Phillip Tobias

22 views
Skip to first unread message

littor...@gmail.com

unread,
Aug 7, 2022, 7:01:12 AMAug 7
to

I Envy JTEM

unread,
Aug 7, 2022, 7:07:20 PMAug 7
to
littor...@gmail.com wrote:
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xj0h-HOZHMk

Well you're up against three insurmountable obstacles, or
so it seems:

#1. The near impossibility of unlearning.

People learned savanna idiocy, it's been pounded into skulls
for generations so you're not just asking them to learn
something new, you're asking them to unlearn something old.

#2. Unrelenting snobbery.

There is no such thing as a classless society and FROM IT'S
VERY BEGINNINGS paleo anthropology has been top-down,
authoritarian nonsense. Even before Piltdown Man, we had
Darwin whose idea of "Evolution" exactly matched the views
of Stalin & Mao only they REJECTED EVOLUTION! Seriously,
the communist world REJECTED EVOLUTION for decades,
and in it's place they taught a competing theory that was a
very close match to Darwin's ideas. And why not? They both
plagiarized the same source: Lamarckism. But Darwin was
one of their own so instead of the real geniuses like Wallace
or Mendel they heaped credit & honors upon the undeserving
blue blood...

#3. It's all politics.

"Out of Africa" purity isn't just politics but official policy.

The evil in charge has decided that their racism is legitimate
and if everyone knew what they knew then they'd be just as
racist, so they have to hide the truth. Because racism never
existed before, right? I mean, nobody ever thought racism
was legitimate, and certainly not before the 20th century, so
if anyone finds out about facts then suddenly racism will
exist and... and... well, that's about it.

But Out of Africa is official policy. Contradictory facts, competing
ideas and alternative explanations of even the "Accepted" data
are not entertained.

Interbreeding was virtually never in doubt. It had been established
before I was born. Yet, it was never ever acknowledged until 2010
when the Neanderthal genome was published.

Why?

All the fake DNA "data" proving Out of Africa? It's all based on
assumptions that we know aren't true -- like that mtDNA isn't
subject to selection/evolutionary pressures -- or even the cold
hard fact of the LM3 insert along Chromosome 11, proving
that BILLIONS of people can trace their ancestry to Oceania. And,
what's more, it's far older than any "Mitochondrial Eve" if we go
by the standards of the "Out of Africa" purists... Their own
damn standards!

IF and I do mean IF we interpret ALL THE DNA EVIDENCE the same
way the Out of Africa purists interpret their "Mitochondrial Eve"
data, modern man began in Australia or vicinity, then migrated into
Africa...

Not saying that's right, but it does clearly prove that the status quo
is wrong. And this leaves us with a rather interesting predicament
where we must conclude that all the top-tier paleo anthropologists
are morons, knuckle dragging imbeciles who are lucky to survive
without drowning in their own urine, they're so stupid, or they have
a socio-political agenda and NOT one of science.

Yeah, they can go ahead and bite me... the twits.



So that's what you're up against.



-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/691908725120876544

littor...@gmail.com

unread,
Aug 8, 2022, 12:14:49 PMAug 8
to
Op maandag 8 augustus 2022 om 01:07:20 UTC+2 schreef I Envy JTEM:


> > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xj0h-HOZHMk

Yes, I fully agree.
Sooner or later, the littoral theory will be accepted.
There are astonishing parallels to the late acceptance of e.g. plate tectonics.
Hardy & Morgan died too early, but I hope I'll live long enough to see our ideas accepted...

At first sight, the savanna idiocy is not idiotic:
many anthropologists still reason:
our nearest relatives are the African Pan & Gorilla,
so "evidently" (if you neglect parallel evolution), the hominid LCA resembled the Afr.apes,
Afr.apes live in forests & are QP, we live outside the forest & are BP,
hence leaving the forest explains the transition QP->BP.
(of course, this is a beautiful example of the logical fallacy: "post hoc ergo propter hoc").

They forget that savanna baboons are more QP than forest baboons etc.
> https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/691908725120876544

DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves

unread,
Aug 8, 2022, 8:01:15 PMAug 8
to

> our nearest relatives are the African Pan & Gorilla,

[But our morphology is closer to Asian arboreal apes]

> Afr.apes live in forests & are QP [on the ground and BP on branches]

we live in [shelters constructed from the forest] & are BP,

> savanna baboons are more QP than forest baboons etc.

Irrelevant. Our bipedalism originated arboreally.
-
Snipped trash.

littor...@gmail.com

unread,
Aug 9, 2022, 12:13:22 PMAug 9
to
Op dinsdag 9 augustus 2022 om 02:01:15 UTC+2 schreef DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves:



> we live in [shelters constructed from the forest]

:-DDDDD

I Envy JTEM

unread,
Aug 9, 2022, 12:51:19 PMAug 9
to
DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:

> Our bipedalism originated arboreally.

No it didn't. Chimps evolved FROM upright walkers to knuckle walkers,
and they did so in adaptation to the forest. It looks like Gorillas did the
same.

But just look at Chimps, as that's more than enough to fill your little
skull to capacity. The LCA was more recent than bipedal locomotion.
The foramen magnum migrated to the back of the skull. The Chimp
hand evolved away from our own and towards the arboreally adapted
hand they now have.

In short: You're an idiot.




-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/691966152530903040

littor...@gmail.com

unread,
Aug 9, 2022, 3:11:52 PMAug 9
to
Op dinsdag 9 augustus 2022 om 18:51:19 UTC+2 schreef I Envy JTEM:
> DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:

> > Our bipedalism originated arboreally.

No: aquarboreally.
In forest swamps, even monkeys wade bipedally.

> No it didn't. Chimps evolved FROM upright walkers to knuckle walkers,
> and they did so in adaptation to the forest. It looks like Gorillas did the
> same.

Yes. Already in 1994 it had become clear that KWing in Pan & Gorilla had evolved in parallel:
"... knuckle-walking of chimps & gorillas has been argued to have arisen independently (Begun 1992), possibly in more BP ancestors (Kleindienst 1975, Hasegawa cs 1985, Edelstein 1987): Gorilla KWing anatomy & ontogeny are much better developed than in Pan, and are different from Pan (Inouye 1992). And the Homo-Pan LCA had not yet acquired KWing: humans do not at any age show the slightest trace of KWing behaviour: (1) we lean (e.g. on a table) far more comfortably on our proximal than on our middle hand phalanges; (2) in KWing apes the middle hand phalanges are naked, in many men they are dorsally haired, and fingers III & IV (that bear most weight in KWers) even more frequently than V & II (Harrison 1958, Singh 1982, Ikoma 1986); (3) “human infants walk or run spontaneously on all fours, and this invariably with the palms flat on the ground, and the fingers completely extended” (Schultz 1936:264).
Lucy’s arms were much shorter than a bonobo's (humerus 24 cm vs 29 cm, cf. 26 cm in human pygmies) and lacked KWing adaptations (Jungers 1982, Stern & Susman 1982), but later the small hominid O.H.62 had more chimp- & bonobo-like proportions (Korey 1990, Aiello & Dean 1990:258, Wood, 1992 box 2), and the larger KNM-ER-1500 (female boisei?) showed some gorilla-like proportions, e.g. rel.large forelimbs (McHenry 1978, 1992). While the early KNM-KP-271 distal humerus was “similar to that of modern man” (Senut 1980, cf.Oxnard 1984 fig.10.12, Aiello & Dean 1990:365,368), A.robustus TM-1517 was more chimp-like, and A.boisei KNM-ER-739 more gorilla-like (Senut 1980, Aiello & Dean 1990:365-368). Body weight estimations for robustus & boisei based on formulae for ape postcrania fit much better with the massive jaws than estimations based on human formulae (see McHenry 1991). The boisei ulnae O.H.36 & L.40-19 & humerus KNM-ER-739 were of gorilla robusticity & length (McHenry 1991,1992, Howell & Wood 1974, Senut 1980, Leakey 1971, Aiello & Dean 1990:367-369), and the curvature & the cross-section of L.40-19 are reminiscent of KWers (Howell & Wood 1974); “the Rudolf australopithecines, in fact, may have been close to the ‘knuckle-walker’ condition, not unlike the extant African apes” (Leakey 1971). Their arm lengthening & strengthening is paralleled ontogenetically in the African apes; Rensch (1972:45) even states that “it is only after birth that an ape’s arms become disproportionally long”, but this can only be true when arm growth relative to the height in African apes is compared with monkeys (Schultz 1936,fig.15)."
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages