Daily reminder that they have DNA, lots of
it, and they've been hiding it since before
we ever found out about the cave.

Maybe their original 2 million+ dating was
based on molecular clock nonsense, maybe
they made that up along with all the other
nonsense they spewed -- modern brains and
intentional burials.

-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/655082232455774208

littor...@gmail.com wrote:

> schreef I Envy JTEM:
> > Daily reminder that they have DNA, lots of
> > it, and they've been hiding it since before
> > we ever found out about the cave.

> Is this so?

Absolutely. They retrieve older DNA, from caves, they retrieve DNA
with fewer remains and even when there are literally no remains at
all but, nothing from Naledi?

It's impossible.

AND everything they've been telling us about Neladi has been bull.

The age, the brain, the intentional burials...

> > Maybe their original 2 million+ dating was
> > based on molecular clock nonsense, maybe
> > they made that up along with all the other
> > nonsense they spewed -- modern brains and
> > intentional burials.

> Google
> "not Homo but Pan Australopithecus naledi PPT"

I've already agreed with you many times, EXCEPT for the fact that
we're missing the DNA. Naledi can look exactly like a Chimp, but in
the end it's the DNA that's going to tell us how closely related we
are.

-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/655161274735476736

Op zondag 27 juni 2021 om 23:32:38 UTC+2 schreef I Envy JTEM:

> > > Daily reminder that they have DNA, lots of
> > > it, and they've been hiding it since before
> > > we ever found out about the cave.
> > Is this so?

> Absolutely. They retrieve older DNA, from caves, they retrieve DNA
> with fewer remains and even when there are literally no remains at
> all but, nothing from Naledi?
> It's impossible.

I have no idea.

> AND everything they've been telling us about Naledi has been bull.
> The age, the brain, the intentional burials...

Intentional burial is indeed unlikely IMO.

> > > Maybe their original 2 million+ dating was
> > > based on molecular clock nonsense, maybe
> > > they made that up along with all the other
> > > nonsense they spewed -- modern brains and
> > > intentional burials.

> > Google
> > "not Homo but Pan Australopithecus naledi PPT"

> I've already agreed with you many times, EXCEPT for the fact that
> we're missing the DNA. Naledi can look exactly like a Chimp, but in
> the end it's the DNA that's going to tell us how closely related we
> are.

OK.

littor...@gmail.com wrote:

> > Absolutely. They retrieve older DNA, from caves, they retrieve DNA
> > with fewer remains and even when there are literally no remains at
> > all but, nothing from Naledi?
> > It's impossible.

> I have no idea.

Really? Because all the original Denisvan claims were based on the
DNA extracted from a body so decomposed there was virtually nothing
left save for.... what it a toe bone? A finger?

In comparison, Naledi offers the single greatest cache of remains yet
discovered anywhere...

They also claim to the extracted DNA directly from the cave floor, with
the strata laid down, even with the physical remains completely gone.

In comparison, the preservation state of Naledi is quite good.

> > AND everything they've been telling us about Naledi has been bull.
> > The age, the brain, the intentional burials...

> Intentional burial is indeed unlikely IMO.

No more so than the 2m (plus) year age they gave us, and their claims
about modern brains, based on endocasts, that are clearly not present
in any other endocast.

-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/655189153911341056

Op dinsdag 29 juni 2021 om 01:34:45 UTC+2 schreef I Envy JTEM:

> > > Absolutely. They retrieve older DNA, from caves, they retrieve DNA
> > > with fewer remains and even when there are literally no remains at
> > > all but, nothing from Naledi?
> > > It's impossible.

> > I have no idea.

> Really? Because all the original Denisovan claims were based on the
> DNA extracted from a body so decomposed there was virtually nothing
> left save for.... what it a toe bone? A finger?
> In comparison, Naledi offers the single greatest cache of remains yet
> discovered anywhere...
> They also claim to the extracted DNA directly from the cave floor, with
> the strata laid down, even with the physical remains completely gone.
> In comparison, the preservation state of Naledi is quite good.

Yes, but Naledi is much older than Denisova.

> > > AND everything they've been telling us about Naledi has been bull.
> > > The age, the brain, the intentional burials...

> > Intentional burial is indeed unlikely IMO.> No more so than the 2m (plus) year age they gave us, and their claims
> about modern brains, based on endocasts, that are clearly not present
> in any other endocast.

I don't know anything on the DNA evidence,
but anatomically Naledi is a chimp or apith IMO,
google "not Homo but Pan or Australopithecus naledi PPT".

littor...@gmail.com wrote:

> I don't know anything on the DNA evidence,

Well you know what I've pointed out many times, which is that there would
be oodles of DNA evidence but they're not telling us. And, what they have
told us has been bullshit -- like the intentional burials.

> but anatomically Naledi is a chimp or apith IMO

It's Sediba after 1.5 million years of evolution... assuming the Sediba dating
wasn't as much bullshit as the Naledi dating.

-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/655189153911341056