Chimpanzees are alot stronger than humans...?

Question

but smaller. Presumably their muscle is alot more efficient than ours. (even more efficient than that of those hard working romans ;) ) Is there an advantage to humans becoming weaker? Is it an unwanted side effect of intelligence - that our bodies become less important and therefore are able to deteriorate whilst we remain viable?
If so, in 100,000 years, will all humans be confined to wheelchairs?

Answer 1

Simple answer, humans have been evolving in an evironment where strength is not an advantage, but balance for upright walking *is* an advantage (as we were evolving in a more savannah-like environments, where those who could survive long treks on foot, and carry things at the same time (like babies) provided an advantage ... so muscles have become shorter and weaker as a result.

Now that we are upright, there is not a lot of reason for this trend to continue ... but maybe we will if we continue our more recent trend of spending a lot of our day sitting in front of computers (as all of us are doing right now).

----

Why do the people just feel compelled to chip in with information that is either irrelevant, or demonstrably false.

For example, volleyballgurl shows just how reliable "common sense" is.

"In tests at the Bronx Zoo in 1924, a dynamometer--a scale that measures the mechanical force of a pull on a spring--was erected in the monkey house. A 165-pound male chimpanzee named "Boma" registered a pull of 847 pounds, using only his right hand (although he did have his feet braced against the wall, being somewhat hip, in his simian way, to the principles of leverage). A 165-pound man, by comparison, could manage a one-handed pull of about 210 pounds. Even more frightening, a female chimp, weighing a mere 135 pounds and going by the name of Suzette, checked in with a one-handed pull of 1,260 pounds. (She was in a fit of passion at the time; one shudders to think what her boyfriend must have looked like next morning.) In dead lifts, chimps have been known to manage weights of 600 pounds without even breaking into a sweat. A male gorilla could probably heft an 1,800-pound weight and not think twice about it."

By comparison, Paul Anderson, the "World's Strongest Man" really had to struggle to lift 1130 pounds to set some record. A little female 135-lb chimp was able to pull 1260 pounds with *one arm*.

So in a battle between a chimp, and the biggest, baddest, meanest NFL lineman ... I put my money on the chimp, *easy*.

Answer 2

It's not that there must be an advantage, it's just that an organism that doesn't need to maintain a lot of physical power to survive and succeed, won't do so because there is a cost of doing so. Life is thrifty with energy and will not invest it in things that don't fill a need. Maintaining a big brain instead works reliably well, anyways -- keeping that up allows us to use intelligence to solve problems and alter the environment, instead of using brute force or, say, running speed or climbing ability or whatever. It's just a different survival strategy.

As long as enough of us who are sedentary are reproducing at a high enough rate for a long enough time, the species overall could conceivably get weaker -- but I think it's extremely unlikely that we would become unable to walk. Successful reproduction depends on being able to gestate, birth, and raise one's children and provide for them, and although it can generally be done without excessive physical strength, to do it from a wheelchair requires vast social & resource support. Perhaps we in developed countries take this for granted, but I think it unlikely that this could be the case long enough and extensively enough for it to affect human evolution. 100,000 years is probably not long enough.

I'm dying of curiosity about what the outcome of football player vs. large male chimp would be...

Answer 3

Look at the environment a chimpanzee has to survive in. Maybe if Chimps stayed captive for 100,000 years, bought food at the market place they would get physically weaker.

That is a real creative, interesting and challenging question.
I gave a thought but I couldn't answer it.

Answer 4

Because we have brains. I don't really know, but I think it is because we are so intelligent and we can make these big guns and stuff that can do the killing for us. I think wild animals need their strength in order to survive, to get food and stuff. Humans can just use their guns and stuff to hunt, don't even need any physical strength. I think its called like, natural selection and evolution or something. Only the animals with the best traits can reproduce and survive, making all the animals of the same species with the best trait so they can survive. There may still be the weaker kind, but the majority will be the stronger one.

Answer 5

A chimp has to lift its own body weight dozens of times a day in order to climb trees and forage for food. Most human beings on the other hand rarely lift anything more heavy that a bag of groceries from the shopping cart to the trunk of their car and even that only occurs a couple of times a week at most. Its the "Use it or Lose it" principle of adaptation at work.

As to what all the bible references in some of the other answers have to do with chimpanzees superior strength have to do with your question... I haven't a clue.

Probably some sort of brain atrophy going on there in the folks who stop thinking for themselves and rely on a collection of two thousand year old fairy tales dispensed by money-grubbing charlatan preachers and other hustler types.

Answer 6

> Presumably their muscle is alot more efficient than ours.
Doubt it. I think it has more to do with the insertion points on the bones. They have a greater mechanical advantage.

> Is there an advantage to humans becoming weaker?
No. It's probably just another effect of the mutations which gave us an upright gait.

> Is it an unwanted side effect of intelligence - that our bodies become less important and therefore are able to deteriorate whilst we remain viable?
Nope.

> If so, in 100,000 years, will all humans be confined to wheelchairs?
Nope. Just the ones who jump their horses over hedges and fall on their heads.

Answer 7

You have to consider its size. If you double the size you make it 8 times as massive. Smaller animals have less mass, which means less weight to carry around.
Humans are much weaker than other animals, but we have intellect and dexterity to manipulate our environment. Humans are getting weaker, smaller and sicker. But don't worry about life100,000 years from now. You'll be dead. Stop thinking like an evolutionist. You will only get more confused.

Answer 8

A possible advantage is that having weaker muscles is saving energy, no, it has nothing to do with intelligence. Yes, we are introducing deteriorations while remaining viable, and yes, we will eventually be confined into wheelchairs.

Answer 9

I think that has always been the case. I dont think humans are becoming weaker. Sounds like you are smoking the good stuff!

Answer 10

Yikes!
Where did this crazy-*** question come from.
In 100,000 years we will be on a new earth with the Lord our Savior.
Wheelchairs will be nothing more than folklore, an urban legend!