PDA

View Full Version : WI No Humans?


Darkest
June 16th, 2005, 10:48 PM
Great, no humans, no real history.

But I just wanted to discuss this real quick concerning with certain AH scenarios that focus on 'Empty Continents'. Any read the scenario 'Empty America'? Giant beavers, giant wolves and mammoths still flourished in the American continent.

But what about other continents? How would animal and (to a lesser extent) plant-life change? Would the terrain/climate be different at all (Sahara/ Australia might not be as much of a desert)?

If you can, respond with all 7 continents and what might have changed if humans never came to evolve and occupy them.

sbegin
June 16th, 2005, 10:53 PM
Great, no humans, no real history.

But I just wanted to discuss this real quick concerning with certain AH scenarios that focus on 'Empty Continents'. Any read the scenario 'Empty America'? Giant beavers, giant wolves and mammoths still flourished in the American continent.

But what about other continents? How would animal and (to a lesser extent) plant-life change? Would the terrain/climate be different at all (Sahara/ Australia might not be as much of a desert)?

If you can, respond with all 7 continents and what might have changed if humans never came to evolve and occupy them.
OK, no humans - how about other primates? When exactly is the change occuring? In Africa, there were many groups of primates competing, which led to many groups of hominids developing at the same time. The branch from which homo sapiens developed out-competed the others in our history, but if they are not there, other hominids will take over. History repeats itself?

Norman
June 16th, 2005, 10:56 PM
More large hairy animals would abound. THere is pretty solid evidence to suggest that early man killed off a number of species in Europe and the Americas.

NomadicSky
June 17th, 2005, 01:40 AM
No way around it without us there would be something as smart as humanity should be
Cromags maybe?

Mike Stearns
June 17th, 2005, 02:02 AM
No way around it without us there would be something as smart as humanity should be
Cromags maybe?


Possibly. Maybe we are replaced Neanderthals?

NomadicSky
June 17th, 2005, 02:12 AM
Cromags are a stupid idea anyway
sliders really sucked I can't believe every fucking world they slid into had the same fucking history as our world untill you get to those rulled by the cromags
Cromags were such a stupid idea

Count Dearborn
June 17th, 2005, 03:50 AM
The Great Apes inherit the earth.

Hermanubis
June 17th, 2005, 03:52 AM
How would a world were humanity never evolved be that different then the world before there were any humans?

Forum Lurker
June 17th, 2005, 04:32 AM
It depends on how long you go with it.

rewster
June 17th, 2005, 04:32 AM
How would a world were humanity never evolved be that different then the world before there were any humans?

It would be thousands of years older?

If you can, respond with all 7 continents and what might have changed if humans never came to evolve and occupy them.

Antartica: still icy.
Australia: similar to pre-colonization era, but with bigger kangaroos and other giant marsupials
South America: Similar
North America: many more big mammals, likely. short faced bear, sabertooth cat, horses, camels, musk ox, etc. perhaps pygmie mastadons/mammoths or even full sized ones.
Europe, Asia: Cave bear, wooly rhino, and the loveliest of all was the unicorn
Africa: er... they already have big animals there.

Other than megafauna that didn't go extinct, there'd be lots less polution, desertification (unless elephants did it) deforestation, etc.

Archangel Michael
June 17th, 2005, 05:32 AM
Can anybody say "Kzinti"?

Dave Howery
June 17th, 2005, 04:57 PM
The Great Apes inherit the earth.
no, apes are actually rather fragile and poor survivors, being tied to specific rain forest regions... the main reason all of them are teetering on the verge of extinction is loss of habitat. I think the world will belong to some kind of advanced squirrel or raccoon... think of it, they have dexterous paws, are fairly intelligent to start with....

Midgard
June 17th, 2005, 05:01 PM
no, apes are actually rather fragile and poor survivors, being tied to specific rain forest regions... the main reason all of them are teetering on the verge of extinction is loss of habitat. I think the world will belong to some kind of advanced squirrel or raccoon... think of it, they have dexterous paws, are fairly intelligent to start with....

The Raccoon Empire?

Hermanubis
June 17th, 2005, 05:06 PM
The Raccoon Empire?
Its full of Bandits…

Count Dearborn
June 18th, 2005, 12:30 AM
I could see felines, or even a new age of dinos.

rewster
June 18th, 2005, 02:11 AM
Cats are antisocial. Dinos would not have become unextinct. Apes may be "fragile" but their descendants are us. They could have easily had another us-like descendant once we were out of the picture that would be able to spread out over the planet. If not apes, then monkeys would be next most likely as they would produce a new ape-like descendant, followed by lemurs, rodents, etc.

If it isn't going to be from that progression, than it would be another social animal most likely. Wolves come to mind. Of course, wolves are the top predator and as such have less incentive to use tools to try to improve their lot. There are plenty of reasons why it was primates who produced the dominant species... social animals with dexterity, omnivores, not at the top or the bottom of the food chain, but usually smart enough to not get eaten.

Pigs are intelligent and somewhat social but lack dexterity. Wolves, as I said, lack incentive, and also dexterity to a degree. Cats are antisocial. Large herbivores use size and group tactics rather than intelligence to defend themselves. Bears have potential, but again are a bit antisocial.
Perhaps if humans, apes, and monkeys all died off, squirrels or other tree climbing rodents (or marmots, mongoose, or some other burrowing thing) would be the source of the next evolution of a social, dextrous, tool using creature. If none evolved, then the world would be "dominated" simply by the regular old top predators, like wolves, cats, bears, crocodiles, etc.

Hmm. Perhaps something evolves to knock all of mammalia off the top rungs, just as mammals superceded reptiles and birds. By logical progression, this animal would have a six chambered heart, all of their fingers would be opposable, their brain would be huge, they'd take about 40 years to reach adulthood, birth would happen through the abdominal cavity to facilitate the huge heads of the babies...

Dave Howery
June 18th, 2005, 04:34 AM
Apes may be "fragile" but their descendants are us. They could have easily had another us-like descendant once we were out of the picture that would be able to spread out over the planet. If not apes, then monkeys would be next most likely ...
Well, humans are not exactly descended from great apes.... we are separate branches on the same tree. Apes are very specialized creatures adapted to very specific environments, while hominids were always more adaptable and able to occupy more environments. Some monkeys might have been able to spread out over the planet (baboons and rhesus monkeys are pretty adaptable). Monkeys live in environments as varied as African deserts to rain forests to open bush to the Himalayan snows... chances are, without humans around, they'd spread out a lot more....

rewster
June 18th, 2005, 04:50 AM
Well, I do understand that we didn't descend from apes but rather both humans and apes descended from an earlier ancestor. Of course that's true. But that earlier ancestor was most likely a lot more similar to apes than to humans, at least until the pathways had diverged for a long time. Regardless, I still believe that gorillas, chimps, etc as specifically tuned to their habitat as they may be are more likely to evolve a descendant that dominates the earth than are cats and such.

Leej
June 18th, 2005, 01:06 PM
I heard the great apes are heading towards extinction on their own even without human interferance.
Mammoths- Mostly extinct even without us. May still survive in a few out of the way northern places.

Most likely for sentinance after the higher apes (and I suppose monkeys) is rodents. They are very smart as it is and many of them have very dexterous hands. Also they are social and many are omnivorous too. Maybe one of the larger (rabbit sized) breeds of gerbil could lead to it.

Count Dearborn
June 18th, 2005, 09:48 PM
The cephlapods, the dolphins, and the whales gain sentience. (Cephlapods: Octopi & squids)

rewster
June 18th, 2005, 11:47 PM
The octopi build enormous undersea empires. By 2005 they are starting to colonize land, having built many land-going vessels in the past, mostly to increase trade between oceans separated by isthmuses. They have domesticated sharks as companions, tuna as food, and whales to do heavy transport and have tamed some bird species. They raise huge crops of plankton to feed their whales, as well as whatever tuna eat (I'm making this up, obviously).
The joint space station was put into orbit in 73 and obviously is filled with water. Zero gravity is only slightly disorienting to the octopi as they are used to the near weightlessness of ocean life and have the water around them to propel themselves naturally on the station.
Undersea volcanic vents are used as massive forges to sustain this civilization. The octopi have never invented fire or the wheel, but they have metalworking, writing, and nuclear weapons.

Leej
June 19th, 2005, 12:07 PM
...under water civilzation doesn't work unless it began on land.

Michael
June 19th, 2005, 12:20 PM
What do you base that on?

Darkest
June 20th, 2005, 02:42 AM
Cephalopods weren't hunted by humans until the last few hundred years. If anything, without humans, the octopi would have evolved less with one less predator. Maybe in another fifty million years, but not by 2005. (Yes, I saw the Future is Wild... haha... flish... that's still pathetically funny.)

Let me revise my POD. What if the genus of homo never evolved? That messes things up considerably.

Also, if mammoths weren't hunted, could they possibly have existed in the Americas by evolving into a more elephant-like form?

Antartica: still icy.
Australia: similar to pre-colonization era, but with bigger kangaroos and other giant marsupials
South America: Similar
North America: many more big mammals, likely. short faced bear, sabertooth cat, horses, camels, musk ox, etc. perhaps pygmie mastadons/mammoths or even full sized ones.
Europe, Asia: Cave bear, wooly rhino, and the loveliest of all was the unicorn
Africa: er... they already have big animals there.

Horses and camels once lived in North America? Never knew that.

rewster
June 20th, 2005, 04:18 AM
Yep. Horses are thought to have originated in N. America and migrated into Asia. Perhaps camels did so as well, all though I never heard of that.

If no genus homo, then Australopithicus would evolve further and not be crowded out.

I'm still confused as to why undersea civilization is impossible...