The BIOGEOGRAPHY of the Ice Age 

Hello there

Then that makes two of us

hey there cody you also have video on this topic

@@AtlasPro1 If you could only match up this video with hypothesis/theories of human evolution. That would really wrap it all together. I mean in much greater detail, and the changing bio as humans evolved from the ice age to roman times.

AlternateHistoryHub and AtlasPro are probably in my Top 10 favourite channels on youtube

Eypick 😂😂😂

as a panamenian i can confirm

*Hears deep stable voice* *instantly SMACKS the subscribe button*

What's uppp bitchisss

*millions of years later.

surely the seeds can be found, they cant have cut them all down?

@Zero 01 a mountain Ash in Tasmania is 99 metres tall, named Centurion and also Icarus Dream 97 metres. Officially measured tallest tree in Australia was 107 metres.

@@galadhremmin 107...METERS?! He a tol boi.

no! :( Did anything happen afterwards? Like maybe trying to replant some or are they all extinct?

Me thinks pale rider is full of dog dodo.

It's usually referred to as a fallin tree with the new Sprout growing from its bark.

clown clone themselves lol its called seeds. its a plant and they are not a-sexual.

all plants do that - EVERY SINGLE ONE. and i dont think its 30,000 years, the rufus in the video said 2000 ?

so every comment here is from wiztards that know nothing of what they are seeing ?

It’s almost like time travel. Imagining the same genetic codes existing for 200 minion years. Part of me wonders if there’s some sort of plant consciousness they’ve developed and what it’d be like to communicate with such a life form.

Yea this channel really did blow up

mason jean yeah, I remember those days!

Yea for real, I was bout to say he was at 120k not even that long ago

@@soap147 Lol you should look for my comment on his city video m8 ;)

only recent i have discovered the channel, incredible work, hope he will get the time and money to produce more clips per month.Respect!

Well,it is a flavor...

Anise actually. Fun fact, almost all Native American herbs have a slightly sweet, anise, or funky minty flavor. Though most aren’t used culinarily. More are used in South America. Think Mexican oregano and how it tastes. NEAT

They roamed about with a higher degree of freedom

Smoked cheese

@Rick K and *oil*

Teaming up with humans works a lot better, tho. Ask your cat or dog. * Oh and with "your cat" i meant your feline overlord.

Underrated comment

While that is very very true, I live by that same strategy, the theory that humans caused the extinction of megafauna has been debunked. Though we are very adept at wiping entire species of animals off the face of the earth today, we weren't nearly as good at it during the last ice age.

@@la7era1u54 Why were there millions of bison when Europeans arrived in North America? You cant eradicate megafauna on foot with stone-age weapons. Horses and .50 cal rifles and it's easy.

Human species sucks so bad in this respect!

it sucks that europe still lost all its megafauna compared to south asia which still has a lot of it despite hominids going into both places at the same time

@@21LAZgoo It sucks that you keep pushing your agenda feeding people with your bullshit who didn't ask.

First of all, Europe's glacial refuges were much smaller. Compare the landmass of Iberia, Italy and the Southern Balkans plus Anatolia and the Caucasus (Western Palearctic, belongs to the European biogeogrphical region) to Southern China, India and South-East Asia. Plus Iberia, Italy and the Balkans would have all been isolated due to glacial ice sheets in the Pyrenees, Alps and the Dinaric mountains. Smaller refuges means smaller population sizes, smaller population sizes means increased vulnerbility to e.g. human hunting. And then even in South Asia with its extensive habitat for megafauna Stegodon (a browsing proboscid), Plaeoloxodon namadicus (a huge elephant), Palaeoloxodon naumanni (Japanese elephant), a giant tapir, several water buffalos, Hexaprotodon (basically a hippo) and more went extinct.

Sebastian Martinez in addition, the land in the Southern Hemisphere is much closer to the equator than the land in the northern hemisphere. The southern tip of S America is only 56 degrees below the equator, whereas 56 degrees north is still below much of Siberia and Canada. And, as he mentions in the video, equatorial regions were relatively unchanged.

That's because there has been less oil exploration in the Southern hemisphere so geologists don't have the data. The Younger Dryas comet impacts were mostly in the North but the South still got the orogeny, subduction, tsunamis, volcanic activity, etc that killed 65% of all life on Earth.

@@johnperic6860 South america didn't change all that much. You still have tropical glaciers in the Andes and desert zones in the exact same places. The amazon rain forest grew considerably but that's pretty much it.

@@TheDanielRagsdale The ice sheets connected South America to Antarctica...

@@therealunclevanya no... Just no.

And that day is Today! (or fairly recently :)

@@GottaWannaDance *wipes away tear* They grow up so fast!

You guessed right :0

*Reads this comment* O,o *Looks at date of video*: 3 years ago Yeah that tracks

@@trishapellis I am so very proud of him! Are you looking through the list of older videos now?

Ya he forgot to mention those tens of thousands of years an error along with saying people from Taiwan populated Australia

Different time frames. The african humid period / green sahara started after the glacial maximum this video is about ended. Glacial maximum > african humid period > last 5000 years

@@XavionofThera We are technically in the ice age still, this video is not even on the glacial maximum specifically. Feels like you are being pedantic to me. **shrug**

@@ThrottleKitty...It is though. This video only accurately describes the climate during the glacial maximum. Before that, things were a bit wetter and the glaciers weren't quite as extensive. And we're only "still in the ice age" in the sense that glaciers still exist at the poles. We aren't in a glacial period anymore. This is an interglacial.

@@XavionofThera I suppose you are technically semantically correct, but my assertion of your pedantic tone is still valid. A brief mention of it still would have fit.

Well,the joke could work with any proboscidean

LOL :)

Q: What do Tully Monsters wear when they go swimming? Scientist: It's a vertebrate Scientist 2 : Your wrong

@@jamescanjuggle Well,they'd be technically swimming all the time

Long live dad jokes.

Less gas emition,plain n' simple

@@jakubpociecha8819 Yes. Plain and simple. You must be so smart. But how does it work?

@@hertogyarno746 A few things I know: 1. The Ozone hole was created through decades of some specific chemicals. 2. Ozone is naturally produced through thunders and other processes. 3. Said chemicals got banned pretty much worldwide. 4. A few decades later, aka now, the levels of ozone are getting back up to what it had once been. 5. Profit???

As Nero Bernardino said, the ozone layer is usually in some kind of equilibrium. Whatever dissipates or vanishes through natural processes, gets also replenished through natural processes. We disrupted this equilibrium with the large-scale production and release of chlorofluorocarbons (hydrocarbons with chlorine and/or fluorine atoms) into the atmosphere. They were used as aerosols (i.e. the gases in spraying cans etc.), in refrigerating, and as solvents. These chemicals also react with ozone in the upper atmosphere and bind the ozone, thereby depleting the ozone layer. Starting in the late 70s, and esp. with the Montreal Protocol in 1987, the countries of the world agreed to severely reduce the use of chlorofluorocarbons, and today, we nearly stopped using them. Therefore, the ozone layer started to return to its normal state, slowly closing the gap.

@@varana also we've found less harmful substitutes for CFC, so that helped in banning CFC.

very similar to natgeo hint hint lawsuit

I read that as BigGeo, and I was wondering what they are pushing

@@ivoboksem851 what does it mean?

Ok, lets found it

or for a hair cream

Agree!

Agree!

Yes !??

if you like that kinda feeling i recommend exurb1a

Russian?

@@zaidkhan6296 yeah

The closest things to your steppes left now is the nearly extinct long and short grass prairies of Canada and the central USA. Now it's mostly farm and cattle land...very little left! :(

Cool kids go here

lol

Such an epic savage moment....

I don't even know what premier chat is

@@FirstnameLastname-py3bc Its a live chat, when someone premiere his video, there's a premiere chat, basically chat in a premiere video (Its live or video upload share into live)

Best part of the video, hope it was intentional

Well he meanth the semi-desert along the coast, Western Sahara and Southern Algeria were not counted

@@Forlfir i think they're referring to the specific use of the word "Fez" being a pun?joke?

@@Forlfir and fun fact, along the coast of the Maghreb was not, as IS not semi-desert, not even close, it's tempered mild Mediterranean forests and the more continental colder Atlas mountain chain, with below that steps and hills like the Aures. Only south of that is where it starts becoming semi-arid, until you get full blown Sahara.

almost sittin at that cool 1 mill

Ferenc Gazdag Most of the world’s resources: _At the gallows_ Iron deposits: “First time?”

They were not very destructive though. On a big scale invention of oxygenic photosynthesis increased organic matter production many times compared with earlier chemosynthesis and anoxygenic photosynthesis. Biodiversity and amount of matter and energy available to biosphere as a result increased. Also, oxygenation of atmosphere happened very slowly, over the millions of years, and microorganisms can reproduce and evolve really fast, so I doubt many huge taxa died out, there were probably more than enough species in every big taxon to either adapt to oxygen, or find anaerobic niche. Most bacterial and archeal phyla diverged before the oxygenation, and they (many many of them we still see today) still survived. If most phyla died out during oxygenation, we would see "bottleneck" - only few phyla diverging before oxygenation, and most diverging after it from only few taxa, which survived the event

Humans are also the only species capable of self-loathing.

You know how small the human population was back then? No way people back then with stone spears extinct animals. The land mass to population ratio , would cause many animals to live without even seeing a human once. Killing big animals with $3000 carbon fiber crossbow is very hard let alone a stone tip spear. "Grab the spear son we are off the extinct the 1000lb cave bears and tigers and chase down the horses and mammoths." WTF?

@@Crashed131963 I belive the alternative theory to humans killing the megafauna is a supervolcano did the heavy lifting. Large animals adapt worse to massive environmental changes as a rule so theyd be more prone to extinction in the case of a large scale volcanic event.

Would've been better if you said ice age beby kil

lmao me too

@@Vic_Lit344 Agreed, now I edit it XD

@@abailumlerrad1037 lol your welcome

@@doctornefardio *K E E L*

🤣🤣😂

Yes

They are exceptions rather than the norm sadly dogs are descended from wolves which seem to have established a cooperative hunting alliance with humans not unlike what dolphins and Tuna do in the sea that eventually transitioned to domestication whereas cats were a more recent relationship related to pest problems and agriculture.

@@Dragrath1 Cats are a parasitoid.

Federico Paulo Mendoza He was talking about animals that were hunted by humans, not about predators. Predators were probably initially aggressive towards humans, to defend their hunting grounds and prey. But since we managed to always be more aggressive, it became more advantagous for survival to engange in friendly relations with humans.

@@aleksanderlenartowicz5659 No they are symbiotic. We use them for pest control and in urban enviroments for emotional wellbeing. Plus we chose to have them as pets, they are not really in a position to force their presence on us. The only parasite in the mix is Toxoplasma gondii, a sigle cell organism that infects cats and humans.

Actually, if you open a fridge, the room gets warmer. I can't explain why though, try to ask to a termophysics nerd

@@renzoraschioni7954 fridge are litrally constantly pulling heat out to cool down the inside. So when you open the fridge, the average temperature wont decrease. But by opening the door for a long time, you force the cooling system to work harder and create even more heat *flies away*

@@StratosphereTHAI thanks!! Great and clear explanation 👍

Hiawatha glacier aside (so much more is needed to determine how old that impact is) I agree that something big happened. I was quite surprised to no hear him mention it at all.

What's that?

@@Omar_ayach Research the Younger Dryas. Its a 1300 year long period at the end of the last ice age. Lots of interesting science going on with it. :)

Isn't that because the younger dryas happened sooner than the scope of this video?

Its a huge catastrophic asteroid impact that most likely ended the latest ice age and is responsible for all those extinctions. But the evidene was only discovered in 2005 which is very recently in terms of getting recognized as a mainstream scientific theory, and therefore its not taught in schools and universities yet.

Even if true, its only relevant for the Americas, the extinctions in Australia, asia, and Europe happened 30 - 40k years ago, well before the American extinctions, but still coinciding with the arrival of behaviorally modern humans.

if it was just climate change it wouldnt have been nearly as devastating. sure, it didnt help, but it was still primarily humams

@@alanivar2752 i dont understand jumping to conclusions tho, its still a mystery

@@frankiemcdonald5559 It's not exactly a "mystery". Climate changes were a regular phenomenon throughout the Quaternary, and ice ages and warm interglacials alternated as many as 8 times during the Pleistocene. Without major ecological catastrophes and mass extinctions of megafauna. Then "coincidentally" the arrival of humans comes at the same time as another climate change, not too significant in itself, and suddenly ecosystems that have evolved over millions of years since the Miocene break apart and lose the animals that held them together and functioned like keystones. To have the audacity to claim that all this has nothing to do with man, a notorious extinctionist whose destructive impact on nature is known, acknowledged, documented and undisputed, to say that it was a natural event that wiped out the megafauna with stunning precision, while leaving a number of smaller species that would have been equally affected by the changing times virtually untouched, is indeed mysterious and beyond my understanding.

@@alanivar2752 it would still be just as devastating, the eemian interglacial 130,000 years ago caused nearly all mammoths on earth to die out and forced them to only live in extremely north places

@Matthew Chenault There ya go, they no doubt did some serious damage. Algae still got them beat. That shit came around and destroyed like 98-99.9% or some shit like that lol. It fucked up the whole game man. It would be like if a similar algae or something appeared tomorrow that learned to live in Cyanide and released a metric fuck ton( that is the Scientific term I think) of Cyanide into the atmosphere replacing all the oxygen. Needless to say we would be flat out fucked and all the tech in the world couldn't save us.

It likely wasn't. The reality is that the areas with the least decline in megafauna are the areas where the climate changed the least, and the areas where the climate changed the most suffered the greatest losses. South America's vast taiga plains turned into a rainforest, Eurasia and North America radically rearranged there biospheres as the vast sheets of ice retreated. Even when we look at Australia, likely half of the forested area of the ancient continent is under water today. In contrast, Africa's deserts are still in basically the same places, Indomalasia's rainforests are still in basically the same places (except where we've chopped them down). Grasslands & forests have shrunk or grown, but are still in basically the same places.

Why wouldn't animals be afraid of other animals that kill them and eat them? It just makes sense...

bnet sucks I mean that depends on how you define “successful”. I think population size is a bit misleading, since the vast majority of those animals and plants are being controlled by humans and killed for human production and consumption. Most domesticated plants and animals would have a terrible time if humans went extinct. That said, I think you’re still right about being cozier with humans makes animals more successful, especially for pests and weeds. I expect rats, Argentine ants, and tumbleweeds would do just as well if we went extinct right now.

@@DneilB007 not to mention that some species of aspen trees, field mice, and hares went extinct at the same time. did humans kill all of one specific species of field mouse? No, its seems to be more closely related to climate.

@@DneilB007 But humans did play a big role in the decline of the megafauna, the best example the Australian megafauna

Remember that one time when earth was covered in purple bacteria which literally farted us in a 200 million years lasting, all encompassing global iceage?

without land plants there wouldn't be life on land

That would explain the event if the Weichselian transition (the last major climate change that ended the last Ice Age and started the current Holocene) was a one-off event. Unfortunately this is far from reality. During the whole Quaternary (Pleistocene + Holocene) the earth experienced as many as 8 such climate changes, i.e. prolonged Ice Ages periodically interrupted by warm interglacial periods, yet the effects on the megafauna were negligible in that they didn't cause nearly as much interuption and didn't produce megafaunal mass extinctions. Actually, the last of these interglacials (that is to say the last before the current Holocene), the Eem interglacial roughly 130.000 years ago, was both longer and warmer than the current Holocene, yet the mammoth-steppe fauna survived throughout without trouble. Similarly, temperate faunal assemblages such as the European Palaeoloxodon-fauna (straight-tusked elephant, two Rhinocerus-species, deer etc.) respectively its ecological predecessors (southern mammoth and different rhino-species) survived throughout all glacial peaks, some of which were more pronounced than the last one that coinceded with the extinction of for instance the straight-tusked elephants, without trouble, even though they were restricted to small refuges. This is a major flaw in the climate-change argument, and I don't see it being adequately adressed by those who claim the climate did the megafauna in.

@@gutemorcheln6134 wow your so well spoken on this. You've clearly been keeping your mind on this fresh. Thanks for responding to this in such a way I couldn't have succinctly, saved me from fearing my comment not coming across well.

@@lawrencemorris2261 the Eemian interglacial 130,000 years ago caused massive population collapses for mammoths and restricted them to only extreme north places, if the younger dryas impacts that happened 12900 years ago happened after the eemian interglacial, the species we saw go extinct during the younger dryas would have went extinct then

@@21LAZgoo Lol this is blatantly wrong. The woolly mammoth, among other emblematic mammoth steppe species, _coexisted_ with completely temperate faunas during parts of the Eemian (Stuart A.J., 1976). Why don't you at least _try_ to be factually accurate, huh?

@@lawrencemorris2261 Thanks man. Actually, I made two mistakes (fixed them), but I appreciate it.

And bricks for half as interesting

@@Iberian49 still waiting for the brics video

RLL is Corollas, not Empires

*toyota corola for RLL

*ti dis dae* we still dont know why we head boss music

That makes more sense. You know how small the human population was back then? No way people back then with stone spears extinct animals. The land mass to population ratio , would cause many animals to live without even seeing a human once. Killing big animals with $3000 carbon fiber crossbow is very hard let alone a stone tip spear. "Grab the spear son we are off the extinct the 1000lb cave bears and tigers and chase down the horses and mammoths." WTF?

Jem Baucan - The narrator introduced correlation of megafauna die-off and expansion of the human species with a sinister silkiness. It stinks of white man’s guilt and politically correct scientific group think. Otherwise, the video offers exceptionally vivid explanation.

You mean the impact event that happened long after the megafaunal extinctions in Australia, Asia, and Europe already happened? Also, humans of that time had bows, blow-darts, serrated throwing spears & knives, fire, and quite possibly dogs (depending on whether you trust the genetic or archeological dates nore).

@@mostlynew Well, sadly the facts don't care whether something "stinks of white man's guilt and politically correctness". It is what is is. And the facts overwhemingly point to the fact that humans were the main drive behind the extinction of the megafauna.

@@mostlynew ikr, and that graph he showed of human arrival is outdated too plus most of the megafauna in australia were extinct 15000 years before the first humans even arrived, and even the few megafauna species that went extinct when humans were there for a while is debated

I would assume it was a situation similar to modern Inuit people where they effectively live off of any animal species (whales, bears, anything edible to be honest). This could've eventually lead to people actually discovering the lush forests and plains further south, where presumably they settled (or in the case of the Inuit, stay). But then again, that is my assumption.

Basically, as the climate warmed up the mammoth steppe slowly moved north-east towards Siberia and Alaska, the herds of mammoths, musk ox, rhinos, etc moved with the steppe and the humans followed. I read - can't quite recall where - that for a time the first humans and megafauna from Eurasia to make it into North America were actually trapped in Beringia/Alaska as the steppes had fully retreated from mainland Eurasia before the glaciers had opened up enough in Alaska for them to make their way into the rest of North America.

@@TheElizondo88 ditto. I would think that land bridge was always in flux, going from somewhat favorable steep, to inhospitable desert, and to being underwater. This is why you have the existence of Dwarf mammoths along the islands near Siberia and Alaska. Also, I read somewhere that while there were a few waves of humans that colonized the Americas, the Native Americans of today came from possibly just one core group of maybe 10,000 Ancient Beringian people that crossed over 20,000 years ago. The lineage does exists in Siberia but seperates from native Americas 17,000 years ago. Seems at some point when humans existed in the area there was a short lived "decent" land bridge, but its was probably not as lush and inviting as it may have been during that pre-human time when animals moving back and forth between the two continents. I think if the land bridge was more lush and long lasting you would have more human diversity in the Americans.

To add on to what others said, for thousands of years humans in the Americas lived basically _only_ in Alaska, as you couldn’t easily go east or south. As the ice sheets melted and retreated a “corridor” of sorts formed in between Alaska and the Cascadia region to the southeast. From there humans were able to spread rapidly across the continents. They went south from Alaska before going east.

They may not have done so at all. The easiest route might have been along the coastlines, once they developed decent kayaks or the like. They'd have lost access to the big, meaty megafauna animals such as caribou, bison, horses, and mammoth, but those are hard to kill with only spears anyway. And they'd have *gained* access to the arctic waters' abundant fish, seals, walruses, Stellar's sea cows, and maybe even whales.

Hail Giratina The true god IKR?

Um. Armadillos are quite common all over the Southern U. S.

@@chris41952 armadillos were originally from south america, as are opossums. both made it across the isthumus a few million years ago, alongside tapirs, capybaras, ground sloths, glyptodonts, and phorusrachids (aka terror birds). aside from some feral populations of the first two in florida, they went the way of much of the megafauna

there's also a llama, which as a camelid is originally a north american mammal lol

And the Racoons in South America...

*Humans and climate change

I don't really buy the human theory. Mega fauna were very dangerous. Just look at our huge fauna today....imagine hunting an elephant or rhino with spears. It's a death sentence. I can see wiping out the more docile ones, but the dangerous ones?

@@pugilist102 I think you underestimate humanity... The more dangerous and impossible the task, the more effort we put into beating it. It's our defining trait.

pugilist102 Those Megafauna are worth a ton XP and resources that nothing else in the environment gives in one fell swoop. One mammoth is worth a lot and taking one down is probably a sign of prestige in their culture. Look at what we did to the whales once our technology caught up.

@@TheOtherNeutrino I don't know. There's a lot of other game that are more numerous and less dangerous. Perhaps human hunting has become so efficient that only fast animals and those with high reproductive rates survived? We killed off the mammoth, wooly rhino, but not buffalo, deer, camel?

@@hannobaalii_makendalii I'm not saying that it's Aliens, but it is Aliens

@@astranix0198 it is well within the realm of logical possibilities. Gene Roddenberry got his ideas from somewhere. Most folks still don't know about black skinned GIANTS with 6 toes/fingers and double rows of teeth. The thought that their females were MAURSUPIAL hue-women is off the rails too. Much is known by el-ites, and hidden from the de-letes.