos.

    4. Re:Not for jacking off? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      don't forget the red dot.

    5. Re:Not for jacking off? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know you're joking but masturbation definitely seems like something that would be selected against.

    6. Re:Not for jacking off? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only when watching Nancy Sinatra and her gang of gals in miniskirts

    7. Re:Not for jacking off? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No,... fisting!

    8. Re:Not for jacking off? by w0mprat · · Score: 1

      Not for jacking off?

      No, that's the current stage of evolution.

      --
      After logging in slashdot still does not take you back to the page you were on. It's been that way for 20 years.
    9. Re:Not for jacking off? by Patch86 · · Score: 1
    10. Re:Not for jacking off? by DarwinSurvivor · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The red dot DOES STUFF?!? Guess I need add another whitelist entry to noscript :(

    11. Re:Not for jacking off? by dintech · · Score: 4, Funny

      Your Hands Were Made For Punching According To New Study

      Fascinating! I did a quick scientific survey of my colleagues and it seems that some peoples faces are evolved for punching too!

    12. Re:Not for jacking off? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We share that ability with apes and monkeys. This is about something we don't share.

    13. Re:Not for jacking off? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And every time people have sex a baby is produced. Yeah, right

    14. Re:Not for jacking off? by ElectricTurtle · · Score: 1, Troll

      Spoken like somebody who knows nothing and just spouts off on 'intuition' ...

      I'm not going to dig it up for you, but I recall that a study demonstrated that regular masturbation actually made all the sperm produced by the individual healthier (increased motility, decreased deformity) albeit at lower counts. Quality over quantity should be the order of the day anyway, considering it's only one in the end that gets the egg.

      --
      I support the Slashcott and will not be reading or commenting from 2/10/14 to 2/17/14. Beta is steaming pile of dog shit
    15. Re:Not for jacking off? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      As a guy that has suffered from various bacterial infections of the prostate and other reproductive parts, masturbation was one of the keys toward clearing out infections.

      See, the ejaculate is designed to be a nutrient bath for sperm cells. And it's good at keeping OTHER cells alive too.

      But it acts like mucus (snot) to clear things out if you are ready to dump lots of it.

      Masturbation (twice a day if possible) is one of the key things to do if you've got prostatitis. So yeah, it's not good to hold your load too long. Why do you think wet dreams occur? Why bother doing that while asleep, couldn't it be completely confined to dreaming?

      If you want to successfully reproduce, you need to be wanking it often, especially if there isn't modern medical care available.

      Ps, I am better now.

    16. Re:Not for jacking off? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If God didn't want us to masturbate, why does our penis fit in the hand so neatly?

    17. Re:Not for jacking off? by craigminah · · Score: 1

      Clowns evolved for punching as well...

    18. Re:Not for jacking off? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For deep-throating?

    19. Re:Not for jacking off? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      our accessible penises...the sound of organ music

      Ah, I see what you did there

    20. Re:Not for jacking off? by CanadianRealist · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think a T-Rex could pretty much screw anything it wanted, whenever it wanted. Ergo no need to evolve long arms.

    21. Re:Not for jacking off? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was not ware of this study so I was always punching in my own way. Is there a penalty for not punching as prescribed by the new study?

    22. Re:Not for jacking off? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      made my day :D

    23. Re:Not for jacking off? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At least it could give one hell of a blow job.

    24. Re:Not for jacking off? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As in, punching the clown?

    25. Re:Not for jacking off? by YodasEvilTwin · · Score: 1

      "Hell" being the operative word.

  2. Explains a lot by Jetra · · Score: 4, Funny

    Now I know why I have the urge to punch stupid people in the face.

  3. Fist walking by tepples · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Was it for punching foes, or was it for punching the ground before bipedalism became the norm? Orangutans, for example, walk on their fists.

    1. Re:Fist walking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      The point of walking was to free up the hands to punch more people. Just like the point of jumping was to do scissors kicks to the neck. Cause that's just awesome.

    2. Re:Fist walking by ColdWetDog · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It wasn't "for" anything.

      In terms of the size and shape of hand anatomy, the scientists point out that humans could have evolved manual dexterity with longer thumbs, but without the fingers and palms getting shorter.

      What a bunch of nonsense. You postulate something on the basis of a weak anatomical correlate study and then you open it up to an evolutionary mechanism. There isn't anything to suggest that reproductive fitness (the thing that drives evolution) has anything to do with punching out competitors.

      I see your fist and raise the ante with a club.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    3. Re:Fist walking by Fned · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Orangutans are the only great ape that walks like that, though, and they're primarily brachiators. Chimps and gorillas walk on the second knuckle rather than the first.

    4. Re:Fist walking by Half-pint+HAL · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There isn't anything to suggest that reproductive fitness (the thing that drives evolution) has anything to do with punching out competitors.

      You've never watched stags or bulls in mating season then....

      --
      Got them moderator blues I blieve I walk out the do', With these mod-points I been gettin', I 'most never post no mo'
    5. Re:Fist walking by Knuckles · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Absolutely. Also, study author should watch less movies and punch someone for real. He will realize that human hands are really bad for punching, you get open bleeding knuckles in no time, and injuries if your fists and arms are misaligned. It's not an accident that martial arts that use punches spend a lot of practice to getting it right, and many don't use closed-fist punches with exposed first phalanges at all.

      --
      "When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns
    6. Re:Fist walking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My advice: If you're going to punch something. Punch something soft.

    7. Re:Fist walking by aurispector · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Agreed. The conclusions are idiotic. Punching something isn't nearly as effective as bashing something over the head with a rock.

      Look at all the things for which modern humans use their thumbs. It's a multifunction device and whether your talking tool use or weapon use, thumbs made our species much more likely to survive.

      --
      I have mod points. The reign of terror begins now.
    8. Re:Fist walking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thy don not walk on their first but on their knuckels..its called 'knuckle walking', us humans dont have a knuckle walking ancestor btw...0_o

    9. Re:Fist walking by dywolf · · Score: 2

      40 ton humpback whales leap out of the water and body slam each either in competition over females, sometimes causing fatal internal injuries.
      Hippos fight each other mating rights, sometimes fatally slicing each others necks open with their tusks.

      So yeah. There is nothing to suggest that reproductive fitness has anything to do with punching out competitors. Not a thing. Nope. Females never select only the agressive winner to breed with.

      --
      The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
    10. Re:Fist walking by dywolf · · Score: 2

      If you get open bleeding knuckles you're doing it wrong. Doesnt take long to develop the calluses and shrunken knuckles that deliver a more powerful impact. And if predecessors did knuckle walk, they would have naturally developed both features. And something tells me, if your mating rights a million ago depended on being able to hit, you would probably spend more time "learning" than martial artists today do, and learn it quicker.

      --
      The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
    11. Re:Fist walking by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

      Was it for punching foes, or was it for punching the ground?

      Neither! It was for punching trees!

    12. Re:Fist walking by Knuckles · · Score: 2

      Yeah, "doing it wrong" in the sense of doing it at all. Sure, calluses and all, not stretching the skin over the knuckles, etc., I know. But fists still are so not good for punching that, as I said, many martial arts don't use it at all (e.g., in Tai Chi Chuan punches are performed only with the back of the (fisted) hand). One would think that if the fists evolved for punching, as the study seems to claim, they would be built for punching, which they aren't really - notwithstanding the fact that with lots of conditioning, practice, and thinking about it you can kind of use them for punching

      --
      "When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns
    13. Re:Fist walking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

      Fifty years of martial arts experience here - the human body has a lot of armor and can take more punishment than the occasional KTFO video might indicate. Against armored targets, a punch can be as ruinous to the puncher as to the one being punched. In a fluid situation, it can be difficult to deliver an accurate, solid punch without injury to yourself. (This is why, although I teach beginners to punch to give themselves a sense of "power", for actual fighting, I don't use punching.)

      The study showing peak stress to a punching bag misses the point of the many different reasons that any hitting occurs (from playful affection to simple relatively benign dominance behavior to kill-him-before-he-kills-you behavior). It also seems to me also to miss the point of fluidity in a situation. Against a resisting enemy, you can do more damage going for "acreage" and be more likely to take someone down. (Think "shock and awe".) I'd like them to measure me against fluid targets and measure untrained people against fluid targets. I'm going to bet that their numbers would - amazingly - be reversed.

      I think that humans are violent for other reasons than that they were somehow "designed" for it by evolution. It seems to me that there's a bit of post hoc ergo propter hoc in saying that, just because we can punch, we are made for punching. I can write my name in the snow with urine, ergo urine should be used as ink.

    14. Re:Fist walking by flayzernax · · Score: 2

      Agreed expert fighters (read killers not showmen or sportsmen) don't resort to punching as their first means of downing their oponents. Your elbow is far superior to your fist. Though the fist and knuckles have some specific opportunistic uses.

      Just because its better to punch with a human fist then a monkey fist, does not mean it was adapted for fighting, just that it got granfathered in as a 2cndary trait or use.

      I believe the actual cause for adaptation has more to do with the manipulation or gripping of tools, in that case its designed very well for smashing your oponents over the head with a heavy peice of femur. (see 2001 a space oddesy)

    15. Re:Fist walking by davydagger · · Score: 1

      because you as an invidual aren't used to punching.

      you need to train for it. Like a martial artist(they really do these things).

      1. do pushups on your knuckles, it builds callouses on them, and strengthens your wrists

      2. Start punching/scraping your knuckles against brick walls, as hard as you can stand it. keep doing this until you build callouses on your knuckles and strengthen your wrists.

      martial artists have been doing this for centuries.

    16. Re:Fist walking by Knuckles · · Score: 1

      See the other posts in this thread, where I already wrote that I know that, and made my point that many martial arts go out of their way to *avoid* punching with the fists, such as the Chinese peasants who codified Tai Chi Chuan in the 18th century, who we can assume to not have lacked knuckle callous.

      --
      "When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns
    17. Re:Fist walking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      His followup study: Faces evolved to break hands while being punched.

    18. Re:Fist walking by Knuckles · · Score: 1

      Also, it's not just about callouses, but about breaking bones as well.

      --
      "When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns
    19. Re:Fist walking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can write my name in the snow with urine, ergo urine should be used as ink.

      More like:

      I can write my name in the snow with urine, ergo male genitalia has evolved for use as a writing device.

    20. Re:Fist walking by steelfood · · Score: 0

      human hands are really bad for punching, you get open bleeding knuckles in no time, and injuries if your fists and arms are misaligned

      This is largely true for punching things other than flesh, and doing so repeatedly. Most people wouldn't be able to withstand more than a few (glove-less) punches to the face. Most people would get a concussion and not stand back up from just one well-placed haymaker. And that's the most natural form of punching (albeit not the most effective).

      Martial arts, when poorly taught, will result in such injuries however. In particular, straight punches need to be done right to avoid injury, but that's also why people don't naturally punch straight.

      --
      "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
    21. Re:Fist walking by Knuckles · · Score: 1

      Agreed, but easy to break a finger even with a haymaker to the hard skull behind the soft face. Anyway, maybe hoofs would be a better evolutionary adaptation to punching.

      --
      "When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns
    22. Re:Fist walking by ByteSlicer · · Score: 1

      Just like the point of jumping was to do scissors kicks to the neck. Cause that's just awesome.

      That triggered the following image in my head, which I subsequently found on Google.
      Kinda like rule 43, but with Norris instead.

    23. Re:Fist walking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, if you've rarely or never punched before, you can get hurt in minor ways that self heal relatively quickly. Like any vigorous physical activity.

    24. Re:Fist walking by hairyfish · · Score: 1

      A punch still works better than the alternative (which is what exactly?) You don't always have a rock on you, and I'd question whether any weapon is as versatile unless you really know how to use it. I grew up in a tough neighbourhood, and knowing how punch people quickly brought you to the top of the food chain because you can have the ability to execute at any time at a moment's notice. Weapons never really give you that same level of confidence or intimidation.

    25. Re:Fist walking by hairyfish · · Score: 1

      Agreed expert fighters (read killers not showmen or sportsmen) don't resort to punching as their first means of downing their oponents. Your elbow is far superior to your fist.

      Yeah so is a round house kick, the problem of course is that you can't deliver anything as quickly or with the range as a punch. Kicks are too slow and awkward (you miss you get knocked out), Elbows require you to be within punching range which you then get knocked out before you get your first strike. Same goes for head butts, knees or anything else you care to mention. I've seen hundreds of street fights in my time, and a guy who knows how to punch will win every time (even against weapons).

    26. Re:Fist walking by hairyfish · · Score: 1

      A lot of martial arts is mostly about choreography (although the newer MMA is a bit more practical). Go hang out in a working class bar for a bit and watch how a street fighter wins. A quick, hard punch will bring down most guys, even black belts without too much fuss. I've seen it happen more times than I care to remember, I've even seen a friend kill a man with one punch. So save that martial arts guff for the movies, in primitive times a good puncher would have enough skills to lead his tribe and rule all the lands that he could see.

    27. Re:Fist walking by Reziac · · Score: 1

      D'oh!!

      I did notice TFA had an agenda to push, largely about how terrible humans are compared to other animals. I smell an AR influence.

      --
      ~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
    28. Re:Fist walking by Knuckles · · Score: 1

      Alternatives: crush face with elbow, for example. Or slap with the back of the hand. Kick in the balls. There is no shortage really

      --
      "When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns
    29. Re:Fist walking by Knuckles · · Score: 1

      The choreography guys are doing it wrong, agreed. This does not change the fact that martial arts have seen hundreds of years of use by professionals (like the Chinese military prior to the arrival of guns) in real-world situations.

      --
      "When I first heard Daydream Nation it quite frankly scared the living shit out of me." -- Matthew Stearns
    30. Re:Fist walking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Absolutely. Also, study author should watch less movies and punch someone for real. He will realize that human hands are really bad for punching, you get open bleeding knuckles in no time, and injuries if your fists and arms are misaligned. It's not an accident that martial arts that use punches spend a lot of practice to getting it right, and many don't use closed-fist punches with exposed first phalanges at all.

      As The Bride proved in the impossible scene (As proved by Mythbusters.) in Quentin Tarantino's wildly overrated Kill Bill Volume 2.

    31. Re:Fist walking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wait Barack Obama's son was trying to punch the ground to offer George Zimmerman Skittles and the victim's face got in the way?

  4. It's all about masturbation, Mr. Carrier by hduff · · Score: 4, Informative

    Then arms were made for masturbation. Otherwise why would they not be that length? If they were made for punching, they would be very much longer to minimize the risk to oneself from an attacker. Hands were then made for masturbation as well, otherwise why put them at the end of the perfect length of arm?

    --
    "I believe in Karma. That means I can do bad things to people all day long and I assume they deserve it." : Dogbert
    1. Re:It's all about masturbation, Mr. Carrier by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's the evolutionary advantage of masturbation?

    2. Re:It's all about masturbation, Mr. Carrier by Johann+Lau · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Not having to impregnate women you don't even like just because you feel horny, for one.

    3. Re:It's all about masturbation, Mr. Carrier by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You really don't understand evolution.

    4. Re:It's all about masturbation, Mr. Carrier by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I think he does.
      Not impregnating women that I don't want to impregnate.
      Means we can handle ourselves when undesirables are around.
      And let loose with the desirables.
      Keep the mind clear for the better of the species.

    5. Re:It's all about masturbation, Mr. Carrier by wmac1 · · Score: 1

      The whole purpose of becoming horny is to have sex and reproduce.

    6. Re:It's all about masturbation, Mr. Carrier by neyla · · Score: 1

      "purpose" ? Whose purpose ? Surely you're not implying that nature as such has a purpose ?

    7. Re:It's all about masturbation, Mr. Carrier by Johann+Lau · · Score: 4, Insightful

      And the "purpose" of not having blue balls, or kids with the first woman you saw the day you reached puberty, is to increase our fitness *vastly* beyond what humping everything would... at least I assume that's the reason we came up with it. We as a species invest a lot in our kids, we don't just lay 20 eggs and let them fight amongst themselves. I mean, our kids are extremely helpless for a very long time, compared to most animals we're hilarious in that sense. This implies the need for society and a bond between the parents that goes beyond mere hornyness. After all, the same person will never make you repeatedly as horny as a person of equal hotness you haven't slept with, if there is nothing else.

      Also, these days we mostly procreate by information and power. When you think you're procreating you're really mostly just making vessels filled by others, how's that for a cheerful thought? Sure, your kids might have your genes, but they mostly do what a handful (in comparison to all the people who are "just parents") of inventors and leaders/owners came up with. They don't run around with cell phones because it was your idea, do they, or fight random shitty wars for with random shitty justifications because you recommended it. The concepts they use to interact with the world they won't get from you for the most part either, nor the movies or the songs or the hygiene products they will associate with their childhood just as much as they will associate it with you. I don't say this to be mean, at least not only; I really have to say "PFFFFFF!!" to the whole gene thing, that's like 10000 years past - a number I completely pulled out of my ass.

      I say we humans don't live in our genes, we live in that tiny percentage of them that makes us have these brains, in which we have ideas, knowledge, language, personality and ownership constructs. The hardware is really not the point of us. Sure, our genes may be selfish and our higher level things just a result of that blind selfishness ultimately, but now that these higher level things have arisen, they do influence and select genes as well, not just the other way around. And I'd say what is going on in our wetware, the current state, is way more important than our genes. There even was a slashdot story about this a while ago I think, about how we haven't really changed a lot biology wise. Our progress is mostly in culture "lately". Not that I'd need a scientist to know that, I looked it up in my gut; but it's always neat to have that gut feeling confirmed.

    8. Re:It's all about masturbation, Mr. Carrier by FatLittleMonkey · · Score: 4, Interesting

      But convincing women to have sex with you requires not being a pathetic drooling moron, which means having a way of bleeding off the excess horniness during sexless courtship. Low horniness means you don't try and drop out of the gene pool, high unrelieved horniness means you don't succeed and drop out of the gene pool. Horniness + ability to masturbate means you can select your level of horniness to fit the situation. Win.

      But there was a side effect: When women breast-feed, it lowers their sex drive on average. A normal horny animal would just go off and find another mate. This limits the resources available for the child, so the species evolves young that are independent early, which limits intelligence. However, because masturbating human males could relieve their horniness, it reduced their need to constantly find other mates. This increased the resources for children, allowing the minor evolutionary pressure for greater intelligence to finally overcome the greater evolutionary pressure to reduce resource use. Thus modern humans evolved.

      --
      Science is all about firing a drunk pig out of a cannon just to see what happens.
    9. Re:It's all about masturbation, Mr. Carrier by WGFCrafty · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Also, these days we mostly procreate by information and power. When you think you're procreating you're really mostly just making vessels filled by others, how's that for a cheerful thought? Sure, your kids might have your genes, but they mostly do what a handful (in comparison to all the people who are "just parents") of inventors and leaders/owners came up with. They don't run around with cell phones because it was your idea, do they, or fight random shitty wars for with random shitty justifications because you recommended it. The concepts they use to interact with the world they won't get from you for the most part either, nor the movies or the songs or the hygiene products they will associate with their childhood just as much as they will associate it with you. I don't say this to be mean, at least not only; I really have to say "PFFFFFF!!" to the whole gene thing, that's like 10000 years past - a number I completely pulled out of my ass.

      I think you are profoundly underestimating the influence a parent who is nurturing and has a positive relationship with their kid, has on that child's personality. That child may be influenced greatly through non-parental channels, but they will most likely hold similair beliefs and values, which may match societal norms as well, but be closer to their family.

      My point is that, their parents values may overlap with societal values but their parent's influence is greater. I'm specifically talking about people who would rate their relationship as very close.

      If what you say is true I would think everyone would be grey and generic.

    10. Re:It's all about masturbation, Mr. Carrier by WGFCrafty · · Score: 1

      Pic or it didn't happen.

    11. Re:It's all about masturbation, Mr. Carrier by Half-pint+HAL · · Score: 1

      Perfect length of arm? It's not. I'm not going to do any literature research while I'm sitting in my workplace, but I believe there are repetitive strain injuries linked to masturbation, because it involves abusing several joints....

      --
      Got them moderator blues I blieve I walk out the do', With these mod-points I been gettin', I 'most never post no mo'
    12. Re:It's all about masturbation, Mr. Carrier by FatLittleMonkey · · Score: 1

      http://www.cartoonstock.com/newscartoons/cartoonists/dms/lowres/dmsn47l.jpg

      I google-imaged "caveman sex". I expected Raquel Welch. I didn't get Raquel Welch. TIL.

      --
      Science is all about firing a drunk pig out of a cannon just to see what happens.
    13. Re:It's all about masturbation, Mr. Carrier by Johann+Lau · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Values, yes. For example, there surely were many of loving parents in Nazi Germany, and the sense of duty and honor they instilled in their kids -- with the best and most loving of intentions --made those perfect fodder for the Nazis. Of course, there was also the resistance. You know, the ones who died a lot, too. While Nazi scientists kind of went on to continue their career in the US. Gotta lurv me some values!

      Values can be routed around and used for whatever if you couple it with deception, and even then there is the whole external forces stuff... You can instill values that would make your kid rather starve than become a murderer, but wether they will have to make such a choice is not up to you or them, ultimately. You can keep your kid from participating in war or slavery, but not from catching a bullet or being enslaved.

      It's kind of ironic: unless we care for all people, our own children (and their children, and theirs..) don't really stand much of a chance, and will not have much of a say. They will pick from choices others engineered and think they are their own. That's even worse than being in prison, where you even know you are.

      We are embedded in society, we breathe it, and the question is, who drives it. Special interest groups, or all? Whom does it serve for the most part? We are being driven, probed, manipulated, divided and conquered, and you tell me your parenting is going to win out? I mean, I get your point, and I agree with it in the scope it applies, but do you hear me, too?

      Even when you say "your beliefs" I have to ask, how many of those are yours, how many have you adopted without looking too closely? And never mind you, how about most people?

      If what you say is true I would think everyone would be grey and generic.

      Likewise, if what you said was true, that either means a lot of parents raise their kids to be tools for robbery, murder, and being experimented on.

      And yes, I am exaggerrating. To make a point, because this cute little "my family tree" stuff is boring me to death. I appreciate the love, but I hate the naivity. Put bluntly, even the most successful kid is still just a slave and cannonfodder with mostly lies, toys and non-sequiturs in the brain, with so few exceptions they're not worth mentioning. It's not worth mentioning until it's at least two thirds, if you ask me :P I know we can't all be super duper grownups all the time, but this is abysmal bullshit. The whole last 100 years have been, at least.

      And yes, once you see through a bunch of patterns you'll find the world, in some ways, IS very grey and generic. Well, the human world, anyway. It's like the emperor has ten thousand outfits, and they all consist of his wrinkly dick swinging in the wind. And pretending otherwise doesn't make it actually colorful, it kinda dooms us... so let's kick the emperor in the nuts. He'll thank us when he snapped out of it, I bet you.

    14. Re:It's all about masturbation, Mr. Carrier by Johann+Lau · · Score: 1

      Man I gotta lay off the ranting :/

      "That's even worse than being in prison, where you even know you are." == "That's even worse than being in prison, where you at least know you are."

      [cue Cypher from the Matrix with his line about steak, cue roundhouse kick to the head]

    15. Re:It's all about masturbation, Mr. Carrier by daem0n1x · · Score: 5, Insightful

      We as a species invest a lot in our kids, we don't just lay 20 eggs and let them fight amongst themselves.

      That's how Libertarians breed, you insensitive clod!

    16. Re:It's all about masturbation, Mr. Carrier by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds like you haven't had any kids.

    17. Re:It's all about masturbation, Mr. Carrier by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So Libertarians don't value their children? Or is it that they don't want to submit to the arbitrary power of an ever more coercive government.

      You bitch about SOPA (good for you) but then have no problem w government telling what you can buy, for how much, that you can't buy sodas of such-and-such size. Yah. You're consistent.

    18. Re:It's all about masturbation, Mr. Carrier by kilfarsnar · · Score: 1

      "purpose" ? Whose purpose ? Surely you're not implying that nature as such has a purpose ?

      We humans ascribe meaning to things. We just like to do it.

      --
      "What the American public doesn't know is what makes them the American public." -Ray Zalinsky (Tommy Boy)
    19. Re:It's all about masturbation, Mr. Carrier by asylumx · · Score: 1

      You must have short arms. Mine have to bend at the elbow to reach there.

    20. Re:It's all about masturbation, Mr. Carrier by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know which I think is funnier: the content of your comment, or its +4 Insightful mod.

    21. Re:It's all about masturbation, Mr. Carrier by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      we don't just lay 20 eggs and let them fight amongst themselves.

      Unfortunately, many men do just that.

  5. Context is important! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Context is important. Violence is not ubiquitous. See this:7 Things Bonobos Can Teach Us About Love and Sex
    http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/sex-dawn/201202/7-things-bonobos-can-teach-us-about-love-and-sex

    1. Re:Context is important! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah. I mean, a small percentage of us are always at war, but that was a ridiculous assertion.

      Would you not say a person was pretty violent if they regularly ripped peoples throats open with their teeth and fingers? Maybe tore their children apart while they were still alive? Nature is fuckin' scary.

  6. As a boxer... by ihatewinXP · · Score: 5, Insightful

    From years of boxing this couldnt be more obvious.

    Your hands will fracture, break, bend, and sometimes emulsify... Especially the forefinger middle knuckle and the top pinky knuckle = 'the boxer break.' Over and over.

    But each time calcifying over and becoming stronger. After a while you literally have 'hands of stone.'

    Now of course my dexterity isnt what it used to be. Typing and fumbling for computer screws reminds me of my favorite pastime often.

    --
    ---- The real Slashdot is still here. You just have to browse at -1 to read the comments.
    1. Re:As a boxer... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But what your experience actually teaches you is that hands are not made for punching, nor for any particular thing, but rather for adapting to whatever it is you need them for in your current environment. Your children will have brand new sets of hands, so if your kids happen to grow up in an environment where playing the piano is more important than punching things, their hands will become good at that.

    2. Re:As a boxer... by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 0

      What, cavemen had boxing gloves? Besides, they didn't practice sparring every day, they fought sporadically.

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    3. Re:As a boxer... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Bullshit, your fists are not properly adapted to bare knuckle boxing, which is what TFS implies. The human face has tons of small muscles, each muscle is anchored by tiny bone ridges. The skull itself is adapted to handle whatever knocks it takes.

      So, what you end up with is breaking your fingers and similar damage. If you really must hit somebody in the face, you do that with the heal of your hand which is much sturdier than your knuckles anyways. It's braced for times when you fall forward and need to use it to keep from smacking your head into the ground.

      IIRC, the term heal claw strike or similar is used in Ninjitsu to refer to that type of hit.

    4. Re:As a boxer... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your hands will fracture, break, bend, and sometimes emulsify... Especially the forefinger middle knuckle and the top pinky knuckle = 'the boxer break.' Over and over.

      I thought maybe there was a definition of "emulsify" that I wasn't aware of. Doesn't seem like it? Unless some really funky stuff is going on when you're boxing.

    5. Re:As a boxer... by mosb1000 · · Score: 1

      If landing punches is breaking your fingers then you're doing something wrong.

    6. Re:As a boxer... by Nefarious+Wheel · · Score: 1

      Pick a soft spot to punch, not the head. If you need to hit them in the head, use a utensil.

      --
      Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
    7. Re:As a boxer... by jbov · · Score: 2

      After a while you figuratively have 'hands of stone.'

      FTFY

    8. Re:As a boxer... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      Cut him some slack, he's been hit in the head few times.

    9. Re:As a boxer... by The+Moof · · Score: 2

      I disagree. It's way too easy for me to injure or break my hand by simply throwing a punch. Not to mention injuring my wrist. And afterward, the full use of my hand might not be the same (you even mentioned the loss of dexterity as a result of your boxing).

      These lead me to believe that hands weren't intended for punching stuff. There's way too much technique required so I don't hurt myself (and even technique isn't enough, which is where the taping comes in).

    10. Re:As a boxer... by phantomfive · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Your hands will fracture, break, bend, and sometimes emulsify... Especially the forefinger middle knuckle and the top pinky knuckle = 'the boxer break.' Over and over.

      Strange, I would take this as evidence that our hands are NOT evolved for punching, but rather that our bodies are amazingly adaptable to what we put them through.

      It's hard to see the thumb as an adaptation used for fighting, as the article suggests.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    11. Re:As a boxer... by azalin · · Score: 2

      It's hard to see the thumb as an adaptation used for fighting, as the article suggests.

      Though it works marvels once a sturdy stick comes involved

    12. Re:As a boxer... by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      YES

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    13. Re:As a boxer... by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Let me say it a different way. If you practice the piano, your hands will stretch, hurt, and grow very very tired. Especially the fourth finger and pinky.

      But each time they grow stronger, more flexible, and capable of independent action. After a while you figuratively become one with the piano.

      And yet your fingers didn't evolve to play the piano. It's just a convenient side-effect.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    14. Re:As a boxer... by databeast · · Score: 1

      Calcium isn't a stone now? he said literally, he meant literally.

    15. Re:As a boxer... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right, you're punching the face, which only a damned fool does. Hence my point. Your fists are not meant for hitting people in the face.

    16. Re:As a boxer... by DarwinSurvivor · · Score: 1

      Or a cast iron frying pan!

    17. Re:As a boxer... by Half-pint+HAL · · Score: 1

      That's a bit circular... we can adapt our hands to any task that we adapt to fit our hands....

      --
      Got them moderator blues I blieve I walk out the do', With these mod-points I been gettin', I 'most never post no mo'
    18. Re:As a boxer... by Nyder · · Score: 2

      Your hands will fracture, break, bend, and sometimes emulsify... Especially the forefinger middle knuckle and the top pinky knuckle = 'the boxer break.' Over and over.

      Strange, I would take this as evidence that our hands are NOT evolved for punching, but rather that our bodies are amazingly adaptable to what we put them through.

      It's hard to see the thumb as an adaptation used for fighting, as the article suggests.

      Really? I find the thumbs can press down into the eyes very well in a fight, and it's hard to get them out when rest of the hand is gripped about the skull.

      --
      Be seeing you...
    19. Re:As a boxer... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or evidence that the piano is badly designed.

    20. Re:As a boxer... by wierd_w · · Score: 3, Informative

      Bone is a calcium phosphate complex bound with protein molecules, which form an extracellular matrix. Calcium is an alkaline earth metal. Phosphorus is a nonmetal, and oxygen is a gas. Calcium phosphate, all by itself, is a mineral which usualy only forms under unusual and arrid conditions.

      The calcium phosphate complex that comprises bone cannot be classified as a mineral, because it is formed via a biological process. (Similar caveat for coal. Not a mineral.) /pedant

    21. Re:As a boxer... by ethorad · · Score: 1

      designed? pah. The piano is badly evolved you mean!

    22. Re:As a boxer... by Quinn_Inuit · · Score: 1

      That's right! Everyone knows that holding bananas is the real evolutionary use of hands!

      --

      Stop learning! Only you can prevent esoterrorism.
    23. Re:As a boxer... by donaldm · · Score: 1

      When talking about a one on one human conflict fists could be used however most early humans would not train to toughen their hands, after-all why should they when a club, sword, spear or projectile weapon could easily take-down a human attacking with just his fists, even if those fists are like "hands of stone". It is also much easier to train for hunting or even war when you have a weapon in your hands and it is far less painful.

      --
      There ain't no such thing as proprietary standards only proprietary formats. Standards are by definition open.
    24. Re:As a boxer... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hard on soft, soft on hard...

    25. Re:As a boxer... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The "heal" of your hand is what happens after you throw a punch with improper technique (assuming you survive the resulting dust-up.)

      The "heel" of your hand, like the heel of your foot, boot, or what you call someone who is generally a scoundrel, is what you use in a "heel claw strike" and similar martial arts techniques.

    26. Re:As a boxer... by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      talk to an excellent martial artist or boxer, you're wrong. they have to force the bone and joints to adapt into weapons, with pain, fractures and breaks along the way. My father was a karate instructor as young man, when my brother started using a punching bag as part of his weights workout, my dad looked at his sore hands the first day and said "Don't be stupid, you're supposed to use mitts"

    27. Re:As a boxer... by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      As if you've ever done that.......

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    28. Re:As a boxer... by mcgrew · · Score: 1

      So, what you end up with is breaking your fingers and similar damage. If you really must hit somebody in the face, you do that with the heal of your hand which is much sturdier than your knuckles anyways.

      I discovered at a young age that punching someone in the nose as hard as you can usually ends the fight right there, and from that point on it's a simple ass kicking. Noses are easy to break.

    29. Re:As a boxer... by painandgreed · · Score: 1

      Well, if stones can only be minerals and minerals can't be organically made, then what about kidney stones? Huh? huh? Answer me that smarty pants!

    30. Re:As a boxer... by jafac · · Score: 1

      Grappling.
      (grab opponent's arm, punch them in the face before they can defend themselves)

        But thousands of species of primate and ape find them handy for grasping things.

      --

      These are my friends, See how they glisten. See this one shine, how he smiles in the light.
    31. Re:As a boxer... by voidphoenix · · Score: 1

      From Wiki: Bone One of the types of tissue that makes up bone is the mineralized osseous tissue, also called bone tissue, that gives it rigidity and a coral-like three-dimensional internal structure. Bone - Molecular structure [Under Inorganic] The inorganic composition of bone (bone mineral) is formed from carbonated hydroxyapatite [7][8] (Ca10(PO4)6(OH)2) with lower crystallinity.[7][9] The matrix is initially laid down as unmineralised osteoid (manufactured by osteoblasts). Mineralisation involves osteoblasts secreting vesicles containing alkaline phosphatase. Bone density Bone density (or bone mineral density) is a medical term normally referring to the amount of mineral matter per square centimeter of bones. Bone mineral Bone mineral (also called inorganic bone phase, bone salt or bone apatite) is the inorganic component of bone. Bone mineral is formed from carbonated hydroxyapatite with lower crystallinity. Dietary mineral Dietary minerals (also known as mineral nutrients) are the chemical elements required by living organisms, other than the four elements carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen, and oxygen present in common organic molecules. Mineralization (biology) In biology, mineralization refers to a process where an organism produces an inorganic substance. Mineral A mineral is a naturally occurring substance that is solid and stable at room temperature, representable by a chemical formula, usually abiogenic, and has an ordered atomic structure. Mineral resources [Under Non-renewable] ...a good example of this are fossil fuels...

    32. Re:As a boxer... by SleazyRidr · · Score: 1

      Well it was a bit circular in development. We have hands, so wee develop tools we can use with our hands, then practice using these tools makes us better at it...

      I think his point was more that our hand /are/ adaptable, breaking your fingers often increases their strength and makes them less likely to break in future, where playing the piano causes them to develop fine control muscles which makes you a better pianist.

  7. According to my vegan, feminist ex... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    We were living in a peaceful vegetarian world, munching on salad until the bronze age. Of course, all evidence for this was wiped out by the evil patriarchy.

    1. Re:According to my vegan, feminist ex... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      She may be right.
      http://news.discovery.com/animals/first-human-ancestor-squirrel-121018.html

      Newly discovered fossilized bones for the world's oldest and most primitive known primate, Purgatorius, reveal a tiny, agile animal that spent much of its time eating fruit and climbing trees, according to a study.

    2. Re:According to my vegan, feminist ex... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I used to read a lot of articles at a particular Swedish newssite that allowed comments. One of the posters there, a feminist, believed in some form of universal theory of everything that basically tied a crapload of things together in a fairly unique way.

      I'll provide a brief summary:
      *The world used to be more equal, then patriarchy and science destroyed everything
      *Science, that is western science, is patriarchical and anchored in belief in rationality (which is patriarchical). It's opposite is the "open-minded" idea that what is science cannot be defined, therefore there is nothing that science can not and should not research. Homeopathy? Ghosts? Telepathy?
      *"Softer" sciences, like history and literature science do not have the same problem with rationality because they are based on discussion. (which is kinda funny, because the reason WHY those sciences are based on discussion and speculation is that they CAN'T be researched the same way you research physics).
      *Organized religion is evil, but its only bad because it's patriarchical and "scientific". New age religions aren't patriarchical, so they're not bad.
      *We should use dancing to teach math at school.
      *ALL hard sciences should be based on a hermeneutic method of analysis. She never described how this should be done in practice, though.

      I'd link you to one of her favourite writers on the subject, but the website was in Swedish.

  8. I call BS by Kargan · · Score: 5, Informative

    Your hands are full of very small bones. It's very easy to break your hand by punching something hard and dense (such as a skull or face for instance).

    If you want to strike someone in the face, it's smarter to use other parts of the body such as your knee, elbow or to use an open hand strike (such as a palm strike). That way you have the edge of a very long bone delivering the blow.

    --
    Palaces, barricades, threats, meet promises
    1. Re:I call BS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In that case, isn't it just better to use a blunt instrument like a bone or tree branch to smash someone's face in?

    2. Re:I call BS by bakes · · Score: 2

      Some martial arts teach striking with the heel of the palm, gaining the 'end-of-long-bone advantage and protecting the fingers.

      --
      Ho! Haha! Guard! Turn! Parry! Dodge! Spin! Ha! Thrust!
    3. Re:I call BS by Dzimas · · Score: 1

      Forget using a knee or elbow. We're tool users, fer chrissakes. Just smash their skulls with a tree branch.

    4. Re:I call BS by w0mprat · · Score: 1

      Your hands are full of very small bones. It's very easy to break your hand by punching something hard and dense (such as a skull or face for instance).

      If you want to strike someone in the face, it's smarter to use other parts of the body such as your knee, elbow or to use an open hand strike (such as a palm strike). That way you have the edge of a very long bone delivering the blow.

      Pick up a stick or a rock. If the article had read, we evolved tool use from weapons then yes. By that benchmark we are the most violent species.

      --
      After logging in slashdot still does not take you back to the page you were on. It's been that way for 20 years.
    5. Re:I call BS by FatLittleMonkey · · Score: 4, Insightful

      But then he'll get a bigger stronger branch. And you'll respond by attaching sharpened flint to your branch. Then he invents a system where he can make others fight you while he is protected. So you invent a system where you personify the sun or a volcano and convince others that it's the personification that wants them to fight his defenders...

      Where does it all end?

      --
      Science is all about firing a drunk pig out of a cannon just to see what happens.
    6. Re:I call BS by azalin · · Score: 1

      For now by setting of the fires of the sun in your enemies villages and turning people into ashes shadows on walls

    7. Re:I call BS by Nyder · · Score: 1

      But then he'll get a bigger stronger branch. And you'll respond by attaching sharpened flint to your branch. Then he invents a system where he can make others fight you while he is protected. So you invent a system where you personify the sun or a volcano and convince others that it's the personification that wants them to fight his defenders...

      Where does it all end?

      In a Quake 3 deathmatch?

      --
      Be seeing you...
    8. Re:I call BS by N1AK · · Score: 1

      All well and good except mixed martial arts apparently was part of the evolutionary process until quite recently. Guess what, shooting someone is easier still so obviously that would be how primates attacked each other... The fact that a bee often dies when stinging gives you a pretty good example of how evolution and theoretically optimal aren't intrinsically linked!

    9. Re:I call BS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      YOU'RE SO AWESOME! You must be A NINJA or from THE CIA! OR SOMETHING!

    10. Re:I call BS by Hentes · · Score: 1

      Or don't target the head, the most protected part of the body. There are many other organs to choose from.

    11. Re:I call BS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you want to strike someone in the face, it's smarter to use other parts of the body

      It's even smarter to use no part of your body, like a club.

    12. Re:I call BS by RabidReindeer · · Score: 1

      All well and good except mixed martial arts apparently was part of the evolutionary process until quite recently. Guess what, shooting someone is easier still so obviously that would be how primates attacked each other... The fact that a bee often dies when stinging gives you a pretty good example of how evolution and theoretically optimal aren't intrinsically linked!

      Depends on what you mean by "theoretically optimal". Darwin's Evolution isn't about the survival of the individual, it's about the survival of the species. Anything that forwards the species is fair game, even if it's at the cost of individuals.

      Besides, the bees with stingers aren't breeders.

    13. Re:I call BS by Viol8 · · Score: 1

      Unless you're Bruce Lee then a punch to the face or throat is the quickest way to put someone down. There's no point going - for example - a kidney punch if you only have a vague clue where to hit and if the person is fat or muscular it might not work anyway.

    14. Re:I call BS by Hillgiant · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Where does it all end?

      1. CHESS
      2. POKER
      3. FIGHTER COMBAT
      4. GUERRILLA ENGAGEMENT
      5. DESERT WARFARE
      6. AIR-TO-GROUND ACTIONS
      7. THEATERWIDE TACTICAL WARFARE
      8. THEATERWIDE BIOTOXIC AND CHEMICAL WARFARE

      9. GLOBAL THERMONUCLEAR WAR

      --
      -
    15. Re:I call BS by swillden · · Score: 1

      Your hands are full of very small bones. It's very easy to break your hand by punching something hard and dense (such as a skull or face for instance).

      This is very true if your hands have spent a lifetime manipulating books and pencils and keyboards, but somewhat less true if they've spent a lifetime doing hard work. A more labor-intensive lifestyle makes the hand muscles bigger and stronger and also thickens the bones. Meanwhile, it doesn't make the face or many other vulnerable points on the body significantly tougher.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    16. Re:I call BS by 3.5+stripes · · Score: 1

      There are 0 muscles in the hands. They're all in the forearms, so they don't provide much protection to the bones.

      --


      He tried to kill me with a forklift!
    17. Re:I call BS by strikethree · · Score: 1

      Where does it all end?

      It doesn't?

      --
      "Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
    18. Re:I call BS by swillden · · Score: 1

      There are 0 muscles in the hands. They're all in the forearms, so they don't provide much protection to the bones.

      There are muscles in the fingers and in the hands as well as in the forearms. Also, have you ever looked at the hands of a man who has spend a few decades doing hard work with them? There's a reason the fingers get thick and the hands get broad and "square" in appearance.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    19. Re:I call BS by swillden · · Score: 1

      Sorry, not the fingers. Though fingers that are worked hard do get thick. I'm not sure what the mechanism is. Perhaps it's mostly bone thickening, which would be even better (for punching) than muscle growth.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    20. Re:I call BS by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Well, my hand is full with muscels. But perhaps they grew later when I was old already ...

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    21. Re:I call BS by turkeydance · · Score: 1

      Muhammad Ali said the (human) hand is a fragile birdcage of bones. i'll take his word for it.

    22. Re:I call BS by hairyfish · · Score: 1

      This is problem with too much theory and not enough practice. Go have a couple of dozen fights and get back to me which striking method is the most effective. I'll save you the effort and pain, it's punching. Nothing else has the speed, power, range and versatility. That's why people who aren't in movies punch each other in fights, because it works. The open palm strike is just martial arts bullshit. A punch is better because you can jab, hook and uppercut with it. An open palm severely limits your strike options.

  9. Level the playing field. by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 3, Funny

    Although some primatologists may argue that chimpanzees are the most aggressive apes, I think the evidence suggests that humans are substantially more violent.

    Set the chimps down in front of a few Windows systems and we'll see...

    [ Sorry, just finished working on my Windows 7 system and reading the recent Windows 8 thread and am feeling a little violent. ]

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    1. Re:Level the playing field. by UltraZelda64 · · Score: 5, Funny

      I predict that they will start throwing chairs.

    2. Re:Level the playing field. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Putting chimps in front of a windows 7 machine? And now we know how windows 8 was made...

  10. These hands were made for punching by kervin · · Score: 2

    And that's just what they'll do

    1. Re:These hands were made for punching by R3d+M3rcury · · Score: 2

      One of these days these hands are gonna punch all over you.

    2. Re:These hands were made for punching by Nefarious+Wheel · · Score: 1

      One of these days these hands are gonna punch all over you.

      Nancy!

      --
      Do not mock my vision of impractical footwear
    3. Re:These hands were made for punching by cffrost · · Score: 1

      Are you ready, hands? Start whacking!

      --
      Thank you, Edward Snowden.

      "Arguments from authority are worthless." —Carl Sagan
    4. Re:These hands were made for punching by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oblig. http://theoatmeal.com/comics/dolphin_punch Hands were made for punching dolphins!

  11. Hulk by Ashenkase · · Score: 1

    SMASH!!!!

  12. You, sir. by ClioCJS · · Score: 1

    I tip my hat to you, sir.

    --
    -Clio
    Karma: Bad (mostly from not giving a fuck)
    Blog: http://clintjcl.wordpress.com
    1. Re:You, sir. by Weaselmancer · · Score: 5, Funny

      Just don't shake his hand.

      --
      Weaselmancer
      rediculous.
  13. Oh yeah? by TWX · · Score: 5, Funny

    David Carrier said, "...I think the evidence suggests that humans are substantially more violent."

    Oh yeah? I bet he wouldn't say that to my face!

    --
    Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    1. Re:Oh yeah? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pff, Humans really aren't all that violent individually.

    2. Re:Oh yeah? by TWX · · Score: 1

      Humans really aren't all that violent individually.

      Only because of the balance of negative consequences to positive successes through other choices. Look at places where the rule of law has faltered or where unemployment is so high that it's exceedingly difficult to make an honest living, people often turn savage. A "bad neighborhood" is an example of this on the lower end of the spectrum, and places like northern Mexico are the other end.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    3. Re:Oh yeah? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      An another World War 3 article.

      Just saying....

    4. Re:Oh yeah? by Inda · · Score: 2

      Humans are not substantially more violent.

      And if any one disagrees with me, I'll punch their face in.

      --
      This post contains benzene, nitrosamines, formaldehyde and hydrogen cyanide.
  14. Re:As a boxer... Ewwwwww by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    mishandling relatively short, small diameter, objects reminds you of your favourite pastime ............ just ewwww

  15. Civilization is a Non-Zero-Sum Game by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 2

    Well, I guess somebody has to go against the flood of neurological research showing that humans tend greatly towards the altruistic. "Fists, yeah, that's the ticket. People are inherently violent, and so we're justified being bad to them, because they need to be controlled." Augustine of Hippo called - he wants his Original Sin back.

    Troll "research" is troll.

    --
    My God, it's Full of Source!
    OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    1. Re:Civilization is a Non-Zero-Sum Game by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought we evolved fists so we could fist. Try doing that without fists.

    2. Re:Civilization is a Non-Zero-Sum Game by Hatta · · Score: 1

      Well, I guess somebody has to go against the flood of neurological research showing that humans tend greatly towards the altruistic.

      Simple observation of the world around us would contradict that notion.

      "Fists, yeah, that's the ticket. People are inherently violent, and so we're justified being bad to them, because they need to be controlled."

      And that's the (extremely common) type of thinking that disproves humans are altruistic.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    3. Re:Civilization is a Non-Zero-Sum Game by yndrd1984 · · Score: 1

      ...neurological research showing that humans tend greatly towards the altruistic. ... People are inherently violent...

      I think you misunderstand the results of this kind of research - people have an inherent capacity for both kinds of behavior. Most people will be fairly altruistic if they feel they can get their needs met in cooperative ways, but will respond aggressively if they're pushed. Sometimes you have to work together, sometimes you have to fight.

  16. and... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    these boots are made for walking...

  17. I wouldn't say humans are more violent by Riceballsan · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Humans are gradually getting less violent. Chimps and other relatives of ours are still more violent. You don't measure violence in how many kills one person had the potential and means to create, that is partly based on intelligence, and it also goes into proportions. Second is coverage, sure we see dozens of racial hate crimes in humans for every Chimpanzee lynching, but the odds of an individual chimpanzee taken at random being killed by his own race, is significantly higher than the odds of any one human being murdered. Statistically humans are dwindling down in violence per capita, we just are more aware of every instance, and individual instances are much larger.

    1. Re:I wouldn't say humans are more violent by blahplusplus · · Score: 1

      "Humans are gradually getting less violent."

      But is this because humans are less violent, or tools of war (WMD) are acting as a check on how violent we can be and not suffer total annihilation in the process? Consider if Japan had nukes when truman dropped the bomb, would he have dropped the bomb? Probably not.

      Humans are violent in calculated ways and their still exists lots of violence in modern societies the violence just takes different forms (bullying, being ripped off, etc).

    2. Re:I wouldn't say humans are more violent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Humans perhaps are getting less violent, but the sure have better tools for killing each other.
      Somehow I don't think 20th century looks less violent than 19th century.
      Consider these killings:
          50,000,000 by Mao Ze Dong
          12,000,000 Hitler
          6,000,000 Stalin
          2,400,000 Bengali Hindus killed by muslims
          1,200,000 The Turks

      http://www.scaruffi.com/politics/dictat.html
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bengali_Hindus
      http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=1006050806108

    3. Re:I wouldn't say humans are more violent by Half-pint+HAL · · Score: 2

      But is a nuclear bomb truly "violence"? Personally I think it's something a little more chilling -- it's cold and calculated with little of the emotional content of headbutting someone for grabbing your girlfriend's arse....

      --
      Got them moderator blues I blieve I walk out the do', With these mod-points I been gettin', I 'most never post no mo'
    4. Re:I wouldn't say humans are more violent by Rudisaurus · · Score: 1

      Humans are gradually getting less violent.

      You obviously don't commute to work every day in city traffic, do you?

      --
      licet differant, aequabitur
    5. Re:I wouldn't say humans are more violent by Riceballsan · · Score: 1

      Sure I do, historically speaking, road rage is still a much less of an issue than say getting your head cut off in a mad rush at the market 2000 years ago.

  18. who funded this? by blind+monkey+3 · · Score: 2

    After reading the article I believe the authors of the study have graphically demonstrated that their hands are best suited for masturbating.

    --
    BM3
    1. Re:who funded this? by avandesande · · Score: 1

      Agreed. I saw this article a few days ago and thought to myself what a piece of crap it was, then /. sunk to a new low by posting it.

      --
      love is just extroverted narcissism
    2. Re:who funded this? by Volastic · · Score: 1

      Funding? only if someone bought her lunch.
      This article was bad filler and should of been passed over.

      This Analysis by Jennifer Viegas has no collaboration, no detailed examination
      just what she says goes. Even if she wrote it up just for a discussion on
      the topic she failed there as well -no commnets. Meaning those at news.discovery.com
      know a bs headline when they see it; not even giving it a serious look.
      Yet give /. a chance at it...

      There was no study done on this, or Jenn forgot her cites.
      Jennifer Viegas http://www.linkedin.com/in/jenniferviegas
      Her job apparently is to write bad science.

    3. Re:who funded this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A cogently argued critique.

      However, you meant "should have", not "should of".

  19. Glad to see it. by ddd0004 · · Score: 2

    More quality research from the Chuck Norris Institute of Bodily Harm. I predict the findings of their next study will either focus on the advantages of delivering a roundhouse kick while wearing jeans.

    1. Re:Glad to see it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't think you know what either means.

  20. Yes by Greyfox · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Yes, they were.

    --

    I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?

  21. Good... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Now when I get in trouble for punching someone, I can tell them it's natural, and part of my evolutionary nature. I was born this way.

  22. The actual article is free to read by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    http://jeb.biologists.org/content/216/2/236.full

  23. Re:and...your boots were made for walking by theodp · · Score: 1
  24. this is a joke by RedHackTea · · Score: 3, Interesting
    I feel like this whole site is made for trolling. Read any of the suggested articles or the other articles that she wrote. And when you say "hands were made for punching" instead of "scientists suggest that hands may have evolved in part due to its fighting capabilities," it's hard to really consider this "scientific" but instead more to just increase read count (++readCount).

    Other articles she wrote:
    1. New Dinosaur Had Unforgettable Smile
    2. Sabertooth Cat Lived in Vegas
    3. Iron Age Feast Found in England

    Suggested related articles:

    1. First Human Ancestor Looked Like a Squirrel
    2. Early Human Ancestors Ate Grass
    --
    The G
  25. Re:As a boxer... Ewwwwww by yndrd1984 · · Score: 4, Funny

    mishandling relatively short, small diameter, objects reminds you of your favourite pastime ............ just ewwww

    If you haven't played with a clit, you're missing out.

  26. The monkey speaks his mind by RevWaldo · · Score: 1

    The monkey speaks his mind

    And three monkeys sat in a coconut tree
    Discussing things as they are said to be
    Said one to other now listen, you two
    “There’s a certain rumour that just can’t be true
    That man descended from our noble race
    Why, the very idea is a big disgrace, yea”
    No monkey ever deserted his wife
    Starved her baby and ruined her life

    Yea, the monkey speaks his mind

    And you’ve never known a mother monk
    To leave her babies with others to bunk
    And passed them on from one to another
    ‘Til they scarcely knew which was their mother
    Yea, the monkey speak his mind

    And another thing you will never see
    A monkey build a fence around a coconut tree
    And let all the coconuts go to waste
    Forbidding other monkeys to come and taste
    Why, if I put a fence around this tree
    Starvation would force you to steal from me

    Yea, the monkey speaks his mind

    Here’s another thing a monkey won’t do
    Go out on a night and get all in a stew
    Or use a gun or a club or a knife
    And take another monkey’s life
    Yes, man descended, the worthless bum
    But, brothers, from us he did not come

    Yea, the monkey speaks his mind

    Yea, now the monkey speaks his mind

    1. Re:The monkey speaks his mind by RabidReindeer · · Score: 1

      Obviously the author had never experienced a chimpanzee attack.

  27. No hard feelings, but by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Total horse shit. 1 in 1000 humans have an instinct for effective punching. The rest need lots of training. Hell; most humans would never think of aligning their radius with their pointer/middle knuckles and would instead use their ulna and pinky knuckles. Typical shoulder theatrics would also make it irrelevant either way, as cordial notifications are conducive to landing strikes. No sir. Aint havin' none of it. Stick with fish slapping.

    1. Re:No hard feelings, but by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      An intended "n't" has been robbed from "are", which should have read "aren't conducive". Moral of correction: Hands are tailored for smashing laptop keyboards and strangling those who make them.

  28. Re:As a boxer... Ewwwwww by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Is that on the Linux command line? I can't find it.

  29. Re:and...your boots were made for walking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    walk all over you ?

  30. Re:As a boxer... Ewwwwww by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I believe the command is touch /dev/clit

  31. What should Liam Neeson Punch Next? by dchamp · · Score: 1

    Liam Neeson will be glad to hear this news as he decides what to punch next.

    http://www.npr.org/blogs/monkeysee/2012/01/25/145837558/what-should-liam-neeson-punch-next

  32. the better to by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    survive a post-apocalyptic world.

  33. Specious "evidence", imo.... by mark-t · · Score: 1

    "Because you have higher pressure when hitting with a fist, you are more likely to cause injury to tissue, bones, teeth, eyes and the jaw,"

    This line is the only thing that I can find in the article that even slightly resembles evidence suggesting that the hand actually evolved for that purpose, but it seems to make the flawed assumption that since a part of our body is better at doing X one particular way than another, perhaps more natural or obvious way, then the act of doing X must have been the most dominating factor in determining the way that body part evolved, ignoring the significance, or lack thereof, of the benefit it might offer compared to the benefits offered because of other attributes. I would personally suggest that while it may be true that part of the hand's evolution could be attributed to hitting (I believe it was more for self-defense than it was actually being violent), the evolutionary advantage of the human hand for grasping and utilizing objects to do what we will with them almost certainly far outweighs that.

  34. Proof of our violent nature? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you need proof of our violent nature, just go shopping on Black Friday.

  35. Middle finger evolution... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Could they explain why the middle finger is the longest? I guess it evolves faster in recent times...

  36. Re:As a boxer... Ewwwwww by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    It's above the b and below the g and h.

  37. Journal of Experimental Biology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So, they tried using their hands in every possible way and found out that the best they could do was punch each other?

  38. What about the nails? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Whithout a means to cut their nails very short I highly doubt primitive people could ever make a fist to actually punch something.

    1. Re:What about the nails? by donaldm · · Score: 1

      Whithout a means to cut their nails very short I highly doubt primitive people could ever make a fist to actually punch something.

      Ever heard of chewing your nails?

      --
      There ain't no such thing as proprietary standards only proprietary formats. Standards are by definition open.
  39. Speaking of chimps and violence by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

    It was great when Chimp Team Six took out Bin Laden!

    --
    #DeleteChrome
  40. Smashdot! by tinkerton · · Score: 1

    There. I've said it.

    1. Re:Smashdot! by Nyder · · Score: 1

      There. I've said it.

      Super Smashdot!

      There. I expanded upon what you said.

      --
      Be seeing you...
    2. Re:Smashdot! by Larryish · · Score: 1

      Super Smashdot Brothers!

      There. Now we have two of them.

  41. A common misconception by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    With the notable exception of bonobos

    Bonobos are actually just as violent as every other ape on the planet.

  42. Re:As a boxer... Ewwwwww by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    touch: cannot touch ‘/dev/clit’: Permission denied

    :(

  43. wwitty ending... come on! by WGFCrafty · · Score: 1

    These hands are made for punching And that's just what all do One of these days these hands are....

  44. Not so convinced by golden+age+villain · · Score: 1

    I find the arguments put forward by the authors of the study rather unconvincing. Once you have an opposable thumb, pretty much anything you can grab on the ground is a better weapon that your fist. Rock anyone?

  45. Hands made for punching by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Humanity, fuck yeah!

  46. Re:As a boxer... Ewwwwww by someone1234 · · Score: 3, Funny

    sudo!

    --
    Patents Drive Free Software as Hurricanes Drive Construction Industry
  47. Not true, for gripping and minimizing damage by detain · · Score: 1

    It seems the article is more saying that our thumbs have evolved in a manor that allows us to fold it into our hand like our other fingers to protect it (which happens to be useful when fighting). I suspect this evolution was more about being able to grip something than it was about fighting.

    --
    http://interserver.net/
    1. Re:Not true, for gripping and minimizing damage by lothos · · Score: 1

      if you fold your thumb inside your hand while punching, you're going to break your thumb. Don't do that :)

  48. Re:As a boxer... Ewwwwww by wierd_w · · Score: 5, Funny

    It says:

    "User Horndog is not a member of the super users group", and that "my access violation will be reported"!

    I think I hear sirens....

  49. Weapons, not fists. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Your hands will fracture, break, bend, and sometimes emulsify... Especially the forefinger middle knuckle and the top pinky knuckle = 'the boxer break.' Over and over.

    Yeah, see this is why I'm immensely skeptical of the article. If we were evolved for punching, then why are we so fucking terrible at it? You don't see these kinds of injuries in most animals that use their natural weapons. Those that use bludgeoning weapons or dull piercing weapons like horns or antlers have serious muscular and bone reinforcement in the area with fewer joints and more fused bone. On the other hand, the other animals that keep their natural weapons on fine manipulators rely on cutting damage that requires significantly less force. Punching is just about the stupidest way to attack there is.

    It's pretty clear our hands are evolved for the use of weapons like spears rather than for slamming into things. We are tool users. Hell, it's probably a good part of why we're able to get away with being so weak compared to chimpanzees, who don't use tools in combat.

  50. Not very convincing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, humans are violent, we should all loathe ourselves and feel bad about being human, let's all kill ourselves and/or just go back to living in caves and apologize to all the innocent creatures we had to kill to get to the top of the food chain where we could wantonly destroy the Earth.

    Blah blah blah.

    More leftist self-loathing bullshit.

  51. Getting less violent. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ..but as a man i shudder to think what would happen if porn, sports & light entertainment didn't exist.

    Men are inherently violent and that is neither good or bad it just is. As are almost all male mammals who don't even hide it but flaunt it.

  52. Obligatory by Meneth · · Score: 1

    They tell ya, 'Never hit a man with a closed fist.' But it is, on occasion, hilarious.

  53. Did nobody think by darkfeline · · Score: 1

    that punching was made for our fists instead? If we had evolved with swords for arms, no doubt this article would say our arms were made for swordfighting.

  54. That Does not Make any Sence by wisnoskij · · Score: 1

    There are far far better designs if all you wanted was a weapon. Like getting rid of these brittle fingers that you are just as likely to break as the thing you are punching. And/or adding some claws or horns.

    --
    Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
  55. Most important by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We have opposable thumbs.

  56. I find that hard to believe by Hentes · · Score: 1

    Human fists are a very ineffective weapon. Most animals have claws, sharp teeth or horns for fighting, a fist is nothing compared to that. If a human had a cagefight with a chimpanzee, my bet would not be on the human. Fists aren't even much help against a defenceless animal: a wolf can bite a sheep's neck off within a minute, but beating a sheep to death would be a long, tiresome and painful procedure for a human.

    1. Re:I find that hard to believe by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

      Agreed. There various "races" of chimpanzees. Te bigger ones have half the size of a human but ten times his strength.
      A chimpanzee literally can rip your arms or legs out.
      There is an article somewhere on the internet about a guy who hold about three chimps in his garden. At one point they suddenly attacked him. If there was no one close with a colt he had died. He is now maimed for live. http://www.nydailynews.com/news/man-lost-face-05-mauling-hell-new-chimpanzee-victim-article-1.364450

      If you google for chimpanzze on man attacks you get hundrets of hist about happenings during the last ten years.

      They are realy dangerous.

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  57. Part 2: Feet Evolved to Kick Groins by retroworks · · Score: 1

    And my fingers have evolved to submit trollish comments. In journalism, such a headline is called "if it bleeds it leads".

    --
    Gently reply
  58. Help, I can't seem to find my hands by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Human hands evolved so that men could make fists and fight"

    What about women then..?

    1. Re:Help, I can't seem to find my hands by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      obviously, woman's hands evolved to give men handjobs during blowjobs. and make dinner

  59. Nope, not punching by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 1

    Think about it. Would you rather punch someone, or would you rather pick up a big heavy club and beat someone with it? Yes, we're violent, but we can do so much more with improved dexterity than a simple punch, even with the crudest tools.

    --
    Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
  60. Orangutans vs. gorillas by tepples · · Score: 1

    Gorillas and chimpanzees walk on their "knuckles", or on their medial phalanges. Orangutans walk on their fists, or on their proximal phalanges. I thought Wikipedia's article about knuckle-walking made this clear.

  61. Evolutionary Advantage by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    From Wikpedia
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masturbation

    "Evolutionary utility

    Masturbation may increase fertility during intercourse. A 2009 Australian study found daily ejaculation to be an important factor in sperm health and motility.

    Female masturbation alters conditions in the vagina, cervix and uterus, in ways that can alter the chances of conception from intercourse, depending on the timing of the masturbation. A woman's orgasm between one minute before and up to 45 minutes after insemination favors the chances of that sperm reaching her egg. If, for example, she has had intercourse with more than one male, such an orgasm can increase the likelihood of a pregnancy by one of them. Female masturbation can also provide protection against cervical infections by increasing the acidity of the cervical mucus and by moving debris out of the cervix.

    In males, masturbation flushes out old sperm with low motility from the male's genital tract. The next ejaculate then contains more fresh sperm, which have higher chances of achieving conception during intercourse. If more than one male has intercourse with a female, the sperm with the highest motility will compete more effectively.

    Health and psychological effects

    Benefits
    It is held in many mental health circles that masturbation can relieve depression and lead to a higher sense of self-esteem.[41] Masturbation can also be particularly useful in relationships where one partner wants more sex than the other – in which case masturbation provides a balancing effect and thus a more harmonious relationship"

  62. apples to oranges. by vonshavingcream · · Score: 1

    Humans are only more violent because we stopped using our fists and turned to alternative weapons. If we all had to stand in the middle east dessert and punch each other to death, I don't think it would take very long for people to get tired of it and just go home.

  63. Our hands evolved to wield weapons by mophab · · Score: 1

    It is obvious to me that hour hands were evolved to pick up rocks and sticks and then either wield them as weapons or throw them.
    Making a fist is something we do as a last resort when we are unarmed.

  64. Humans more violent by CosaNostra+Pizza+Inc · · Score: 1

    Given what happened in Newtown a week ago, I'd say humans are even more violent than chimps. Its especially true since we've created tools for being violent efficiently and quickly.

    1. Re:Humans more violent by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Given what happens every weekend in Chimpcago you know its true.

  65. We don't have tiger like claws. by Lashat · · Score: 1

    Razor-sharp and that go through meat like warm butter. Seems only fair that we have better blunt bashers.

    --
    For every benefit you receive a tax is levied. - Ralph Waldo Emerson
  66. There IS another "benefit"... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I, like another poster here (dreamchaser -> http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=3322527&cid=42320943 ), have "polydactyl" 6 toed cats (4 of them, 1 male, 3 female - the male is just like his, almost a clone in fact -> http://i.imgur.com/NjdkT.jpg , only front paws that way, like his late now deceased mother, & the females have them on all 4 feet...)

    Yes, just like Ernest Hemmingway did (he favored them, & even setup a "habitat" of sorts for them to THIS VERY DAY):

    They display AMAZING dexterity!

    E.G.-> They "grab" things no differently than you or I do in fact, where other normal footed cats, cannot... it is truly something to see!

    However, my point?

    An opposable thumb (which we too have along with other primates) ALLOWS FOR TECHNOLOGY imo... eventually @ least (Of course, also providing the brain evolves enough & the need presents itself as well).

    * Yes, it helps them in fights too... extra "blades" on each paw... & a LARGER heavier one to strike blows with!

    E.G./I.E.-> It is amazing how much MORE "striking power" the 6 toed cats have, vs. ordinary cats (of which I have those too). You can hear a "thud"/"thump" when the pop other cats in the head... lol!

    It was the same with a feral cat my family adopted in the 80's too... same extra striking force, AND, the ability to literally hold objects as we do.

    It is hilarious watching them pickup food & put it to their mouths, when the other cats, cannot, in fact.

    APK

    P.S.=> As dreamchaser called them? LMAO - "Felis Catus Erectus" (I would've used "polydactus", but the point's there)...

    ... apk

  67. Oh, I get it now. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All of these things fit in your anus, therefore, your anus was created to carry things.

  68. Pfft, the study is wrong ... by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 1

    Perhaps instead of punshing a sand bag they should ask some guys who do martial arts?

    First of all: most apes fight. Chimps go to war, kill enemy tribes and take the "wemon" prisoner or rape them.

    When Chimps or Bonoboes fight, then the question is: do they fight or do they ritually test their strength? Like in fighting for a better rank in the hierarchy.

    Hirarchy or ritual fights are done with fists, just like humans do.

    Fighting to kill are done with open hands, just like martial artists do. (Martial artists also use "very special" fist forms, which you don't test on sand bags)

    Gorrillas on the other hand don't fight at all. They use fists for ritual fights. However in those cases only the challanger is attacking and the older one is ignoring him and accepting his blows. The winner is determined by "who has the patience to accept the outbreak of the otherone". In other words the gorrila that is turning his back to the attacker an let him beat the back is usually winning, and the attacker simply gives up when his steam is gone.

    No primate is fighting with fists to kill ... (if an ape likes to kill he mainly uses his teeth anyway, and struggeling during the fight easily ends in broken limbs or litteraly teared out arms)

    So imho the whole research article is utter nonsense.

    --
    Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
  69. What about these boots? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    These boots were made for walkin', and that's just what they'll do...

  70. Re:As a boxer... Ewwwwww by DMUTPeregrine · · Score: 1

    It's the .lit to epub converter's name. http://www.convertlit.com/
    Really, the executable is "clit".

    --
    Not a sentence!
  71. obviously wrong by dotar · · Score: 1

    Deer, or more precisely, stags, have horns so they can have their tremendous mating battles. Pachycephalosaurus had half of its skull hard bone, because they liked to smash their heads together. If you punch someone in the face, you'll be lucky if you don't break something in your hand. It's quite clear that hands did not evolve for punching. If they did, they'd be made of something very, very hard.