I'm a big fan of Alice. Glad to see she is working in the home of my ancestors.

Most teachers/professors are like that. They are all amazing people. This talk was excellent. I couldn’t get enough of it.i am going to go find her documentary.

TheGrimReaper please enlighten us, why is she leading us in the wrong direction?

She also worked at Pizza Hut in Bristol when she was a student (late 90s) with a friend of mine. Coincidentally that friend was studying illustration at UWE and drew parts of anatomy from life (more accurately from death) in the city mortuary. Though I don't think they ever worked together in that setting!

@@nixodian why do you believe it is the wrong direction?

Your comment reads like a joke, but I fear it might be true.

How true 😆😆😆 not a joke . Funny to me just the same . But they better hurry I don't think there's that much future left . Extinction is upon the human race. Quite possibly self destruction the cause . The planet will get along better without humans .

@@michaelasbury1521 No chance. We're more resilient than cockroaches. We've survived near extinction before. The planet never has had a clue we ever existed. It's a planet. Stone and bone and wood technology survived and thrived through the last 2.5 million year long ice age. And warmer weather before and interglacial periods during. We are infinitely better prepared now for any worst case scenario. Another Chicxulub event couldn't take us all out. Humans hack it.

You know, even the ancient Greek philosophers where worried about the youth generation. I think it will turn out ok... We have never had som easy access to so much splendid information ever in the history of the humans.

@@ferengiprofiteer9145 we will probably wipe ourselves out with a 3rd World War. I support Musk's push toward Mars colonization as insurance against ourselves

She is a wonderful,informed speaker,an academic,a surgeon and other things ,and also if the truth were told for us males,she is eye candy as well !!!

Don’t count on it

evolution is not necessarily in the direction of increased intelligence.

GreenichViper the only other other that goes into menopause are the orca whales. One thing about orca whales is that the males stay with their mother for life. They will go off have sex but come right back to their mothers. So a pod of them are the mom the sons (no matter the age) and the young one (male and female). Their must be a value to the males to stay with her. Which is consistent about what she says about menopausal human women and possible value. My point is that the orcas kind of back up what she is saying. As far as we know no other mammal except orcas and humans do menopause. Strange that it is so rare in the mammal kingdom and by two species so far apart.

///to help progression by giving back knowledge and insights and wisdom to the people around you./// Yeah, but we've got facebook and instagram now, so old people are no longer needed ...apparently.

That was the norm for most of humanity's past. There are holdovers in societies with some remnant of their pre-consumerist traditions, like Japan for example, with its cultural memory of a tifme in which the elderly had an integral social role. In their case, it's preserved as a general respect for older generations, relatively speaking, and a duty to personally take care of them (often in the same home as one's spouse and kids) instead of warehousing them out of sight and mind until they die. Even that, however, is an echo of the way it once was. Up until relatively recently, the elderly who fwere still of sound mind were viewed as a repository of practical, cultural, and spiritual knowledge as a simple consequence of their age. "Progress" was imperceptible and things seemed static for most of humanity (e.g. look at the technology used in AD 0 versus AD 1000) If you were born into a way of life, you would likely learn the same occupation as your parents using the same tools, which you would then pass on to your children. Change was so gradual that it was measured in centuries, if not millennia, depending on how far back we're considering. Things accelerated with the industrial revolution so that obvious change occurred every couple generations and their grandparents' practical knowledge, while still relevant in many ways, was becoming proportionately less-so. By the time the 20th Century rolled around, that upward curve of technological advancement was already steep enough that a single individual could see it growing higher and higher within their own lifetime. Regimes that had stretched back to the Middle Ages were collapsing as "tradition" failed to act as a bulwark against the tides of modernity, led by increasingly-educated younger generations with access to education their (grand)parents couldn't have dreamed. Ever since we entered this exponential curve of technological development, paired with social revolution after social revolution, one generation's technology and norms are the next generation's relics. In the post-WWII world, with the US at the forefront, consumption became a virtue and high-value products in concert with ad agencies honed-in on the bourgeoning youth demographic, eventually leading to the youth-dominated culture with live in today. Of course a culture in which technological change occurs at blinding speed would be obsessed with the most cutting edge stuff (especially when it's intertwined with social status), and it only makes sense that the youngest generations would become the centre of that culture, having grown up in a world with a similar level of tech that they take it for granted, and would, therefore, find intuitive in a way older generations might not. That's not to mention the fact that the young of any generation are naturally programmed to take-in new information in order to learn and adapt to their surroundings, and are hyper-vigilant of trends because they spend so much time in the cultural petri-dish that is high-school and college. My point: a society obsessed with _"the new"_ is going to build a culture and economy focused on youth culture. It wasn't always this way, but especially from the '50s onward, Western-inspired consumer societies have progressively shifted the central demographic around which the entire culture revolves from younger to younger age groups. I'm not trying to come off as some grumpy old dude decrying the changing world; I'm a millennial and I love technology, but I also grew up in a really close extended family and hate the thought that some elderly are treated as if they've been sapped of their usefullness and are waiting to die. It cheers me up to hear that they likely do serve an important evolutionary role, as we are a highly-social species that's simply living in highly-irregular circumstances.

Old people are the Windows 95 of today... no longer used or compatible with any current hardware and of no interest to current users...

It's very nice to hear a bit of Bristol accent. I studied biology there but at the Polytechnic now the university of the West I think.

She is great. Need more educational talks like this!

A beautiful woman holding an ugly animal... I am not sure if enjoying seeing that.

Dreamy full stop my man.. just dreamy full stop.. especially that knowledge.. wow..

She is not telling anything though. Empty lecture.

You don't find all the "um" ticks in her speech annoying? I find it very detracting from what she's saying.

She loves the subject, it is quite obvious in her nonverbal body language. I can listen to anyone who is passionate and knowledgeable about the subject on which they are speaking, however I thoroughly enjoy listening a knowledgeable female with a pleasant voice - probably goes back to my childhood.

Where in the world is the stress to drive mutation coupled with productivity?

Eleventy.

She is indeed!

not really she does it for a living.

Alice You

It's easy when you have slides to talk about... I've done it many times.

Then you must be in the audience when I do it for 8hours.

omg same

I'm seeing her in person at hertford theater this month.

I I’m in front of you mate, thanks you 😊😊😊

I watched her in a documentary too, she was trying get us to believe that woolly mammoths lived on a diet of snow and ice in Siberia.

Well duh, they wouldn't be missing if we'd found 'em would they? Think on this: There have been animals with bones and/or shells for the last 500 millions years & virtually every species that ever existed is extinct. Less than 1% exists today - That might sound implausible in itself, until you put both facts together and realise 1% of 500 million is still 5 million years. A typical skeleton is 1 to 2% Calcium. About 4% of the Earth's crust is Calcium. There are creatures alive today we have yet to discover and that's a fraction of a percent of a fraction of a percent of what's only ever been able to exist by recycling a rare mineral from its most accessible source. Generous estimates suggest the Neanderthals were around for 400,000 thousand years and never topped 100,000 in population. It's something of a miracle we have any evidence of them; let alone a transient older species.

The ego

Chimpanzees already walk an two legs because they have stiffened lumbar vertebrae like all other great apes. Also, implying that evolution can only work on one structure at a time is an oversimplification of its process.

Probably very gradual changes to each in response to selection pressures.

I reckon they're deliberate edits for whatever reason. Or just technical faults. My first thought was edits so as not to offend. Some people still find evolution offensive. The word 'relative' was edited out. Hopefully I'm wrong.

I expect the sound man is a creationist lol

@WhoDarestheMAN gamer no that's not what Eldridge said at all. The fossil record simply shows a punctuated equilibrium, which is to say, long periods of stasis and then short periods of rapid evolution. That's just a modification of Darwin's original idea which was continual small changes. _natural selection simply keeps a species strong and mutations cause cancer or death. They don't perpetuate life_ Mutations are either beneficial, malign or neutral. Most are neutral. _They don't perpetuate life_ They sure do.

@WhoDarestheMAN gamer Either way life had to come from somewhere.

did you find anything? just put it into the search box, so far nothing that specific..

See "Epic of Gilgamesh", the Code of Hammurabi, Buddhism, & Zoroastrianism...

Professor Roberts !

SAdly her eurocentric feminist spin on the Hadza women took me out of her talk a bit. She was projecting her European views and culture onto a foreign people and making judgements based on that.

Glad you liked it!

Now ... if we follow her reasoning, that elderly people live longer after the reproductive phase of their lives because they are a repository of our knowledge and experience, now that we have Google, the largest repository of knowledge Humanity has ever known, evolution will eventually see to it that our life spans are greatly shortened to just after the menopause in women and erectile dysfunction setting in in the male component of our species ?? Just wondering.

Todd Johnson im going vegetarian ...less i.q less drama😆😩

I think fire was discovered by homo erectus. Homo habilis had a larger brain and stone tools are found with their remains, but not fire.

Todd Johnson a factor yes

Protein. Meat gave us easily digestible food, with far more benefits than plants. More energy for brain growth.

You are a slow learner if you believe any of that mush about Evolution.

To love this lecture is good, you seem to have mixed the word conference with convention?

Jack bassman Check out her BBC documentary on the human migration, its amazing.

They're British

Surely , a grave omission on her part !

This is unbearable. ?