Ancestors of Homo Sapiens Hunted by Birds 286
CFTM writes "The associate press writer, Alexandra Zavis, reports that 'A South African anthropologist said Thursday his research into the death nearly 2 million years ago of an ape-man shows human ancestors were hunted by birds.' The article raises some really fascinating questions, particularly when one begins to think about the evolutionary impact that this may have had on humans." From the article: "The Ohio State study determined that eagles would swoop down, pierce monkey skulls with their thumb-like back talons, then hover while their prey died before returning to tear at the skull. Examination of thousands of monkey remains produced a pattern of damage done by birds, including holes and ragged cuts in the shallow bones behind the eye sockets. Berger went back to the Taung skull, and found traces of the ragged cuts behind the eye sockets. He said none of the researchers who had for decades been debating how the child died had noticed the eye socket damage before."
Birds of Prey or Carrion Birds? (Score:5, Insightful)
If at one time our ancestors were hunted by large birds, what happened to them? One can easily think of ways for other large predator animals to be removed from the food chain but large raptors seem to have no natural predator. Did modern man learn to defend himself from such birds? Did our stone weapons suffice for protecting us from such large aerial predators or was it not until bronze weapons that we were specialized enough to protect ourselves?
While the telltale signs might remain in skeletons, these issues raise a host of new issues that obviously require much more research to be determined.
More importantly, aren't the researchers overlooking the obvious possibility that the "ragged cuts" behind the eye sockets resulted from carrion birds after the death of the individual?
Perhaps it was the case that many of these ancestors were wiped out from a plague that left no evidence of itself and there just happened to be large scavenger birds everywhere to capitalize off of these corpses? The result would be thousands (if not millions) of dead corpses left for scavengers to ravage. Corpses close enough to an aviary or bird sanctuary would likely suffer from these skull markings. Were the markings also present on other parts of the bodies? I've seen vultures pick a corpse clean and they probably worked pretty hard to get at the fat and oil rich brain
Maybe the eyes of dead human corpses are merely a delicacy among scavenger birds or some other scavenger that left similar markings?
Re:Birds of Prey or Carrion Birds? (Score:5, Funny)
You worked at Microsoft too?
Re:Birds of Prey or Carrion Birds? (Score:2)
Re:Birds of Prey or Carrion Birds? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Birds of Prey or Carrion Birds? (Score:5, Funny)
You insensitive clod. I would, but some giant bird just clawed my eyes out!
Re:Birds of Prey or Carrion Birds? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Birds of Prey or Carrion Birds? (Score:2)
Re:Birds of Prey or Carrion Birds? (Score:5, Interesting)
Heck, burying your dead becomes a great advantage: predators gain nothing from killing your species, and soon seek prey that actually gives them food! Maybe human death rituals (e.g. burial, burning, leaving to vultures) got started because they ensured predators didn't profit from the death of the victim.
Re:Birds of Prey or Carrion Birds? (Score:5, Informative)
That is an extremely complex behavior. Very few animals do it, and those that do are very intelligent social animals. The only animals who do it that I can think of offhand are elephants and humans.
Re:Birds of Prey or Carrion Birds? (Score:3, Insightful)
The obvious way to ensure that eagles don't benefit from a dead human lying around is to eat it first.
"It" being either the eagles or the body.
Re:Birds of Prey or Carrion Birds? (Score:2)
On the other hand, it's really easy to defend ourselves against worms... just makes sure we're on the top of the ground, and not buried underneath it.
See? No worries
Some theories on human burial rituals (Score:5, Insightful)
Maybe human death rituals (e.g. burial, burning, leaving to vultures) got started because they ensured predators didn't profit from the death of the victim.
In Pascal Boyer's book, Religion Explained, he suggests that burial rituals may have formed for a variety of reasons. One idea is that burial rituals mark a transition between two states of being, since our human free agent inference system in our brains still think of the corpse as somehow still possessing an attribute of human-ness. In that way, burials can be viewed in the same light as other rite-of-passage rituals like baptism or marriage.
Another theory is that mentioned by the parent poster, in that dangerous scavangers are less likely to come near the clan looking for dead bodies to eat. The problem with that idea is that early humans were nomadic foragers, which would make it easy for them to avoid such an invasion. And then why do these early burials involve such unnecessary components as flowers, aligned horns, or tools? Furthermore, it would seem that risks of infection from a decaying body would present a more compelling reason to dispose of the body (burial, burning, ingesting by a spiritual specialist, etc.).
Death rituals are likely to stem from the natural human disposition that something must be done. I could go on for several more paragraphs, but this diversion has gone on far enough; those who would like to more fully investigate the phenomenon of burial should read chapter 6 of Boyer's book.
Onto the subject of being preyed upon by birds -- Joseph Campbell talks about experiments wherein scientists draw a wood cutout of a hawk on a string across a chicken pen. The chicks will scurry for cover when that happens. When the scientists drew the hawk across the pen backwards, the chicks did not react. Campbell identified this behavior as an innate releasing mechanism (IRM). It is somewhat like a hard-wired circuit in the brains of these animals that evolved through the selection pressure of millions of years of being hunted by hawks. Other posters have mentioned that perhaps that is why we are so fascinated by dragons and what not in our mythological tales. We have an inference system in our brains that is wired to evoke a stronger emotive response to the image of a big bird-like creature, and hence that leads to the adoption of the bird meme in the images of our culture.
Re:Some theories on human burial rituals (Score:2)
I'd like to propose that burial rituals could result from how distressing it is to see the remains of your loved one slowly decaying, being gnawed away, etc. The only alternative that made sense would be to burn the remains. And as it turns out, that is the other common death ritual.
Thousand Years of Conditioning (Score:2, Offtopic)
If a person does not cooperate with the group and stakes his own territory, then he risks his own survival. By himself, he will have a hard time in finding the necessary food and hospitab
Re:Thousand Years of Conditioning (Score:2)
Re:Birds of Prey or Carrion Birds? (Score:4, Interesting)
Up until about 200,000 years ago [wikimedia.org] there were about 5 or 6 different apes running around alongside our direct ancestors. These guys were smart, and they could use spears. My guess is they had a lot of body hair.
My personal pet theory is that about 100,000, human beings began systematically exterminating all other groups of hominids besides their own. The only hominids crafty enough to escape the slaughter were other homo sapiens.
You can see this continue today. Any group of human beings that give themselves some kind of group identity hate those other guys -- that group next door -- and will try to kill all of them, given the opportunity. They also think of other groups of people as savage animals.
So anways, rewind 100,000 years ago. A hairless human hunter venturing out into the woods to track down lunch stood a good chance of being killed by some hairy spear-wielding apeman.
Fast forward to today. People are still catching glimpses of hairy apemen in the woods (Bigfoot, Sasquatch, Yeti, whatever). Not that those hairy apemen are still alive, but that it's better to be paranoid and *suspect* that a creaking branch or other ambiguous sensory data is a hairy apeman, rather than foolishly walking into a hairy ape-mans' spear. To this day, human groups view their neighbor groups as savage animals who they are probably better off getting rid of.
Re:Birds of Prey or Carrion Birds? (Score:4, Interesting)
You may not be afraid of bigfoot because you didn't have an experience of 'encountering' a bigfoot in the woods. My theory currently states that you have some ambiguous sensory experience in the woods, and the paranoid hunter/gatherer part of your mind incorrectly interprets it as an ape-man. If you haven't had the experience and misinterpretation, you wouldn't be afraid. The same way you may not be afraid of the ghetto if you've never been mugged in the ghetto -- which happened to me recently. I live in Columbus, OH, which is a relatively safe place, and does have its share of ghettos. I never had any fear walking around in them, but a couple of weeks ago I was mugged in the ghetto. Nothing bad happened -- I just got hit and they took my wallet. However, now I am suspicious of every guy I see when I'm walking in a ghetto, and if someone gets close to me, the hair on the back of my neck stands up.
Why are you not a racist? One answer is that maybe you aren't a typical human being. My theory states that *groups* hate each other, not necessarily individuals hate other groups or other individuals. If you look at human group relationship around the world and across time, they always hate or at best think poorly of the other group. The theory does not predict or address individual behavior. Here in Columbus Ohiom there is an intense Ohio State / Michigan rivalry. This always results in fights between college age fans. Now, if those people weren't wearing Ohio State or Michigan jackets, nobody could tell them apart. But somehow being a Michigan fan during a home game in Columbus gets you a beating. It's the same for any other group identification, whether it's high schools, gangs, neighborhoods, religions, or ethnicities.
Also, have you ever been to a place where you were a minority? I'm guessing that you are a white male living in the US. That's my background -- I never had a problem with other people until I spent a couple summers in Ecuador, where I was very obviously a minority. I don't hate Ecuadorians or Hispanics or anything like that, but I definately felt a sense of "me against them" while walking down the main streets of Ecuador.
I guess my theory states that after a violent trauma, the human mind haphazardly groups recognizably 'other' people together in a danger category. If a member of your own group beats you up, you probably won't hate your own group as a whole, because you know too many individuals. But if can't differentitate any individuals of the other group, you mind will just err on the side of caution and fear all of them.
Predatation dynamics (Score:2)
Raptor attacks would [rein]force hominids into social bands. Even stoning would be an unacceptible risk to the fragile wings. So raptors would only attack out of absolute panic sta
Re:Birds of Prey or Carrion Birds? (Score:3, Interesting)
When humans developed either spear throwers or archers then the birds would have begun learning to keep their distance. This wouldn't have needed to wait for stone tools, either, if, e.g., spear throwers came first.
OTOH, larger primates like even proto-humans don't need to fear active predation from flying birds (as opposed to something like ax-beaks) even when they are unarmed. It's too dangerous for the bird. Primates are likely to grab ahold and not let go. The bird may kill them by
Re:Birds of Prey or Carrion Birds? (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Birds of Prey or Carrion Birds? (Score:4, Insightful)
It is belived that Haast's eagle [bbc.co.uk] preyed on early New Zealanders.
"Most every animal on the planet washes his arse, but not proto-Human"
If you got close to a wild animal you would find it "filthy" and riddled with parasites, I have never seen one "wash it's arse" unless you count licking. If that is what you have to do to "wash" I would rather have a dirty arse.
"They hunt in groups, but jump around and make more noise than a herd of elephants."
They are the "beaters" that are jumping around, the purpose is to drive prey toward an ambush. It is a simple and very effective way to hunt in groups, wild chimps have been filmed hunting monkeys in a similar fashion.
"[Why] do we paint pre humans this way?"
Because it is the way they lived, many people don't have a clue of what it takes to live like a caveman. These people simply conclude the strange actions of "filthy" cavemen are "stupid" (or there is a conspiracy to portray them as filthy and stupid).
Re:Birds of Prey or Carrion Birds? (Score:3, Interesting)
How apt! (Score:5, Funny)
Suddenly... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Suddenly... (Score:2)
Re:Suddenly... (Score:2)
Actually, I already didn't feel bad about eating duck
Old news, some doubt (Score:5, Informative)
This story is mostly old news; the same researchers proposed it about ten years ago. The original idea was that the site where the skull was found (Taung) had a lot of young monkeys, which not only suggests predation, but also a relatively lightweight predator. Most of the other South African caves preserve larger adult specimens as well, which might have gotten in themselves or been carried (or dropped) by larger predators like leopards. It is a very tricky case to say that the accumulating agent at Taung must have been eagles, though, since it is much more likely that different predators and non-predation factors operated at different times for any given site.
What they found that justified a new paper was damage inside the eye orbits of the specimen, which is one area where eagle talons damage their prey. It could be true, but on the other hand there is a lot of doubt. After all, eagles aren't the only predators that damage the eyes, and there are other ways that the bones may have accumulated, chiefly water transport, that might not require predation at all. As one of my colleagues put it, so many young primates die of disease or inadequate nutrition; the chances of this story is greater than zero, but how much?
--John (my anthropology weblog is at http://johnhawks.net/weblog/ [johnhawks.net])Re:Old news, some doubt (Score:5, Funny)
Harpy Eagles hunt monkeys today (Score:5, Informative)
Wikipedia entry for Harpy Eagle [wikipedia.org].
Re:Eagles hunted MODERN MAN (Score:2, Interesting)
http://www.nzbirds.com/birds/haasteagle.html [nzbirds.com]
Those must have been BIG birds.... (Score:3, Insightful)
How do we know that the holes in the heads didn't come from other proto-humans that fastened a bird talon to the end of some spear and then battled one another? That would seem to make a pretty lethal weapon.
Re:Those must have been BIG birds.... (Score:4, Insightful)
Certainly so, if it was big enough to carry the kid off -- we're talking about a 2-4 year old toddler -- it would have to be a LOTR-size eagle. Maybe Gandalf called in an airstrike?
I think either an attack with damage inflicted at the site of attack, or an eagle who had later access to a carcass killed by another predator and carried off only the head would be more likely hypotheses.
An earlier poster suggested that carrion birds might have been responsible, and I think that is a good idea as well.
--John (My post is at my anthropology weblog, http://johnhawks.net/weblog [johnhawks.net])Re:Those must have been BIG birds.... (Score:4, Funny)
Oh yea, I'm on slashdot baby.
Re:Those must have been BIG birds.... (Score:2)
The ancestor we are talking about was from two million years ago. It was a tree-swinging ape. The two year old probably weighed five pounds.
Five pound toddlers (Score:2)
Remember that chimpanzees and other apes develop faster than humans. Although the adults were a bit less in mass than living people (35 - 45 kg instead of 55 - 70), the toddlers would have been either about the same or slightly more for their age than living humans. My 2-year-olds are 30 pounds.
--JohnAge? (Score:2)
Re:Those must have been BIG birds.... (Score:2)
You are ignoring an important possibility: Supposing two birds carried the kid off, together? They could just use a strand of creeper to do that!
Swooping for feast (Score:2)
The problem with that hypothesis is that it doesn't explain the accumulation of lots of eagle-eaten monkeys in a single cave. Transport does explain it, but then you have to figure out how they moved the hominid. I myself think that the swooping and eating hypothesis is more likely, but it isn't how the hypothesis came to be.
--JohnRe:Those must have been BIG birds.... (Score:2)
Re:Those must have been BIG birds.... (Score:3, Interesting)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argentavis_magnifice
Not too much you could do to stop one of those swooping down and sucking on your brain!
Re:Those must have been BIG birds.... (Score:3, Interesting)
New Zealand has very unique fauna, and unlike nearby Australia (which seems to have the finest array of deadly creatures in the world) it's almost all harmless. Haast's eagle w
Re:Those must have been BIG birds.... (Score:2)
Now when humans arrived, standing on two legs and about the same height as a Moa, the Eagle would not have thought twice about trying something new for lunch. As witnessed by the Eagle's rapid extinction, modern humans do not tolerate that kind of behaviour from a bird.
Re:Those must have been BIG birds.... (Score:2)
Go ahead, screw with an owl nest or eagle nest. I'd make sure your insurance is up to date before you do.
Re:Those must have been BIG birds.... (Score:2)
Go ahead, screw with an owl nest or eagle nest. I'd make sure your insurance is up to date before you do.
I was parking my car in a lot where a pair of Canada geese were nesting, and as soon as the car stopped, the male came towards it, honking and wings flapping, preparing to attack. I decided to avoid stressing them out, and parked further away.
Plus my car is so old, I'm n
Re:Those must have been BIG birds.... (Score:2)
It preyed on Moas, birds about 6ft tall and pretty slow. OK, it's not Africa, but when the Maoris came to NZ there would have been another creature about 6ft tall and pretty slow to prey on...
Re:Those must have been BIG birds.... (Score:2)
But if the early adult humans were the size of modern 4 year old children, no wonder they were getting picked off by predatory birds...and any other hungry beast in that environment.
Re:Those must have been BIG birds.... (Score:2, Interesting)
Sea gulls + French Fries + Fast Food Parking Lot (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Sea gulls + French Fries + Fast Food Parking Lo (Score:2)
KFC for Vendetta (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:KFC for Vendetta (Score:3, Funny)
I for one. . . (Score:3, Funny)
Thank God! (Score:2)
Re:Thank God! (Score:2)
Re:Thank God! (Score:2)
the circle of life (Score:5, Funny)
It just makes you wonder (Score:2)
THWACK! THWACK!!
hey, man, cut it out. I'm Hindu, you insensitive clod!
So where have they gone? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:So where have they gone? (Score:2)
but if you did have to you'd sure as hell wan't to carry with you the best anti bird weapon you could get your hands on and/or travel in groups.
humans biggest evolotuionary advantage has been the ability to use weapons (and those weapons have got better and better over time) to take out animals much larger than themselve
Re:So where have they gone? (Score:2)
They were destroyed during the Taft administration's seldom-mentioned War on Birds.
Must have been some giant birds (Score:2)
They'd have to have some might powerful talons to break through a thick skull.
Re:Must have been some giant birds (Score:2)
I am editing wikipedia (Score:5, Funny)
to recategorize The Birds (1963) as a 'documentary'.
Happened Then...Happens Now (Score:5, Insightful)
The whole reason that we consider a 30.06 superior to a flint tipped spear or big stick is because it can kill more stuff before that stuff can kill us. I can only imagine what it would have been like to try to fight of a predator armed only with the most basic implements. This leads me to think that early man was on the menu rather often. While this may sound cold to many of you, we have all benefitted from it, so don't feel too bad for the early guys. We know that our ancestors evolved quite a bit from looking at the fossil record. What's the big driving factor behind evolution? Predation. Wolves make the deer smarter and faster by culling the weak and stupid. Birds force moths to shift their coloration patterns by eating anything that "stands out". Why do we have these big brains and not a whole lot else? Predation. Since we didn't have fangs or claws or venom, we had to think our way out of being eaten. This selected for intelligence.
One theory has it that we're here because we're loosers. Now, don't squeal...keep reading. We know that early hominds lived in forests. Why? Plenty of food and plenty of cover. The same reasons that modern apes are found in forests. Given the idea that forest is the most desirable habitat, why did early hominds forsake the forest and creep on to the plains? It's simple...they didn't leave because they suddenly thought "You know, going out there on the plains where there's no food, no water, and a lot of predators we can't out run sounds like a MARVELOUS idea!" They were driven out. Groups of apes, chimps, etc. war over territory constantly. Early hominids lost a battle to retain their territory and were driven out of the forest and on to the plains because they were loosers. That's right, we're all decended from a big bunch of loosers who made the best of what they had left. Sound familiar??? Being on the plains made forced the evolution of walking upright so that we could see over the top of the grass to see predators coming at us. Once we starting walking around as bipeds instead of knuckle draggers, we had these free hands. With free hands and opposable thumbs, well you can just get into all kinds of trouble can't you.
Given that we have a long history of being dinner, I fail to see why these scientists think it's so odd. It seems emminently logical that some predator made the wounds on the skull.
2 cents,
Queen B
Re:Happened Then...Happens Now (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Happened Then...Happens Now (Score:2)
No, there isn't. Ostrich eat plants and bugs [wikipedia.org]
Why is this bogus post modded up?
Re:Happened Then...Happens Now (Score:2, Interesting)
The cassowary (australia and NZ) kills a few people each year by kicking them (it can weigh as much as 125 pounds and has very strong legs disemboweling or doing massive internal damage) as do Ostrich and Emu, and um Secretary birds are pretty large and carnivorous, but not big enough to attack humans.
There was a man killed by Magpies in Australia Sept 2003 A ROGUE magpie has been captured and destroyed after fatally injuring one man and seriously i
Re:Happened Then...Happens Now (Score:2)
There are plenty of other reasons beyond those that you suggest. No creatures alive today hunt humans for food, although many
Re:Happened Then...Happens Now (Score:2)
Re:Happened Then...Happens Now (Score:2)
Humans don't need body hair anymore and are slowly going bald, but conventional wisdom would say that women generally aren't attracted to bald guys. Just because we don't understand how the advantageous traits work their way into the gene pool doesn't
Re:Happened Then...Happens Now (Score:2)
Ummm, did you watch 'Walking with Beasts' and think it was a real nature documentary?
Re:Happened Then...Happens Now (Score:2)
Genes might "affect" intelligence, but they don't "effect" intelligence. There's a difference. They're both verbs, but "affect" is the one you want.
Re:Happened Then...Happens Now (Score:2)
Re:Happened Then...Happens Now (Score:3, Insightful)
Not to discount your point, but:
1) You versus a wolf might win, but you wouldn't look too pretty.
2) Wolves are pack hunters.
Re:Happened Then...Happens Now (Score:2)
Re:Happened Then...Happens Now (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes, surprisingly weak, in fact. A gorilla or chimpansee is a *lot* stronger, when compared to body size.
I can't really see a wolf attaking and killing, alone, a grown human male.
Well, that's because wolfs don't attack alone. Like us, they hunt in packs. But if you were to be attacked by a lone wolf sometime, I'd put my money on the wolf, unless you were armed or Conan the Barbarian.
So in most climates we'd be at the top of the food chain, or close.
I agree.
Re:Happened Then...Happens Now (Score:2)
I agree.
What about all them little things we can't see? I'd say we slowly but surely losing that battle.
Re:Happened Then...Happens Now (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Happened Then...Happens Now (Score:2)
Re:Happened Then...Happens Now (Score:2)
Surely you would get better at it. But not in the same way that Conan the Barbarian would. You'd get wiser! Hunt smarter. Know what to eat! Know what to avoid! Ever looked at one of those programs on TV about aboriginals in Australia, or some forgotten
Re:Happened Then...Happens Now (Score:2)
Overlords (Score:2, Insightful)
Some little pip-squeak sitting around the communal fire, 2-million years ago trys to be cool and impress his commrades by announcing "I for one welcome our new avian menance overlords" Snicker snicker snicker. After months of repeating this phase with multiple variations his brained cracked skullcase somehow ended in the fire pit.
One thing is for certain... (Score:2)
I, for one, welcome this new variation on the "I, for one, welcome our new {x} overlords". And I'd like to remind /. readers that as a trusted moderater, I can be helpful in modding up other variations to the effect that more /. readers are made to toil over such musings in their underground sugar caves.
This is nothing new (Score:4, Funny)
I know it's cliche, but... (Score:2)
The speed of gene spreading (Score:3, Interesting)
Correcting some misconceptions (Score:5, Insightful)
First of all, the Taung baby was not a modern human. (Ausralopithecines are bipedal, but closer to apes than to modern humans apart from that). An adult averaged between 65 and 90 lbs., depending on gender.
Second of all, they're talking about a child. It would be tiny, and the idea of something that small being attacked by a larger predatory bird doesn't seem that far-fetched. No need for Mothra.
Still happening to this day ! (Score:5, Funny)
Look up in the sky on any given day - and behold the clouds, the blue skies, the sunshine
It was only weeks ago that I was having a picnic by the river with my girlfriend and her 2 gorgeous children. Many other families were there as well, happy, laughing, breathing the fresh air and revelling in the sunshine. During this blissfull experience, I couldnt help but notice the sight of a pack of ibises chasing a young child of about 3 years old. The child was wailing in terror, and the ibises eventually cornered the victim in the reeds, tripped him over, and began to peck greedily at his flesh. The child's wailing died down to the replaced only by the squelching sounds of torn flesh.
Whilst this awful scenario unfolded, everyone - including the child's parents, seemed to be totally oblivious to this horror. Countless generations of conditioning have left humankind in a position where we turn a blind eye to the sadistic excesses of our avian overlords.
"Oh my - arnt the ants bad today !" explaimed my girlfriend. Yes, the ants were out in small numbers, but the shocking fact is that she made this statement as an ibis trotted triumphantly past us, dragging a ropey length of some unnamed human organ from its most recent victim - that cornered child !. This march of triumph was conducted in full view of everyone present - however it seems that acknowledging this sight was soooo clearly taboo that it remained blocked in the minds of the observers. I cannot forget the blazing triumph in the eyes of that Ibis, nor the mocking grin sculpted permanently onto its beak !
And yesterday - queuing up in the local bank branch to deposit some cheques - there were at least a dozen people in the queue, all waiting patiently for service. Whilst things proceeded quickly enough, a few people were heard to mutter jokingly how they thought that the bank could afford to put on some more staff to speed up the level of service. A valid complaint perhaps
Walking out of the bank, people continued about their business and even stepped over the grisly remains of the old lady - AS IF SHE WASNT THERE, AND AS IF THEY HAD NOT SEEN A THING. Smiling to themselves, they remembered the worst thing at the bank being the not-so-bad wait for service.
The deeds of birds remain blocked in our minds.
WHY ?
Holy Shit, That Explains It (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Holy Shit, That Explains It (Score:2)
Torture instead of "attacks"? (Score:2)
The Catherine Wheel [comcast.net] was a product of the middle ages, especially popular in Germany. The victim's limbs were crushed with blunt objects. His (or her) still-living remains were subjected to the wheel. This meant the mangled arms and legs were threaded through the spokes. The wheel was then hoisted into the air using a long pole. Hungry vultures and crows picked at the body. Death came slowly.
So in conclusion, Homo Sapiens used torture?
Not suprising... (Score:2)
Will hunger drive any species to attack another? (Score:2)
Now we can understand that (Score:2)
Damage Pre- or Postmortem? (Score:2)
Chickens? (Score:2)
Re:The Cycle (Score:2)
Re:The Cycle (Score:2)
Re:Er.. (Score:5, Funny)
Let me see if I have this straight...
You're postulating that zombie chickens used to plague the earth?!?
I find your ideas intriguing and would like to subscribe to your newsletter.
Re:But was this just a fluke? (Score:2)
So what are the odds of that happening? It's not like after 48000 years archeologists dig up everything, and deliberately choose a misleading sample to base their theories upon. Whether you are killed by a dog or not, chances are you will be crem