from reddit user: PresterJohnson
Context: https://www.britannica.com/topic/persistence-hunting
persistence hunting, a form of hunting in which a hunter drives prey to exhaustion with a combination of walking and running, usually in a hot environment. A number of instances of persistence hunting have been noted among modern hunter-gatherer groups. Some scholars argue that persistence hunting played an important role in human evolution, a hypothesis known as the endurance-running hypothesis. The practice is enabled by, and could further advantage, several adaptations of the human body, such as sweating, a relative lack of body hair compared with other apes, arched feet, and a long Achilles tendon. Others argue that persistence hunting was a rare endeavor, citing how ethnographically uncommon the technique is and the difficulties in employing the method in the ancient environment.

The practice of persistence hunting is known from a relatively limited number of reported hunts. They were performed in disparate regions of the world, but always in flat, arid environments, such as the Australian Outback, the American Southwest, and the Kalahari Desert.

Several persistence hunts were recorded in the central Kalahari. Hunters in the area undertook 10 persistence hunts between 1985 and 2001. Eight of the hunts were done for the sake of two documentaries: The Great Dance (filmed in 1998) and an episode of David Attenborough’s Life of Mammals (filmed in 2001). In each case a group of three or four men drank as much water as possible before beginning the hunt during the heat of the day, when temperatures reached about 100–105 ℉ (39–42 ℃). They then selected an animal to hunt, often a kudu. The group then ran toward the animal, which fled from them. The hunters tracked the creature as fast as they could, in order to find the animal and scare it from its shady resting spot and into the sun again. Five of the hunts were successful. During these the animal ran until it collapsed of exhaustion. The time required for this was variable: the shortest of the hunts lasted fewer than two hours, while the longest took more than six. These hunts were often performed over sandy terrain, which tired the animal more readily.

Based on a limited number of reported hunts, a similar technique was employed by the Tarahumara in northern Mexico. Hunters chased prey, normally deer, to exhaustion before killing them with rocks or clubs. Other persistence hunts used the landscape to slow the animal, such as running it into a river or a cave. The most common strategy among the Tarahumara involved the use of traps. In a ravine, or arroyo, hunters would drive about a dozen wooden stakes into the ground at an angle and cover them with leaves. A few hunters would then chase an animal into the ravine and run it into the stakes. The duration of the hunts varied widely, from two or three hours to two or three days (with breaks when it was too dark to continue tracking the animal).

Persistence hunting plays an important role in the endurance-running hypothesis, which states that the ability of humans to run long distances is an adaptation that originated approximately two million years ago with the emergence of the genus Homo. The hypothesis was first put forward in a 1984 paper authored by American biologist David Carrier. He pointed to several features of the human body that he argued were adapted to endurance running, including cholinergic sweat glands, absence of body hair, bipedalism, and an omnivorous diet that allows individuals to load up on carbohydrates in preparation for running. Because distance running would not help in outrunning fast-sprinting predators, Carrier posited that these adaptations aided in predation, meaning that persistence hunting would have been an important method of predation in the deep past. Carrier’s ideas were expanded upon by the paleoanthropologist Daniel Lieberman and biologist Dennis M. Bramble, who noted additional features that may have facilitated endurance running and first appeared in H. habilis and H. erectus—including shortened toes and feet and lengthened legs. The two added that endurance running may have been useful for scavenging carcasses of animals killed by other predators.

However, not all scholars accept the endurance-running hypothesis. Two University of Wisconsin anthropologists, Travis Pickering and Henry Bunn, outlined the argument against the endurance-running hypothesis in a 2007 paper. They cast doubt on the idea that persistence hunting ever played a major role in human predation, since it is a very rare method of hunting in the present and recent past. They pointed out that persistence hunting is practiced today only in arid environments, while humans evolved in comparatively wet savanna-woodlands. Further, they noted that all known persistence hunts required the hunters to engage in fairly extensive tracking, requiring advanced intellectual abilities that early members of the genus Homo may not have possessed. Pickering and Bunn also argued that early Homo did not need to be a strong endurance runner to scavenge in its environment, since it was likely better than other animals at scavenging in the wooded parts of the region.

I most definitely believe that people were. It may not have been everywhere and it wasnt always needed. For example the indigenous people in North America could outsmart the Buffalo, heard them via scaring them with wolf like pelts/noises and direct them towards cliffs to fall. The buffalo in back don't see the cliff, and essentially push the one or two up front off

But where there wasn't Buffalo you see tribes who hunted deer, deer won't run in herds and be forced off cliffs so easily. A human can't outrun a deer in short distances, but we can cool ourselves and regulate our temperature better than deer can, so while working in a team will obviously make it quicker, a healthy human can run down a deer and make it quit out of exhaustion.

I don't know what there is to believe or not. It's definitely a capability of ours, but did we ever organise a society around persistence hunting? "We're the persistence hunters, fuck tools and domestication, we just chase things." That's crazy, we're smart enough to get food way easier.

I don't doubt that our unique endurance was a key part of our survival as a species, but I would doubt the intentionality. I highly doubt the hunts were organized under this farcical "Terminator-esque" methodology. The idea that all of humanity would just non-stop chase an animal down until it died of exhaustion is nuts. It seems more likely that human tribes would harass a particular herd, following them and weakening the herd over the course of several days. It's not like it was a strategy they were trying to employ, it's just a mechanical outcome of what early hunts were.

To make a good argument against persistence hunting you'll need another reason for the evolution of hairlessness and sweating. Never heard a good one. We also go into ketosis at the drop of a hat compared to basically all other mammals, no carbo loading needed, just burning fat.

As technology (tools), tribal communication, and intellectual capacity increased, I have little doubt strategies beyond persistence hunting became the norm. So, by the time we became 'human', it was probably a strategy of last resort, but we have retained the adaptions.

Don't forget, there are still people living in huts and tents right now. We haven't changed all that much still.

you have the theory of aquatic ape (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aquatic_ape_hypothesis#The_Hardy/Morgan_hypothesis) if you want a funny explanation for hairlessness.. explain also speech, sex, sweat...

Feels like a non-sequitur, could you elaborate? Somehow the dots aren't connecting.

I mean there are literally still tribes in tents and huts with fire and spears out there right now.

I mean ... Yes? It's still not clear how primitive housing relates to ineffective hunting methods.

Ok

Bro said "time to log onto the talking to people website and not communicate"

Bro doesn't know how to break it down further into 2 year old speak. Sorry.

You haven't made an intelligent point, you just equated persistence hunting with living in yurts. It's a complete non sequitur with no point, where are you getting this smug confidence from?

Well, if you've seen the rise in disaffected young men, boy are they good at persistently and obsessively stalking women while the police do nothing. So 🤷

Dude this shit was yesterday and your still harping on about how you don't understand a simple thing. I'm sorry I don't have the time or energy for this nonsense.

Yes, we have spent the better part of a whole day talking about how you won't explain a simple idea but you do seem to have the time and energy to talk complete shit and you wouldn't believe it so do I. This could have all been avoided by you simply explaining what you meant! This was way more work, what an interesting observation. Glad we got there in the end, now are you going to explain what you meant or did you just not want to because you knew it'd sound stupid?

Have a good one dude

I don't understand the distinction you are making. Humans are conscious, they think about their actions. If they are chasing the same herd for days until animals start collapsing of exhaustion, what do you expect them to disagree on if a fellow hunter were to describe their hunt in "terminator-esque" terms?

I believe humans were opportunist hunters who used a variety of strategies. With brains as clever as ours why stop at one method? Isn't farming just an advanced hunting method, if you think about it? You have to apply the technique that works the best to each hunt.