Wild and Wooly Weeds

Prior to about 12,000 years ago we humans had lived lives of hunter-gatherers for some 200,000 years. We roamed the land, selecting what food and shelter Nature offered. We gathered and hunted the provisions we needed. Like most animals, we lived light on the land. Our numbers were few and we moved to new territories, when natural resources became scarce. Mother Nature was in the driver's seat—not us.

The accepted story of human development is that we transitioned very gradually from hunter-gatherers, by first playing a minor role as horticulturists, in the sense of coming to realize that we could encourage plants that we found useful to us, and discourage problematic plants (weeds). The major transition in our culture, however, occurred when we shifted from horticulturalists to farming, about 12,000 years ago—establishing full-fledged agriculture. There is a fine line between cultivation and agriculture... both involve planning, planting, tending, and harvesting. I think an important distinction between them is that cultivation entails working with and encouraging crops, while agriculture is more about controlling Nature.

Thus, authority and power were the role increasingly taken on by humans. That story is being challenged by recent research, which pushes our transition to agriculture at least another ten thousand years or so earlier. One of the most recent findings suggesting that we took up agriculture much earlier comes from archaeological research in Israel, which dates farming to about 23,000 years ago in the Levant. Dating techniques get ever more accurate and increasingly sophisticated analytical techniques are also yielding fascinating results. For example microanalysis of teeth plaque of skeletons reveals their eating habits; chemical analysis of fossilized poop adds to the picture; and soil analysis further broadens our understanding.

What I found captivating about this 23,000-year-old Israeli site analysis is that the researchers found that the same weeds species which plagued farmers back then are still flourishing today in gardens and fields in Israel. Many of the vegetables grown back then are no longer around—having been replaced by newer breeds—but the ancient weeds persist. (In a similar manner, Nature's insects that we consider to be pests persist.) Despite our dislike, Nature assigns a crucial task to weeds: to quickly establish themselves in disturbed soils, so as to curtail erosion. Thus we are being rather self-centered when we condemn weeds as being worthless.

It’s very interesting that Israel's farmers are today fighting battles against the same weeds their deep ancestors did. I can relate to that. Nearly four decades ago we took up residence in a very rural, wooded area in Virginia. We cleared some trees to build a house and plant a garden. Immediately thereafter, new kinds of weeds (that don't grow in the forest) found a haven in our garden. New kinds of insects (that don't grow in the forest) found our luscious vegetables. We have been fending off these weeds and bugs ever since.

I am sure that thousands of years after I’m gone, many of these same weeds and insects will continue to thrive, despite what farmers do to try to control them. They will persist, as long as future farmers continue to offer them good pickings. 

AI Oinks

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is being employed in increasingly widening applications these days—often when an enormous amount of data needs to be sifted and analyzed. AI uses machine learning algorithms to program computers, which then teach themselves how to make sense of all the reams of information.

Now comes yet another (barnyard) use of AI, from researchers at the University of  Copenhagen, in Denmark, who have been studying how to decipher the various sounds emitted by pigs. The researchers do this in order to understand the animals’ feelings and emotions. 

We humans take pride in knowing that our language is more complex than any other creature, yet we do not have the last word in communications. Other critters may not possess the ability to emit the intricate sounds we do, but they do very well in communicating, as they often supplement sounds with visual clues, smells, and even taste. For example, trees possess a multi-faceted and sophisticated means of transferring information to each other through chemicals emitted and received through leaves and roots.

Our porcine friends also use various senses other than hearing (such as sight and smell) for sending their messages, but the Danish study focused just on their sounds—oinks, sniffles, grunts, and squeals. Pigs' behaviors were observed, as sound recordings were made. The goal was to relate their emotions to their grunts. The pigs were observed both on the farm and in the laboratory. They were placed in positive circumstances to promote positive emotions—such as suckling mom, playing with their mates, being reunited with family, etc. Negative situations to induce negative emotions included fights, castration, and waiting in the abattoir. (That last one sure is negative!)

From thousands of recordings and observations of hundreds of pigs in various circumstances, the AI analysis went to work, to discern what consistent vocal messages they were relaying. In general, when pigs are in positive situations, they emit short grunts, with very little difference in amplitude. When they are stressed, they tend to call out with high-pitched squeals. (Did it take all the computing power of AI to learn that?)

The hope of the Danish researchers is to help people who work with pigs to better understand their complex oinks and grunts, both to monitor their well being and to encourage better treatment on farms. A healthier pig is a happier pig... and tastes better. When these AI studies eventually get expanded to other domestic animals, it could lead to their improved psychological well being, as well. If farmers learn to treat their animals better, maybe fewer of them would be killed for food. Wouldn't it be hard to slaughter a happy pig who was joyously oinking about the barnyard?

Extraterrestrial Expertise

Regular readers of this blog know by now that I am fascinated by the possibility of life existing on other worlds. The more science learns about the broad spectrum of life here on Earth and some of its extremes, and the more exoplanets we discover, the more likely it seems that we may not be alone in the universe; that Earth is not the sole island of life, because life is so variable and planets are so abundant. This possibility of life elsewhere has captivated humans for millennia. While it remains conjecture, astronomers have embarked upon studies in recent decades that are revealing some fascinating aspects on the issue. 

We are currently engaged in various searches of the heavens, looking for a revelatory piece of evidence that we are not alone. These studies have continually evolved, as our technology has evolved. Most of these efforts have been driven by the technology that we possessed at the time we began them. What I have found fascinating, for example, is that our SETI (search for extraterrestrial intelligence) attempts have always been based upon what we could imagine alien technology might be like at the time these projects were initiated. They later became a bit outdated, as our technology advanced; so the SETI tools were accordingly updated. 

For example, many decades ago we looked into space for telltale flashes of light. Then we imagined that alien species might be sending out electromagnetic signals—radio waves. Recently, as more and more planets have been found (we have now discovered about 5000 exoplanets), some scientists maintain that we should be looking instead for how alien civilizations have altered the atmosphere of their home planets. They may have created biosignatures of gases as we have, such as oxygen and methane. 

Thus much of our search has been based on our guesses of the nature of alien technology that we had at the time. Given that our own technology has rapidly evolved and that extraterrestrial civilizations may be unimaginably advanced—how do we know that our current search methods are even sensible?

A recent question raised by some SETI researchers suggests a different approach. Rather than look for some sort of overt communication signal, might we instead seek what are called “technosignatures?” As life on Earth has evolved, our planet's atmosphere has changed (such as the increase of oxygen and methane mentioned above). Many millions of years ago carbon dioxide was the Earth’s dominant atmospheric gas, which later gave way to oxygen, with increasing touches of methane. As global warming is currently growing, however, carbon dioxide is once again increasing. We may soon be forced to choose to engage in planetary engineering, to control climate heating, since we lack the resolve to cut back on our consumption. Might we possibly be able to observe similar kinds of changes in the atmosphere of exoplanets?

As the field of SETI advances, we will likely continue to update our searches—based upon improved estimates of the possibilities and nature of advanced alien technology. Can we imagine the paths that other civilizations may have followed? If not, we may be looking down the wrong alley and missing the truth of alien technology. It's quite possible, for example, that they long ago decided to change direction, as they realized that their technology was leading them down a destructive blind alley; as we seem to be doing. Maybe they survived by moving other options higher up on their priority list—such as placing harmony and peace above technological advances.