Interesting point by Aidan. And yes, I interpreted it in the way Gavinās comment implies it should be interpreted, partly because I think Jebari was implicitly speaking in those terms: likelihood of agriculture developing, conditional on something like anatomically modern humans existing in substantial numbers, vs likelihood of industry developing, conditional on the same thing plus on agriculture being in place.
A possible counterargument to Aidanās idea: Maybe for some purposes the number of humans between one development and the next is more relevant than the number of years between them. That āmetricā would presumably suggest the development of industry was either (a) more likely than the development of agriculture, but by a smaller margin than a focus on the number of years would suggest, or (b) less likely than the development of agriculture.
(I havenāt looked at the estimated cumulative population of humans pre-agriculture vs between agriculture and industry, so I donāt know whether this would end up suggesting (a) or (b). And in any case, our overall views should then of course also be influenced by a variety of other arguments and lines of evidence.)
Interesting point by Aidan. And yes, I interpreted it in the way Gavinās comment implies it should be interpreted, partly because I think Jebari was implicitly speaking in those terms: likelihood of agriculture developing, conditional on something like anatomically modern humans existing in substantial numbers, vs likelihood of industry developing, conditional on the same thing plus on agriculture being in place.
A possible counterargument to Aidanās idea: Maybe for some purposes the number of humans between one development and the next is more relevant than the number of years between them. That āmetricā would presumably suggest the development of industry was either (a) more likely than the development of agriculture, but by a smaller margin than a focus on the number of years would suggest, or (b) less likely than the development of agriculture.
(I havenāt looked at the estimated cumulative population of humans pre-agriculture vs between agriculture and industry, so I donāt know whether this would end up suggesting (a) or (b). And in any case, our overall views should then of course also be influenced by a variety of other arguments and lines of evidence.)