Genetically that's more or less true. However, developmentally they were likely to suffer from various issues that limit intelligence. Things like poor diet/starvation, parasites, and limited socialization can have a dramatic impact.
But what if they weren't starving? What if they had a rich social structure, where children could learn from directly observing their leaders?
I'm not convinced they were starving "cavemen". If they couldn't cut it, Mother Nature would just kill them off - unlike modern, "civilized" people. They had better use of their brains than we do in day-to-day survival.
There is a large gap between survival and having a well-balanced diet for 13+ developmentally critical years. As strange as these sounds, the US actually has problems in this area resulting in a noticeably shorter population. There where likely successful tribes in the short term 45,000 years ago where people actually grew to 6 feet in height, but the average case is likely worse.
One thing to consider is population growth was fairly slow overall. Just 5% every 100 years and 2 people grow to ~6.8 billion in 45,000 years and there where far more than 2 people back then.
This surprising reappraisal of American and European physiques is the work of researcher John Komlos of Munich University. 'Much of the difference is due to the great social inequality that now exists in the United States,' Komlos told The Observer last week. 'In Europe, there is - in most countries - good health service provision for most members of society and plenty of protein in most people's diets. As a result, children do not suffer illnesses that would blight their growth or suffer problems of malnutrition. For that reason, we have continued to grow and grow.'
All I've seen indicates that hunter gatherer populations were more likely to be taller than most historical peasant populations. As a consequence of a peasant's diet being less nourishing.
Sure, peasant populations where often really short relative to us for a range of reasons. But, but that says little about 45,000 era hunter gather lifestyles.
PS: I have wondered if part of the disdain historic rulers had for the lower classes was not just education, but also poor nutrition lowering IQ's. Diet can easily make a 30 point difference in IQ which is huge.
You are not using facts to prove your point. It's basically the same sort of ignorance that people use to deny global warming. "I not convinced that humans can change the climate". If you have some facts that you'd like to share, please do. Making up really clever shit that can't be verified doesn't help. In fact, it could be the same human flaw that explains why it took us 45,000 years to get where we are today.
Am I in the middle of a fuck wad nerd debate? I time travel 45,000 years into the past. Will I be able to survive? If not that proves humans were just as smart then as they are now. Where's that pg "Life is Short" article?
