warning this could be the weirdest or most offensive posting you ever read!
Do you guys think that there might be a domestic human that has adapted to city and home life and a outdoors human that is adapted to living in outdoor areas as a hunter gatherer warrior.
Sometimes I wonder this when comparing people in northern countries where they are forced to live in snowy areas they seem to be more quiet, more aware of how they look and most of those countries have been ones to show great technological advances.
As that famous statistic said, the closer to the equator you get the less inventions that are invented.
I think there may have been three ways that lead to this adaptation.
1. the farmers who became accustomed to living and innovating in one place.
2. The northerners who have to live in log cabins and in turn due to free time have to find things to do with their time and are forced to socialize more especially in the long winters.
3. the early city folk who by living in cities early on over long periods of time adapted to this.
One way I would say you can say that this is the case is Northern China vs the Phillipines.
In northern china these people who were farmers and also lived in cabins were forced to co-habitate with people since the population was small. The population was small this was the key.
So what happened is in China they had villages for a long time since when the population count was low slowly the people who could survive city life remained and had kids.
In the Phillipines the growth of large cities was rapid and out of nowhere from when the invaders came like (spain) you took these hunter gatherers not used to it or adapted and put them in a city. The population explosion is so short that you don't have time to adapt to city life, not the hundreds of years other populations had.
You can see this in many places, the area where the population had long had civilization continue to have more stable populations, while areas that were made civilized might have not had the filtering process of killing off people who were better off as hunter gatherers.
In some places like say Italy, they brought in many immigrants and promoted the warrior behavior so you get people mixed in from other regions you get more riots, more gangs probably from a higher case of Warrior gene.
I know this sounds a bit crazy, but I think we might be hurting small populations by giving them technology and means for rapid population growth because then those people with the warrior genes who would normally have not been able to make it end up surviving and even being the criminals and gang members. It's said that people with "warrior genes" are more likely to be in a gang.
read up on the warrior gene.
I'm certainly not claiming this as fact, merely an idea/theory I thought up the other day which I think would more likely be what people in the days of Darwin would come up with to explain our differences
some countries that had un-natural rapid population growth
so I think it's not that the people are different, they might just have a higher rate of "warrior genes" that are more useful in a different environmental setting, that cause crime.