Just in context, you're arguing against a random point I made in tangent to the main discussion here, but OK. If you feel you need something to knock against, hello. So...

No, not without evidence. Simply just evidence that you don't want to see or don't think exists, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. I get if you look at the same stuff and reach different conclusions. But you say you think not hearing about stuff is strong evidence against. I don't think so, that you've never heard of it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

You want to ask for "evidence"...can you really provide any evidence either way? Can you give me like a study that compares hunter-gatherer groups and shows a majority of them do most of their hunting during the day? No. So don't try to talk about evidence as if you're backing up your claims with it. How ridiculous.

We're both just thought experimenting. So...Comparing humans to other primates it stupid. We're an apex predator. Our ancestors even more so re hunting. Just think about it. What will we eat? When will it be easier to catch that? How do other super predators hunt? At night. We were hunting experts. Our hunting behaviors would probably be similar to other hunting experts. "Hunt at night" describes every spec ops outfit ever, as well as big cats.

We're evolved enough to hunt at night in moonless nights I'd say your "evolutionary evidence" which you claim supports your idea, actually fully supports what I'm saying instead.

You don't seem like you're open to changing your mind or learning something new here, so I don't expect you to respond and go, "Oh yeah, I hadn't thought of that. Good point."

All that hot air and you didn't put any evidence forward. I'm open minded, but you're not giving me anything to work with here.

Haha, i assure you the air is very cool. Did you give any either? No. We're both just thought experimenting. Just seemed fine to work with that until you got beat. Now your just pretending your don't get any evidence, when you never had any to start with. Don't a pretender! Own it, you lost.

I lost alright, I lost time and opportunity to learn something by arguing with someone of your caliber.

So you didn't learn? Told you (my other account I put a long noprocrast on). And if you did, who's fault is that? You want to blame someone but yourself? That's your responsibility, not mine, of course, because what you think and react is up to you, not me. You could have learned something, but you weren't open to it. You pretended everything I said was wrong, because it wasn't what you said, and didn't conform to your view.

When you missed your opportunities to learn, because you wanted to look "right" instead:

1.

You: no one hunts at night, no blue light. Me: paper says night blue light. Not you: Ok, you're right, blue light.

2.

Actually you: No solo human night hunters! Me: packs. Not you: You're right, packs. But night?

3.

Actually you: NO evidence for night! Me: Night makes sense, here's examples. But consider...No "evidence" for anything, neither of us know, we're just thinking about it. Not you: OK, you're right, night makes sense, and btw, you're right, I've offered no evidence either. Let's keep thinking

4.

Actually you: Still no evidence!

So the pattern seems to be, when you've been outdone in thinking, you retreat into a cave crying for more "evidence" when that was never the currency you dealt with in the first place, and you were content to base your existing views on zero evidence, but not content to hear views of others without evidence. What can explain that except a form or arrogance, where your view is someone necessarily "more true" than someone else's? Or a form of fear, where you are unable to admit that someone knows something you don't? (I find this to be common in engineers perhaps because their wallet size is tied to their percieved "knowledge size" ~~ but I always wonder, how can knowledge get bigger if you cannot say, "I don't know, thanks for teaching me")

You had at least 3 places you could have learned something, and explored the topic together, but instead of doing that...you just kept saying, basically, "What you say is wrong, I'm right".

Maybe you just don't trust yourself to think yourself to some new perspective, you need someone else (with "authority" or "evidence") to tell you, 'this has been "proved", now you can "trust" it.' Or maybe you were just not willing to admit you didn't know and choose to become open to learning something from someone else...because...you think you're smarter than or more experienced than everyone so you couldn't learn from them, as that would challenge your precious belief of your superiority? I don't think it's what you "know" that makes you "superior" or not, I think it's your ability to "know", to be open, and to think. It's possible we just have different ideas of that, and each of us is pursuing our own idea of the best thing to do. I get you want evidence, (who doesn't) but it's disingenuous to demand of others that when you don't even demand that of yourself.

I don't want to think you're one of those irretrievably arrogant people who can never ever admit they were wrong, but I've often been optimistically biased towards seeing a fantasy of the good in people long past it should have been evident to me that the reality of them didn't live up to that. Maybe you really are like that. But I prefer to think it's simply a misunderstanding, and you were not understanding things or having a bad day or something.

So I wish you have a better 2021! Make it great :p ;) xx