The dawn of civilization

[Jackalope]

We only need to refer to the relationships between existing human populations and the remaining apex predators to see how we have always dealt with the issue.

...particularly aboriginal peoples who still live a largely if not exclusively neolithic lifestyle.

[The Grand Nudger]

@Locke
-and that's the situation that animals like bears and big cats found themselves in.  Probably explains the dearth of evidence for predation.  They weren't interested in eating us, they were interested in keeping as far away from us as possible.  You know..just like today, lol.

We were competitors, not prey...and a stunningly persistent and destructive predator, at that.

[T0 Th3 M4X]

Exactly.

We "survived" predation not through our brawn but through our brains. By avoiding fights to begin with, or fighting only when necessary, it allowed us a measure of freedom to advance and become what we are today.
If we want to go back to caveman days, we'd have a massive, HUGELY massive, population drop, and wouldn't have nearly the capabilities we have today. Nature abhors a vacuum, and I can all but guarantee that another species, most likely another primate, would have developed the intelligence we have now, that we no longer would have if we stayed "primitive". We wouldn't be worried about tigers or wolves trying to eat us. We'd be worried about the areas we lived in being cut down, burned down, and uprooted for the use of whatever the dominant species on Earth is, which would not have ever been Homo Sapien.

It's not one or the other.  You combine those skills.  You approach with the right concept and the right equipment, then you execute with as much force as necessary to get the job done.  If circumstances chance, you use your noggin some more and figure it out.

[The Grand Nudger]

They didn't have "the right equipment" Max.  It took a dozen or so to kill a cat no bigger than a dog. I can't stress enough that the archaeological record indicates that both parties were practicing a strategy of avoidance...not conflict.

Our later conflicts with the fauna...as we wiped out vast tracts of flora... color our assumptions..but, at the time, there was simply no point to either of us bothering with each other.

---

So..for reference, the most common piece of equipment we find, in the period in question, is a handaxe.  A piece of stone about the size of your mouse.

You gonna take it to fuckin mufasa with that, Max..lol?

[LostLocke]

If circumstances chance, you use your noggin some more and figure it out.

And that's exactly why we are where we are today. It's intelligence.
Primitive man, and their ancestors, didn't wonder if what they were doing made them "more manly". They only wondered if what they were doing helped them "not die".
If something made your chance at survival better and/or easier, you did it.

We figured out, "Hey, instead of hunting animals, let's bring the animals to us."
We figured out, "Hey, instead of searching for and gathering edible plants, let's bring the plants to us."
Do you think any of them said "No no, we can't do that. That'll make us soft and weak and our men won't be 'real men'"?
If we had done that, we wouldn't have developed. And again, if we hadn't done that, something else would have, and they'd be running the show instead of us.

[The Grand Nudger]

Then there's the issue of how agrarian settlement actually didn't make us softer at all.  It made us hard, hard motherfuckers, lol. It's alot of work.

---

So...more somewhat obscure facts.

In our minds, stone age people were largely encounter hunters...but judging by the taxonomy of their midden heaps...they were more likely trappers who engaged in opportunistic encounters.   We can only judge that by trash profile because snares and baskets don't preserve as well as points do.  

Taking down something like a mammoth took alot more coordination...and judging from puncture wounds on the vertebrae of those fossils we have..we can say with certainty that it was an execution at range, with the help of atlatls and points designed to cause immense blood loss (serrated clovis are the case example here).  Apparently..we mostly hunted the males, too...perhaps due to a solitary habit on their part.

We picked an animal alone..and from height and with distance and great numbers, wounded it so that it bleed out by volley fire.  We then processed the meat on site. That's not bravery...it's downright clinical efficiency, lol. Neanderthals...we think..may have tried to go all cqc on a mammoth...but if they did they were far more suited for that kind of nonsense than we are - and look where it got them.

[LastPoet]

It's not one or the other.  You combine those skills.  You approach with the right concept and the right equipment, then you execute with as much force as necessary to get the job done.  If circumstances chance, you use your noggin some more and figure it out.

You are playing too many games, instead of fresh air. :grumpy:

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Dunno.  It seems that - evolutionarily speaking - running away from large pack predators was the standard response.  Early people who stood and  fought (for example) smilodons or short-faced bears would have been at a decided disadvantage, preserving a 'flight' response for future generations.

Boru

[T0 Th3 M4X]

They didn't have "the right equipment" Max.  It took a dozen or so to kill a cat no bigger than a dog.  I can't stress enough that the archaeological record indicates that both parties were practicing a strategy of avoidance...not conflict.

Our later conflicts with the fauna...as we wiped out vast tracts of flora... color our assumptions..but, at the time, there was simply no point to either of us bothering with each other.

---

So..for reference, the most common piece of equipment we find, in the period in question, is a handaxe.  A piece of stone about the size of your mouse.

You gonna take it to fuckin mufasa with that, Max..lol?

They didn't have sticks and stones?  They didn't have reeds and various plant life to build things like netting?  Even animal carcasses can be used to build fibrous materials to build things like traps.  You don't need Walmart and Dick's Sporting Goods.  You don't need anything beyond what nature has to offer.  You just need to turn on the light bulb in your head and make something work.  Less time with the "I can'ts" and more time with the "I cans."  But that's me.  You be who you are, and I guess as long as you're happy, then more power to ya.

[Jackalope]

In our minds, stone age people were largely encounter hunters...but judging by the taxonomy of their midden heaps...they were more likely trappers who engaged in opportunistic encounters. 

This would be completely unsurprising due to the simplicity, efficacy, lower energy expenditure and far greater safety of setting simple snares vs hunting (much less hunting of apex predators). Ogg was't stupid.