Theme: Science

@ RK
Not countersignaling. Questioning.
1) There has been a tendency for the scientific community to overcompensate (and over-signal) for previous errors in response to the DNA results of the Neanderthal and Denisovan admixtures.
2) All we are discovering is that gene flow was constant in all directions.
3) And that given human specialization in adaptation itself, especially male sexual opportunism of every imaginable kind, that should be obvious.
4) But does the fundamental narrative really change?
… (a) That regardless of world disribution and gene flows, the east african expansions produced the dominant influence in sapiens sapiens, and the subsequent four(five?) speciation events.
… (b) And that the agrarian revolution produced the subsequent hybridization events?
5) And it doesn’t alter the political conflict created by the postwar reversal of the eugenics movement, and the subsequent suppression of knowledge of human group differences around a sequence of neotenic means.

In other words, are we really learning much, or are such discourses, claims, signals really yet another overcompensation as a defense mechanism for anthropologists and other related academics?

And yes it’s a serious question because IMO this question is the origin of the conflict of our age: sex, class, race, culture differences. Are we equally plastic enough to adapt to the standards the west has set? Or not. How utopian was the enlightenment? Or the past sequence of revolutions?

Reply addressees: @razibkhan

@ RK
Not countersignaling. Questioning.
1) There has been a tendency for the scientific community to overcompensate (and over-signal) for previous errors in response to the DNA results of the Neanderthal and Denisovan admixtures.
2) All we are discovering is that gene flow was constant in all directions.
3) And that given human specialization in adaptation itself, especially male sexual opportunism of every imaginable kind, that should be obvious.
4) But does the fundamental narrative really change?
… (a) That regardless of world disribution and gene flows, the east african expansions produced the dominant influence in sapiens sapiens, and the subsequent four(five?) speciation events.
… (b) And that the agrarian revolution produced the subsequent hybridization events?
5) And it doesn’t alter the political conflict created by the postwar reversal of the eugenics movement, and the subsequent suppression of knowledge of human group differences around a sequence of neotenic means.

In other words, are we really learning much, or are such discourses, claims, signals really yet another overcompensation as a defense mechanism for anthropologists and other related academics?

And yes it’s a serious question because IMO this question is the origin of the conflict of our age: sex, class, race, culture differences. Are we equally plastic enough to adapt to the standards the west has set? Or not. How utopian was the enlightenment? Or the past sequence of revolutions?