Category Archives: Evolution

At the heart of Richard O. Prum's new book The Evolution of Beauty: How Darwin's Forgotten Theory of Mate Choice Shapes the Animal World and Us is a bold idea:

"... that animals are not merely subject to the extrinsic forces of ecological competition, predation, climate, geography, and so on that create natural selection. Rather, animals can play a distinct and vital role in their own evolution through their sexual and social choices."

Actually, this is Charles Darwin's idea his other idea. It's an idea so revolutionary that, unlike natural selection itself, it has been systematically misunderstood, or outright repressed, since Darwin first developed it in his other book The Descent of Man first published in 1871, 12 years after The Origin of Species.

What's so dangerous about what Prum calls "aesthetic evolution by mate choice?" Precisely the idea that it acknowledges, supposedly, real agency in the nonhuman world and that it is an agency that doesn't bottom out in facts about fitness and adaptation. It does so, Prum argues, because it's good science.

Now, it isn't exactly news to be informed that Darwin grappled with the problem of the diversity, indeed the gorgeous magnificence, of ornament in the biological world. It is well-known that he once wrote in a letter to a friend: "the sight of the feather in a peacock's tail, whenever I gaze at it, makes me sick!" For the peacock's tail is, manifestly, of no adaptive value whatsoever. It is no aid to flight, no benefit in combat with another, no enhancement of the ability to secure food or provide concealment from predators. In short, it would seem to be one (of countless many) direct counterexamples to the proposition that biological traits are adaptations, that is, that they are selected to enhance survival value or the ability to bring offspring into the world.

The thing about the peacock's tail is that the peahen likes it. It's sexy. It's beautiful to her. It is attractive. And that's why peacocks who've got it, and are able to flaunt it, are in fact more likely to have offspring. So the trait is selected. Not for its adaptive value, but by the female of the species.

And that, Prum suggests, is a very radical idea, especially in Darwin's Victorian England, but even now in a world where patriarchy is still the order of the day.

This is why, Prum argues, evolutionists have tended either to downplay sexual selection or ground it in the logic of adaptation. Perhaps the best known strategy for doing this is to hold that the reason the peahen likes the peacock's tail is that the tail is actually a signal of the peacock's fitness: Only a peacock from a good family with disposable income is going to live long enough to afford the luxury of maladaptive ornamentation. Ornament is conspicuous consumption, on this view, and females like it, so the inevitable logic runs, because they are can't resist male power.

Oy vey! That is an ugly idea and not one that casts the men who are its proponents in a particularly nice light.

It also, according to Prum, completely misses Darwin's revolutionary idea: that the aesthetic delight animals take in each other in this case, that the female takes in the male of the species is arbitrary; it is grounded in nothing more than desire and its fulfillment. It is the conscious sensory experience of animals especially female animals and it is the choices they make as a result of these experiences that are one of the governing forces of natural evolution.

Now Prum is an ornithologist, not a polemicist, and this book is a delight to read also because of the knowledge and the love of learning and teaching that it puts on display. On one point, though, I am quite certain he goes too far. In the final pages of the book he proposes to take his account of aesthetic evolution and use it to show that what the animals are doing, and have been doing, and what Mozart, Manet, van Gogh and Czanne were doing, are all of a piece: art.

The basic problem with other attempts to biologize art by grounding it in natural selection is that they end up treating art, like the peacock's tail, as just another form of conspicuous consumption. And whatever else is true, Mozart, Manet and the rest are not bling, and even if part of why we like them is that there is social prestige attached to them, it's just wildly implausible that that is the basic source of their value.

But Prum's view, as we've already seen, is very different. As I have argued in a brief discussion of Prum in my book Strange Tools, according to Prum's view, beauty is the result of a co-evolutionary process: "Changes in mating preferences have transformed the tail and changes in the tail have transformed mating preferences." Prom extends this account to human art. According to Prum, the pleasures we take in art are directly and specifically bound up with art. Not because art generates a special sort of aesthetic feeling or sensation. But because our responses to art the pleasures we take in it are are bound up with art itself by processes of co-evolution. What we like shapes art and art, in turn, shapes and reshapes what we like. Art, like attractive ornament in the biological world, is the result of a co-evolutionary processes spanning evolutionary and cultural time scales. Art, as Prum puts it, is "a form of communication that co-evolves with its own evolution."

One of the strengths of this view is that it can do justice to radical change in aesthetic evaluation. The works of an artist think Andy Warhol, for example can become beautiful; for these works can contribute to the changing of the very criteria of evaluation by which we aesthetically assess this work itself. And Prum's account also does justice to fact that it is one thing to like something, and another to find it beautiful. Beauty finding something aesthetically pleasing isn't just a matter of liking it. For Prum can allow that our pleasures and preferences get refined through evolutionary recursion. Some pleasures like the pleasures we might take in an elegant mathematical proof, for example, or in the work of the late Beethoven are only available to those who stand on the scaffolding of past communication and agreements.

This is a very powerful proposal. It brings out the distinctively cognitive, that is to say, evaluative, character of the pleasures that art affords. We don't just respond to art, we judge it.

Now, I don't doubt for a minute that peahens take pleasure in what they see, when they see a handsome peacock. Indeed, the seeing itself gives them pleasure. And I have no objection to calling that pleasure aesthetic.

But is it really true that when we look at a work of art we enjoy pleasures of that kind? Not all art is "aesthetic" in this sense. And I don't just mean Warhol and Marcel Duchamp, or even Beethoven's late quartets. The experience of art is seldom tied, in the way the peahen's gaze is tied, to lust or desire for what you are looking at. I make take pleasure when I gaze upon a Poussin landscape, but it is a pleasure that depends, pretty obviously, on the fact that neither the painting, nor anyone or anything in it, is really there. Its importance to me only shows up through my detachment from it. And when Mozart's audiences delighted in the ways he foiled their expectations of how a piece of music was supposed to be organized, they were getting his joke, understand his thought, not just, as it were, languishing in pleasurable sounds.

But I also fear that Prum's theory, as a theory of art, ends up casting the net too wide: Every artifact or social activity or technology is constrained by what we like (evaluative response) even as it offers the opportunity for us to change and update those responses (co-evolution). But art is not merely a social activity or technology even if it masquerades as such. For art always disrupts business as normal and puts the fact that we find ourselves carrying out business as normal on display. Put bluntly: The value of art does not consist in a co-evolving fit or dialog between what we make and what like, but rather in the practice of investigating and questioning and challenging such processes.

I met Prum once, a few years before his book's publication. He heard me give a lecture and we sat next to each other discussing these questions at dinner afterwards. It was a delightful encounter. I fear, however, that he might have had me, or at least those like me, in mind when he writes:

"Some aesthetic philosophers, art historians, and artists may find the recognition of myriad new biotic art forms to be more of an annoyance, or even an outrage, than a contribution to their fields."

Maybe so. But, speaking for myself anyway, it would not be because I doubt the aesthetic richness of the natural world. Or because I see reason to deny the importance of the experience of pleasure and, indeed, of something like beauty, on the part of animals. Animals are truly, in Prum's sense, aesthetic agents.

The problem is not with Prum's insistence that we say "yes" to the aesthetic lives of animals I applaud that. The problem is that, as I read him, Prum ends up saying "no" to art.

Alva No is a philosopher at the University of California, Berkeley, where he writes and teaches about perception, consciousness and art. He is the author of several books, including his latest, Strange Tools: Art and Human Nature (Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2015). You can keep up with more of what Alva is thinking on Facebook and on Twitter: @alvanoe

Read the original:

Aesthetic Evolution In The Animal World : 13.7: Cosmos And Culture ... - NPR

News item: A new Florida law allows any resident, regardless of whether he or she has children in the public school system, to instigate a formal challenge to any textbook, library book, novel, or other kind of instructional material used in a public school.

The state law channels the residents complaint to an unbiased and qualified hearing officer who is empowered to determine whether the material is accurate, objective, balanced, noninflammatory, current, and suited to student needs and their ability to comprehend the material presented.

***

Dear Unbiased and Qualified Hearing Officer:

So my cousins nephews best friends daughter tells me theres nothing about Noahs Ark in her public school textbook for Earth Science. How can this be?

Instead of filling these kids minds with nonsense about sedimentary rocks from billions of years ago (when we know the earth is only 6,000 years old!) they should be taught how theyre all here today because the 600-year-old Noah loaded all the animals two-by-two on his big ark, and thereby preserved life on Earth.

I believe without the ark, your explanation of the world fails being balanced and noninflammatory.

Which is why me and the others in the prayer circle are planning to show up for the public hearing we are entitled to under the new Instructional Materials Act passed by legislature.

Just say when.

***

Dear Unbiased and Qualified Hearing Officer:

It has come to my attention that some public school libraries in this district contain the novel Grapes of Wrath by John Steinbeck, a well-known socialist who visited the Soviet Union in 1947 and espoused biased opinions about capitalism.

By allowing students to read Steinbecks Grapes of Wrath you are exposing them to a work of art that shines a harsh light on American history and its ideals.

This is shameful, and obviously part of the school boards liberal agenda. Which is why me and others in my morning Einsteins Bagels discussion group hereby demand that unless you balance Steinbecks Grapes of Wrath in school libraries with Sean Hannitys inspiring book, Let Freedom Ring: Winning the War over Liberalism we will be requesting a public hearing.

Were not putting up with the school districts Saul Alinsky tactics!

***

Dear Unbiased and Qualified Hearing Officer:

As the owner of a piece of property I maintain in Florida for tax purposes and the proud lobbyist of our nations most historically important source of energy generation, I am dismayed to learn that public school children are being brainwashed by Earth Day every year.

Through course materials and something called the Florida Green School Network, public school students are being taught to feel less than enthusiastic about harnessing the awesome power of coal. We find the constant praise for renewable energy to be subjective, not objective, as your teaching standards are required to be.

Pounding the importance of solar, wind and other renewables into impressionable young minds while ignoring the vital contributions of clean coal, extracted from dynamited mountain tops, is both un-American and unbalanced.

Which is why my friends and I in the coal industry, are hereby demanding that all course materials relating to Earth Day be suspended until and unless Floridas public schools start celebrating a yearly and counter-balancing Clean Coal Day.

Please schedule a public hearing on this, preferably not during Black Lung Awareness Month.

***

Dear Unbiased and Qualified Hearing Officer:

So my neighbor tells me that his childs middle school has morning announcements that do the weather. And that one day in May, the student weather-person remarked that it was really hot outside, and that maybe its the climate change.

As you know, climate change is a hoax perpetrated by the Chinese on America. (See enclosed presidential tweet.)

Me and my friends on the InfoWars chat group feel that children in Floridas public schools may be exposed to school materials that support the view that climate change is real, which is obviously designed to turn them into sheeple during a government false flag operation.

Please investigate this immediately and schedule a public hearing at a time when none of us are working which just so happens to be anytime right now.

See more here:

Florida's evolution to complainer's paradise for public schools - MyPalmBeachPost

If anyone still doubts the staying power of Kendall and Kylie Jenner, the two youngest members of the Kardashian-Jenner clan have hit a milestone that many other brands have struggled to reach amid the troubled retail climate.

We have a few years now under our belt and definitely feel like weve hit our stride, said Kylie, 19, who earned the distinction of being the youngest person on Forbes latest ranking of the highest-paid celebrities in the world, with earnings of $41 million. Kendall, 21, is currently one of the top-earning models, according to Forbes, with earnings of $10 million in 2016 included in her estimated $36 million net worth.

The contemporary line Kendall + Kylie was launched two years ago this month and wholesales to 390 doors in the U.S. and 975 worldwide, including Neiman Marcus, Nordstrom, Saks Fifth Avenue, Bloomingdales, Shopbop, Revolve, Selfridges, Printemps, I.T. Hong Kong and Luisa Via Roma. Retail prices range from $50 to $495, with the majority of pieces selling for under $195.

Last year the sisters introduced an #OnlyatNM capsule collection and have also expanded into handbags and eyewear since their initial foray into apparel, swim and shoes.

Here, the Jenners share what theyve learned about the fashion business, where they get their design inspiration and how they like to shop. As for what categories are next for the K + K line, they wont say but jewelry, activewear or fragrance could be next.

WWD: How has the look of the collection evolved over the past two years?

Kylie: We have learned what the customer wants and what she gravitates towards through trial and error. We love to push the envelope with adding statement and novelty styles that in the past we would have shied away from and seeing how our customer has loved those items has been amazing. Now we love to offer our core basics and then sprinkle in the fun statement items.

Kendall: I agree with Kylie the foundation of the collection remains tried and true basics with a twist. We have fun reinventing these styles every season and learning what our customer is coming to us for. Creating the statement pieces and having our customers love them is like icing in the cake.

WWD: Who or what other style inspirations do you use for the collection?

Kylie: I love pulling from vintage shops and old design house books.

Kendall: I always have our mood boards, and love pulling from classic fashion photographers for color and print inspiration.

WWD: In what ways have you broadened or deepened the assortment? Or have you edited it down?

Kylie: In the beginning we didnt know what our customer would love from us so we kind of gave her a little bit of everything and then watched to see how she reacted. Seeing our bodysuits and dresses take off was amazing. Focusing our collection after that has been fun because our customer loves what we love.

Kendall: We have focused our rtw assortment on everyday basics and added a few covetable fashion pieces. Our accessories were created to complete the lifestyle and look and to create newness and novelty each season, giving our customer more options on how to pull looks together and keep them looking fresh and trend relevant.

WWD: What are your bestsellers?

Kylie: Our bodysuits, knit dresses and sneakers have been best sellers since we launched them.

Kendall: Yes! Our bodysuits, backpacks and more forward eyewear have been extremely successful.

WWD: How have your personal styles evolved over the last two years?

Kylie: I definitely feel more comfortable with who I am and where I am in my life, and love taking risks and putting unexpected styles and colors together to create my own look. I love being comfortable in everything I wear.

Kendall: I have been exposed to so many amazing design houses and brands, I have definitely learned how to pull pieces together to create a very polished look with everyday classics and statement pieces.

WWD: Are there things you wear now that you didnt before? Are there new looks or moods you are into? Or do you stay pretty consistent?

Kylie: I am not consistent and love mixing things up and pulling inspiration from different icons and eras.

Kendall: I started a mood board in my closet that I continually add to. Things that inspire me, looks that I love from different eras that I reference for inspiration. I take more risks and feel more comfortable putting styles together in an unexpected way.

WWD: In what ways have you incorporated that into the collection?

Kylie: Our focus has always been on creating comfortable basics with a twist. Putting unexpected details on an everyday top or dress, and styling it back to something fun. I pull inspiration from my closet to reference past favorite looks.

Kendall: Our names are on the label, and we strive to constantly create and design styles that we ourselves want to wear and pair with statement pieces and vintage from our own closets. We have been very consistent with our vision of creating wearable and fun everyday classics.

WWD: What is the most important thing youve learned, business-wise, from the experience?

Kylie: Creating a brand takes time and the key is listening to our customers and creating newness each season in categories she loves from us.

Kendall: Each category we introduce has its learning curve based on us taking the time to develop the line and then, most importantly, seeing what our customer gravitates towards. Then its back to the drawing board to tweak and perfect our brand formula.

WWD: What has it taught you about yourself, personally?

Kylie: To listen to my instincts.

Kendall: Trust that taking risks is worth it and if we love it, so will our fans.

WWD: What has been the biggest challenge in launching the line?

Kendall: When Kylie and I launched this line we were so young and also still figuring out our own personal style and what we loved so building a brand and trying to figure out who our K+K customer was and what she wanted on top of that was definitely a challenge. Now looking back on the other side and knowing what we personally love along with what our customer wants is amazing. Now we get to combine the two and create styles that she comes back to us for each season.

WWD: Whats been the most surprising thing about the business to you?

Kendall: We remind ourselves never to get comfortable! The fashion industry is changing now more than ever and the key is to have your eyes wide open and to have fun creating.

WWD: What differences do you see between the brick and mortar business and the e-comm business for your collection? Is one growing more quickly than the other

Kylie: E-comm is the future of how people in our generation shop. Creating experiences and covetable items online helps to create and build excitement and give customers a reason to continually shop.

Kendall: I completely agree. Dont get me wrong I love going in to stores to touch, feel and try on product, but there is something to be said about being able to test and try new ideas and strategies out online.

WWD: What are your favorite Instagram accounts to follow for style inspiration?

Kylie: Honestly, I find the most random accounts and pull for inspiration. Everyday beautiful people that I see and love their style become some of the most influential for me.

Kendall: Im more of a Pinterest mood board kind of girl so I pull most of our inspiration from there versus Instagram.

ALSO

The trendiest shoe of the summer comes from SoCal skate parks, not New York runways

Model Georgia May Jagger rides the waves into a new Volcom fashion collaboration

Barbie, are you ready for man-bun ken and Dad-bod Ken?

Read the original post:

Kendall Jenner, Kylie Jenner reflect on Kendall + Kylie line's evolution - Los Angeles Times

Corporate team building, which for years brought co-workers together in disdain for activities such as trust falls and ropes courses, has elevated its game.

Escape rooms, "Survivor"-style competitions and improv training are bringing a new level of excitement and perhaps effectiveness to the once-dreaded outings, meant to bond employees and fortify roles outside the confines of their daily cubicle-farm existence.

A recent excursion to a Chicago escape room by a team of 15 United Airlines employees proved challenging, surprising and successful in shaking up the status quo, with an intern leading his managers to freedom and participants energized in the process.

Whether a simulated jail break transfers to an improved workplace, however, remains an open question.

"It's not clear yet what are the benefits of it, other than people love it because it's something outside of work," said Eduardo Salas, an organizational psychology professor at Rice University in Houston. "But when they go back, the same conditions are there, so the long-term effects of team building are unknown."

Terrence Antonio James/Chicago Tribune

United Airlines employees, including Lizzie Cristobal, standing right, and Rhonda Crenshaw, seated right, take part in a corporate team-building exercise June 29, 2017, as they work together to try to free themselves from an escape room at a PanIQ Room in Chicagos Fulton Market district.

United Airlines employees, including Lizzie Cristobal, standing right, and Rhonda Crenshaw, seated right, take part in a corporate team-building exercise June 29, 2017, as they work together to try to free themselves from an escape room at a PanIQ Room in Chicagos Fulton Market district. (Terrence Antonio James/Chicago Tribune)

A series of exercises meant to encourage cooperation, goodwill and, ultimately, increased productivity, team building has long been fodder for corporate satire. The quintessential team-building activity was the trust fall: closing your eyes and falling backward into the arms of your colleagues, secure in the knowledge that they have your back or not.

While team-building facilitators proliferated and business was brisk, the old-school outings rarely hit the mark, according to experts.

"It really didn't improve their performance," said Wendy Bedwell, an assistant professor of organizational psychology at the University of South Florida.

In recent years, team building has evolved in more creative and engaging ways, Bedwell said, amping up both the fun quotient and the potential benefits to the workplace. Activities include solving simulated crime scenes, building bicycles for charity and competing in "Survivor"-inspired challenges, among others.

Improv training is also popular as a corporate team-building activity, with Second City Works, the business consulting arm of the Chicago-based comedy troupe, a logical player in that arena.

"We've built a pretty significant business," Kelly Leonard, executive director of insights and applied improvisation at Second City Works, where a half-day team building workshop starts at about $12,000.

Escape rooms, however, have emerged as perhaps the go-to team-building activity. In a typical scenario, six teammates are locked in a themed room, where they must work together to find clues and solve puzzles to escape within 60 minutes.

The activity can be both intellectual and physical, and for those who are not claustrophobic, apparently a lot of fun. It also provides some actual team-building benefit, Bedwell said.

"Anything that really requires people to work together, think critically and solve a problem is going to have more of a benefit than just standing in a forest and falling backwards and having everyone catch you," Bedwell said.

PanIQ Room, a Hungarian company that opened a Chicago outlet in March 2016, is in the basement of an industrial three-story brick building in the Fulton Market district.

The facility consists of three rooms dubbed "Infection," "Prison" and, in homage to Chicago, "Mob," where participating groups generally pay between $129 and $189 for a one-hour escape.

Camille Wheeler, 36, of Mount Prospect, senior manager in contact center applications for United Airlines, recently funded a PanIQ Room outing for herself and 14 members of her team, who split into groups to tackle the three rooms simultaneously.

"I wanted to get the team out and do some team-building exercises in a new and different way," Wheeler said.

The groups dug into the task, connecting via walkie-talkies for occasional clues from the PanIQ Room managers, who monitored their respective efforts from a control room video screen.

Terrence Antonio James/Chicago Tribune

United Airlines employees search for clues in a corporate team-building exercise June 29, 2017, as they work together to try to get out of an escape room at PanIQ Room in Chicagos Fulton Market district.

United Airlines employees search for clues in a corporate team-building exercise June 29, 2017, as they work together to try to get out of an escape room at PanIQ Room in Chicagos Fulton Market district. (Terrence Antonio James/Chicago Tribune)

Only one group emerged within the allotted time, escaping from the Infection room in about 45 minutes to trade high-fives and war stories.

Leading the way was Justin Booms, 30, an intern from Bloomington, Ind., who took command from his more tenured co-workers, having previously navigated a different escape room.

"Given my previous experience and with everybody thrown into the same boat, there's no hierarchy whoever sees something first can kind of lead," said Booms, who now lives in the Lincoln Square neighborhood.

With no customers scheduled for the next hour, Heidi Blanc-Blum, unit manager for PanIQ Room Chicago, gave the other two teams some extra time to escape, with both eventually making their way to freedom.

"Prison is really hard," declared Pam Hannan, of Palatine, a 22-year veteran of the applications team, upon emerging from her cell and plopping down on the lobby couch for a drink of water.

rchannick@chicagotribune.com

Twitter @RobertChannick

Link:

From trust falls to escape rooms: The evolution of corporate team building - Chicago Tribune

A A

There is much value to be found in spending a summer scooping ice cream or stocking grocery store shelves or picking fruit. Generations of American teens have gleaned life lessons and work experience from traditional seasonal jobs, learning responsibility and money management and the all-important skill of customer service.

Anybody who has worked in the retail industry, for example, can share stories of unreasonable patrons and the difficulty of embracing the idea that the customer is always right a mantra that reportedly dates to 1909 and a London department store.

Yet, while we agree with the benefits of summer employment for teens, we also recognize the changing economy that has altered employment options for young workers. According to a recent report from the Associated Press, 57 percent of Americans ages 16 to 19 were employed in July 1986. That percentage remained above 50 percent until 2002, but by last year it had dipped to 36 percent.

One major factor is that jobs traditionally taken by teens often are filled by adults these days. Experts point to growth in the number of low-skilled immigrants, a population that works later in life, and increases to the minimum wage as factors that reduce seasonal employment for teens. Each of those boosts the number of adults seeking jobs formerly filled by young workers. A study by Drexel University found that in 2000-01, teens accounted for 12 percent of retail workers; by 2016, that number was 7 percent. In the restaurant and hotel industries, the percentage of teen employees fell from 21 percent to 16 percent.

Indeed, there is a tendency to lament this trend. As the Associated Press report details: Economists and labor market observers worry that falling teen employment will deprive them of valuable work experience and of opportunities to encounter people of different ethnic, social and cultural backgrounds. Locally, Sharon Pesut of Partners in Careers told The Columbian in May: Where those jobs used to be plentiful, those are now few and far between. The kids really need to do their research. Its not as simple as dropping off a r?sum? anymore.

At the same time, it is important to acknowledge that fewer and fewer teens are seeking summer jobs. No, this is not the result of a lazy generation that would rather sit on the couch and play video games; it is the result of a generation that is busier than ever. Teens are more inclined to seek summer educational opportunities, fill their schedules with sports, volunteer for r?sum?-building endeavors, travel with their families, or attend summer camps. As Derek Thompson wrote last month for The Atlantic: Education is to blame, rather than indolence. The percent of recent high-school graduates enrolled in college both two-year and four-year has grown by 25 percentage points.

Thompson also details a rise in unpaid internships, in which teens are working but are not counted among the labor force.

As with any economic trend, the issue of teen employment is complex, and it was exacerbated by the Great Recession of the past decade. The recovery has come largely in the sector of low-skilled, low-wage jobs, increasing the likelihood of adults filling jobs formerly open to youngsters.

Summer employment for teens is, indeed, valuable. But the loss of summer jobs does not necessarily reflect a loss of the American work ethic or a changing generation. Instead, it reflects unavoidable alterations in the nations economic structure.

Continue reading here:

In Our View: Evolution of Summer Jobs - The Columbian

Male baboons have been observed carrying out long-term abuse of their female partners as a means of control and to increase mating success.

The discoverythe result of a four-year research projectprovides more evidence to support the idea that sexual intimidation among humans has evolutionary roots, potentially helping explain why domestic abuse is so frequent in humans today.

Researchers from the Zoological Society of London, U.K., and CNRS in France monitored a population of chacma baboons in Namibia to find out whether male aggression towards females was a type of sexual coercion, where females were intimidated into mating rather than being directly forced to.

Tech & Science Emails and Alerts- Get the best of Newsweek Tech & Science delivered to your inbox

"When I was in the field and observing the baboons, I often noticed that males were directing unprovoked attacks or chases toward females in oestrus [in heat]," study author Alice Baniel said in a statement. "They also maintained close proximity and formed a strong social bond with one particular cycling female, from the beginning of their cycle until the end.

Researchers monitored the baboons for attacks and sexual activity in the 20 minutes that followed and found there was no increase in mating directly after violent attacks, but further analysis revealed another trend. Their findings are published in the journal Current Biology.

A male baboon attacking a female. Scientists found males use long-term sexual intimidation to increase their mating success. Alecia Carter

Over four years, researchers found fertile females suffered more aggression from males than those that were pregnant or lactating. Male aggression was a major source of injury to fertile females. Males that were more aggressive towards one particular female were found to have had more mating success than those that were less aggressive.

Instead of forcing the females to mate after violence, the males appear to be using the attacks as a means of long-term sexual intimidation that, over time, encourages the female to stick with the male aggressor.

Elise Huchard, another author on the study, tells Newsweek the patterns seen appear to work as a mating strategy in two waysit discourages the female from leaving the proximity of the male, while also inciting her to accept his mating facilitation.

Similar long-term sexual intimidation has previously been observed in chimpanzees and may well be present in other primates. "Because sexual intimidationwhere aggression and matings are not clustered in timeis discreet, it may easily go unnoticed," Baniel said. "It may therefore be more common than previously appreciated in mammalian societies, and constrain female sexuality even in some species where they seem to enjoy relative freedom."

Female baboon with her newborn baby. Alice Baniel

Because both chimpanzees and baboons are relatives of humans, this behavior being present in all three could indicate it has a long evolutionary history, Baniel said.

Sexual intimidation was first described in chimpanzees a few years ago and now weve got evidence of sexual intimidation in baboons, Huchard says: This suggests sexual intimidation might be widespread in social primates, so it opens the possibility for an evolutionary origin of human sexual intimidation.

But its just a possibility. It doesnt mean it has an evolutionary basis. All we can say at the moment is that its now well documented in animalsanimals that are closely related, so its not impossible to think that human sexual intimidation has a long evolutionary history.

She says they will next need to find more evidence of this behavior in other mammals to pinpoint the systems involved. That would shed more light on human sexual intimidation and whether its an evolutionary trait, she says.

Original post:

Evolution of Sexual Intimidation: Male Baboons Beat up Females to Increase Mating Success - Newsweek

Would humanity survive if the Sun somehow escaped the orbit of the Milky Way and broke free? originally appeared on Quora: the place to gain and share knowledge, empowering people to learn from others and better understand the world.

Answer by Richard Muller, Professor of Physics at UC Berkeley, author of Now, The Physics of Time, on Quora:

If we gently left the Milky Way today, the main difference would be the absence of starry nights. But if it had happened a billion years ago, the evolution of life on our planet would have been dramatically different.

Without the Milky Way, we would have had few cometary impacts on the Earth. Comets have stable elliptical orbits, and in the first few hundred million years of the solar system, any comet with an orbit that intersected the inner solar system would crash (or be kicked out by Jupiter) and be wiped out. This would happen before life began.

Remarkably, most cometary impacts occur because of the local tidal force of the Milky Way galaxy. (That is a theory first published by Donald Morris and myself, and now generally accepted.) The next most common cause is gravitational perturbation from passing stars. If we were out of the Milky Way, neither would happen. Without either effect, there would not have been catastrophic impacts and evolution might have been much simpler. And less interesting.

We now think that cometary impacts played a huge role in evolution. Take the simple case of the dinosaurs. They were powerful and intelligent, and far better suited to survival than the tiny mammals that lived along side. But then came the cometary impact, blocking sunlight and killing the plants that were the foundation of life.

The large animals could not survive. Indeed, neither could most of the smaller ones. Probably 99.99% of all individuals were killed. But the little animals were more abundant, and some of them made it through. The only dinosaurs which survived were indeed the mobile seed-eaters those that didnt depend on fresh plants. We now call those survivors the birds. Over a few thousand years, the little creatures spread exponentially (like the famous rabbits in Australia) and repopulated the Earth.

Remarkably, being big helps you in competition with other species. But being small helps you to endure catastrophe.

Evolution is driven by survival of the fittest, but what makes for fitness? We once thought it mean competition with other creatures both peers and microscopic organisms that are trying to eat us. The discovery of the role of impacts added something new. To survive for millions of years, species must be fit to survive catastrophe. The small and numerous ones have an advantage. But so too do the intelligent ones. (Good news for humans.) Without the occasional catastrophic interruption of the ecology that took place during the evolution of life, there might not have been sufficient advantage to have a calorie consuming big brain.

The world would have had a different history of life. It is fun to speculate on how it would have been different. Would dinosaurs still be at the top of the food chain? Or maybe it would be something simpler, like worms. Or trilobites.

This question originally appeared on Quora - the place to gain and share knowledge, empowering people to learn from others and better understand the world. You can follow Quora on Twitter, Facebook, and Google+. More questions:

The Morning Email

Wake up to the day's most important news.

Read the rest here:

The Whole Milky Way Galaxy Shaped the Evolution of Life on Earth - HuffPost

Wed., July 5, 2017, 7 p.m.

When I was a kid, my Uncle Pat and Aunt Molly would gather up nieces and nephews for a camping/fishing extravaganza to the San Poil River right after school let out for the summer. We would arrive early, erect a huge canvas tent, roll out the goose down sleeping bags and go fishing.

Afterwards, we would build a fire and Aunt Molly would cook the small trout for dinner. The adventure was completed with marshmallows roasted on willow sticks before crawling, sticky fingers and all, into our beds.

I loved camping back then, and would continue the tradition years later with my own family. My grown children still talk about these excursions the day we saw a bear, the day Jennifer caught the enormous sucker, the day Dad lost his bathing suit in a poetic cartwheel off a slalom ski on Priest Lake.

Sadly, when my children hit their teens they decided Mom and Dad werent cool, and slumber parties with their friends replaced family camping trips. Without their enthusiastic presence, camping wasnt as fun anymore.

I thus went many years without it, but in my 50s, I bought a camper for my pickup. There were still a lot of places I needed to explore that werent close to a motel and a caf, and it seemed logical I should be able to carry my bed and groceries with me.

I used the camper solely for these hunting and fishing and gathering adventures until recently, when a lady friend mentioned she would enjoy a real camping trip.

Real camping? I questioned.

Yes, real camping, she answered sweetly. Wood smoke. Sleeping under the stars. A pine-scented forest. The songs of crickets and frogs. Water over polished pebbles and the wind in the trees. I think she had been taking a poetry workshop at the community college.

I told her she could look out the window of my camper if she wanted to see the stars. And though it went against all my instincts to be camping just for the sake of camping, I knew a spot by a river not too far from home that would offer all the natural wonders she craved from the comfort of my camper. It was a poor compromise, she said, but she signed on.

That night I grilled salmon on a hardwood fire alongside the river. We had wine and chocolate very romantic. Then, the mosquitoes and black flies came out hungry hordes which hadnt fed in months They landed anywhere there was exposed flesh. I got out the bug dope and doused us with a bitter-tasting chemical, but the evening was ruined and we retreated to the camper reeking of insect repellant.

The lady pulled the sheet over her head, and was soon breathing deeply. I, on the other hand, was swatting at the 10,000 shrilly whining mosquitoes that had found their way in.

When I started the truck at midnight, the lady awoke. I take it this means no morning coffee over a wood fire, she whined as I shoved the grill back into the camper and told her we were leaving.

That is correct I said kindly. If we were fishing or hunting or picking mushrooms or huckleberries tomorrow, Id tolerate the bugs. But not just so we can say we went camping. When we get back to my place, Ill park down by the creek in the meadow. You can stay there as long as you want. Build a fire if you so desire. If you need anything, Ill be in the house.

Follow this link:

Alan Liere: A camping evolution - The Spokesman-Review

Aston Villa announce the signing of John Terry, left, and Bryan Robson joins Manchester United in 1981. Composite: Getty Images, AVFC

These are familiar times at Aston Villa. They have, after all, started July by signing on a free transfer a medal-strewn Premier League legend in his late 30s, once considered perhaps the finest player in his position in the land but more recently used to openly pondering the possibility of retirement, and announced the arrival to the world in rather humiliating style.

So far, so 2001. It was 16 years ago next week that John Gregory invited reporters to Villa Park to meet his new goalkeeper, Peter Schmeichel. The Dane, at 37 a year older than John Terry is now, was scheduled to pose for photographers while holding the clubs new goalkeeping shirt in then-traditional style but when it was brought out, bearing his name and the No1, he took one look and turned away.

I think well have to chat about that, he told his new manager, choosing instead to brandish the standard outfield kit. Peter just wont wear grey, Gregory later explained. Hes like a boxer. Everything in his corner has got to be just right.

The kit manufacturers, Diadora, were bemused. I am amazed that one guy can dictate to the club what he wears, said their managing director, Andrew Ronnie. We worked with David James on the fabric, colour and design and everything was fine. We put a lot of effort into it. David was happy but then he left for West Ham. Peter joined and now we have a problem.

Perhaps this was the day that the foundations of the traditional transfer-unveiling ceremony started to crumble. A photo opportunity with the nearest item of club-branded merchandise will no longer do: modern footballers are complex characters with high wages and higher expectations, most of whom would not deign to look at a 9.99 acrylic weave scarf, let alone brandish it with pride for all posterity.

They also bring with them an expanding coterie of agents and advisers. Bryan Robson signed his first contract at Manchester United on the pitch shortly before the start of a match against Wolverhampton Wanderers in October 1981, perched upon a wobbly wooden folding chair with his new manager to his right, the chairman to his left and the club secretary stood behind, helpfully pointing to the bit that needed his signature. It is a scene that viewed today appears as outdated as Robsons tight perm; any modern restaging would require, at the very least, more chairs, better haircuts, a great deal more paperwork and several bad-tempered arguments about image rights.

Clubs have always used the very latest communication technology to announce new signings, it is just that between the 1890s and the 1990s it changed little, with teams frustratingly restricted to the use of newspapers, photographers and the occasional town crier. Suddenly, however, their horizons have expanded. Villa announced Terrys arrival by posting on Twitter a conversation on Snapchat, thereby simultaneously ticking two social-media boxes and keeping at arms length journalists who might overhear embarrassing conversations about the ugliness of their kit.

Last week Roma unveiled Lorenzo Pellegrini by posting a video of the player using his Roma-kitted virtual self to score a virtual goal on Fifa. Last month Liverpool published a video of a thumb scrolling through a Twitter stream of posts beseeching them to sign Mohamed Salah, which turned out to be Salahs very own digit. A few days later the world learned that Crystal Palace had finally found a new manager when they posted footage of white smoke emerging, Vatican-style, from the chimney of a local Caribbean takeaway.

The popular reaction has been to mock these clubs for their novelty efforts, but after generations of cut-and-paste shirt-brandishings any innovation is surely to be celebrated, even if we still look forward to someone coming up with a good one. For years it took no thought whatsoever to organise a player unveiling, and now clubs dedicate at least a few minutes consideration and a bit of video editing to it, which is a shuffle in the right direction.

The great advance will be to professionalise and, inevitably, commercialise the experience, treating sold-out stadiums and audiences of millions via global cinema simulcasts to choreography, showtunes, fireworks both literal and figurative, and inevitable guest appearances from David Guetta. What is for certain is that unlike the monochrome efforts of yesteryear, the unveilings of the future will be anything but grey, which is something Schmeichel, at least, will be grateful for.

View original post here:

WhatsApp, Fifa and takeaways: the perpetual evolution of unveilings - The Guardian

Turkey has historically prided itself on being a secular state.

Amendments to the constitution during the 1920s and 1930s separated religion and government policy.

Since that time, debates about the role of religion in public life have continued in the Muslim-majority country.

Evolution in Turkish schools

In a recent decision, the government banned the teaching of evolution in high school.

This action means that Turkish students entering high school will no longer learn about the theory of evolution. The theory comes from the work of Charles Darwin, the famed British naturalist.

His ideas are considered to be the basis for the scientific study of life on Earth.

The government said its decision was not about teaching Islam. Instead, officials said high school students "don't have the necessary scientific background and information-based context to understand the theory of evolution.

Alpaslan Durmus is the head of the education ministry's curriculum board. Durmus said members of the board thought the theory should be taught to higher-level students.

"We tried to leave out some of the controversial issues from our students' agenda," Durmus added.

Critics of the decision

Critics of the decision say that Turkish children will not get the education they need.

Scholar Alaattin Dincer told VOA "The Turkish education system is very weak concerning the fundamental sciences. Both in domestic and international exams; be it math, physics, chemistry and biology, our students have very low passing grade percentages. It is actually terribly low."

Dincer added that the next generation of Turkish students should learn about evolution and Darwin. "If you raise them [students] without learning those subjects, how can you argue that we are a scientifically enlightened country that can produce the scientists of the future?" Dincer asked.

This week, Turkey's main teachers' union, Egitim Sen, said it was taking the issue to court.

Mehmet Balik is the chairperson of Egitim Sen. He criticized the decision to ban the teaching of evolution and a new policy that requires schools to have a prayer room. These actions "destroy the principle of secularism and the scientific principles of education," he said.

Other critics say the government's ban on teaching evolution is part of a plan by President Erdogan to push an Islamic identity onto Turkish society.

International perspectives on the teaching of evolution

Similar debates about the teaching of evolution have taken place in other countries, including the United States.

In the late 1990s, the state of Kansas famously banned the teaching of evolution in public schools. The School Board reversed its decision in early 2001 amid public criticism.

In the mid-2000s, at least 16 U.S. states were considering changes to the teaching of evolution in schools.

Religion and science

Although critics say religion and science are at odds, some Islamic theologians say evolution and Islam can exist together quite easily.

Ihsan Eliacik is a Muslim theologian. He told VOA, "If evolution is scientific truth that exists in nature, nobody can stand against itBesides, by my religious faith, scientific truth means religious truth. The two are not contradictory."

I'm Jonathan Evans.

Kevin Enochs reported on this story for VOA News. John Russell adapted the story with additional materials for Learning English. Hai Do was the editor. _____________________________________________________________

secular adj. not overtly or specifically religious

evolution n. the process by which changes in plants and animals happen over time

naturalist n. a person who studies plants and animals as they live in nature

curriculum -- n. the courses that are taught by a school, college, etc.

fundamental adj. forming or relating to the most important part of something

controversial adj. relating to or causing much discussion, disagreement, or argument: likely to produce controversy

theologian -- n. a person who is an expert on theology

View original post here:

Turkey Bans the Teaching of Evolution in Public Schools - Voice of America