Theme: Science

  • I know genetics have solved the Anthony-Renfrew debate, but any half-decent econ

    I know genetics have solved the Anthony-Renfrew debate, but any half-decent economist would have explained rather easily that IE had to evolve on the Eurasian Steppe, not in Anatolia. Or as Mainer’s say “Ya c’-hn’t get they-yah (evolve that) from hee-yah.” Always despised Renfrew as an anti aryanist for ideological reasons. Honestly, steppe life must have been pretty cool. In some ways, it still is.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-09-23 13:42:00 UTC

  • Well, since as far as I know, we don’t have any known hittite dna we don’t know

    Well, since as far as I know, we don’t have any known hittite dna we don’t know that. The AFAIK Armenians are iranic peoples (southern to eastern), not europeans (Northern-to-western).

    Everything I know of says that the hittites survivors moved south into the levant and eventually outbred and are lost. It’s more correct to say that the lebanese, georgians, armenians, kurds, iranians, are the closest we can claim to indigenous people of the region and the hitties were a conquering minority of european invaders whose arrival created a dispersal (mass migration) out of anatolia.

    The marsh arabs (semites) probably arrived from the southern route via the arabian peninsula, red sea, and persian gulf rather than eastern route from the indus river back across the iranian plain and into the cuacuses.

    The indo european langauge evolves (as I undersetand it) from these proto-iranic people and the steppe people cooperating-competing with larger herds made possible by the invention of animal-drawn carts (wagons->chariots) – yurts on wheels – that allowed them to take supplies with them onto the steppe. They developed lactose tolerance into adulthood by substituting fresh water consmption for milk consumption, and gaining the 40% more calories from that than traditional food sources by doing so.

    Whatever the relationship, the grops shared a language and culture but still separated and behavied differently as they expanded iranic-east into india (repeating the iranic agrarian invasion in india of 4000 bc, and european-west (repeating the agrarian invasion of europe in 7000 bc.)

    The metal-economy in the ancient world was much like the oil economy in the modern world. Food was the subsistence economy. Metal made states and armies possible. States and armies made professionals possible. Professionals made invention possible, and so on.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-09-23 13:23:00 UTC

  • The most useful thing is to reform your thinking: historians wrote from a time f

    The most useful thing is to reform your thinking: historians wrote from a time frame. But in realistic terms, humans spread lightning fast, adapted lightning-fast, started speciating lightinng fast, and re-hybridized lightning fast. And it appears that it’s larely due to technological innovation on one hand and selection for adaptability (intelligence) on the other.

    During this entire time, migration and trade existed and was interesting and it was profitable. Because trade is always mre profitable than production. It’s just a far higher opportunity cost.

    Agrarianism wasn’t particularly good for intelligence, but it freed up the intelligent folks to work on intelligent things.

    We have, with the industrial revolution, freed up not so intelligent folks to work on unintelligent things. 😉

    Island 120’s.

    Given that I undrstand consiousness as a (thin) tool life evolved for the purpose of creating returns on social cooperation (envisioning otehrs minds), I tend to take not only emotions, but consiousness out of the process of analysis entirely, and see man as a trial and error calculator exploiting every possible opportnity for caloric returns.

    mandelbrots fractals, in a vast game of life.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-09-23 12:26:00 UTC

  • THE THREE LITTLE BEARS AND EUROPEAN GENETIC PORRIDGE I don’t understand the ques

    THE THREE LITTLE BEARS AND EUROPEAN GENETIC PORRIDGE

    I don’t understand the question. Europoids are the result of ice age endurance by hunter-gatherers. Hunter-gatherers, were then nearly replaced by Neolithic farmers. Neolithic farmers by steppe herders. We are a combination of all three, driven by male selection. (Women make nests and stay, young men expand the radius – capturing territory and women).

    Sometime around 43,000 BC, the ancestors of the Early European Farmers (EEF) split from Western Hunter-Gatherers (WHGs), and again appear to have split from Caucasian Hunter-Gatherers (CHGs) around 23,000 BC. Around 20,000 bc the glaciers stop growing.

    This produced a north-south cline we still see today from the very white north of Russia to the caucuses, from the caucuses to the not so white south of the Levant, to the not white people of southern Saudi Arabia.

    Similarly, around 24,000 bc we see the evolution of the Ancient North Eurasians (ANE), who rapidly expand and disappear westward into the hunter-gatherers, and eastward into what would become the Siberian-Americans.(there are no native americans. And the second wave of Siberians were more asiatic and nearly exterminated the first wave, in a cline north to south.).

    The East Asian data is slowly accumulating, but they are almost as isolated by their mountains deserts, cold, and ocians, as are the africans by the desert and oceans, so they arrive from the south, and they saw less admixture with only three events, the last one being tiny. (we dont know where their features came from – or at least I ‘m not willing to commit to any of the theories). So the agrarian expansion combined with the Han expansion (which is continuing in tibet and mongolia, and threatens Vietnam), continues. Make no mistake that the chinese are the most successful empire in history, producing the most forcible integration in history. And they do it without religion (lies). They do it with burueacratic management and time.

    The chessboard is set by the retreat of the glaciers. all these populations are somewhat distinct. As far as I know proto-populations in europe, levant, iran, and north Eurasia are as different as Europeans and Asians are today.

    By 10,000 bc the ice age is over, and the various floods result. Very shortly thereafter the domestication of animals (pigs and sheep), and very quickly the agrarian revolution begins. ~8000bc.

    Today’s populations are the result of two rapid expansions that demonstrate technology is more influential than natural selection: the agrarian expansions in Eurasia and China, followed by the IE expansion in Eurasia.

    These two expansions homogenized by hybridization (racialized) what had been a far higher number of racially distinct human groups.

    What I find interesting is that the favorable traits: Height, Light Skin, Blue Eyes, Blonde Hair, Sociability, Agency, Milk, and Grain tolerance end up in Europeans thus maintaining medium neoteny without sexual neoteny as in east Asia. Despite the fact that these traits evolved in different places in different groups.

    This is one of the key insights I’ve had.

    East Asians overplayed neoteny. Africans, Austronesians (impulsivity) and Semites underplayed neoteny (aggression). Europeans collected highly desirable features abandoning primitive rapid maturity, deep morphology, and lack of agency (Africa) without sacrificing reproductive desirability (east Asians), or carrying reproductive undesirability to extremes (Australians).

    In other words, Europeans selected for symbolic neoteny without significant suppression of sexual maturity. Thus creating a balance between impulsive and rapidly maturing Africans, and calm slowly maturing east Asians.

    It’s like the three little bears: “this one is just right”.

    But while those factors produce a sexual market value, with the sweet spots in Indian brahmins and northern Europeans along the west to east cline, the quality of life of a people is largely produced NOT by those features, by CLASS selection. In other words: domestication (neoteny). So neoteny can be achieved by any of the races and subraces with time – not much time really. A few centuries at most.

    If the group has the will for it.

    “Tech beats genes.” Physical, political-social, and conceptual-informational.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-09-23 12:17:00 UTC

  • One worth reading. Ten hours of this today…. Now, I get to spend another ten..

    https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960982209020673Finally. One worth reading. Ten hours of this today…. Now, I get to spend another ten… lol.

    https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960982209020673Updated Sep 22, 2020, 11:22 PM


    Source date (UTC): 2020-09-22 23:22:00 UTC

  • This has explanatory power but I don’t know what research it’s coming from, and

    This has explanatory power but I don’t know what research it’s coming from, and i’m suspicious.

    —“…there were several migrations from Eurasia into Africa. The Khoi and San populations are descendants of a back-migration from Asia. Additionally, it was found that the Austronesian expansion had also stronger influence on Africa than suggested before. Between 1% to 10% of eastern Africans have East Asian-related ancestry from Austronesians.”—

    ( Göran Dahl? )


    Source date (UTC): 2020-09-22 22:13:00 UTC

  • Conclusion from Yuan et al. 2019: —“We have shown that there are only three ma

    Conclusion from Yuan et al. 2019:

    —“We have shown that there are only three major human groups, Africans (Negroid), East Asians (Mongoloid), and Europeans/Indians (Caucasoid). Aboriginal Australians and the related Papuans, traditionally viewed as the fourth major group, in fact consist of largely European/Indian and African genomes and their unique traits might have come from admixture of incoming Neanderthals with local archaic humans.”—


    Source date (UTC): 2020-09-22 21:41:00 UTC

  • (and yes, every single one of them is a pseudoscientist or or pseudomathematicia

    (and yes, every single one of them is a pseudoscientist or or pseudomathematician)


    Source date (UTC): 2020-09-20 17:55:23 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1307740149988626432

    Reply addressees: @adinhaykin @nathancofnas

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1288106527824310272

  • (and yes, every single one of them is a pseudoscientist or or pseudomathematicia

    (and yes, every single one of them is a pseudoscientist or or pseudomathematician)

    Reply addressees: @adinhaykin @nathancofnas

  • Throughout all of history. “The Invention of The mass production of lying by Soc

    Throughout all of history. “The Invention of The mass production of lying by Social Construction, using false promise of freedom from physical natural and evolutionary laws.” Judaism/Islam are not primitive. They’re as radical an innovation in deceit as Aristotelianism in truth.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-09-20 17:53:49 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1307739755522805762

    Reply addressees: @adinhaykin @nathancofnas

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1288106527824310272