Hunting and gathering > agriculture

>>2377575

>knew neither hunger or disease

Spectacular citations needed

>>2377575
To many people on the planet to rely on hunting and gathering so they started farming.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2016/07/oldest-human-cancer-disease-origins-tumor-fossil-science/

>>2377575
>Hunter-gatherers knew neither hunger, nor disease.

?????

>>2377594

No epidemics, though.

>>2377575
>Hunter-gatherers knew neither hunger, nor disease.
Nope.
>According to experts by the year 2100 disease and hunger will have been completely eradicated from the world.
Agree
>Agriculture began around the year 9.500 B.C.
More around 10 000 BC but it counts so yes.
>It took Humanity around 11.600 years to make it back into prosperity.
Define ''Prosperity''.
>What went wrong?
Nothing really.

>>2377575

>Hunter-gatherers knew neither hunger, nor disease.

that's blatantly wrong anon

>>2377575
Have you ever read accounts of civilized people encountering hunter gatherers?

Without fail they mention how nasty brutish and short their lives were.

>>2377575

More people >>> fewer people.

Not only did farming people outnumber hunter-gatherers militarily, they also produced far more culture and technology because more brains to do the thinking and division of labor to allow artistic people to refine their techniques.

So while a H-G may have had a healthier and in many ways "better" life, it's no mystery that it was the settled people who invented the internet in 10,000 years while H-G barely innovated over hundreds of thousands of years.

>>2377641
Good point actually

Did we domesticate wheat, or did wheat domesticate us?

>>2377683
Yeah but thats not from disease or famine its just that hunter gatherers constantly murder each other and fight wars

Hunting and Gathering age was the most best and comfiest age to be alive in. Literally no racism,wars and famines

>>2377869
Don't be a tool

http://johnhawks.net/weblog/reviews/life_history/aging_evolution/hill_2007_hiwi_mortality.html

>>2377575
GREAT SOURCES THERE OP

There certainly was disease and hunger back then, albeit less. This because large numbers of humans and large numbers of animals together helps breed disease, not forgetting pathogens evolving past the drugs we keep giving animals and such.

We need to set up a model of civilisation that avoids giving drugs to animals unless blindly necessary and that also makes the world more spaced out. Also, we need to do something about climate change.

>>Hunter-gatherers knew neither hunger, nor disease.
lol wat

>>2377892
>>2377819
>>2377683


http://www.anth.ucsb.edu/faculty/gurven/papers/GurvenKaplan2007pdr.pdf


??? ???

>>2377641
No proof for this claim either

>>2377591
More like after discovering farming they got lazy and relied on it too much and when the population grew too much it led to the instabilities we've had up to now.

>>2378003
anyway, the point is, hunter-gatherers indeed had shorter lives (but not as short as some would claim) than we do today.
But, their lives were comparable in longetivity to 18th century agricultural societies.

It's the advent of modern medicine, food, hygienics and so on that vastly improved our lives.

>>2377680

Of course some people fell ill and some people were afflicted with hunger, but there were no famines and no epidemics. No hunger and no disease on a grand scale.

>>2378222
There was no famines and no epidemics because there wasn't as many people at the same place.

What the fuck dude. You think they didn't starve to death or got killed by stepping on a rock causing an infection?

>>2377591
No, people started farming to have a mire stable source of food. This led to an abundance of food which led to a huge boom in population, then it turned out agriculture can only feed so much people which led to frequent starvation and countless hours of work on the field just to sustain the population.

>>2377869
>Literally no racism

I'm going to get called "pool" for this by why do people unfailing add racism to one of the greatest sins of humanity? "Racism" probably didn't exist but it's just a facet of perceived in-out group functions and I'm sure tribalism always existed. It makes as much sense to hate someone for their phenotypic features as for their opinions and beliefs.

>>2378238
http://discovermagazine.com/1987/may/02-the-worst-mistake-in-the-history-of-the-human-race

>>2377575
Hunter-gatherers were violent as fuck, haven't you read Pinker?