Below are two discussion posts. Read and respond to each post seperately. 150 wo

Place your order now for a similar assignment and have exceptional work written by our team of experts, At affordable ratesFor This or a Similar Paper Click To Order NowBelow are two discussion posts. Read and respond to each post seperately. 150 words minimum for each response to post. Also, answer the two questions listed in each post. (4 total)Post 1#3 Over time humans have evolved in many ways in order to suit their resident environment. But because humans evolved in Africa in hot dry conditions adapting for cold is often harder than adapting to hot temperatures because we weren’t built for them. The Inuit are a group of people that have adapted well to extreme cold temperatures. Their adaptations for that environment include: increasing calorie content with few carbs & nonshivering thermogenesis. These two adaptations combined allow for inuits to have a higher than average BMR and produce extra body heat because of all of the calories they consume. Inuits also have an adaptation to be able to use their hands for longer at colder temperatures than your average white person. There are also many adaptations to high altitudes that humans have developed over time, the most important of them are: increased resting heart rate, memory and learning impaired, and decreased neuromuscular control. Conversely, humans have a relatively easy time acclimating to heat. Adaptations to repeated exposure to a hot environment include: increased sweating efficiency, stabilization of the circulation, the ability to perform work with a lower core temperature and heart rate, and increased skin blood flow at a given core temperature. These heat adaptations are important factors in mitigating the physiological stress induced by heat in order to improve thermal comfort and enhance exercise capabilities. As people get acclimated to heat the way the body sweats changes in order to optimize water loss. The more frequently you are exposed to high temperatures, you will begin to sweat sooner in order to cool off faster, the salt content in the sweat will decrease making the sweat more efficient at keeping nutrients within the body, and you will urinate less frequently because of how often you are sweating. All these combined help you cool off faster when you get out into the heat.(DTIC, 2002),(Human biology,2022)Question: Knowing all of this would you rather go backpacking through the sahara desert or across antarctica?#5 The agricultural revolution began as a paleolithic society during the stone age. For instance there was an egalitarian social status with a sexual division of labor. This means that at the time men and women were equals of the household while also having specific roles to play. I would consider this to be a pro because it democratized the household for the time being. Hunter-Gatherer also worked well only in small populations as temporary settlements because its easier to control what jobs everyone has. I would consider this to be a con because it isn’t super scaleable. with the advent of modern agriculture these features were turned on their heads. Because animals became domesticated over time in order to provide for families there was no need for a hunter in the duo so the only work was to tend to the farm and that was often antiegalitarian because the woman was often stuck in the house catering to the man’s needs. However at the same time farms that produce anything you’d need are much more scaleable than hunting and gathering so this would allow them to provide for larger and larger populations. And these farms would be more permanent settlements to allow for the farmers to invest in their product and methods. I think that the original shift to agriculture despite being a major breakthrough and advancing society massively propelled us to modern agriculture which has a terrible impact on the environment and is super distant from the everyday consumer, compared to vendors that I see when I go to the farmers market that use agricultural methods but also grow food for themselves and their families, whereas produce conglomerates only produce the food for business they dont produce it to live off of for nutrition. On top of that the environmental impact that modern agriculture has is so terrible it overshadows any positives that it may have. The over nitrogenation of the crops through fertilizer, the majority of pesticides used on fruit and veggies, & the unregulated flatulence of cattle (and pigs) are all examples of practices that are commonly used in modern agriculture that negatively impact the environment in one way or another. Question: what is one highlight of the agricultural revolution that really speaks to you?Post 2The first and probably most obvious trend you will see between australopithecines and humans would be cranial cavity. As you can see with the earliest australopithecines you at first see a small cranial capacity but by the time you get to the later australopithecines like Au. africanus (490 cubic centimeters), or Au. robustus (540 cubic centimeters) (Wolpoff,1999). You see a clear upwards traction of cranial capacity. This capacity still might not come near that of modern homo sapiens but still shows that early hominin and hominid evolution put a focus on gaining, through knowledge improvements as well as physical ones. Another major trend between australopithecines and humans is the use of earlier stone tools. As with the homo species, you would see the use of tools used at first with Homo habilis with the use of Oldowan tools usually for dismembering animal carcasses and for opening marrow cavities (Kottak, 2015). But the discovery of Australopithecus garhi showed that the homo genus wasn’t the only users of stone tools, in fact, the Au. garhi species not only showed evidence of early tool use but also showed the use of other materials like bone to form tools and even evidence of horses and antelopes being butchered at these sites showing reasoning for said tool use (Kottak,2015). To answer the question of what possible changes the homo genus would undergo you must first think of what route between mental or physical the human body would believe would lead to more survival for humans. I believe that the human species will continue to see a capacity in brain capacity and a more efficient change to how the brain is made up. I think we would see slight changes in the biology of the brain to make processing more efficient while seeing a slight increase to manage those changes in physiology. The interesting part of this though is that to have this change in brain capacity, we might also see a slight increase in human size as a way to keep the relative size of our brain to our body similar to avoid our head being too large, while at the same time accommodating for the change. This change in size could even lead to things like broader shoulders, or ribcages again adjusting for the larger builds. Think of a physical de-evolution to neanderthals but keeping the unique makeup of the brain to increase the capacity for human intelligence.My question to the rest of the class would be how do you think Australopithecus species like Au. boisei and Au. garhi would have evolved if not pushed to extinction by homo erectus and other species of the homo genus?Some of the largest advantages of bipedalism center around the freeing of the arms for other uses than motion. Without needing to use the arms in any way whether as both stability and motion like many animals or for mostly motion purposes like knuckle-walking, you’ll see a wide variety of actions that are now freed up. Some of the most obvious advantages of bipedalism being the increase in height allows for easier viewing over taller grasses and shrubbery, while also allowing for easier use of dragging carrying of items to different locations, and one large but not really popular known advantage is that bipedalism causes a large decrease to the body’s exposure to solar radiation (Kottak, 2015). Along with all of this mentioned you also have things like the ability to make and use tools, the ability to stretch your arms out to reach for different items, and the use of the arms in social displays or other communication styles. Some of the disadvantages of bipedalism mainly focus around the sizes of the skull and pelvis. As for the pelvis to support bipedal motion, it must have a smaller opening to provide support for the trunk, or else the support will fail and posture problems begin to develop (Kottak,2015). You will also have to see either a shrink in skull size to avoid the pelvis to be too narrow for birth resulting in complications for both mother and child, or the development of the skull and brain will have to be done on the outside of the mother’s body, creating a larger dependence on the child to their parents or other adults of their species (Kottak, 2015). Bipedalism was originally thought to be developed for open grassland and savanna, but since it developed through Ardipithecus in woodland habitats, it is now theorized that bipedalism evolved in woodland areas, but became more adaptive and selected in savanna habitats. One such reason for bipedalism selection is that bipedal motion greatly reduces the energy used for movement and made it easier to regulate body temperature which saved more energy to be sued for things like scavenging and rearing their young (Gracie,2022). All of the reasons mentioned and the advantages of the freed-up hands mean that bipedal locomotion would be greatly selected in place of quadrupedal locomotion among the early hominins.My Question to the rest of the class would be why do you think hominins and later humans evolved into fully bipedal locomotion and didn’t keep some of the quadrupedal aspects that we see from early hominins?For This or a Similar Paper Click To Order NowRelated