- cross-posted to:
- collapse@sopuli.xyz
- cross-posted to:
- collapse@sopuli.xyz
His answer is the octopus. What say you?
You must log in or register to comment.
Crabs. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carcinisation
Multiple different species have evolved into crabs. Apparently it’s kind of a mystery.
I think they’re the perfect organism.
I’m only 1/4 joking.
But they
- Have extremely short lifespan so a limited capacity to learn (1-2 years)
- Don’t raise their offspring, in fact after mating/laying eggs they naturally die, so no knowledge sharing
- Are extremely solitary and don’t have social bonds or do anything socially, so little communication/passing of knowledge
On top of that, they might not even survive the CO2 and consequent ocean acidification. If humans were to get eradicated by some super plague, then octopi might still stand a chance. However, the points you mentioned mean that they are playing this game in hard mode when it comes to winning by intelligence.
I worked as an intern at a lab studying octopus vulgaris.
They are extremely sensitive to all sorts of things in the water. Keeping them well is very difficult. Although I would imagine if there are big but gradual changes in water environment, they would have a chance of adapting faster due to short life cycles and the fact that mating creates hundreds of thousands of eggs.
If we assume that they somehow survive all the way to the very moment when humans get a permanent ban to the Earth Server, then the changes should be gradual enough after that. The bad news is, humans love to play this game by recklessly exploiting every bug and glitch, so rapid changes (in evolutionary scale) are the norm.
See also: Peppered moth evolution
I’m not even convinced that intelligence is a requirement to be the dominant species. Intelligence is so expensive that nature rarely ever selects for it.
Trilobytes did pretty damn well for a hell of a lot longer than we have so far. I think we need a stronger working definition of “dominant” in order to judge any candidates.
But the reason he gives for them becoming the dominant species is their intelligence.
Sure well if that is a precondition of the conversation, we can talk about it. But IMO it may be a faulty assumption to go on.
I’ll bet 90% of people commenting on the internet immediately thought: “octopi!”
Twelve ponderous paragraphs into the article, this brilliant scientists finally says: “octopi.”
Eighteen paragraphs of throat clearing to get to the point of the title.
It’s the new norm. Worse when it’s video format and, thus, hard to skim.
Sponsorblock and YT’s “relevant metrics” or chapters are life savers lol.
It’s unlikely an aquatic species can achieve technological breakthroughs needed to spread like humans can. It would be very difficult for them to build fires, smelt metal, and create the advances based off of those tools.
While they can be extremely smart and adaptable, it’s difficult to imagine how a species like that could develop machines.
Sure, there’s possible ways around it, like natural vents and geothermal power, but why would they utilize these resources without a benefit like cooking?
Shells or coral could serve as early tools, but (just my opinion) I feel it’s a little human-centric to assume fire and metallurgy are required to progress. Just because we did it that way, doesn’t mean another species would have to.
Fire and tools were what we needed to become the dominant species, as they gave us power to take down the larger megafauna.
whatever comes after us will have to make due with whatever crap we leave behind. There wont be enough natural resources left for them to use if they want to do anything larger scale or advanced
A symbiosis between octopi and dolphins 🤔
Every RPG has taught me that coral swords are a thing.
Crows! Oh. Are we taking guesses? Dogs! Any creatures who have lived close with humans? Cockroaches!
I’d bet on racoons or some primate. They aren’t going to get far though until there’s enough continental subduction to reveal fresh metal and fossil fuel deposits, and that could take a very, very long time.
My best guess? Probably another primate. Bonobos and Chimpanzees seem like the ideal candidate to take over the husk of Human civilization the quickest. Another species might have a shot, but then it’s a question of how many millions of years it’s going to take for them to evolve and if they can survive the cataclysmic events that will no doubt hit Earth in the meantime.
If not primates, I would bet on one of the following species:
Corvidae - Extremely intelligent, highly adaptable, tool-users, social, pass down their knowledge to offspring.
Canis Familiaris - Highly social, apex predators, genetically diverse, spread throughout every corner of the world.
Loxodonta - Extremely intelligent, highly social, adaptable, builders and tool-users, long lifespans.
Their lifespans are very short and that whole ocean acidification thing might be a problem.
They will evolve to have gills and walk on land
Then I hope they also dump copper for iron-based blood.
Their top guys are already working on it
They are marine which makes fire impossible which severely limits industrial advancement. Similarly they are not social animals which negates a lot of the division of labour advantages of a society. While a species of octopus might advance intellectually to ponder its own existence I doubt it could achieve the infrastructure necessary to significantly control its environment.
Don’t forget that they only live 1-2 years. 3 tops. I think this is even more limiting than fire. And if evolutionary pressure leads to longer lifespans somehow, they must overcome the whole dying after mating thing.
True, also they do not raise offspring which means zero communication of non-instinctive knowledge between generations.
They could use the underwater volcanoes to smeltle the meltle though, thought of that? Checkmate.
We have terrestrial volcanoes, how far would human civilisation advanced if they were our only source of fire.
Crows and ravens. Highly adaptive. At home in a deep forest or the remains of a burnt out city. Social. Predisposed to intelligence.
The whole concept of a “dominant species” is also a bit ridiculous and probably shouldn’t be bought into whole cloth. If what we mean by “dominant species” is 'the most radiatively expansive single species before allopatric speciation takes over…", then pick any one of the many many invasive we’ve spread around the planet. Our intelligence has allowed for a massive and basically instantaneous geologic layer globally, but it’s not something that can be handed off in the way that a vasculature did for land plants or the ability to decompose cellulose and lignin did for fungi… unless we want it to be.
If you really want intelligence to make it’s mark on the earth we need a way to move it from our species into other species, because we’re not long for this world. Move the genes specific to human nervous tissue and neurons into bees, ants, termites, any formian creature. That’ll get this party started.
I think there’s a solid argument to be made for ants as the world’s dominant species. There are even supercolonies that span multiple continents. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3352483/
They will likely continue to thrive in the post-human global environment. Their success does not rely on human development (like, say, rats), nor are they severely threatened by human development (like…well, most things).
Was talking about this earlier with the s.o., we’ve both got pretty substantial biology training (phds, ms, bs etc). We both agreed that “dominant species” is a bit of a term looking for a definition, as in, it’s not something extending from biology or ecology but rather something being imposed upon them. We were between nostoc and rhizobium, with fungi capable of digesting lignin in third place, for the most “world dominating” species, in the sense that those species, through their biology, have carved the planet into a place much more suited for themselves.
It strikes me that humans aren’t even really doing that, but rather, we’re selecting for an environment less suitable to our own survival. So I don’t know that humans would even rank for dominance over the environment because we really don’t have any sense of control over the matter, whereas, some other species clearly do.
I think we will screw up this planet even more before the end. So, probably bugs.
deleted by creator
I don’t think any species could beat my Revolution X top score so… we kind of do dominate sweetie.
Humans most certainly would be it by almost any intellectual qualifier you chose to use. Grading every species we have encountered with regards to intelligence and ability to control its environment humanity is a wildly insane outlier. To point of absurdity, to the point where we do not fit to such an extent that some agency other than organic evolution might be suspected.
deleted by creator
Intelligence is a qualifier unlike other physical qualities, it allows humanity to dominate its environment while not being physically superior to many of the species surrounding us. Intelligence is a quality we recognise and calibrate in other species and seek out in the search for extraterrestrial intelligence and the development of artificial intelligence. Unlike flying or walking intelligence is universally accepted as a uniquely separate attribute, although not of course by you, so this is where I will end my discussion with you.
deleted by creator
Human beings can, of course, fly. We can fly much faster and further than any owl could even conceive. However we did it through intelligence, knowledge sharing, tool use, rather than physical evolution. Human flying dominates all other flying life, because of intelligence.
For pretty much anything most creatures have adapted to do, you could argue so can humans, but because of intelligence, not just narrow physical adaptation. Intelligence is a supreme trait
deleted by creator
Yeah but we literally are changing the planet and affecting other species. We’ve developed nukes that could take out the whole world
deleted by creator
We are in no way special when it comes to impacting other species or the Earth as a system.
We do it on purpose, with intent. Heck, we do it for multiple reasons! We also massively impact all parts of the ecosystem at the same time.
deleted by creator
Because it opens up doing so many different things that impact the world as a whole. Beavers instinctually damn moving water and build homes, but that has been their limited behavior for thousands of years. They don’t expand out and change things even more and more over time like humans do, because they don’t actively choose to do new things that continuously expand their impact.
That intent and conscious decision making by humans to change the world around them is what makes them special.
purpose, with intent
allegedly.
True but we’re one species. This is comparing one species to all the bacteria
deleted by creator
I think you should chill out bc this was supposed to be a fun discussion, but I’ll give you the same energy back. The fact that you brought up viruses, which aren’t even living organisms, into a debate regarding species tells me all I need to know about your so-called expertise. We can agree to disagree, that way you can save your arrogance for someone who’s impressed. :)
*This is MelonYellow. My server went down with fantastic timing!
Ants. The hive mind structure will be hard to beat.
Ants are Fascinating
There is no hive mind. They use chemicals to communicate.
Dominant at what?
Yeah, nature is not good with a “dominant” species. Not for the whole planet at least.
