# Why can't babies walk?



## Aizceq (Dec 27, 2014)

Because .. In womb, they ate shit and drank their own piss -> used those nutrients only in development of brain


----------



## TwinAnthos (Aug 11, 2014)

Why are all the strange comments bade by INXXs'?


----------



## Cesspool (Aug 8, 2014)

Because they're too weak and they don't know how.


----------



## inthesnowman (Jun 18, 2014)

UnicornRainbowLove said:


> A newborn baby doesn't even have its senses developed. It cannot see, has little sense of balance and needs lots of sleep just to process all the new impressions. It spends all its time and energy transforming the brain so that it can actually sense correctly.
> 
> And yeah, it's too weak and weird to be able to stand up without a considerable balance.


Babies can see at birth... i don't know who told you they can't. They have poor eyesight, but they can see.


----------



## UnicornRainbowLove (May 8, 2014)

inthesnowman said:


> Babies can see at birth... i don't know who told you they can't. They have poor eyesight, but they can see.


I know. For all practical purposes people who can only see everything in a highly blurry manner are called blind though.


----------



## inthesnowman (Jun 18, 2014)

UnicornRainbowLove said:


> I know. For all practical purposes people who can only see everything in a highly blurry manner are called blind though.


Not necessarily. Some people with migraines lose their vision temporarily, they aren't blind. The sight comes back very quickly, but being in a womb filled with fluid and very little light does not make it easy to see when you enter the outside world.


----------



## Toru Okada (May 10, 2011)

Babies don't need to walk because you can throw them.


----------



## Kynx (Feb 6, 2012)

Upright pelvis shape isn't an ideal birthing pelvis. Our baby's have limited space in the birth canal, which is why they need to twist when moving through it. 










large head + upright pelvis = now or never


----------



## Thalassa (Jun 10, 2010)

Diligent Procrastinator said:


> Because human babies don't need to run from predators. Many other animal babies are born walking as usually the mother cannot carry the baby, and those who couldn't walk on birth died out, leaving only animals that have the ability to run or become caged at a lower. Humans, however, can survive even in very premature conditions, so humans are just the top of the food chain, and can afford to have premature babies.


Then how do you explain marsupials? Apparently pigs and dolphins and chimps are smarter than marsupials, but they also give birth to premature young, which they carry in a pouch.


----------



## inthesnowman (Jun 18, 2014)

Thalassa said:


> Then how do you explain marsupials? Apparently pigs and dolphins and chimps are smarter than marsupials, but they also give birth to premature young, which they carry in a pouch.


Marsupials evolved in a very dangerous environment. The benefit of having very premature young is that with the high mortality rate of their young a marsupial can easily and quickly replace a dead baby. Marsupials typically have another fetus ready to crawl into the pouch at any given moment.


----------



## Death Persuades (Feb 17, 2012)

Thalassa said:


> Then how do you explain marsupials? Apparently pigs and dolphins and chimps are smarter than marsupials, but they also give birth to premature young, which they carry in a pouch.


They have the means to carry the baby, hence can also afford premature young...................


----------



## Fredward (Sep 21, 2013)

All their energy reserves are tied up in shrieking and dripping from their numerous orifices.


----------



## LibertyPrime (Dec 17, 2010)

conscius said:


> It seems most animals that can walk, can do so within days of birth. It takes much longer in people. What it is it, one year, two years? Why?
> 
> Is the baby's head too heavy for the body? Muscles weak? Some important neurons or connections are not formed? I appreciate the scientific explanations if you've studied human development.


Scientists have figured out the underlying reason why human babies can't walk at birth while foals and other hoofed animals get up and go within hours of being born. Turns out, all mammals essentially take their first steps at the same point in brain development.

Human brain development however takes longer then most mammals.


----------



## Wonszu (Sep 25, 2013)

conscius said:


> It seems most animals that can walk, can do so within days of birth. It takes much longer in people. What it is it, one year, two years? Why?
> 
> Is the baby's head too heavy for the body? Muscles weak? Some important neurons or connections are not formed? I appreciate the scientific explanations if you've studied human development.


Because of the relatively big brain and problems of giving birth. Babies are born underdeveloped in comparison to other animal babies. At birth newborns heads are almost one half of the body length already. If the baby had to learn how to walk within days or weeks it would need more developed brain and those are bigger in size. It means that a head would be even bigger and giving birth to such big headed baby would be impossible. In other word when born, human babies are still on stage where normal animals would be still in womb. Their brains are still growing and certain areas are not ready for outside world like motor skills or sight. That's why human babies are so vulnerable and can't even hold on to mother like other primates - we are paying the costs of having big brain in comparison to body. You want to have a big brain? You have to be born earlier than you should.


----------



## kannbrown (Oct 3, 2014)

Big brains. Literally. We can only develop so long in the womb before the head would make our exit impossible. So, the head to body (and neck) ratio means we're born not even able to hold the damn thing up, much less walk upright. So, we can walk right off and sacrifice brain power, or give up immediate mobility in return for a bigger frontal lobe. It's a trade off.


----------



## Word Dispenser (May 18, 2012)

Bishop said:


> The Buddha has disproven all of you. According to legend, when Siddhartha Gautama was born, he stood up and walked seven steps to the north, and every place the baby Buddha placed his foot, a lotus flower bloomed.


Yeah, but Buddha was born from a space craft.


----------



## Golden Rose (Jun 5, 2014)

Because going into labor and birthing a fully functional toddler with the proper bone structure to walk would be a fate worse than medieval torture. Ginormous baby heads are already bad enough.


----------



## inthesnowman (Jun 18, 2014)

Hotaru said:


> Birthing a fully functional toddler with the proper bone structure to walk is a fate worse than medieval torture.


All the babies in my family average around 10 lbs. Quite a few of them land over the 10lb mark. That alone is a fate worse than death, a toddler would rip me in half.


----------



## Gossip Goat (Nov 19, 2013)

Half (or more than half) of the responses were bashing on babies and trying to be funny (aka not taking the thread seriously), and less than half were actually informative. Though this question could have been asked on google.

Let me google that for you


Results:

Are Our Big Brains the Reason Newborns Can't Walk? - Scientific American


* *








> But at some point, the selection for bigger and bigger brains collided head-on, so to speak, with the narrow pelvis. If babies’ heads got any bigger, they would get stuck in the birth canal and kill both mother and child. Although natural selection worked to maximize what could be done—for instance, babies’ heads compress as they twist their way around the bones in the pelvis—there simply is not enough room for a big, mature brain to pass through.
> 
> As it turned out, the evolutionary answer was to let the brain keep growing outside the womb before it matures. So in contrast to other mammals, humans have a good bit of development to do after birth. The result is a relatively undeveloped infant who needs lots of care and can do much less for itself than other newborn primates.








Why newborn babies can't walk



* *






> Their results, reported in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) in the U.S. this week indicate that the mass of the adult brain accounts for 94 percent of the variance between species in the time from conception to walking, so mammals with larger brains, such as humans, take longer to master walking than species with smaller brains.
> 
> Read more at: Why newborn babies can't walk







A newborn infant can take steps. Why can’t she walk? | BrainFacts.org Blog

Study Reveals Why Infants Can't Walk


----------



## Shahada (Apr 26, 2010)

Because babies are fucking stupid, OP.


----------



## 1000BugsNightSky (May 8, 2014)

Why can't babies jump?


----------



## inthesnowman (Jun 18, 2014)

Moonious said:


> Why can't babies jump?


All I can think about is the little bunny butthole in this picture


----------



## johnnyyukon (Nov 8, 2013)

LOS ANGELES--A surprising new study released Monday by UCLA's Institute For Child Development revealed that human babies, long thought by psychologists to be highly inquisitive and adaptable, are actually extraordinarily stupid.

The study, an 18-month battery of intelligence tests administered to over 3,500 babies, concluded categorically that babies are "so stupid, it's not even funny."

According to Institute president Molly Bentley, in an effort to determine infant survival instincts when attacked, the babies were prodded in an aggressive manner with a broken broom handle. Over 90 percent of them, when poked, failed to make even rudimentary attempts to defend themselves. The remaining 10 percent responded by vacating their bowels.

"It is unlikely that the presence of the babies' fecal matter, however foul-smelling, would have a measurable defensive effect against an attacker in a real-world situation," Bentley said.

Another test, in which the infants were placed on a mound of dirt outdoors during a torrential downpour, produced similarly bleak results.

"The chicken, dog and even worm babies that we submitted to the test as a control group all had enough sense to come in from the rain or, at least, seek shelter under a leafy clump of vegetation or outcropping of rock," test supervisor Thomas Howell said. "The human babies, on the other hand, could not grasp even this incredibly basic concept, instead merely lying on the ground and making gurgling noises."







According to Howell, almost 60 percent of the infants tested in this manner eventually drowned.

Some of the babies tested were actually so stupid that they choked to death on pieces of Micronaut space toys. Others, unable to use such primitive instruments as can openers and spoons due to insufficient motor skills, simply starved to death, despite being surrounded by cabinets full of nutritious, life-giving Gerber-brand baby-food products.

Babies, the study concluded, are also too stupid to do the following: avoid getting their heads trapped in automatic car windows; use ice to alleviate the pain of burn injuries resulting from touching an open flame; master the skills required for scuba diving; and use a safety ladder to reach a window to escape from a room filled with cyanide gas.

"As a mother of four, I find these results very disheartening," Bentley told reporters. "I can honestly say that the effort I have expended trying to raise my children into intelligent beings may have been entirely wasted--a fool's dream, if you will."

Study results also prompted a strong reaction from President Clinton. "All of us, on some primitive, mammalian level, feel a great sense of pride in our offspring," Clinton said. "It is now clear, however, that these feelings are unfounded. Given the overwhelming evidence of their profound stupidity, we have no choice but to replace our existing infant population with artificially incubated simu-drones, with the eventual goal of phasing out the shamefully stupid human baby forever."

(The Onion)


----------



## 1000BugsNightSky (May 8, 2014)

inthesnowman said:


> All I can think about is the little bunny butthole in this picture


No, no, no. The focus is on the bunny that doesn't have one.


----------



## inthesnowman (Jun 18, 2014)

Moonious said:


> No, no, no. The focus is on the bunny that doesn't have one.


Yes butt.. look at the little bunny butthole... appreciate it.


----------



## Golden Rose (Jun 5, 2014)

inthesnowman said:


> Yes butt.. look at the little bunny butthole... appreciate it.


The bunny on the left sure is enjoying the view.
I love how it looks like they're checking out the goods.


----------



## bigstupidgrin (Sep 26, 2014)

They aren't trying hard enough because you sissies give everybody participation trophies!


----------



## Donkey D Kong (Feb 14, 2011)

y can't Metroid crawl?


----------

