Saturday, November 21, 2009
Are we big headed chimps who killed the Homos?
Klevius important acknowledgement to the reader
This is Saudi "king" Abdullah, Mr X "president's" first call & the main islamic terrorist in the world (right now busy killing Shia muslims in Yemen)! Learn more (Origin of islam) abt him & his disgusting racist/sexist hate mongering islamic pals in the most intolerant of countries! This criminal's best friend (except for the muslim born White House guy) is Bashir, Sudan's "president" who is arrested in his absence for crimes against humanity. Abdullah is also responsible for initiating an islamic campaign (via O.I.C.'s 57 islamic member states) in UN for the purpose of criminalizing (sic) criticism against the worst crime ever against humanity! Abdullah also initiated Cairo declaration on "human rights", which is essentially a cover up for sexist Sharia (see Enlightenment vs islamic darkness)!
So what has islam to do with anthropology? Klevius answer: Quite a lot, because it was islam (via its representative Teuku Jacob) that stole & damaged the remains of the world's most important find, "Homo" floresiensis (compare islam's long histoty of destroying civilizations, from great non-muslim libraries, such as Alexandria etc, to Buddha sculptures etc)!
Using "god" & "language" for boosting oneself over the rest
As communication IS language (see Klevius groundbreaking hypothesis on consciousness) we hardly need to bother abt “whether social creatures have a language”. All communication is language or languager is just a non sense conceptualization, only useful in an everyday "language game" but hardly as a comparative tool over the human borders (anthropocentrism). We don’t consider us primitive compared to Saamis or Inuits just because we have only one word for ‘snow’, do we! The modern exaggeration of the position of "language" (i.e. words) has blinded us to believe that the distance between us & the rest of nature is bigger than it in fact is. As Klevius describes it in Demand for Resources, "to be impressed by human progress you need to be a human" (Klevius 1992:37). We take every opportunity to boost ourselves (through science, religion, politics etc) although the only thing we really need to bother abt is the least considered, nameky our most important social space, Negative Human Rights.
The extinction of Homo
There's apparently some confusing abt the Hobbit (Homo floresiensis) out there. Yesterday we could read three different news lines:
The Hobbit is a new human
The Hobbit isn't a new human
Humans may have been Hobbits
The last one might have come closest although the textual content didn't. According to Peter Klevius theory Out of Africa as pygmies & back as global mongoloids, so yes, we are, sort of! We are the product of an Australopithecine like Homo creature who hybridized with a Pan like creature, with a much more wrinkled/effective brain, in such a way that the descendant(s) were unable to return to a chimp like species but able to breed with Homo. The look alike of pre HSS Homos has made us believe we also share their brain.
A main objection against Homo floresiensis has been that it's hard to believe a creature with such a small brain could make such sophisticated tools. Klevius theory (2004 on the net) seems to be the only one (so far) that explaines it. Yes, there are a lot of brain details/differences that has yet to be arranged, but the overall development inevitably ought to have been in line with this theory, at least profiled against that very macro structure of findings/knowledge we have for now. Although Klevius probably misses oceans of details, he also pinpoints those missed by others & essential for the overall picture?
As has been repeated for many years by Klevius*, "Homo" never became human in any sense before it got a new brain from Pan. What has been seen as a fairly straight Homo evolution, starting from Australopithecus & ending in HSS, is nothing like that but a striking failure of the big brain to get anything done, according to fossil records & tool indiustries etc. Before this succesful hybridization (which might have occured several times) the Homo lineage was forced to enlarge its brain to get anything done outside their initial habitations. So when the dwarf sized hybrid 'Hobbit' first met with smaller Homos, they also transferred the genetic blueprint for a much more efficient chimp brain. Slowly but inevitably the "new" brain (developed in the opposite direction of Homo brain, due to climate etc changes & withdrawel into a dwarfing jungle environment) was poured into bigger Homo skulls, from small sized pygmy Homos to big sized sapiens Homo.
Pan/floresiensis brain vs the others
Consider these facts:
LB1's (a female Homo floresiensis)cranial capacity of 417 cm3. Average cranial capacity of female chimp is reported as 366 cm3, & of female gorilla as some 500 cm3.
Chimp (female): 325 g brain weight
Gorilla (female): 466 g brain weight
Human (female): 1228 g brain weight)
Homo habilis, the first rude tool making/using Homo, is est. to average 612 cm3 (i.e. probably less for females). We ought to jump forward more than a Million year to meet Homo erectus at a tool-making stage similar to that of Homo floresiensis, & with a brain volume that far exceeded that of the 'Hobbit'!
The assumtion that only Homo had the ability for tool making/usage has long since been disproved. This is just another piece the new puzzle that reveals that there are two more or less distinct brain capacity/behavior relations: One of them is some 50-100% more effective than the other.
Neanderthal, the Homo with the biggest ever average brain size: 24.1cm (length) x 14.6 cm (width) x 17.8 cm (height). Compare Klevius: 20cm (length) x 16.7 cm (width) x 16.5 cm (height).
Also consider that Daniel Lyons, who was allegedly a non retarded normal human, had a brain weight of 680 g corresponding to 650 cm3.
In addition you may consider that the skull, face, and wrist of the female Homo floresiensis have many unusually primitive features that resemble chimp and Australopithecus.
And the more advanced of you may consider that Ardi get's a suitable position in Klevius picture as well. Ardi is a ?-mark witch gets its full explanation with Klevius pygmy chimp/Homo hybridization, which also explains the lack of Homo diversity after this hybridization.
Klevius help for those of you (if there are any, which I doubt) who still can't hear the bell.
Just like Neanderthals, & other extinct Homos, had a large brain yet couldn't make it, gorillas & other apes have the same problem compared to chimps. A gorilla's huge advantage in brain size compared to a chimp doesn't alter the fact that a small chimp brain totally outperforms whatever gorilla when it comes to brain power.
Klevius again rests his case.
And you brave ones out there, don't hesitate to correct details in the puzzle. Klevius details are often flawed, although his macro understanding seldom is.
And btw, although Klevius in general doesn't support the use of references, in this case it could be extremely helpful to spread the message of Klevius theory. If we're lucky it might hit someone with a chimp brain, who can even read without PC glasses & prejudice!
* rumor has it there are still some morons out there who don't get the use of 'Klevius' instead of 'I'! Well, first of all, Klevius blogs/sites/books/papers etc aren't for opinions but for logic (it's an embarrasing but undeniable fact that most non-mathematical science is in the hands of simple minded people with strong subjective motivations))! Secondly, 'I' might easily be confused whereas 'Klevius' doesn't. Thirdly, although Klevius has written the (so far) most serious criticism abt the use of references (today you don’t need references because necessary information can easily be tracked anyway - in fact, the use of references often deliberately contradicts its alleged aims - see chapt. Science & references in Demand for Resources) there are still two reasons why he wants to refer to himself. The first one can be dismissed as vanity, but the other has to be understood as a contextual label signing that very macro effort (KLEVUX) which was the cradle for these kinds of insights in the first place. Of course Klevius extra ordinary brain capacity (see below - & if you don't understand Klevius "bragging", just try to look at it as an effort to intellectually capitalize important info for the world via a media that would otherwise make it be waived as just one more private "thinker") has contributed, but the main KLEVUX tool is a thought process unaltered by modern academics (yes, even Klevius has made some mistakes hence smudging his name with some academic titles - didn't I mention he's a human after all). It's a matter of fact that academic science is almost 100% polluted by mediocrity & mass ignorance & PC. However, when these traces of Klevius start looking like ordinary "science" crap out there I suggest you seriously consider dropping Klevius from your info sources!
Labels:
Agri,
Demand for Resources,
Hobbit,
Homo floresiensis,
human,
pygmy
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
How sexism makes "researchers" stupid
As you might already know (after having studied on KLEVUX) non-bio & needless sex segregation (i.e. ss that's more based on cultural prejudices etc than bio) is an inflamed appendix we need to cut off asap, before it bursts into a totalitarian Sharia islamic peritonitis. Moreover, whatever bio traces we might have they aren't relevant anymore because of, yes, that very same culture/civilization (Negative Human Rights) that made the free individual possible.
This sex segregation has blinded social "scientists" to an extent that is at least at the same level as the painful struggle of positioning the (flat) Earth in the Universe. See e.g. Klevius Psychosocial Freud timeline!
One of a multitude of stupid, evil or just laughable myths this medieval sexism has created & still upholds, is the sex filter applied by many evolutionists etc. Its most common forms include the male who fights other males for the purpose of planting his sperms in the princess, an other being the princess who "chooses" the best sperms by looking at his fighting skills or the size of him or some physical parts of him (like horns, feathers etc) or the abundance of colors & other expressions.
The sad fact is that we happily talk & feel a lot more than we know abt sex. Includes Klevius as well, although he at least tries to minimize his stupidity by questioning unfounded "scientific" claims no matter how "well referred" (see Chapt. Science & references in Demand for Resources) or how flattering they would be for a sexist agenda. So, for example, has it been revealed what Klevius has for long proposed, namely that male color pattern, contrary to sexist beliefs, functions as to discriminate between species for the purpose of avoiding hybridization (a sort of species incest).
Although fertile hybrids are a key element in evolution, to let them completely loose would stop that very same evolution. This is what has happened to us.
Definition of Evolution: Human evolution is trapped in an overpopulated speciation dead end
Contrary to popular belief real evolution (speciation) has stopped among humans, unless, of course some fanatic sect manages to keep themselves out of reach from the main gene flow stream for so many generations that speciation is possible (reproductive isolation), or via enetic engineering, so to protect from devolution (see also Klevius Demand for Resources - on the right to be poor & Gametes have no sex).
What is commonly misinterpreted as evolution is the expression of latent genes. However, this has nothing to do with evolution before there's a new fertile species. Even if the species itself changes it's still not evolution in any meaningful sense.
A Chihuahua isn't an evolved wolf, is it!
A species ought not to be blurred as "a separately evolving lineage that forms a single gene pool" but, according to Klevius, a hybridization that isn't fertile to one of its parents. Bio evolution, i.e. inheritable & upheld change, is a seamless part of Klevius classic formulation in Demand for Resources (1992) first published (with the same wording) in a newspaper article in 1981:
The solid state of existence is movement. Movement consists of occurences. The causality of occurences is a complex of evolution and devolution. Evolution, hence, is the deterministic outcome of variables of causality over time that enforces the complexity in previous structures (P. Klevius 1981, 1992). Also note that the lousy translation is Klevius own.
This sex segregation has blinded social "scientists" to an extent that is at least at the same level as the painful struggle of positioning the (flat) Earth in the Universe. See e.g. Klevius Psychosocial Freud timeline!
One of a multitude of stupid, evil or just laughable myths this medieval sexism has created & still upholds, is the sex filter applied by many evolutionists etc. Its most common forms include the male who fights other males for the purpose of planting his sperms in the princess, an other being the princess who "chooses" the best sperms by looking at his fighting skills or the size of him or some physical parts of him (like horns, feathers etc) or the abundance of colors & other expressions.
The sad fact is that we happily talk & feel a lot more than we know abt sex. Includes Klevius as well, although he at least tries to minimize his stupidity by questioning unfounded "scientific" claims no matter how "well referred" (see Chapt. Science & references in Demand for Resources) or how flattering they would be for a sexist agenda. So, for example, has it been revealed what Klevius has for long proposed, namely that male color pattern, contrary to sexist beliefs, functions as to discriminate between species for the purpose of avoiding hybridization (a sort of species incest).
Although fertile hybrids are a key element in evolution, to let them completely loose would stop that very same evolution. This is what has happened to us.
Definition of Evolution: Human evolution is trapped in an overpopulated speciation dead end
Contrary to popular belief real evolution (speciation) has stopped among humans, unless, of course some fanatic sect manages to keep themselves out of reach from the main gene flow stream for so many generations that speciation is possible (reproductive isolation), or via enetic engineering, so to protect from devolution (see also Klevius Demand for Resources - on the right to be poor & Gametes have no sex).
What is commonly misinterpreted as evolution is the expression of latent genes. However, this has nothing to do with evolution before there's a new fertile species. Even if the species itself changes it's still not evolution in any meaningful sense.
A Chihuahua isn't an evolved wolf, is it!
A species ought not to be blurred as "a separately evolving lineage that forms a single gene pool" but, according to Klevius, a hybridization that isn't fertile to one of its parents. Bio evolution, i.e. inheritable & upheld change, is a seamless part of Klevius classic formulation in Demand for Resources (1992) first published (with the same wording) in a newspaper article in 1981:
The solid state of existence is movement. Movement consists of occurences. The causality of occurences is a complex of evolution and devolution. Evolution, hence, is the deterministic outcome of variables of causality over time that enforces the complexity in previous structures (P. Klevius 1981, 1992). Also note that the lousy translation is Klevius own.
Tuesday, November 03, 2009
In memorial of "entropologist" Claude Levi-Strauss
Social entropy (see Klevius book Demand for Resources - on the right to be poor)
According to late "entropologist" Claude Levi-Strauss, primitive societies are "cold" while civilized societies are "warm". This important opening is developed to its extreme in Klevius (1991) where this dynamics is connected to creativity & alienation caused by investment (i.e. "expanded demands for resources"). Btw, Marx' negligence of the "primitive" quality (his biggest mistake) was rooted in his believe that investment (as he understood it) also was a "general" social principle. Unfortunately he never got a real clue abt "Bushmen" & similar gatherer/hunter societies. Also he never read Claude Levi-Strauss.
According to late "entropologist" Claude Levi-Strauss, primitive societies are "cold" while civilized societies are "warm". This important opening is developed to its extreme in Klevius (1991) where this dynamics is connected to creativity & alienation caused by investment (i.e. "expanded demands for resources"). Btw, Marx' negligence of the "primitive" quality (his biggest mistake) was rooted in his believe that investment (as he understood it) also was a "general" social principle. Unfortunately he never got a real clue abt "Bushmen" & similar gatherer/hunter societies. Also he never read Claude Levi-Strauss.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)