Guest guest Posted March 20, 2006 Report Share Posted March 20, 2006 Kate: > Leif mentions the Neanderthal theory, which I have heard of (that > autism/Aspie genes come from Neanderthals who had children with > Cro-Magnons). I would like to know more about this, and I'd like to > know what people here think about it. www.rdos.net/eng/asperger.htm > The theory interests me because the skulls of three members of my > family (one of my sisters, my father, and his mother - now deceased) > have a big " bump " (a little bigger and flatter than a golfball) on the > back of the head right above where it joins the neck: something you > see in every picture of a Neanderthal skull, but you never see in > pictures of " normal " human skulls. (I have a similar " bump, " but about > half the size of the " bumps " that these family-members have. One of my > doctors commented on my relatively tiny " bump, " and various of my > father's/sister's/grandma's doctors have commented on the " bumps " that > they have.) Yes, the occipital bun is diagnostic of neanderthals, and part of a tiny percentage of Caucasians. > Of course, if the Neanderthal theory ever gains general acceptance as > fact, then (it occurs to me) the CAN/ABA folks and other > " cure-'em-or-prevent-'em " types will *really* go out on the prowl, and > will *really* publicly clamor and raise money to get rid of us - > because the Neanderthal theory (if proven) will give them an even > easier way to define us as " not quite human. " I don't think this is necesarily so. Black people enjoy quite a bit of acceptance because they are black, and a huge amount of effort has been put down to make them equals. It is possible to advocate that we should gain the same priviliges as other cultures / ethnicities. This might in fact end the discrimination we are currently subject to, or at least end the government controlled discrimination. > At that point (it occurs to me) the CAN/ABA wish to either cure > us or extinguish/prevent us will change to a desire to just > prevent/extinguish us and not bother with a " cure " - because, pretty > obviously, all the Applied Behavior Analysis in the world cannot > change a gene. I'm not so sure. Eugenics on blacks is not allowed, nor on any other ethnic group. It is not allowed on homosexuals either. OTOH, eugenics is allowed on many medical conditions, and if autism continue to be defined in medical terms, eugenics will sooner or later be used to eliminate us. There are also other potential benefits if the theory becomes widely accepted. For instance, research efforts for many comorbidities can be steered onto a more productive track. For instance, every autistic could be checked for common European-origin diseases like Hemochromatosis, Cystic Fibrosis and so on. There is currently great reluctance to research any such links because of " political correctness " and a belief that autism is not connected to race. Leif Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 20, 2006 Report Share Posted March 20, 2006 Re: > > Of course, if the Neanderthal theory ever gains general acceptance as > > fact, then (it occurs to me) the CAN/ABA folks and other > > " cure-'em-or-prevent-'em " types will *really* go out on the prowl, and > > will *really* publicly clamor and raise money to get rid of us - > > because the Neanderthal theory (if proven) will give them an even > > easier way to define us as " not quite human. " > > I don't think this is necesarily so. Black people enjoy quite a bit of > acceptance because they are black, and a huge amount of effort > has been put down to make them equals. ... Yes, but blacks and whites and Asians all belong to the same species - _Homo_sapiens_, Antrhopologists/biologists now define this as a different species from the extinct (? or not-so-extinct?) species of _Homo_neanderthalensis_. If it turns out that Aspies/autistic people have (say) partly _sapiens_ ancestry and partly the ancestry of a different species (_neanderthalensis_), then I can see people, or some people, re-defining us as, literally, " only half-human " : a term that, just 150 years ago, white people very often applied to black people, Asian people, Native American people, etc. A species that can call some members of *its* *own* species " half-human " could very easily spend centuries applying the same term (and the same/similar degrading treatment) to people who really *did* turn out to have genes from another species. Yours for better letters, Kate Gladstone Handwriting Repair and the World Handwriting Contest handwritingrepair@... http://learn.to/handwrite, http://www.global2000.net/handwritingrepair 325 South Manning Boulevard Albany, New York 12208-1731 USA telephone 518/482-6763 AND REMEMBER ... you can order books through my site! (Amazon.com link - I get a 5% - 15% commission on each book sold) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 20, 2006 Report Share Posted March 20, 2006 Re: > > Of course, if the Neanderthal theory ever gains general acceptance as > > fact, then (it occurs to me) the CAN/ABA folks and other > > " cure-'em-or-prevent-'em " types will *really* go out on the prowl, and > > will *really* publicly clamor and raise money to get rid of us - > > because the Neanderthal theory (if proven) will give them an even > > easier way to define us as " not quite human. " > > I don't think this is necesarily so. Black people enjoy quite a bit of > acceptance because they are black, and a huge amount of effort > has been put down to make them equals. ... Yes, but blacks and whites and Asians all belong to the same species - _Homo_sapiens_, Antrhopologists/biologists now define this as a different species from the extinct (? or not-so-extinct?) species of _Homo_neanderthalensis_. If it turns out that Aspies/autistic people have (say) partly _sapiens_ ancestry and partly the ancestry of a different species (_neanderthalensis_), then I can see people, or some people, re-defining us as, literally, " only half-human " : a term that, just 150 years ago, white people very often applied to black people, Asian people, Native American people, etc. A species that can call some members of *its* *own* species " half-human " could very easily spend centuries applying the same term (and the same/similar degrading treatment) to people who really *did* turn out to have genes from another species. Yours for better letters, Kate Gladstone Handwriting Repair and the World Handwriting Contest handwritingrepair@... http://learn.to/handwrite, http://www.global2000.net/handwritingrepair 325 South Manning Boulevard Albany, New York 12208-1731 USA telephone 518/482-6763 AND REMEMBER ... you can order books through my site! (Amazon.com link - I get a 5% - 15% commission on each book sold) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 20, 2006 Report Share Posted March 20, 2006 Kate: > Yes, but blacks and whites and Asians all belong to the same species - > _Homo_sapiens_, Antrhopologists/biologists now define this as a > different species from the extinct (? or not-so-extinct?) species of > _Homo_neanderthalensis_. > If it turns out that Aspies/autistic people have (say) partly > _sapiens_ ancestry and partly the ancestry of a different species > (_neanderthalensis_), then I can see people, or some people, > re-defining us as, literally, " only half-human " : a term that, just 150 > years ago, white people very often applied to black people, Asian > people, Native American people, etc. > A species that can call some members of *its* *own* species > " half-human " could very easily spend centuries applying the same term > (and the same/similar degrading treatment) to people who really *did* > turn out to have genes from another species. It is not that simple. It is not only Aspies that would be carrying these genes, but most Caucasians as well. The borders between Aspie and NT are real fuzzy because it depends on which genes in a large set a particular individual has. The notion that autism can be explained by a single gene, or even a few genes, is not compatible with the Neanderthal theory. Also, it is not true that all Aspies have all Neanderthal genes. It is very likely only a smaller set of the original Neanderthal phenotype that has survived, and thus all Aspies would have many Hss origin genes as well. To start with, some people claimed the theory would be abused by racists, but that turned out to be wrong. Most white-suprematists do not like the implications that white people are a mix of African and Neanderthal inheritance. Neither do they like the idea that Aspies carry " high-status " genes and inherited them from a dispised species. Not only does the theory predict that Aspies will have high Neanderthal inheritance, it also predicts that Aspie / Neanderthal traits are responsible for the entire differences that exists between races. This is perhaps the most off-putting implication of all. Leif Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 20, 2006 Report Share Posted March 20, 2006 Re: > It is not that simple. It is not only Aspies that would be carrying these > genes, but most Caucasians as well. The borders between Aspie and > NT are real fuzzy because it depends on which genes in a large set > a particular individual has. The notion that autism can be explained > by a single gene, or even a few genes, is not compatible with the > Neanderthal theory. Well, Leif, you know that sooner or later somebody will invent a biological/chemical test for Neanderthal genes ... with a cut-off score for " pass/fail " on this test of " humanness " ... Let's say it turns out that a certain 100 genes make you an actual Neanderthal if you have all 100 ... if youhave 75 of them, you show autism ... if you have 50, you show Asperger's ... if you have 25, that just makes you Caucasian ... people would fix some cut-off point between 25 and 50 as the line for having " too many " Neanderthal genes (rather like the Nazis, whose law-code eventually accepted people with just one one non- " Aryan " great-grandparent because otherwise almost all Nazi Party members would have flunked their " Aryan-ness " test) and then - just like the Nazis - they can still declare you " half-human/sub-human " for having a bit " too much " of what you can legally have in some legally determined small amount. Re: > ... Not only does the theory predict that Aspies will have high Neanderthal > inheritance, it also predicts that Aspie / Neanderthal traits are > responsible > for the entire differences that exists between races. This is perhaps the > most off-putting implication of all. Yes - especially if some group(s) with very low Aspie/neanderthal inheritance decide that only they count as " real humans. " White supremacists, as you point out, dislike the Neanderthal theory ... but some groups of black supremacists have *already* adopted it: under the name of the " Ice People versus Sun People " theory. To read more (if you don't find it too off-putting - I generally find it of-putting!), do a Google-search on " leonard jeffries " " ice people " " sun people " to find arguments (mostly quite bizarre arguments) both pro and con. Leaving aside whites, blacks, supremacist notions, and all of that, I can think of an even *more* off-putting consequence of the Neanderthal theory getting proven true and generally accepted. What *would* happen to a society that *did* effectively purge itself of all/most/as many as possible Aspie/Neanderthal/not-quite-human genes (by aborting fetuses who failed the " humanness " test, or whatever)? Yours for better letters, Kate Gladstone Handwriting Repair and the World Handwriting Contest handwritingrepair@... http://learn.to/handwrite, http://www.global2000.net/handwritingrepair 325 South Manning Boulevard Albany, New York 12208-1731 USA telephone 518/482-6763 AND REMEMBER ... you can order books through my site! (Amazon.com link - I get a 5% - 15% commission on each book sold) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 21, 2006 Report Share Posted March 21, 2006 Re: > > Yes - especially if some group(s) with very low Aspie/neanderthal > > inheritance decide that only they count as " real humans. " > > Isn't this already the case? Isn't this why AS and autism is > listed in DSM? Listing someone as " ill " does not compare with listing him/her as " non-human. " People who want to help " sick " folks (even if at present they have only very misguided or destructive " help " to offer) would probably not want to offer either real or imagined " help " to " non-human " folks - they would want to kill the " non-humans " outright or, at best, to make the " non-humans " into a caste of slaves (probably not *called* slaves, but amounting to that). Humans find it very, very easy to define other humans as " non-humans " and then to enslave these others on the basis of this presumed " non-humanness. " I suspect that, if we could go back with a time-machine to look at the days when Crô-Magnon and Neanderthal both inhabited the world, we would find at least some places where a tribe of invading C-Ms had enslaved a tribe of Neanderthals and put them to work as a slave-caste: doing the things that the C-Ms didn't like doing, and/or things that the C-Ms didn't do as well as the Neanderthals did those things. (We can imagine a tribe of socially adept C-Ms tricking their socially less-perceptive Neanderthal neighbors into swearing themselves and their posterity into lifelong serfdom, after which the masters require their new serfs to make spears and axes and then to go out and hunt while the C-Ms just sit back, enjoy themselves socially around the campfire, and wait for the Neanderthals to drag home some deer or a mammoth so the C-Ms can eat it and throw the hunters the leftovers ... ) As in master/slave caste-relationships throughout history (e.g., the American South pre-1865), when slave-owners used the slave women for sex this would have craeted mixed-ancestry offspring Over time (several centuries in the old South - and several millennia in Neanderthal-plus-Crô-Magnon Europe), as generation on generation of slave-owners use slave women for sex, more and more of the masters' genes enter the slaves' genomes (because slave-owners normally do not accept the children of slave women into the slave-owner caste - these children remain slaves like their mothers, and then the next generation of masters has sex with the half-breeds, creating quarter-breeds and eventually eighth-breeds, sixteenth-breeds, etc.). Within just a few centuries of whites enslaving blacks in America, this process resulted in slaves often having a great deal of slave-owner ancestry (though nobody liked to admit that) - records of the time (in the American South) and also archeological studies of bones, etc., establish that, by the end of the Civil War, almost all slaves had at least 25% slave-owner ancestry ... and many of them had enough slave-owner ancestry to appear physically indistinguishable/hardly distinguishable from people of " pure " slave-owner blood - which would mean *at* *least* 50% slave-owner ancestry. People visiting the American South in the early nineteenth century report seeing, to their surprise, that the " black " slaves on the plantations included quite a few entirely Caucasian-featured individuals [many with blond hair, blue eyes, pale skins, etc.] neverthess considered as blacks and therefore enslaved. Since the " dilution " of a slave-caste's genetic inheritance had gone that far in just a few centuries, how far could similar dilution gone in a few millennia of master/slave relationships 'way back in Pleistocene Europe? Millennia of Crô-Magnon enslaving Neanderthal (and using the slaves, and their hybrid offspring, for sex) would account, very neatly, for what we have now (a human race that generally looks like C-M, but that includes many people with a few traits - and a few people with rather more of these traits - that seem to hark back to Neanderthal). Leif, have you considered enslavement of one people by another as a possible part of the Neanderthal hypothesis? > > > White supremacists, as you point out, dislike the Neanderthal > > theory ... but some groups of black supremacists have *already* > > adopted it: under the name of the " Ice People versus Sun People " > > theory. To read more (if you don't find it too off-putting - I > > generally find it of-putting!), do a Google-search on > > " leonard jeffries " " ice people " " sun people " > > to find arguments (mostly quite bizarre arguments) both pro and con. > > Very off-putting, considering the claims of " sun people " to be > friendly and " ice people " to be cruel. He obviously haven't > studied US-crime data. Leonard Jeffries explains away any crime-data (showing that any non-whites commit crimes at all) by saying that " sun people " (anyone not white or yellow) commit crimes only under " ice people " oppression created by " ice people " social standards that " sun people " reject and virtuously refuse to live by. (E.g., Jeffries claims that " sun people " naturally share everything, out of the pure generosity of their warm " sun people " hearts, so [according to Jeffries] " sun people " cannot understand - and should not have to live by - such chilly, inhuman " ice people " notions as private property.) Re: > > > Leaving aside whites, blacks, supremacist notions, and all of that, I > > can think of an even *more* off-putting consequence of the Neanderthal > > theory getting proven true and generally accepted. > > What *would* happen to a society that *did* effectively purge > > itself of all/most/as many as possible > > Aspie/Neanderthal/not-quite-human genes (by aborting fetuses who > > failed the " humanness " test, or whatever)? > > We would evolve backwards. This is already happening as more > and more Aspies are labeled instead of put into meaningful ocupations. What would/does this " evolving backwards " look like? What would society look like, once some an undesirable process had become complete? And what would an all-Neanderthal society look like, today, if Crô-Magnon people had never existed? Yours for better letters, Kate Gladstone Handwriting Repair and the World Handwriting Contest handwritingrepair@... http://learn.to/handwrite, http://www.global2000.net/handwritingrepair 325 South Manning Boulevard Albany, New York 12208-1731 USA telephone 518/482-6763 AND REMEMBER ... you can order books through my site! (Amazon.com link - I get a 5% - 15% commission on each book sold) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 21, 2006 Report Share Posted March 21, 2006 Re: > > Yes - especially if some group(s) with very low Aspie/neanderthal > > inheritance decide that only they count as " real humans. " > > Isn't this already the case? Isn't this why AS and autism is > listed in DSM? Listing someone as " ill " does not compare with listing him/her as " non-human. " People who want to help " sick " folks (even if at present they have only very misguided or destructive " help " to offer) would probably not want to offer either real or imagined " help " to " non-human " folks - they would want to kill the " non-humans " outright or, at best, to make the " non-humans " into a caste of slaves (probably not *called* slaves, but amounting to that). Humans find it very, very easy to define other humans as " non-humans " and then to enslave these others on the basis of this presumed " non-humanness. " I suspect that, if we could go back with a time-machine to look at the days when Crô-Magnon and Neanderthal both inhabited the world, we would find at least some places where a tribe of invading C-Ms had enslaved a tribe of Neanderthals and put them to work as a slave-caste: doing the things that the C-Ms didn't like doing, and/or things that the C-Ms didn't do as well as the Neanderthals did those things. (We can imagine a tribe of socially adept C-Ms tricking their socially less-perceptive Neanderthal neighbors into swearing themselves and their posterity into lifelong serfdom, after which the masters require their new serfs to make spears and axes and then to go out and hunt while the C-Ms just sit back, enjoy themselves socially around the campfire, and wait for the Neanderthals to drag home some deer or a mammoth so the C-Ms can eat it and throw the hunters the leftovers ... ) As in master/slave caste-relationships throughout history (e.g., the American South pre-1865), when slave-owners used the slave women for sex this would have craeted mixed-ancestry offspring Over time (several centuries in the old South - and several millennia in Neanderthal-plus-Crô-Magnon Europe), as generation on generation of slave-owners use slave women for sex, more and more of the masters' genes enter the slaves' genomes (because slave-owners normally do not accept the children of slave women into the slave-owner caste - these children remain slaves like their mothers, and then the next generation of masters has sex with the half-breeds, creating quarter-breeds and eventually eighth-breeds, sixteenth-breeds, etc.). Within just a few centuries of whites enslaving blacks in America, this process resulted in slaves often having a great deal of slave-owner ancestry (though nobody liked to admit that) - records of the time (in the American South) and also archeological studies of bones, etc., establish that, by the end of the Civil War, almost all slaves had at least 25% slave-owner ancestry ... and many of them had enough slave-owner ancestry to appear physically indistinguishable/hardly distinguishable from people of " pure " slave-owner blood - which would mean *at* *least* 50% slave-owner ancestry. People visiting the American South in the early nineteenth century report seeing, to their surprise, that the " black " slaves on the plantations included quite a few entirely Caucasian-featured individuals [many with blond hair, blue eyes, pale skins, etc.] neverthess considered as blacks and therefore enslaved. Since the " dilution " of a slave-caste's genetic inheritance had gone that far in just a few centuries, how far could similar dilution gone in a few millennia of master/slave relationships 'way back in Pleistocene Europe? Millennia of Crô-Magnon enslaving Neanderthal (and using the slaves, and their hybrid offspring, for sex) would account, very neatly, for what we have now (a human race that generally looks like C-M, but that includes many people with a few traits - and a few people with rather more of these traits - that seem to hark back to Neanderthal). Leif, have you considered enslavement of one people by another as a possible part of the Neanderthal hypothesis? > > > White supremacists, as you point out, dislike the Neanderthal > > theory ... but some groups of black supremacists have *already* > > adopted it: under the name of the " Ice People versus Sun People " > > theory. To read more (if you don't find it too off-putting - I > > generally find it of-putting!), do a Google-search on > > " leonard jeffries " " ice people " " sun people " > > to find arguments (mostly quite bizarre arguments) both pro and con. > > Very off-putting, considering the claims of " sun people " to be > friendly and " ice people " to be cruel. He obviously haven't > studied US-crime data. Leonard Jeffries explains away any crime-data (showing that any non-whites commit crimes at all) by saying that " sun people " (anyone not white or yellow) commit crimes only under " ice people " oppression created by " ice people " social standards that " sun people " reject and virtuously refuse to live by. (E.g., Jeffries claims that " sun people " naturally share everything, out of the pure generosity of their warm " sun people " hearts, so [according to Jeffries] " sun people " cannot understand - and should not have to live by - such chilly, inhuman " ice people " notions as private property.) Re: > > > Leaving aside whites, blacks, supremacist notions, and all of that, I > > can think of an even *more* off-putting consequence of the Neanderthal > > theory getting proven true and generally accepted. > > What *would* happen to a society that *did* effectively purge > > itself of all/most/as many as possible > > Aspie/Neanderthal/not-quite-human genes (by aborting fetuses who > > failed the " humanness " test, or whatever)? > > We would evolve backwards. This is already happening as more > and more Aspies are labeled instead of put into meaningful ocupations. What would/does this " evolving backwards " look like? What would society look like, once some an undesirable process had become complete? And what would an all-Neanderthal society look like, today, if Crô-Magnon people had never existed? Yours for better letters, Kate Gladstone Handwriting Repair and the World Handwriting Contest handwritingrepair@... http://learn.to/handwrite, http://www.global2000.net/handwritingrepair 325 South Manning Boulevard Albany, New York 12208-1731 USA telephone 518/482-6763 AND REMEMBER ... you can order books through my site! (Amazon.com link - I get a 5% - 15% commission on each book sold) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 21, 2006 Report Share Posted March 21, 2006 In a message dated 3/21/2006 1:50:21 PM Eastern Standard Time, leif@... writes: > Listing someone as "ill" does not compare with listing him/her as> "non-human."Perhaps, but I can't see much of a difference. So I suppose you avoid hospitals then, particularly those European ones with lax definitions on who the doctors decide get euthenized. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 21, 2006 Report Share Posted March 21, 2006 In a message dated 3/21/2006 1:50:21 PM Eastern Standard Time, leif@... writes: > Listing someone as "ill" does not compare with listing him/her as> "non-human."Perhaps, but I can't see much of a difference. So I suppose you avoid hospitals then, particularly those European ones with lax definitions on who the doctors decide get euthenized. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 21, 2006 Report Share Posted March 21, 2006 > Listing someone as " ill " does not compare with listing him/her as > " non-human. " Perhaps, but I can't see much of a difference. > People who want to help " sick " folks (even if at present > they have only very misguided or destructive " help " to offer) would > probably not want to offer either real or imagined " help " to > " non-human " folks - they would want to kill the " non-humans " outright > or, at best, to make the " non-humans " into a caste of slaves (probably > not *called* slaves, but amounting to that). Aren't we already? I've seen many autism organizations put autistics into labor that nobody else want to do. You could call this slave labor. > Humans find it very, very easy to define other humans as > " non-humans " and then to enslave these others on the basis of this > presumed " non-humanness. " Absolutely. > I suspect that, if we could go back with a time-machine to look at the > days when Crô-Magnon and Neanderthal both inhabited the world, we > would find at least some places where a tribe of invading C-Ms had > enslaved a tribe of Neanderthals and put them to work as a > slave-caste: doing the things that the C-Ms didn't like doing, and/or > things that the C-Ms didn't do as well as the Neanderthals did those > things. I very much doubt they could. Neanderthals were physically stronger than C-Ms. > (We can imagine a tribe of socially adept C-Ms tricking their > socially less-perceptive Neanderthal neighbors into swearing > themselves and their posterity into lifelong serfdom, after which the > masters require their new serfs to make spears and axes and then to go > out and hunt while the C-Ms just sit back, enjoy themselves socially > around the campfire, and wait for the Neanderthals to drag home some > deer or a mammoth so the C-Ms can eat it and throw the hunters the > leftovers ... ) You certainly have a vivid imagination, at least ;-) I suspect that the demise of Neanderthals should be explained by quite different factors. It is a well-known fact that C-M left mass-extinctions everywhere they went. The reason they did this was because they were living for the moment and didn't plan ahead for leaner seasons. They probably also had far higher fertility-rates and faster maturation. This is similar to African vs Eurasian populations today as well. IOW, C-M killed the dinner that Neanderthals needed at a later moment. They simply distrupted their new habitat and left everybody starving. > As in master/slave caste-relationships throughout history (e.g., the > American South pre-1865), when slave-owners used the slave women for > sex this would have craeted mixed-ancestry offspring > Over time (several centuries in the old South - and several > millennia in Neanderthal-plus-Crô-Magnon Europe), as generation on > generation of slave-owners use slave women for sex, more and more of > the masters' genes enter the slaves' genomes (because slave-owners > normally do not accept the children of slave women into the > slave-owner caste - these children remain slaves like their mothers, > and then the next generation of masters has sex with the half-breeds, > creating quarter-breeds and eventually eighth-breeds, > sixteenth-breeds, etc.). I suspect this is not correct. For starters, it took 5 to 10 millenia before Neanderthals disappeared. > Within just a few centuries of whites enslaving blacks in America, > this process resulted in slaves often having a great deal of > slave-owner ancestry (though nobody liked to admit that) - records of > the time (in the American South) and also archeological studies of > bones, etc., establish that, by the end of the Civil War, almost all > slaves had at least 25% slave-owner ancestry ... and many of them had > enough slave-owner ancestry to appear physically > indistinguishable/hardly distinguishable from people of " pure " > slave-owner blood - which would mean *at* *least* 50% slave-owner > ancestry. Exactly. This took a few centuries in America. It took 50-100 centuries for C-M. This long time-span is more indicative that the two species had such different life-styles / mating patterns, that virtually no mixing took place. Instead, occassional interbreeding took place in *C-M*, and after a few generations any Neanderthal phenotype would vanish. I believe it was C-M females that occassionally made extra-pair matings with single Neanderthal males. That introgression took place into Hss and not Neanderthals is the reason why Neanderthals disappeared and Hss didn't. All the hybrid vigor went into Hss. If the roles were reversed, Neanderthals would still live & thrive. > Millennia of Crô-Magnon enslaving Neanderthal (and using the > slaves, and their hybrid offspring, for sex) would account, very > neatly, for what we have now (a human race that generally looks like > C-M, but that includes many people with a few traits - and a few > people with rather more of these traits - that seem to hark back to > Neanderthal). Leif, have you considered enslavement of one people by > another as a possible part of the Neanderthal hypothesis? Doesn't seem too likely. You'd have to explain why this slavery persisted for 5000 - 10 000 years with little cross-breading. > Leonard Jeffries explains away any crime-data (showing that any > non-whites commit crimes at all) by saying that " sun people " (anyone > not white or yellow) commit crimes only under " ice people " oppression > created by " ice people " social standards that " sun people " reject and > virtuously refuse to live by. (E.g., Jeffries claims that " sun people " > naturally share everything, out of the pure generosity of their warm > " sun people " hearts, so [according to Jeffries] " sun people " cannot > understand - and should not have to live by - such chilly, inhuman > " ice people " notions as private property.) Sigh. And naturally the government doesn't view this as racism? > What would/does this " evolving backwards " look like? What would > society look like, once some an undesirable process had become > complete? Well, I don't know if I want to know. Given our admiration for violence and war, I suspect things will get real nasty as raw-materials and fossil fuels deplete, and the bright individuals that could solve it are put on a pension or eliminated by eugenics. I surely don't want to see it. > And what would an all-Neanderthal society look like, today, > if Crô-Magnon people had never existed? I suspect much the same as it did 50,000 years ago. So would Hss if Neanderthals hadn't existed. I think " God " made a real serious mistake as he let Hss and Hn intermingle. :-) Leif Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 21, 2006 Report Share Posted March 21, 2006 > Listing someone as " ill " does not compare with listing him/her as > " non-human. " Perhaps, but I can't see much of a difference. > People who want to help " sick " folks (even if at present > they have only very misguided or destructive " help " to offer) would > probably not want to offer either real or imagined " help " to > " non-human " folks - they would want to kill the " non-humans " outright > or, at best, to make the " non-humans " into a caste of slaves (probably > not *called* slaves, but amounting to that). Aren't we already? I've seen many autism organizations put autistics into labor that nobody else want to do. You could call this slave labor. > Humans find it very, very easy to define other humans as > " non-humans " and then to enslave these others on the basis of this > presumed " non-humanness. " Absolutely. > I suspect that, if we could go back with a time-machine to look at the > days when Crô-Magnon and Neanderthal both inhabited the world, we > would find at least some places where a tribe of invading C-Ms had > enslaved a tribe of Neanderthals and put them to work as a > slave-caste: doing the things that the C-Ms didn't like doing, and/or > things that the C-Ms didn't do as well as the Neanderthals did those > things. I very much doubt they could. Neanderthals were physically stronger than C-Ms. > (We can imagine a tribe of socially adept C-Ms tricking their > socially less-perceptive Neanderthal neighbors into swearing > themselves and their posterity into lifelong serfdom, after which the > masters require their new serfs to make spears and axes and then to go > out and hunt while the C-Ms just sit back, enjoy themselves socially > around the campfire, and wait for the Neanderthals to drag home some > deer or a mammoth so the C-Ms can eat it and throw the hunters the > leftovers ... ) You certainly have a vivid imagination, at least ;-) I suspect that the demise of Neanderthals should be explained by quite different factors. It is a well-known fact that C-M left mass-extinctions everywhere they went. The reason they did this was because they were living for the moment and didn't plan ahead for leaner seasons. They probably also had far higher fertility-rates and faster maturation. This is similar to African vs Eurasian populations today as well. IOW, C-M killed the dinner that Neanderthals needed at a later moment. They simply distrupted their new habitat and left everybody starving. > As in master/slave caste-relationships throughout history (e.g., the > American South pre-1865), when slave-owners used the slave women for > sex this would have craeted mixed-ancestry offspring > Over time (several centuries in the old South - and several > millennia in Neanderthal-plus-Crô-Magnon Europe), as generation on > generation of slave-owners use slave women for sex, more and more of > the masters' genes enter the slaves' genomes (because slave-owners > normally do not accept the children of slave women into the > slave-owner caste - these children remain slaves like their mothers, > and then the next generation of masters has sex with the half-breeds, > creating quarter-breeds and eventually eighth-breeds, > sixteenth-breeds, etc.). I suspect this is not correct. For starters, it took 5 to 10 millenia before Neanderthals disappeared. > Within just a few centuries of whites enslaving blacks in America, > this process resulted in slaves often having a great deal of > slave-owner ancestry (though nobody liked to admit that) - records of > the time (in the American South) and also archeological studies of > bones, etc., establish that, by the end of the Civil War, almost all > slaves had at least 25% slave-owner ancestry ... and many of them had > enough slave-owner ancestry to appear physically > indistinguishable/hardly distinguishable from people of " pure " > slave-owner blood - which would mean *at* *least* 50% slave-owner > ancestry. Exactly. This took a few centuries in America. It took 50-100 centuries for C-M. This long time-span is more indicative that the two species had such different life-styles / mating patterns, that virtually no mixing took place. Instead, occassional interbreeding took place in *C-M*, and after a few generations any Neanderthal phenotype would vanish. I believe it was C-M females that occassionally made extra-pair matings with single Neanderthal males. That introgression took place into Hss and not Neanderthals is the reason why Neanderthals disappeared and Hss didn't. All the hybrid vigor went into Hss. If the roles were reversed, Neanderthals would still live & thrive. > Millennia of Crô-Magnon enslaving Neanderthal (and using the > slaves, and their hybrid offspring, for sex) would account, very > neatly, for what we have now (a human race that generally looks like > C-M, but that includes many people with a few traits - and a few > people with rather more of these traits - that seem to hark back to > Neanderthal). Leif, have you considered enslavement of one people by > another as a possible part of the Neanderthal hypothesis? Doesn't seem too likely. You'd have to explain why this slavery persisted for 5000 - 10 000 years with little cross-breading. > Leonard Jeffries explains away any crime-data (showing that any > non-whites commit crimes at all) by saying that " sun people " (anyone > not white or yellow) commit crimes only under " ice people " oppression > created by " ice people " social standards that " sun people " reject and > virtuously refuse to live by. (E.g., Jeffries claims that " sun people " > naturally share everything, out of the pure generosity of their warm > " sun people " hearts, so [according to Jeffries] " sun people " cannot > understand - and should not have to live by - such chilly, inhuman > " ice people " notions as private property.) Sigh. And naturally the government doesn't view this as racism? > What would/does this " evolving backwards " look like? What would > society look like, once some an undesirable process had become > complete? Well, I don't know if I want to know. Given our admiration for violence and war, I suspect things will get real nasty as raw-materials and fossil fuels deplete, and the bright individuals that could solve it are put on a pension or eliminated by eugenics. I surely don't want to see it. > And what would an all-Neanderthal society look like, today, > if Crô-Magnon people had never existed? I suspect much the same as it did 50,000 years ago. So would Hss if Neanderthals hadn't existed. I think " God " made a real serious mistake as he let Hss and Hn intermingle. :-) Leif Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 21, 2006 Report Share Posted March 21, 2006 Well, Leif, I suppose my idea of vast ancient Pleistocene slave-farms must remain in the realm of science-fiction ... > > I very much doubt they could [enslave Neanderthals]. Neanderthals were >physically stronger than C-Ms. Right - though of course enslavement does not always mean the physically stronger over the physically weaker. I had imagined that perhaps Neanderthals felt, as strongly as (I think) many of us feel, that " a promise is a promise " - so that a C-M could trick a Neanderthal into making (and abiding by) a promise which had social consequences that the Neanderthal hadn't foreseen: something like what happens at times in schoolyards today, when one child says to another (often to an Aspie kid) " I'll be your friend and stop making fun of you and I'll keep all my other friends from attacking you if you do what I want " - and the other kid says " sure " - and then it turns out that " what I want " means " I want you to do all my math-homework, I want you to give me all your lunch-money every day, etc., etc. - remember now, you promised! " Although, yes, probably, " quite different factors " do explain it. > > Leonard Jeffries explains away any crime-data (showing that any > > non-whites commit crimes at all) by saying that " sun people " (anyone > > not white or yellow) commit crimes only under " ice people " oppression > > created by " ice people " social standards that " sun people " reject and > > virtuously refuse to live by. (E.g., Jeffries claims that " sun people " > > naturally share everything, out of the pure generosity of their warm > > " sun people " hearts, so [according to Jeffries] " sun people " cannot > > understand - and should not have to live by - such chilly, inhuman > > " ice people " notions as private property.) > > Sigh. And naturally the government doesn't view this as racism? Not yet - but unease over this professor (he teaches at a publicly funded college in New York City) has grown. Fortunately, he now has a harder and harder time filling his classes - partly because he now restricts his classes to those who have a dark enough complexion to suit him - he tells anyone " too light " (including most blacks) who may show up on the first day that they should probably choose another class because they have too many " ice people " genes to do well with his " sun people " teaching-style and subject-matter. (His subject-matter includes claims that the " sun people " of the world invented mathematics, language, science, and just about everything else - e.g., he claims that the ancient Egyptians often traveled by airplane and that the " ice people's so-called science " has maliciously destroyed evidence of this.) The guy gets fired or put on " academic leave " every couple of years, but then he calls one or another of his friends who have friends on the college's board of trustees, and they get him back into the classroom for another few years. > > And what would an all-Neanderthal society look like, today, > > if Crô-Magnon people had never existed? > > I suspect much the same as it did 50,000 years ago. So would Hss > if Neanderthals hadn't existed. > > I think " God " made a real serious mistake as he let Hss and Hn > intermingle. :-) Serious mistake or not, we have computers and airplanes and other such things in our intermingled society - which we wouldn't have in a society that had stayed much the same for 50,000 years. Possibly God (or Whoever) thought we could eventually figure out some ways to preserve the good/pleasant results of intermingling while avoiding the bad/unpleasant results ... Leif, have you ever read any of the books (now out of print, I think) by a UK author named Stan Gooch? Some of his speculative non-fiction (e.g., a book called THE NEANDERTHAL QUESTION) makes a similar argument that present-day humanity resulted from mingling Hss and Hn .... but his arguments differ from yours in at least some important details. (I'll go into Gooch's ideas if Leif or anyone shows an interest - however, I find Gooch's version of the Neanderthal theory rather less plausible than Leif's although far more plausible than Jeffries'.) A Google-search for " stan gooch " should turn up some things, at least. Yours for better letters, Kate Gladstone Handwriting Repair and the World Handwriting Contest handwritingrepair@... http://learn.to/handwrite, http://www.global2000.net/handwritingrepair 325 South Manning Boulevard Albany, New York 12208-1731 USA telephone 518/482-6763 AND REMEMBER ... you can order books through my site! (Amazon.com link - I get a 5% - 15% commission on each book sold) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 21, 2006 Report Share Posted March 21, 2006 > The theory interests me because the skulls of three members of my > family (one of my sisters, my father, and his mother - now deceased) > have a big " bump " (a little bigger and flatter than a golfball) on the > back of the head right above where it joins the neck: something you > see in every picture of a Neanderthal skull, but you never see in > pictures of " normal " human skulls. (I have a similar " bump, " but about > half the size of the " bumps " that these family-members have. One of my > doctors commented on my relatively tiny " bump, " and various of my > father's/sister's/grandma's doctors have commented on the " bumps " that > they have.) As I recall, those of Melungeon and Anatolian ancestry have such bumps. " There are some physiological characteristics which are called ethnic markers, that seem to be passed on through the lines of some Melungeon descendants. There is a bump on the back of the HEAD of SOME descendants, that is located at mid-line, just ABOVE the juncture with the neck. It is about the size and shape of half a golf ball or smaller. This is called an ANATOLIAN BUMP, and indicates ancestry from the Anatolian region of Turkey. If you cannot find the bump, check to see if you, like some descendants, including myself, have a ridge, located at the base of the head where it joins the neck, rather than the Anatolian bump. " http://www.melungeonhealth.org/info.html sara -- Sprouts http://clanmcgrath.blogspot.com mother anarchy http://motheranarchy.blogspot.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 21, 2006 Report Share Posted March 21, 2006 Kate: > Well, Leif, I suppose my idea of vast ancient Pleistocene slave-farms > must remain in the realm of science-fiction ... I think that is best. I wouldn't be pushing the Neanderthal theory if I thought there were a remote chance that C-M could enslave or out-smart Neanderthals. > Right - though of course enslavement does not always mean the > physically stronger over the physically weaker. I had imagined that > perhaps Neanderthals felt, as strongly as (I think) many of us feel, > that " a promise is a promise " - so that a C-M could trick a > Neanderthal into making (and abiding by) a promise which had social > consequences that the Neanderthal hadn't foreseen: > something like what happens at times in schoolyards today, when > one child says to another (often to an Aspie kid) " I'll be your friend > and stop making fun of you and I'll keep all my other friends from > attacking you if you do what I want " - and the other kid says " sure " - > and then it turns out that " what I want " means " I want you to do all > my math-homework, I want you to give me all your lunch-money every > day, etc., etc. - remember now, you promised! " Yes, such things happens when we are a tiny minority. Such situations hardly existed as long as pure Neanderthals existed. I could imagine all the awful things that happened to hybrids though. I also anticipate high levels of autoimmune disease after a few successful introgressions. After the genes got introgressed, they had no way of getting rid of the resulting diease, even if they knew it's origin. Kind of the same situation as with the genomic virus insert that happened in African apes a couple of million years ago. This lead to a decimation and bottleneck. Our fear of hairy creatures, and many other traits comorbid with autism could very likely stem from ancient memories of linkage between disease and these traits. > Not yet - but unease over this professor (he teaches at a publicly > funded college in New York City) has grown. Fortunately, he now has a > harder and harder time filling his classes - partly because he now > restricts his classes to those who have a dark enough complexion to > suit him - he tells anyone " too light " (including most blacks) who may > show up on the first day that they should probably choose another > class because they have too many " ice people " genes to do well with > his " sun people " teaching-style and subject-matter. The American guilt towards blacks during the slavery period must be really deep to accept this. > (His subject-matter includes claims that the " sun people " of the > world invented mathematics, language, science, and just about > everything else - e.g., he claims that the ancient Egyptians often > traveled by airplane and that the " ice people's so-called science " has > maliciously destroyed evidence of this.) Ancient Egyptians were not black, they were Caucasians. ;-) > Serious mistake or not, we have computers and airplanes and other such > things in our intermingled society - which we wouldn't have in a > society that had stayed much the same for 50,000 years. Yes, but are we happier with all of these things? > Possibly God > (or Whoever) thought we could eventually figure out some ways to > preserve the good/pleasant results of intermingling while avoiding the > bad/unpleasant results ... Hopefully we still could. > Leif, have you ever read any of the books (now out of print, I think) > by a UK author named Stan Gooch? Oh yes. I read his excellent book " Cities of dreams " a couple of years ago. It was an inspiration for me on some accounts, even though some of his claims didn't seem to fit into the picture. > Some of his speculative non-fiction > (e.g., a book called THE NEANDERTHAL QUESTION) makes a similar > argument that present-day humanity resulted from mingling Hss and Hn I haven't read that one. >... but his arguments differ from yours in at least some important > details. (I'll go into Gooch's ideas if Leif or anyone shows an > interest - however, I find Gooch's version of the Neanderthal theory > rather less plausible than Leif's although far more plausible than > Jeffries'.) Please do, if forum moderators allow us to go on with it :-) Leif Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 21, 2006 Report Share Posted March 21, 2006 Kate: > Well, Leif, I suppose my idea of vast ancient Pleistocene slave-farms > must remain in the realm of science-fiction ... I think that is best. I wouldn't be pushing the Neanderthal theory if I thought there were a remote chance that C-M could enslave or out-smart Neanderthals. > Right - though of course enslavement does not always mean the > physically stronger over the physically weaker. I had imagined that > perhaps Neanderthals felt, as strongly as (I think) many of us feel, > that " a promise is a promise " - so that a C-M could trick a > Neanderthal into making (and abiding by) a promise which had social > consequences that the Neanderthal hadn't foreseen: > something like what happens at times in schoolyards today, when > one child says to another (often to an Aspie kid) " I'll be your friend > and stop making fun of you and I'll keep all my other friends from > attacking you if you do what I want " - and the other kid says " sure " - > and then it turns out that " what I want " means " I want you to do all > my math-homework, I want you to give me all your lunch-money every > day, etc., etc. - remember now, you promised! " Yes, such things happens when we are a tiny minority. Such situations hardly existed as long as pure Neanderthals existed. I could imagine all the awful things that happened to hybrids though. I also anticipate high levels of autoimmune disease after a few successful introgressions. After the genes got introgressed, they had no way of getting rid of the resulting diease, even if they knew it's origin. Kind of the same situation as with the genomic virus insert that happened in African apes a couple of million years ago. This lead to a decimation and bottleneck. Our fear of hairy creatures, and many other traits comorbid with autism could very likely stem from ancient memories of linkage between disease and these traits. > Not yet - but unease over this professor (he teaches at a publicly > funded college in New York City) has grown. Fortunately, he now has a > harder and harder time filling his classes - partly because he now > restricts his classes to those who have a dark enough complexion to > suit him - he tells anyone " too light " (including most blacks) who may > show up on the first day that they should probably choose another > class because they have too many " ice people " genes to do well with > his " sun people " teaching-style and subject-matter. The American guilt towards blacks during the slavery period must be really deep to accept this. > (His subject-matter includes claims that the " sun people " of the > world invented mathematics, language, science, and just about > everything else - e.g., he claims that the ancient Egyptians often > traveled by airplane and that the " ice people's so-called science " has > maliciously destroyed evidence of this.) Ancient Egyptians were not black, they were Caucasians. ;-) > Serious mistake or not, we have computers and airplanes and other such > things in our intermingled society - which we wouldn't have in a > society that had stayed much the same for 50,000 years. Yes, but are we happier with all of these things? > Possibly God > (or Whoever) thought we could eventually figure out some ways to > preserve the good/pleasant results of intermingling while avoiding the > bad/unpleasant results ... Hopefully we still could. > Leif, have you ever read any of the books (now out of print, I think) > by a UK author named Stan Gooch? Oh yes. I read his excellent book " Cities of dreams " a couple of years ago. It was an inspiration for me on some accounts, even though some of his claims didn't seem to fit into the picture. > Some of his speculative non-fiction > (e.g., a book called THE NEANDERTHAL QUESTION) makes a similar > argument that present-day humanity resulted from mingling Hss and Hn I haven't read that one. >... but his arguments differ from yours in at least some important > details. (I'll go into Gooch's ideas if Leif or anyone shows an > interest - however, I find Gooch's version of the Neanderthal theory > rather less plausible than Leif's although far more plausible than > Jeffries'.) Please do, if forum moderators allow us to go on with it :-) Leif Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 21, 2006 Report Share Posted March 21, 2006 Re: > As I recall, those of Melungeon and Anatolian ancestry have such bumps. As far as I know, my family (Jewish) doesn't belong to either group. But my father's, sister's, and grandmother's bumps fit the description you describe (though larger, not smaller, than a golf-ball half) and the description of " Anatolian ridge " describes what I have. Do you (or does anyone) know of any statistics on how often the ridge/bump appears in people of Jewish ancestry? Yours for better letters, Kate Gladstone Handwriting Repair and the World Handwriting Contest handwritingrepair@... http://learn.to/handwrite, http://www.global2000.net/handwritingrepair 325 South Manning Boulevard Albany, New York 12208-1731 USA telephone 518/482-6763 AND REMEMBER ... you can order books through my site! (Amazon.com link - I get a 5% - 15% commission on each book sold) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 21, 2006 Report Share Posted March 21, 2006 Re: > The American guilt towards blacks during the slavery period must > be really deep to accept this. I'd agree. > > > (His subject-matter includes claims that the " sun people " of the > > world invented mathematics, language, science, and just about > > everything else - e.g., he claims that the ancient Egyptians often > > traveled by airplane and that the " ice people's so-called science " has > > maliciously destroyed evidence of this.) > > Ancient Egyptians were not black, they were Caucasians. ;-) Right - but Leonard Jeffries claims that " ice people " history/archeology have lied about that, too. (Hey, look - if a man sees no problem with saying that the Egyptians had airplanes, why would he see a problem with saying anything else he wanted to say about the ancient Egyptians? He could just make up anything in the world and say, if you disagree: " Well, your disagreement comes from those inhuman 'ice people' genes of yours and/or from the fact that you have been tricked by the 'ice people's' inhumanly clever conspiracy to suppress us 'sun people who perceive the truth directly due to the psychic, empathic qualities of melanin in our skins. If you have enough melanin, you don't need silly 'ice people' inventions like following external evidence instead of your inside feelings " - in fact, he *does* say this, according to people who have gone to his lectures. > > > Serious mistake or not, we have computers and airplanes and other such > > things in our intermingled society - which we wouldn't have in a > > society that had stayed much the same for 50,000 years. > > Yes, but are we happier with all of these things? I think so - for one thing, I wouldn't vastly enjoy spending hours cleaning dead animals and turning their skins into leather (tanning leather *stinks*!) - the things I probably would have had to do a lot of, fifty thousand years ago. If you felt happier without " all of these things " (computers, etc.) I think you would have given them up long ago. > > > Leif, have you ever read any of the books (now out of print, I think) > > by a UK author named Stan Gooch? > > Oh yes. I read his excellent book " Cities of dreams " a couple of years > ago. It was an inspiration for me on some accounts, even though some > of his claims didn't seem to fit into the picture. > > > Some of his speculative non-fiction > > (e.g., a book called THE NEANDERTHAL QUESTION) makes a similar > > argument that present-day humanity resulted from mingling Hss and Hn > > I haven't read that one. > > >... but his arguments differ from yours in at least some important > > details. (I'll go into Gooch's ideas if Leif or anyone shows an > > interest - however, I find Gooch's version of the Neanderthal theory > > rather less plausible than Leif's although far more plausible than > > Jeffries'.) > > Please do, if forum moderators allow us to go on with it :-) Since it turns out that you have read Stan Gooch, I think you would do a much better job than I could of explaining his theories (similar to yours) and showing how your theories differ in the areas where they do differ. Yours for better letters, Kate Gladstone Handwriting Repair and the World Handwriting Contest handwritingrepair@... http://learn.to/handwrite, http://www.global2000.net/handwritingrepair 325 South Manning Boulevard Albany, New York 12208-1731 USA telephone 518/482-6763 AND REMEMBER ... you can order books through my site! (Amazon.com link - I get a 5% - 15% commission on each book sold) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 21, 2006 Report Share Posted March 21, 2006 Re: > The American guilt towards blacks during the slavery period must > be really deep to accept this. I'd agree. > > > (His subject-matter includes claims that the " sun people " of the > > world invented mathematics, language, science, and just about > > everything else - e.g., he claims that the ancient Egyptians often > > traveled by airplane and that the " ice people's so-called science " has > > maliciously destroyed evidence of this.) > > Ancient Egyptians were not black, they were Caucasians. ;-) Right - but Leonard Jeffries claims that " ice people " history/archeology have lied about that, too. (Hey, look - if a man sees no problem with saying that the Egyptians had airplanes, why would he see a problem with saying anything else he wanted to say about the ancient Egyptians? He could just make up anything in the world and say, if you disagree: " Well, your disagreement comes from those inhuman 'ice people' genes of yours and/or from the fact that you have been tricked by the 'ice people's' inhumanly clever conspiracy to suppress us 'sun people who perceive the truth directly due to the psychic, empathic qualities of melanin in our skins. If you have enough melanin, you don't need silly 'ice people' inventions like following external evidence instead of your inside feelings " - in fact, he *does* say this, according to people who have gone to his lectures. > > > Serious mistake or not, we have computers and airplanes and other such > > things in our intermingled society - which we wouldn't have in a > > society that had stayed much the same for 50,000 years. > > Yes, but are we happier with all of these things? I think so - for one thing, I wouldn't vastly enjoy spending hours cleaning dead animals and turning their skins into leather (tanning leather *stinks*!) - the things I probably would have had to do a lot of, fifty thousand years ago. If you felt happier without " all of these things " (computers, etc.) I think you would have given them up long ago. > > > Leif, have you ever read any of the books (now out of print, I think) > > by a UK author named Stan Gooch? > > Oh yes. I read his excellent book " Cities of dreams " a couple of years > ago. It was an inspiration for me on some accounts, even though some > of his claims didn't seem to fit into the picture. > > > Some of his speculative non-fiction > > (e.g., a book called THE NEANDERTHAL QUESTION) makes a similar > > argument that present-day humanity resulted from mingling Hss and Hn > > I haven't read that one. > > >... but his arguments differ from yours in at least some important > > details. (I'll go into Gooch's ideas if Leif or anyone shows an > > interest - however, I find Gooch's version of the Neanderthal theory > > rather less plausible than Leif's although far more plausible than > > Jeffries'.) > > Please do, if forum moderators allow us to go on with it :-) Since it turns out that you have read Stan Gooch, I think you would do a much better job than I could of explaining his theories (similar to yours) and showing how your theories differ in the areas where they do differ. Yours for better letters, Kate Gladstone Handwriting Repair and the World Handwriting Contest handwritingrepair@... http://learn.to/handwrite, http://www.global2000.net/handwritingrepair 325 South Manning Boulevard Albany, New York 12208-1731 USA telephone 518/482-6763 AND REMEMBER ... you can order books through my site! (Amazon.com link - I get a 5% - 15% commission on each book sold) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 22, 2006 Report Share Posted March 22, 2006 > Do you (or does anyone) know of any statistics on how often the > ridge/bump appears in people of Jewish ancestry? There is some speculation that the Melungeons may have Jewish origins amongst others. I don't know much about the 'Anatolian bump.' Sara Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 22, 2006 Report Share Posted March 22, 2006 In a message dated 3/21/2006 11:34:36 PM Eastern Standard Time, inglori@... writes: Not yet - but unease over this professor (he teaches at a publiclyfunded college in New York City) has grown. Fortunately, he now has aharder and harder time filling his classes - partly because he nowrestricts his classes to those who have a dark enough complexion tosuit him - he tells anyone "too light" (including most blacks) who mayshow up on the first day that they should probably choose anotherclass because they have too many "ice people" genes to do well withhis "sun people" teaching-style and subject-matter. (His subject-matter includes claims that the "sun people" of theworld invented mathematics, language, science, and just abouteverything else - e.g., he claims that the ancient Egyptians oftentraveled by airplane and that the "ice people's so-called science" hasmaliciously destroyed evidence of this.) People like him have obviously never been to Africa where the "sun people" are mostly in control. We had a student in high school from Sierra Leon who was sent there to get him out of the country where he would be safe. HIs father was a government offical of some kind. Unfortunately for this cadet, who was a friend of mine, he was one the phone talking to his father one day when a group of "rebels" broke in the house and killed him and his wife, the cadet's mother. You might have guessed, the fellow heard the whole thing over the phone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 22, 2006 Report Share Posted March 22, 2006 In a message dated 3/21/2006 11:34:36 PM Eastern Standard Time, inglori@... writes: Not yet - but unease over this professor (he teaches at a publiclyfunded college in New York City) has grown. Fortunately, he now has aharder and harder time filling his classes - partly because he nowrestricts his classes to those who have a dark enough complexion tosuit him - he tells anyone "too light" (including most blacks) who mayshow up on the first day that they should probably choose anotherclass because they have too many "ice people" genes to do well withhis "sun people" teaching-style and subject-matter. (His subject-matter includes claims that the "sun people" of theworld invented mathematics, language, science, and just abouteverything else - e.g., he claims that the ancient Egyptians oftentraveled by airplane and that the "ice people's so-called science" hasmaliciously destroyed evidence of this.) People like him have obviously never been to Africa where the "sun people" are mostly in control. We had a student in high school from Sierra Leon who was sent there to get him out of the country where he would be safe. HIs father was a government offical of some kind. Unfortunately for this cadet, who was a friend of mine, he was one the phone talking to his father one day when a group of "rebels" broke in the house and killed him and his wife, the cadet's mother. You might have guessed, the fellow heard the whole thing over the phone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 22, 2006 Report Share Posted March 22, 2006 Kate: > > Leonard Jeffries explains away any crime-data (showing that any > > non-whites commit crimes at all) by saying that " sun people " (anyone > > not white or yellow) commit crimes only under " ice people " oppression > > created by " ice people " social standards that " sun people " reject and > > virtuously refuse to live by. (E.g., Jeffries claims that " sun people " > > naturally share everything, out of the pure generosity of their warm > > " sun people " hearts, so [according to Jeffries] " sun people " cannot > > understand - and should not have to live by - such chilly, inhuman > > " ice people " notions as private property.) > > Sigh. And naturally the government doesn't view this as racism? > Not yet - but unease over this professor (he teaches at a publicly funded college in New York City) has grown. Fortunately, he now has a harder and harder time filling his classes - partly because he now restricts his classes to those who have a dark enough complexion to suit him - he tells anyone " too light " (including most blacks) who may show up on the first day that they should probably choose another class because they have too many " ice people " genes to do well with his " sun people " teaching-style and subject-matter. (His subject-matter includes claims that the " sun people " of the world invented mathematics, language, science, and just about everything else - e.g., he claims that the ancient Egyptians often traveled by airplane and that the " ice people's so-called science " has maliciously destroyed evidence of this.) Stunning! I think we need to be REALLY careful to not get caught up in similar Homo Aspiens racism and assume that everything useful and good in the world was invented by Aspies, and everything bad by everyone else. That can easily happen if we go too far on the 'autistic pride' thing (which is part of my beef with some other advocacy groups out there). Inger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 22, 2006 Report Share Posted March 22, 2006 Kate: > > Leonard Jeffries explains away any crime-data (showing that any > > non-whites commit crimes at all) by saying that " sun people " (anyone > > not white or yellow) commit crimes only under " ice people " oppression > > created by " ice people " social standards that " sun people " reject and > > virtuously refuse to live by. (E.g., Jeffries claims that " sun people " > > naturally share everything, out of the pure generosity of their warm > > " sun people " hearts, so [according to Jeffries] " sun people " cannot > > understand - and should not have to live by - such chilly, inhuman > > " ice people " notions as private property.) > > Sigh. And naturally the government doesn't view this as racism? > Not yet - but unease over this professor (he teaches at a publicly funded college in New York City) has grown. Fortunately, he now has a harder and harder time filling his classes - partly because he now restricts his classes to those who have a dark enough complexion to suit him - he tells anyone " too light " (including most blacks) who may show up on the first day that they should probably choose another class because they have too many " ice people " genes to do well with his " sun people " teaching-style and subject-matter. (His subject-matter includes claims that the " sun people " of the world invented mathematics, language, science, and just about everything else - e.g., he claims that the ancient Egyptians often traveled by airplane and that the " ice people's so-called science " has maliciously destroyed evidence of this.) Stunning! I think we need to be REALLY careful to not get caught up in similar Homo Aspiens racism and assume that everything useful and good in the world was invented by Aspies, and everything bad by everyone else. That can easily happen if we go too far on the 'autistic pride' thing (which is part of my beef with some other advocacy groups out there). Inger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 22, 2006 Report Share Posted March 22, 2006 Kate: >>... but his arguments differ from yours in at least some important > details. (I'll go into Gooch's ideas if Leif or anyone shows an > interest - however, I find Gooch's version of the Neanderthal theory > rather less plausible than Leif's although far more plausible than > Jeffries'.) > Leif: > Please do, if forum moderators allow us to go on with it :-) Why would we not?? I personally find this thread fascinating. Inger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 22, 2006 Report Share Posted March 22, 2006 Kate: >>... but his arguments differ from yours in at least some important > details. (I'll go into Gooch's ideas if Leif or anyone shows an > interest - however, I find Gooch's version of the Neanderthal theory > rather less plausible than Leif's although far more plausible than > Jeffries'.) > Leif: > Please do, if forum moderators allow us to go on with it :-) Why would we not?? I personally find this thread fascinating. Inger Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.