Chimp brain outperforming human dito gives additional support for Klevius hypothesis on late chimp/human hybridization

According to Out of Africa as "pygmies" and back as global "mongoloids" human evolution was a dead end until they got the chimp gene for a better packed brain. And originally chimps got it because they had to shrink their size in the jungle whithout loosing processing capacity! This view is well supported by a recent Japanese study. "There are still many people, including many biologists, who believe that humans are superior to chimpanzees in all cognitive functions," said Tetsuro Matsuzawa, of Kyoto University. "Here we show for the first time that young chimpanzees have an extraordinary working memory capability for numerical recollection - better than that of human adults tested in the same apparatus, following the same procedure."
Furthermore, also adult chimps performed well and Ai, a female, had a short time memory capability equal to that of adult humans.

Klevius comment: That youngsters may perform better than adults in certain tasks doesn't need to be considered a surprise. Nor the fact that chimps "outperform" humans. However, overall the results fit perfectly well into my hypothesis precisely because it places the chimps very close to human brain capacity when correcting for difference in size. Homo Floresiensis (the ape-like dwarf found in Islamic Indonesia and there causing the worst scandal since Piltdown - incl. a Muslim professor stealing and partly destroying valuable material), who had a chimp-size brain but performed tasks associated with e.g. Homo erectus, with more than double the brain volume, can only be reasonably explained by this (see postings on the postings below and the main page).

And pedagogical brainwashing is, of course, always a troublesome distortion in this kind of analysis!

Talking abt brainwashing - ALSO VISIT THE MOST REVEALING INFO ON THE WEB WHEN IT COMES TO THE ORIGIN OF MOSQUE/MADRASSA!

Out of Africa as Islamic slaves and back again as Muslims

see Origin of Islam!
see Sex segregation, feminism & religion!

Sexist sex-segregation again on the run at Harvard

The desperate search for evolutionary traces supporting sexist sex segregation prejudices (see From Klevius without love) is perhaps best exemplified by the notorious Lawrence Summers, the president of Harvard University, and his fanatic ideas abt innate sexism. Now a "researcher" at the same university, Coren Apicella, delivers the next stupidity on this path by wildly speculating ("We really don't know what is behind this yet") that males with deeper voice pitch are better breeders (made me think abt high pitch Somali males in Sweden with some ten kids each - yes, of course I know it's the same cultural sexism but in the shape of Islam). Apicella conducted her "research" by driving randomly in Tanzania and asking pygmy-like statured Hadza males abt their kids! But when there is a positive expectation/demand for a certain result, the quality of the research usually suffers. It's also noteworthy that human evolution during the last two million years has been precisely in the opposite direction, namely towards less, not more, sexual dimorphism, i.e. we (in general, - I don't know abt Summers) have distanced ourselves from Gorillas, Orangutangs etc! It may also be noted that according to Frank W Marlowe "Hadza men value fertility in a mate more than women do, and women value intelligence more than men do"! Furthermore, according to Klevius, one may also consider the effects of Bantu/Arab gene flow (not the least because of Bantu/Islamic slavery) on a pygmy-like population (or didn't she even control for the stature/pitch relation?!).

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".

South African Hofmeyr skull perfectly in line with Klevius Out of Africa as "pygmies" and back as "mongoloids" hypothesis!

Left: European 35-40,5 ky Oase skull from southwestern Romania.



Right: 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".

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"! 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!