|Out of Africa: How a wrinkled/complex African "Pygmy"*1) brain became "human"/"Mongoloid"* in cold Asia
Human rights, anti-racism/sexism, and a global worldview. without separatism*2) by Peter Klevius KLEVUX
|Klevius' hypothesis on human evolution (Discuss/refute it via Klevius' Anthropology Blog):
Hypothesis assembled in public in May 2004 (Original idea from 1992 Demands for Resources).
Link to a pile of open questions related to the hypothesis below. Please add, answer or correct!
Link to "A Nomenclature System for the Tree of Human Y-Chromosomal Binary Haplogroups"
Link to a good background "...that a large component of the present Khoisan gene pool is eastern African in origin and that Asia was the source of a back migration (>20 kyr) to sub-Saharan Africa..."
Anthropologists often suffer from a serious, modern blindness/fear to the meaning of biokinship. This will heavily affect their capability of interpreting foreign, not to say extinct cultural behaviour and social settings (see e.g. P. Klevius 1992 on Popper's World III and "primitivism" and 1996 on the Social State and Klevius' Definition of Religion). This individualism (see World Values Survey) bias might be of particular concern regarding our understanding of sexual selection (also see From Klevius without love), shamanism etc. How does a woman "select" the "right" sperm in a tribal, non-monogamic/-close relatives (endogamy/exogamy - see Kinship Atom) sexual context when she has only ONE chance per 1-5 yrs? Actually most parental investment and sexual selection theories seem to suffer from an individualistic perspective. Sexual selection in the form of "rapetivism" (Y/X balance) is yet another source of confusion. The stupid Hamilton's rule is as wrong as every such analysis!
Did the "Aurignacian"*) revolution (starting some 40.000? ya) from Lake Baycal**) to Europe create the multi-racial single-species we now consider the "real, global humans"?
*) An advanced tool technology that is solely associated with modern humans and which originated outside Africa. M. Otte in The Aurignacian in Asia: "...discoveries in central Asia permit the distribution of Aurignacian to be extended far beyond Europe, which brings into question the hypothesis of a direct African origin for modern humans."
**) According to S. Wells modern humans spread to Europe (M173) and NEast-Asia (M242) from Central-Asia/Mid-Siberia (M45).
Also note: "Native Siberian populations represent one of the least studied groups in the world".
"...current data indicate a very early development of a “transitional” or early Upper Paleolithic industry in Central Asia."
It seems (P. Klevius 1992) that there has been a marked acceleration in brain development after 400 kya in Central and East Asia. This is consistent with recent findings suggesting more frequent and pronounced climate variations during the period. The last major stage of modern human evolution started (?) <50-80 kya (also see Out of Africa again and again) perhaps with small "pygmies" (perhaps descending from ape to human hybridization - see Homo floresiensis below as well as the close chimp/Neanderthal connection) with brains that were more wrinkled/complex (e.g. ASPM) than those of the Neanderthals/Erectus/-Pekingensis/Java man and early moderns (also consider map of race distribution below). They spread/developed - like the earlier Levallois-Mousterian tool tradition - (partly due to climate variation) through two different channels (the Levant and the African Horn respectively) a) towards the vast and challenging but also rewarding Central Asia/Siberia (mongoloid traits > 50 kya? and M173 exported to Europe from Siberia >30 kya - see e.g. S. Wells 2002) and b) along the South Asian coust-line (Negritos, M130? <50-60 kya, but see South Asia, the Andamanese, and the Genetic Evidence for an “Early” Human Dispersal out of Africa). Late archeological and linguistic traces of the northern route may also be connected to the first Scandinavians, in southern Mesolithic Finland and the west/northern Fosna-Hensbacka culture (extending to the far north-western Norway). Phylogeographic data from Britain indicate shared ancestry across the north of Europe from Norway to Estonia, possibly reflecting common ancestors dating back to the last glacial epoch. The southern route may also have contributed to the Central-Asian lineage. Because of different climate conditions the southern pygmies/Negritos (see Genetic affinities of the Andaman islanders) did not change much (before they met the Mongoloids from the North - this view will also solve puzzling y-chromosome similarities) whereas the northern route (M89/9, <50 kya) created more fair-skinned, taller and heavier "mongoloids" (so called "minor local contribution"). Shovel-shaped incisors in both Erectus and Sapiens indicate gene flow and/or shared gene stock/hybridization/drift, or simply an unknown local adaptation. A northern climate with plenty of proteins etc. enforced cultural changes (e.g. longevity and due multi-generational cultural wisdom collected and transfered by the elderly) and changed physical appearance (mongoloid, i.e. adaptation for coldness/darkness/brightness) without the latter necessarily having any direct impact on the former. The distance to the southern Europe (northern Europe was under the glacial maximum) was too short to avoid direct mixing thus making it impossible to create a distinct new "race" ("...the Europeoid movement is clearly fixed at Lake Baikal"). Genes were "pumped" back and forth through mostly the same geographical "veins" by frequent climate changes, hence prohibiting speciation but encouraging local "raciation". When the "mongoloids" returned - through the same routes and/or through M175 or the East-Asian routes (Negritos have shovel-shaped incisors and other mongoloid traits) - with main clashing points perhaps somewhere in southern China (also compare Taiwan & Gm ab3st) and Southwest Asia. Eurasia "would be the logical homeland of the proto-U6 that came back to Africa and spread in its northwest area around 30,000 ya" . The "source area could lie equally in
northeast Africa, the Arabian peninsula, or even across towards Iran and northwest India". They (i.e. the genes - compare e.g. DYS 391-9 allele - only common among Siberians/Mongolians/Amerinds - in the background of M130T) met (widely in time and space) and "re-shaped" most of the Negritos and remaining older moderns and laid the basis for today's racial pattern (compare Hammer et al 1998). In this scenario the mongoloid traits in Khoisan/Sandawe originated in Asia (also see Khoi, San and Bantu in Klevius 1992 for a socio-cultural interpretation) but ended up in southern Africa (a kind of genetic escapism in "demographic refuges", that actually made them visible) after having met with the non-Pygmy and taller black population and contributed to the appearance of North-Africans/Caucasoid people ("Paradoxically, genetic comparisons of Khoisan and Ethiopian populations show both polarity and affinity". It is noteworthy that only Negritos and Khoisan seem to share steatopygia (compare Venus figurines from Baykal to Europe), and that Khoisan and mongoloids have shovel-shaped incisors (i.e. I suggest that we might find both "original" and "mongolized" click-speakers in Africa <37 kya and >20 kya). When the already "mongolized" mix of farmers we use to name Caucasoids eventually met with the northern mongoloids they created the blond, Scandinavian type. East Finland, where the lightest people on Earth seems to have evolved, was a straight, dark dead end for farming arriving from southeast (also see Are Finnish related languages Europe's oldest?). Is this related to the haplogroup X mystery? What about blondness in young Australoids? The pattern is also reflected in different genetic studies (see e.g. a possible description of relative genetic distance among Europeans and racial comments). This hypothesis is strongly supported by Diego positive blood distribution and is especially appealing because most (outside East Asia) seem to avoid it (i.e. I don't believe in my own skills as much as in the striking self-explanatory inevitability of such a picture). An interesting mutation called RPS4YC711T may play a part in future revelations, as may the scattered distribution of YAP+ in Tibet, Japan and southern China, (but less in between or in Siberia). It is also noteworthy that speciation or lack of it interacts in a "sex-biased" way, i.e. may follow/disrupt either through the Y or the X chromosome. But although we have just started a genetic revolution, physical appearance may still be of great interest for the puzzle, not for racist interpretations but precisely because our understanding of how genetic interaction appears physically is so limited and our capability to visually recognize faces etc. is so extraordinary (also compare From Klevius without Love - on heterosexual attraction, kinship and friendship). For more on the hypothesis see Klevius Anthropology Blog - NEWS, DISCUSSION & PECULIARITIES!
"They (the North African Fulanis) despise the Black populations to their South, describing them as ‘hyenas, apes, and asses’"
"The million-dollar question of the origin and dispersal of the classical Negroids". Can we even handle the answer and/or are the "pure" Negroids long since already gone? The factual state of Africa's diverse gene pool seems plausible within a pattern of a long distance back and forth migration. One might also compare the above with the earlier rapid transition from African Ergaster to the more advanced Asian Erectus. Furthermore there seems to be an unnecessary bias connected to the geographical "Africa". Why, for example, emphasize (that's what the Afro-American black man Mr White says) the Herto moderns 154-160 kya, abt 1.400 cc as "Africans" (compare Jinniushan, northern China 250-280 kya, abt 1.400 cc)? A look at the map (African/Asian border) makes such interpretations, at the best, ridiculous, and at the worst almost like the racist 19th Century "European" "findings". Like "This Eurocentric view of equating AMH with UP tools...." Although the pics (and links) below are choosen with care to describe and enlighten the hypothesis above, please don't hesitate to comment or suggest improvements. As a proponent for basic (negative) UN Human Rights in a future Global Village I don't believe in races other than as historical descriptions of evolutionary events. I'm particularly offended by religious white/black, "caucasoid/negroid" racism (a "mongolized bastard caucasoid whitey" myself).
|Negritos from early 20th century SE Asia|
|Shompen SE Asia. Possible relatives to Negritos|
|"Connections between Taiwan aboriginal groups and cranial series from Polynesia suggest that Taiwan’s aboriginal inhabitants may have been the ancestral source of these inhabitants of Remote Oceania. Similarly, these results suggest that the ultimate source of Taiwan’s prehistoric and modern aboriginal groups may be among the early inhabitants of eastern (Northeast or SEA"
Multivariate Craniometric Analysis of Taiwan Aboriginals.
First Americans: M130 + "proto-Mongoloid" traits?
|Atayals from early 20th century E Asia|
|Saami woman from Sweden in the early 20th century|
|eAruaks, early (genetically and linguistically) American Indians, photographed almost a century ago (also see Pirahă and EMAH - the Even More Astonishing Hypothesis that explains their language|
|Ainus have little in common with "caucasoids" but most with the mongoloid Jomon/Japanese (also compare Minatogawa). Blood link to Negritos (Pic from 1904 Fair).|
|Tibetans a century ago|
|Origin of the Vikings - Valkyries for Islam
Origin of Islam - a blueprint for slavery/rapetivism based on racism
Why do you call yourself a feminist, Judith Butler?
From Klevius without love - definition of feminism
Klevius non-sexist love letter to Edith Södergran
The Death of Homunculus - AI vs. mind
P. Klevius' concept "critical European tradition" (1992) & how it's related to G. H. von Wright & L. Wittgenstein
Human gene migration & culture timeline
Psychosocial timeline from Freud to bin Laden
What is sex segregation? - Girls! If you like to rule your own life don't
IS ARABIC ISLAM THE WORST CRIME EVER?
Was Jesus religious?
Klevius definition of religion
Un-intelligent design and crypto-creationism
"For the sake of Islam itself its true teachings should not be so clearly expressed"
Black Bimbos & Rambos in the service of pan-Arabic oil-Islam
KLEVIUS' INTERDISCIPLINARY NEWS BLOG:
EMAH: A NEW HYPTHESIS ON AI/CONSCIOUSNESS
KLEVIUS' ANTI SEX SEGREGATION BLOG
Are you a sexist racist? Take the Fundamentalist Test!
Sex Segregation from Freud to bin Ladin
Arab slave routes reflected in genetic pattern?
The Forgotten Holocaust: The Arab/Islamic Slave Trade
"RAPETIVISM", Hip Hop & Islam
Mulla Omar: "US forces the obscene Western culture on the Afgan people under the cover of democracy" (i. e. obviously he doesn't like the idea that girls/women should be able to choose for themselves!
The Finnish/European Mongoloid Complex
|Homo floresiensis, Flores WoMan, is s/he related to M130???!!!
Tool performance, food processing techiques etc, of this new species Homo Floresiensis seem to fit well in the description of "pygmies" with more wrinkled/complex brains in the hypothesis above. Is it related to Negritos/Minatogawa etc (who are of course much more modern, but again consider local impact and/or relict population of a chain of fast changing population. Also consider the narrowing sides of the Minatogawa and Flores Man compared to the more straight lined Erectus)? The crucial question, though, might be whether they came from Africa or if they evolved locally. The former possibility may support the "again and again and again" interpretation whereas the latter one gives a strong boost to the "multi-regional" hypothesis. However, what seems obvious is that Homo did not loose its capability for variation as soon as many had previously thought. At least the gap between us and our cousins seems to diminish (Must be a welcome for R. Leakey!).
Is Flores WoMan associated in any important sense with M130? And how does the time range (>90 kyr to 12 kyr or less) fit in an M130 pattern? Does the Flores WoMan belong to the pre-M130 spreading (80 kyr or more)? Is it related to Mungo Man and other old modern "strangers" (Remember Birdsell and others?)? And how well do we understand the mechanisms behind size, stature etc. Maybe it is not only a simple nutrition and jungle issue? The proposed 90kyr makes it incomprehensible with the proposed 50-60 kyr barrier of M130! Also compare the Dmanisis skull and its similariliy conflicting signals! I have not read the article in full as yet (20041028)but as a working hypothesis one might interpret Flores WoMan as a forerunner to the M130/Negrito lineage.
What happened 11-12 kyr ago when the first moderns arrived in Flores and the Floresiensis got extinct (or did they)? Were these events related and/or co-related with seismic catasrophes in the region?
The connection to Erectus seems to me absurd, unmotivated and even naive in many ways, So, for example, we have the 280 kyr Erectus-boy from Jinnuishan (sometimes labelled Sapiens "Archaic" but what's that anyway? See pic below.) from China with a brain capacity of moderns. Furthermore "Erectus" as a concept for a species is unprecise, blurred and wideranging (not to mention the problem caused by the "Asian Ergaster"). Finally it can be argued that Pygmies, Negritos and others convincingly disprove such conclusions, or at the least, make them "out of the blue". "Wrinkled/complex brains" (see the hypothesis above), on the other hand, fits in a pattern of new genetic directions (caused by a sudden and small but implicative gene change/mutation) that finally ended up in our own species of today. (I really had no idea of what was going on on Flores when I made my hypothesis above, which was solely based on material available for everyone! Now. I got a suspicion that the delay of my long awaited new book by Wolpoff might have something to do with it (he must have known)
Is Flores WoMan a remnant of an Asian ancestor to moderns like the Negritos?
Stories about Orang Pendek and Ebu Gogo seem to support their very recent existence.
Modern Mungo Man (Australia abt 40 kyr) mtDNA not related to modern living humans!
The Kow Swamp (Australia) mystery
Linguistic traces of Negritos (also compare M20 & M175): Kusunda, Burushaski, Nahali (Please comment for additional info!)
"...simply a fossil of a modern human, Homo sapiens, that lived about 1,300 to 1,800 years ago," Teuku Jacob (Indonesian Muslim paleoanthropologist) told a press conference Indonesian (Muslim?) scientist about the Flores WoMan!?
Flores WoMan fossil locked up by Muslim "scientist"
The reconstructions below may offer some insights into how biased & full of prejudices our interpretations might be!
H. Idaltu 1400 cc 160 kyr Jinnuishan 1400 cc 280 kyr Flores 380 cc 18 kyr reconstr.
|Mungo (Australia) 40-50 kyr The real Aboriginal? Allegedly so small and lightly built that it might have been outside the modern female range of variation (also see Thorne 1977). Brown (1987, 1989).|
|AN ANTI RACIST/SEXIST APPEAL for an "Anti-Jihad" against sexist/lunatic/fascist Islamic murderers/rapists (and their suppor-ters) who sponge on Human Rights they deny others! If you name uncertainty God, and make statements and rules out of this uncer-tainty, then these rules do not reflect “the will of God” but your own (lunatic?) worldview. The only social moral codex possible is the “bubble of freedom” (protection against impositions) outlined in the Negative Human Rights (P. Klevius)|
|Cro Magnon 1400 cc (Originating from the Siberian M174 lineage) 30 kyr|
|Flores WoMan vs. HSS
Acknowledgement. ?-mark is the true symbol of the scientific idea behind www.klevius.info, i.e. not to "know" when you don't know, but rather to hunt for the true motives behind "knowing", thus paving the way for new openings.
|Kow Swamp (Australia) 14 kyr! Allegedly heavy built and Erectus like. But see e g P. Brown (who described Homo Floresiensis) and his long fight against his former PhD supervisor who now supports the *Muslim crypto-creationist "scientist" who stole (and possibly also destroyed vital parts of **Flores WoMan).|
|Minatogawa (Japan) 18 kyr|
|*1) not to be confused with modern human Pygmies!
*2) not to be confused with ethnicity!
This page often top-rated on MSN!
"Islamophobia" is a synonyme for anti-fascism!
|NEWS & DISCUSSION
Klevius' Out of Africa as "pygmies" and back as global "Mongoloids" BLOG: Evidence for Archaic Asian Ancestry
Klevius' Interdisciplinary BLOG: 50 kya traces of humans in America?
PECULIARITIES related to the hypothesis above. Please refer to the numbers when commenting.
1 While Homo Sapiens on average is a species pretty poorly physically adapted to most environments, this feature seems to have followed brain development.rather than being a predecessor to it. According to the hypothesis above hybridization between tiny, thin pygmies with good brains, and heavy "brutes" with less good brains (although compensated by volume - pre-modern hominids & homos are surprisingly stupid considering their brain size!) but better adapted for the north made the basis for what become us. This process might have genetically (via hybridization or some other process) "dissolved" all/most of remaining low quality brains.
*) I use the term "Mongoloids" just as the Swedish word 'finne' is used about Finnic people. Mongoloids who suffer from a genetic disease is something very else, exactly as the Swedish 'finne' (meaning acne) is. The fact that some might mix the meanings of the words deliberately just to boost prejudices, is no reason to abandon them. In fact, I think "Caucasoid" and "Negroid" (crypto)racism directed towards "Mongoloids" should be strongly encountered. The term "Pygmy" should not be confused with today's Pygmies who are, of course, in every respect fully human.
Klevius OOAAPABAGM hypothesis and factual racial distribution
Below: Grey represents what Klevius names "the caucasoid bastard belt" between the "global mongoloids", incl. "capoids" in southern Africa who formerly were distributed all over Africa, and pre-Islamic north and east-Africans who show the same traces (slenderness, unrobust facial appearance etc) of their clash with the "mongol genes" as do north Europeans,Indians etc.
"Thin" or "full" lips
"normal" or "thick" lips!?
| Rosa Park's white sister?
also read abt Linda, 13, sex abused to death
Do you really believe in Freud? Then read the Psycho-timeline! A better understanding of modernity and sex segregation may help your anthropology and your understanding of Islam.
|* I'm referring to "Muslim" because I suspect religion has played a crusial but unfortunate role in Indonesian anthropology. Also see Klevius definition of religion.
**Flores WoMan is P. Klevius original anti sex segrregational naming of the remains.
|Klevius' Definition of Human Rights esp. the important "negative rights", denied in every possible form of pan-Arabic Koran-Islam!|
|SEX SEGREGATION, FEMINISM & RELIGION NEWS
Also read the nets most essential* analysis abt the Origin of Islam
* slavery/rapetivism in the context of sex segregation
|The "bastard belt" and the "global mongoloids
Klevius OOAAPABAGM hypothesis and factual racial distribution
Grey represents what Klevius names "the caucasoid bastard belt" between the "global mongoloids", incl. "capoids" in southern Africa who, on their return from Asia, dispersed all over Africa from the northeast. The latest dispersal to the far south, however, was due to the Bantu expansion.
After the modern human with the new brain had evolved as "mongoloid" in Asia its spreading was fast and decisive. Of course there were multiple "mongoloids" due to their interbreeding with different looking archaic "moderns".
Neanderthal/erectus/early modern traits have dissolved differently over the spectrum but can still be recognized. However, due to Klevius OOAAPABAGM hypothesis little can be said abt the content of the brain before we have assess to more statistical brain data. Nonetheless, it is believed here that the big stupid Neanderthal brain has since long been replaced by the new "pygmy-brain". Only some traces of the look remains.
To really understand the scenario one has to keep in mind: 1) the small but well-packed pygmy brain* came handy when poured into the "empty "Neanderthal/erectus/archaic modern heads"*. 2) These were good vessels due to their earlier adaptations for the cold. However, by hybridizing them with the slender pygmies a new species, our own, was born. 3) by moving north they not only turned "mongoloid" but also, due to the enourmous wealth of protein available for skilled people, became culturally multi-generational, due to extended life spans. 4) on their "return" complex clashing points developed, e.g. that the first modern human Africans, the Khoisan relatives, were genetically "sucked up" and only a minority survived until present.
* the "pygmy brain" came ultimately from a chimp but was refined in a human pygmy population
** some of the Neanderthals may had already been affected by earlier hybridization to some extent
# posted by Klevius @ 4:13 AM 0
Support for Klevius' late chimp-human hybridization hypothesis
Imported Barred Tiger salamanders that mated with native California Tiger salamanders seem to have successfully hybridized.
Ben Fitzpatrick (UT/Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology): "To give you a sense of the difference between these two species, they are about as closely related as humans and chimpanzees".
# posted by Klevius @ 2:23 PM 0 comments
Monday, March 12, 2007
South African Hofmeyr skull perfectly in line with Klevius Out of Africa as "pygmies" and back as "mongoloids" hypothesis!
European 35-40,5 ky Oase skull from southwestern Romania.
South African 36 ky Hofmeyr skull.
Both skulls reveal archaic traits. However, non of them are associated with true Aurignacian, i.e. the Oase tools (if related) are not only "early" but also on the very limit of Aurignacian alltogether! Hence no one can today declare the Oase skull as belonging to a representative for the cultural evolution that typical Aurignacian inevitably signs. This was perhaps some of the first archaic moderns dispersed into Europe but has nothing to do with the real modern "mongoloids" coming from Siberia along the M173 genetic path. On the contrary their Neanderthal features (frontal flattening, large juxtamastoid eminence and exceptionally large upper molars with unusual size progression) seems to indicate less advanced capabilities which fact, together with its proposed resemblance with the Hofmeyr specimen, would fit well in the obvious lack of Aurignacian in sub-Saharan Africa at the time. It would also fit the chronological overlap with transitional forms.
To strech the conclusion that the Hofmeyr skull represents something even remotely resembling truly Aurignacian moderns is nothing but desperate. There seems to be a desperate (racist?) need for someone to rob the Khoisan people from their status as the first really modern humans in Africa!
Jií Svoboda and Katalin Simán:"The date of the appearance of the typical Aurignacian, the first culture clearly related to modern humans, is unclear, but it certainly developed after 36,000 B.P. and has several dates between 35,000 and 30,000 B.P."
Klevius conclusion: The Hofmeyr skull refutes the conventional out of Africa hypothesis!
BTW, YOU DO FIND THE BEST ANTHROPOLOGY ON BLOGS, SITES, FORUMS ETC.!
The reason is simply that real (skilled) social scientists do not fit in forms made for natural scientists. Why? Because social science can never be determined like natural science (which fact opens up for the social "scientific" writings of millions of charlatans and dilettantes) and, as a consequence, the only true social science is produced outside the institutions (incl. "scientific" magazines etc). Of course there are a few exceptions to this rule, but still! Also descriptive reports like the one referred to above are to be seen as representatives of the "natural science block".
# posted by Klevius @ 8:50 AM 2 comments
Thursday, February 01, 2007
Klevius confirmed: Homo Floresiensis declared a new species - Did ASPM/FOXP2 hinder human intelligence
In the Jan. 29, 2007 issue of the journal PNAS (Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States Dean Falk et al at Florida State University's anthropology department reveal evidence proving that Homo Floresiensis ought to be considered a homo species with a new type of small but very sophisticated brain. "LB1 has a highly evolved brain. It didn't get bigger, it got rewired and reorganized, and that's very interesting."
Klevius comment: See postings below and Out of Africa as "pygmies" and back as global "Mongoloids" above! I rest my case!
One might also seriously consider whether the introduction >1.8 MYA of a FOXP2 related brain size determinant may have caused that Homo erectus & Co chose the dumb path to enhanced intelligence, namely via the enlargement of a low quality brain, whereas the chimp and chimp-human hybrid was forced to keep it small in the jungle and to create more intelligence through a more sophisticated processor!
# posted by Klevius @ 3:57 PM 0 comments
Thursday, November 23, 2006
Senseless sex segregated chimp "research" at Boston University
Male Chimpanzees Prefer Mating with Old Females
Martin N. Muller et al
"Cross-cultural studies indicate that women's sexual attractiveness generally peaks before motherhood and declines with age . Cues of female youth are thought to be attractive because humans maintain long-term pair bonds, making reproductive value (i.e. future reproductive potential) particularly important to males [2, 3]. Menopause is believed to exaggerate this preference for youth by limiting women's future fertility [1, 4]. This theory predicts that in species lacking long-term pair bonds and menopause, males should not exhibit a preference for young mates. We tested this prediction by studying male preferences in our closest living relative, the chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes). We show that despite their promiscuous mating system, chimpanzee males, like humans, prefer some females over others. However, in contrast to humans, chimpanzee males prefer older, not younger, females. These data robustly discriminate patterns of male mate choice between humans and chimpanzees. Given that the human lineage evolved from a chimpanzee-like ancestor, they indicate that male preference for youth is a derived human feature, likely adapted from a tendency to form unusually long term mating bonds."
Klevius comment: How come that a scientific magazine approves such nonsense?! Ever heard abt kinship, kin recognition etc - the most essential relationship in the living nature? If the "research" team compared a chimp kin-society/family/group with a non-kin human dito, then not only their conclusion but the entire research project was pure nonsense! It's a well known fact (albeight today surprisingly surpressed) that most creature/plants have a strong tendency to avoid incest! Take a human kinship family and you will find a striking resemblance with chimps (albeit such an experiment would demand that both chimp- and human cultural bias/traditions somehow are taken into account)! This also explains why bio-parents are the least likely to commit incest as shown in Klevius revealing comparison of incest research as well as in the thesis "Pathological symbiosis" in the sex segregated social state.
For more info on the connections between kinship blindness and sex segregation see:
Definition of religion: Vagina gate & kinship
Angels of Antichrist - kinship vs social state
From Klevius without love - Definition of feminism
# posted by Klevius @ 12:39 AM 0 comments
Monday, November 20, 2006
Why not lend your brilliant brain to the nets most intellectually advanced criticism of sex segregation in general and Islam in particular? The thoughts of tomorrow today!
SEX SEGREGATION, FEMINISM & RELIGION NEWS