> A fossil hominin cranium was discovered in mid-Pliocene deltaic strata in the Godaya Valley of the northwestern Woranso-Mille study area in Ethiopia. Here we show that analyses of chemically correlated volcanic layers and the palaeomagnetic stratigraphy, combined with Bayesian modelling of dated tuffs, yield an age range of 3.804 ± 0.013 to 3.777 ± 0.014 million years old (mean ± 1σ) for the deltaic strata and the fossils that they contain.
They found the bone in the rock. Scientists look at the rock and can tell the rocks age. They assume that the bone is about the same age as the rock it was found inside.
There are many methods of determining rock age. A common one is finding signature fossils that are known to only exist between certain ages. Putting the rock in a machine to record its magnetic field and correlating this with pole reversals on earth. Using isotope ratios (not just radiocarbon dating), chemical composition, identifying how the sediment was laid down by rivers or the sea etc.
> why would animals in wild suffer more than in captivity?
Not necessarily more in every case but they do suffer in many different ways. Nonhuman animals in the wild are routinely exposed to: starvation, dehydration, disease, injuries, predation, parasitism and extreme weather conditions:
> The total amount of suffering per year in the natural world is beyond all decent contemplation. During the minute that it takes me to compose this sentence, thousands of animals are being eaten alive, many others are running for their lives, whimpering with fear, others are slowly being devoured from within by rasping parasites, thousands of all kinds are dying of starvation, thirst, and disease. It must be so. If there ever is a time of plenty, this very fact will automatically lead to an increase in the population until the natural state of starvation and misery is restored.
– Richard Dawkins, River Out of Eden: A Darwinian View of Life
> It's not about taking suffering away. Animals born in the wild live their life naturally.
A "natural" life does not necessarily mean a good one.
> Animals created by us in farms are raised for one thing, for human consumption. If an animal wants to run away in wild and do it's thing, it has that choice.
The choice to do what? The vast majority of nonhuman animals receive no help with their suffering. There are exceptions of course like when we help by rescuing trapped animals, vaccinating and healing injured and sick animals, caring for orphaned animals etc. But the general rule is a very short life (most nonhuman animals in the wild don't live to adulthood) with far more suffering experienced than happiness.
> Basically if we have slightest amount of empathy for our pets and are willing to apply that to other animals, eating meat doesn't look enticing
No disagreement here, but the same empathy should be given to nonhuman animals suffering in the wild and we should help to reduce their suffering as much as practically possible. Widespread interventions aren't practical now due to a lack of knowledge and resources but our future descendants may well be in a better position to make an effective difference.
>Predator-induced fear is both, one of the most common stressors employed in animal model studies of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and a major focus of research in ecology. There has been a growing discourse between these disciplines but no direct empirical linkage. We endeavoured to provide this empirical linkage by conducting experiments drawing upon the strengths of both disciplines. Exposure to a natural cue of predator danger (predator vocalizations), had enduring effects of at least 7 days duration involving both, a heightened sensitivity to predator danger (indicative of an enduring memory of fear), and elevated neuronal activation in both the amygdala and hippocampus – in wild birds (black-capped chickadees, Poecile atricapillus), exposed to natural environmental and social experiences in the 7 days following predator exposure. Our results demonstrate enduring effects on the brain and behaviour, meeting the criteria to be considered an animal model of PTSD – in a wild animal, which are of a nature and degree which can be anticipated could affect fecundity and survival in free-living wildlife. We suggest our findings support both the proposition that PTSD is not unnatural, and that long-lasting effects of predator-induced fear, with likely effects on fecundity and survival, are the norm in nature.
>I've generally been opposed to the whole concept of animal "rights", as opposed to having laws that prevent humans from abusing animals, which I support. Animals having "rights" would seem to imply that we have a duty to protect animals in the wild, which we can't do, and, more importantly, don't want to do: many conservationists would be strongly opposed to us preventing predators from killing prey in the wild.
Rethink Priorities (which focuses on foundational research on neglected causes) has carried out a massive amount of research recently on invertebrate welfare and sentience.
Their findings are well worth a read:
> Rethink Priorities reviewed the scientific literature relevant to invertebrate sentience. We selected 53 features potentially indicative of the capacity for valenced experience and examined the degree to which these features are found throughout 18 representative biological taxa. These data have been compiled into an easily sortable database that will enable animal welfare organizations to better gauge the probability that (various species of) invertebrates have the capacity for valenced experience. This essay details what we’ve done, why, and the strengths and weaknesses of our approach.
Brian Tomasik argues that we should avoid insect farming entirely since it's likely worse (ethically speaking) than farming larger nonhuman animals:
> Entomophagy (eating insects for food) is sometimes proposed as an alternative to factory farming because it has lower environmental impact. But entomophagy is not necessarily more humane than factory farming of livestock all things considered, and along some dimensions it's actually worse, because it involves killing vastly more animals per unit of protein. Rather than promoting insect consumption, let's focus on plant-based meat substitutes.
Farmed insects live their full lifespan as opposed to larger animals which only live around ten percent on average.
I personally do not advocate anyone to eat plant-based meats because of the harmful effects on health (this coming anecdotally from myself after eating them for 2+ years). The phytates in almost all grains / legumes / beans bind to almost all free zinc copper and iron which has a very negative effect on health.
Insects (similar to ruminants) are able to naturally assimilate the high protein foods and filter out the phytates. Eating a half-pound per day of insects helped me to greatly recover my health after following a vegan diet for almost three years.
That makes the silly assumption that all organisms are equal. I'm sure we can all agree that a human's life is more valuable than a bacterium's. Or else you'd have to admit to genocide every time you use hand sanitizer.
It's an interesting point though - if we remove human life from the equation, how do you define the "value" of an animal or insect life?
It will even vary from culture to culture; for example, cows are revered in much of India, and in much of the west we seem to place more value on values we perceive as "cute", such as dolphins, or "magnificent", such as whales.
It's not a zero-sum game, we can recognise and work to solve both issues simultaneously.
Tomasik's recommendations are moderate:
> Given how many insects each of us harms or helps by our choices, consideration of insect suffering should play a significant role in our actions. For instance, we should generally avoid buying silk and shellac, reduce driving especially when roads are wet, and minimize walking on grass or in the woods.
We aren't responsible for the vast majority of insect suffering but can potentially in the future do something about it:
> Most insect suffering results from natural causes such as predation, parasitism, physical injury, and dehydration. We should encourage concern for wild-insect suffering and research ways in which human environmental policies can reduce it. Our descendants should also think twice before spreading insects and insect-like creatures to new realms, which could multiply suffering manyfold.
lol you support an article that includes the following:
"consider the ethical implications of virtual insects, including insect brain “uploads” and insect-like artificial intelligences that will emerge in the next few decades."
