Thursday, November 24, 2011

Science With Two Standards Isn't Science

You can read here the peculiar, complex, politically charged nature of what is supposed to be objective science.

1. When we find fully developed modern dogs everywhere in Neanderthal camps, they're just scavenging wild runts hanging around the fringe hoping to steal food. In Homo Sapien/Cro-Magnon camps, they are proof that it was Cro-Magnons who domesticated and used dogs in hunting ... not Neanderthals 200,000 years earlier.

2. When we find multicolored complex crayons all over Neanderthal caves, that's just apes playing with naturally occurring pigments. The absence of them in Homo Sapien/Cro-Magnon life proves that they outgrew such childish things and concentrated on what was important in life - killing people and having sex.

3. Ornate, elaborate burials of Neanderthal dead with evidence they had been nursed to health and cared for by others most of their old age is just primitive crude pagan acts. The absence of much formal ritual in the burial of Cro-Magnons is because they didn't foolishly waste resources on dead people and usually ate them where they dropped.

4. Bone flutes and possible lyres were simply adjuncts to primitive animal calls for hunting in Neanderthals. In Sapiens they were highly advanced musical instruments.

5. When we find bones scraped and cleaned in Neanderthal camps, that's proof they were cannibals. In Sapiens it is proof of secondary burial practices, in spite of the fact they are found with teeth marks and in expedient barbecues.

6. The fact that aurochs were almost completely domesticated during the Neanderthal reign is due to the fact that the cows voluntarily shrunk themselves by 75% and decided they would throw themselves at humans in hamburger form is no evidence that Neanderthals were herders. The lactose gene in the human gut may be from the Neanderthals but that's just a fortuitous mutation that occurred to the Neanderthals and waited 200,000 years to be put to good use when Sapiens domesticated cattle.

7. When Neanderthals scribbled elaborate abstract designs for the pure joy of it, that was just chimps having a random go at a surface without any particular aim in mind. When Sapiens did it with far more primitive designs he was a jeenious Picasso.

8. Since individuation with jewelry implies a complex notion of the self and a complex language to express it, it is possible that Neanderthals may even have been capable of speech, but it is highly theoretical and we would be shocked if that turned out to be the case. They apparently coordinated 80 meter wide murals with consistent themes on the walls of caves by using hand gestures and grunting to supervise more than 10 people at a time.

9. The fact that only a small handful of Neanderthals have been found at very early dates with the pronounced brow and cheekbones of people suffering from severe rickets does not mean these people had rickets and all the more recent Mousterians/Amuds found who looked like completely modern people does not mean that Neanderthals did not look like caricatured squat apes. The evidence is confusing and will take hundreds of years to analyze, despite people walking into the British Natural Museum of History over a hundred years ago and saying "That bow legged chap looks like he had severe rickets. 'Ee looks as if he'd barely be able to walk much less run. We have chaps like that down at the factory, they look nearly identical. I guess they must be Neanderthals instead of suffering from rickets."


Solsys said...

About the eating of Neanderthals.

I have repeatedly read that in cultures where cannibalism was ritualized, the eater wants to gain the strength and virtues of the person he eats.

It might be the case here, with Cro-Magnon morbidly jealous of Neanderthal, and desperately wanting to "become like him". He rapes Neanderthal females, and eats the males so he can become like them.

Look at corporate culture, and how the hierarchy always imitates intelligence to gain some credibility. Ape is the creature of imitation.

Anonymous said...

A rule in science is that when a theory explains all the facts then that theory is the dominant explanation until it is replaced by a better theory.

Like it or not Tex has supplied something that academics have failed to do (including Trinkhaus.) A theory that explains all the facts. Unless somebody can do better than what Tex has done I think Tex deserves the title of the worlds prominent authority on neanderthals.

Mr. T has explained many many things that were mysteries with a simple explanation. If you think Mr. Ts explanation doesnt make sense then lets here your theory. Note its important to know what the question is before you offer the answer.

Anonymous said...

"That is the essence of science: ask an impertinent question, and you are on the way to a pertinent answer."

Jacob Bronowski (nuclear scientist; author of The Assent of Man

"Dissent is the native activity of the scientist, and it has got him into a good deal of trouble in the last years. But if that is cut off, what is left will not be a scientist. And I doubt whether it will be a man."

Jacob Bronowski

"It is important that students bring a certain ragamuffin, barefoot irreverence to their studies; they are not here to worship what is known, but to question it."

Jacob Bronowski