Could Humans have still evolved in a world like this, or would climate and resources lead to some other animal(s) achieving sapience? Would any creature even be able to evolve sapience in a world like this? Would there be a need?
Would animals in a world like this resemble modern or prehistoric ones at all, or be completely alien?
Other urls found in this thread:
atmosphere and gravity?
In reality, the atmosphere would probably be toxic to any modern or ancient animal on Earth, but for this let's assume it's the same as modern Earth's.
I don't know if gravity would change or not in a world like this.
Completely alien OP. You're pretty much changing the world's geography and climate from the ground up, Earth life will not remotely resemble anything close to what we have today.
Obviously humans would evolve to be inside out
You did it wrong OP
Where are the land bridges that used too be rivers?
>Could Humans have still evolved in a world like this
No.
>or would climate and resources lead to some other animal(s) achieving sapience?
Impossible to say. There's no reason to think of sapience as the end goal of any chain of evolution.
>No.
Why not?
Because the conditions would be entirely different, which would lead to an entirely different evolutionary chain.
Humans wouldn't have naturally evolved here, too many different factors.
Humans could probably survive there though.
>evolution
Naive. Humanity still hasn't figured out how life works.
>North and South reversed
Are the weather patterns also inverted or are they completely different ?
>there's now way less water
probably no life at all.
Are you retarded?
The bodies of water are so much smaller in OP, that the atmosphere would probably be unbreathable by modern man.
Sentience? We're talking can primordial soup even take place in the first place.
Intelligent life would be more like merfolk. Also, it seems like the icecaps would melt faster in this world, flooding a bit of the north and south.
Why would we evolve unto mermen when most of the world is land
Why do we walk on land when most of the world is water?
Depends on the tectonic shift throughout the ages
Dolphins are assholes so we moved out and don't talk to them anymore.
Sapience doesn't seem to be too useful until you get your hands on fire. Why is that all our fellow Homo are extinct?
There's vastly less water on this planet than there is on regular Earth, and so less chances for life to develop at all. If life ever did manage to get going, it's almost guaranteed there'd be nothing like humans there.
Why do I get the feeling that this is ripped straight from Requiem Vampire Knight?
>Could human's have evolved in such a world?
Yes
>Would they have evolved in such a world?
Probably not, assuming you still end up with a sentient race, you'd be looking at something a lot more resistant to heat and requiring less water.
Are you seriously suggesting that we evolved on land and not the ocean because there's less land? Buddy, I'm no doctor but I think you may have a touch of the downs.
Humans couldn't, but Inverted Humans could.
Assuming the temperature is very close to Earth's temperature, it should be pretty similar. Of course, if Earth's orbit is kept identical while the water ratio is changed, the temperature will probably be very different.
My biggest worry would be the effect on weather patterns. But I don't know enough about weather systems to say if the weather would be more intense/less intense, more rainy/less rainy, etc.
I think the most interesting thing would be the Pangea-like fully-connected landmass. The history of evolution has been very strongly affected by the divisions of continents.
Maybe humans wouldn't evolve along exactly the same route, but I see no reason why a sapient creature wouldn't eventually evolve. Any useful adaptation is likely to eventually repeat itself across large enough timescales, even if it takes slightly different forms. Flight has evolved separately 4 times on Earth.
An inverted human would have bone where there's flesh and flesh where there is bone... A giant cockroach with an exoskeleton!
The biggest issue I have with this map is turning Canada's and Finland's glacial lakes into those tiny fucking islands.
No. Just no. Jesus. Why would there ever be such things?
Why does any island exist - they manage to be above sea level.
What, insects, birds, bats, and...? The winged reptiles just glide, right?
Modern fossil studies believe that Pterosaurs were capable of long-distance sustained flight (before they went extinct).
go to bed christfag
OP here with a couple more questions:
Would mountain ranges be able to form on this Earth? Aren't those mostly based on tectonic plates moving underwater?
And could salt water from without mountains? Doesn't rainfall wash sediment and salt off mountains into the water, or does erosion break rocks into minerals and those get mixed with the water?
I don't know a lot about geology.
I thought it looked familiar.
It would be a very, very dry planet, with barely any plant life, thus affecting entire evolution cycle, not just existence of human.
Not to mention it makes zero sense tectonic-wise.
So no. Not only the planet makes zero sense, but expecting from it to end up with anything even remotely resembling real world species is naive as fuck.
Thanks for the link. Looks neat.
Erosion did away with them. They're not bridges, they'd be really long and twisted peninsulas.
Given the vast deserts I think that arabs would evolve eventually. So no.
Capital of Dystopia is Dolon
Can't say I'm surprised.
Termites hoi
Because we fucked them in to our species or killed them because they looked similar enough to be a threat but dissimilar enough to be identified as an enemy. Well, that or they just didn't survive the harsh rigors of nature and died out on their own, in which case we just outlasted them.
Sea level is not a magic level where water suddenly condenses or evaporates. That's why the Panama Canal has locks, because one ocean is higher than the other. The issue with a map like in OP is that it is inverted land/water without regards to how water would settle. If you invert elevation but keep the amount of water constant, the world is still mostly covered in water, and the shore lines are way different than just inverted terrain on a map.
In the case that there really is that small of water amount, you're less worried about human life forming and more worried about surface temperatures and the planet's ability to regulate its own temperature to a livable zone.
>If you invert elevation but keep the amount of water constant
That's a map I'd like to see. I imagine it would be pretty unrecognizable.
Humans would evolve eventually, but the Mahars would be first and keep humans as food and slaves.
The Mahars?
The space marines. They have missile pistols, autism-powered armor, and masturbate to golden stuff.
Same, user. That would be awesome.