I've tried submitting some "shorts" from Science or Nature that I find farkworth only to have them rejected only to have them appear days later after they hit a "news" site such as AP.

I didn't submit Science: How humans became social which is a much better summary of the research than the idiot UPI version.

The Science version talks about evolution of primate social structures and the new theory that such evolution didn't include a nuculear family stage - that "the solitary ancestor started banding together not in pairs, as scientists had thought, but as loose groups of both sexes".

Off course idiot UIP bases their whole writeup on the following passage which has nothing to do with the results and is just a plausible guess:

"Shultz suspects that, at this time, the nocturnal ancestors of today's primates became more active during the day. It's easier to sneak around at night when you're alone, she notes, but when you start hunting during the day, when predators can more easily spot you, there's safety in numbers"