They're aquatic and aa says they need one.

Primum Sapienti wrote:
> They're aquatic and aa says they need one.

Instead of parading the massive gaps in your knowledge, why not base
your questions on what you do know?

For example, as Coastal Dispersal is accepted, even by Out of African
purists, and stopping at a sea side McDonald's was unlikely, how could
anyone outside a psychiatric hospital think they weren't exploiting the
sea in order to eat?

And why did they spread across the globe? The screaming obvious
answer is that BECAUSE they lived along the waterline, they consumed
resources & moved on. But your ears are clogged, you can't hear all
those obvious screams, So you clearly "Argue" that they treks from
continent to continent for a different reason...

Overcrowding? Is that it?

Actually, sorry, but if we ask questions based on what we know -- even
you know -- instead of ignorance, going off about otters or beavers seems
a little dumb. Or a lot dumb.

-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/684832909622951936

littor...@gmail.com wrote:
> Some imbecil believes aquatic mammals have exgernal noses:
>> They're aquatic and aa says they need one.
>
> :-DDD
> How stupid can you be?
Tell us about snorkel noses again ->

I Envy JTEM wrote:
> Primum Sapienti wrote:
>> They're aquatic and aa says they need one.
>
> Instead of parading the massive gaps in your knowledge, why not base
> your questions on what you do know?
>
> For example, as Coastal Dispersal is accepted, even by Out of African
> purists, and stopping at a sea side McDonald's was unlikely, how could
> anyone outside a psychiatric hospital think they weren't exploiting the
> sea in order to eat?
>
> And why did they spread across the globe? The screaming obvious
> answer is that BECAUSE they lived along the waterline, they consumed
> resources & moved on. But your ears are clogged, you can't hear all
> those obvious screams, So you clearly "Argue" that they treks from
> continent to continent for a different reason...
>
> Overcrowding? Is that it?
>
> Actually, sorry, but if we ask questions based on what we know -- even
> you know -- instead of ignorance, going off about otters or beavers seems
> a little dumb. Or a lot dumb.

Tell it to mv and his snorkel nose fantasy.

Primum Sapienti wrote:

> Tell it to

So you're not mv and mv posts your words and that's why
your so called "Argument" is not yours?

(let me know when it dawns on you)

-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/685829083109720064

Op woensdag 1 juni 2022 om 19:54:31 UTC+2 schreef I Envy JTEM:
> Primum Sapienti wrote:

> > Tell it to

> So you're not mv and mv posts your words and that's why
> your so called "Argument" is not yours?
> (let me know when it dawns on you)

As ridiculous as "why don't sea-otters have snorkel noses" is "why don't humans (endurance runners!! :-DDD) run on hooves?".

On Monday, May 23, 2022 at 2:01:17 AM UTC-4, Primum Sapienti wrote:
> They're aquatic and aa says they need one.
Neither do sea turtles.

littor...@gmail.com wrote:

> As ridiculous as "why don't sea-otters have snorkel noses" is "why don't humans
> (endurance runners!! :-DDD) run on hooves?".

Lol! That's an excellent point... which of course will be lost on the endurance
running advocates.

-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/686063009321336832

littor...@gmail.com wrote:
> Some imbecil believes aquatic mammals have exgernal noses:
>> They're aquatic and aa says they need one.
>
> :-DDD
> How stupid can you be?
>

"snorkel noses"

And let's not forget you believe nostrils on TOP of the neanderthal nose...

Op woensdag 8 juni 2022 om 05:32:21 UTC+2 schreef Primum Sapienti:

> And let's not forget you believe nostrils on TOP of the neanderthal nose...

:-DDD
My little little boy, you're becoming more+more infantile.

The nostrils of the big neandertal nose + prognathism were closed by the upper lip, of course: philtrum!

Please keep running after you kudu... :-DDD

Primum Sapienti wrote:

> And let's not forget you believe nostrils on TOP of the neanderthal nose...

According to you, not that you can keep track of your idiocy but, according
to you he quoted someone who claimed to observe it at the time of the
discovery of the remains.

So what you would do, if you weren't a mouth breather, is try to come up
with something to verify or falsify the claim. Because that's precisely
what science is: A process that eliminates the human element, such as
your idiotic response here.

There's lots of claims, even physical evidence, that is ignored because it
is anomalous. Myself? I've often discounted claims on that very basis,
offering that if the claims are true then it's only a matter of time before the
evidence establishes it as fact, but until then I would favor a conservative
approach. And you could do that here, but you're not. You don't even know
how you might test ideas or why ideas should be tested.

-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/666892277639233536

littor...@gmail.com wrote:
> Op woensdag 1 juni 2022 om 19:54:31 UTC+2 schreef I Envy JTEM:
>> Primum Sapienti wrote:
>
>>> Tell it to
>
>> So you're not mv and mv posts your words and that's why
>> your so called "Argument" is not yours?
>> (let me know when it dawns on you)
>
> As ridiculous as "why don't sea-otters have snorkel noses" is "why don't humans (endurance runners!! :-DDD) run on hooves?".
>

Why are ALL aquatic short limbed? for running in water? :=DDD

littor...@gmail.com wrote:
> Op woensdag 8 juni 2022 om 05:32:21 UTC+2 schreef Primum Sapienti:
>
>> And let's not forget you believe nostrils on TOP of the neanderthal nose...
>
> :-DDD
> My little little boy, you're becoming more+more infantile.
>
> The nostrils of the big neandertal nose + prognathism were closed by the upper lip, of course: philtrum!
>
> Please keep running after you kudu... :-DDD
>

Many mammals have a philtrum.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philtrum

"In most mammals, the philtrum is a narrow groove that may carry dissolved
odorants from the rhinarium or nose pad to the vomeronasal organ via ducts
inside the mouth.[4]

"For humans and most primates, the philtrum survives only as a vestigial
medial depression between the nose and upper lip.

"A flattened or smooth philtrum may be a symptom of fetal alcohol syndrome
or Prader–Willi syndrome.[7][8]

"A study of boys diagnosed with autism spectrum disorders found that a
broader than average philtrum is one of a cluster of physical attributes
associated with autism."

I Envy JTEM wrote:
> Primum Sapienti wrote:
>
>> And let's not forget you believe nostrils on TOP of the neanderthal nose...
>
> According to you, not that you can keep track of your idiocy but, according
> to you he quoted someone who claimed to observe it at the time of the
> discovery of the remains.

mv did quote that.

<https://www.academia.edu/9566466/Marc_Verhaegen_1985_1995_Medical_Hypotheses_papers_on_AAT>

"When the Moustier Neandertal was excavated (1908), the nostrils, which
could still be discerned then, were situated at the top instead of underneath
the nose as in H.sapiens(55)."

"In a Neandertal swimmingon his back, the large nose with distal nostrils and
the protruding midface surrounded by large air sinuses functioned as a
snorkel."

55. Moerman P. In het spoor van de Neanderthal-mens. Boekerij, Baarn, 1977

> So what you would do, if you weren't a mouth breather, is try to come up
> with something to verify or falsify the claim. Because that's precisely
> what science is: A process that eliminates the human element, such as
> your idiotic response here.

If only mv would do that, it's his belief.

> There's lots of claims, even physical evidence, that is ignored because it
> is anomalous. Myself? I've often discounted claims on that very basis,
> offering that if the claims are true then it's only a matter of time before the
> evidence establishes it as fact, but until then I would favor a conservative
> approach. And you could do that here, but you're not. You don't even know
> how you might test ideas or why ideas should be tested.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -- --
>
> https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/666892277639233536
>

Some kudu-runner who is so idiotic as to confuse the human "philtrum" with the completely different "philtrum" in most mammals (google e.g. "philtrum dog" or "philtrum monkey") wrote:

> > And let's not forget you believe nostrils on TOP of the neanderthal nose...

Childish liar: Otto Hauser's description in 1908 when he unearthed the Moustier Hn:
the nostrils were placed more anteriorly:
from my 1997 book p.171:
"... Otto Hauser ... onderscheidde nog de afdruk van de uitwendige neus:
de neusgaten stonden meer naar voren, verder op de neustop als bij ons."

Op zondag 12 juni 2022 om 01:36:55 UTC+2 schreef I Envy JTEM:

> According to you, not that you can keep track of your idiocy but, according
> to you he quoted someone who claimed to observe it at the time of the
> discovery of the remains.

Yes.

> So what you would do, if you weren't a mouth breather, is try to come up
> with something to verify or falsify the claim. Because that's precisely
> what science is: A process that eliminates the human element, such as
> your idiotic response here.
> There's lots of claims, even physical evidence, that is ignored because it
> is anomalous. Myself? I've often discounted claims on that very basis,
> offering that if the claims are true then it's only a matter of time before the
> evidence establishes it as fact, but until then I would favor a conservative
> approach. And you could do that here, but you're not. You don't even know
> how you might test ideas or why ideas should be tested.

Yes, we waste our time with such idiots.
If I put my 2nd & 3rd fingertops 1 or 2 cm apart underneath my upper lip, and then try to inhale through my nose, my lip perfectly closes my nostrils.
The human philtrum (completely different from the monkey's, of course) fits perfectly at the underside of our nose if we had been more prognathous (as Hn were):
most likely our upper lip in the early- & mid-Pleistocene could easily close our nostrils.
It's difficult to find another functional explanation for the *human* philtrum in our upper lip: a nostril-closing device, that beautifully fits the columella.
But according to the savanna fools, it's no doubt an adaptation for running after antelopes... :-DDD

littor...@gmail.com wrote:
> Some kudu-runner who is so idiotic as to confuse the human "philtrum" with the completely different "philtrum" in most mammals (google e.g. "philtrum dog" or "philtrum monkey") wrote:
>
>>> And let's not forget you believe nostrils on TOP of the neanderthal nose...
>
> Childish liar: Otto Hauser's description in 1908 when he unearthed the Moustier Hn:
> the nostrils were placed more anteriorly:
> from my 1997 book p.171:
> "... Otto Hauser ... onderscheidde nog de afdruk van de uitwendige neus:
> de neusgaten stonden meer naar voren, verder op de neustop als bij ons."

Apparently neither Hauser nor you ever compared a human and a neandertal
skull...

<https://www.academia.edu/9566466/Marc_Verhaegen_1985_1995_Medical_Hypotheses_papers_on_AAT>

"When the Moustier Neandertal was excavated (1908), the nostrils, which
could still be discerned then, were situated at the top instead of underneath
the nose as in H.sapiens(55)."

"In a Neandertal swimmingon his back, the large nose with distal nostrils and
the protruding midface surrounded by large air sinuses functioned as a
snorkel."

55. Moerman P. In het spoor van de Neanderthal-mens. Boekerij, Baarn, 1977

littor...@gmail.com wrote:
> Op woensdag 8 juni 2022 om 05:32:21 UTC+2 schreef Primum Sapienti:
>
>> And let's not forget you believe nostrils on TOP of the neanderthal nose...
>
> :-DDD
> My little little boy, you're becoming more+more infantile.
>
> The nostrils of the big neandertal nose + prognathism were closed by the upper lip, of course: philtrum!

Not possible. If those nostrils were on TOP of the nose, how could the
upper lip go
that far to cover them????

Provide evidence...

> Please keep running after you kudu... :-DDD
>

Keep looking for snorkel noses!

Op maandag 27 juni 2022 om 00:45:59 UTC+2 schreef Primum Sapienti:

> >> And let's not forget you believe nostrils on TOP of the neanderthal nose...
> > :-DDD My little little boy, you're becoming more+more infantile.
> > The nostrils of the big neandertal nose + prognathism were closed by the upper lip, of course: philtrum!

No answer, only this nonsense:

> Not possible. If those nostrils were on TOP of the nose, how could the
> upper lip go that far to cover them????

???
Are you really that stupid??
Again, my litle boy:
If you put your 2nd & 3rd fingertops 1 or 2 cm apart underneath your upper lip, and then try to inhale through your nose, your lip perfectly closes your nostrils.
Didn't you know??

The human philtrum (very unlike the monkey's) fits perfectly at the underside of our nose if we had been more prognathous (as H.neand. were):
IOW, our upper lip in the early- & mid-Pleistocene could easily close our nostrils.
It's difficult to find another functional explanation for the *human* philtrum in our upper lip: a nostril-closing device, that beautifully fits the columella.
Okidoki?

Primum Sapienti wrote:

> mv did quote that.

Think of this like a court of law, where facts have to be established: You
just established that you are an goddamn nimrod.

I mean, you read a quote, you confirm it was a quote -- when both sides
agree on something in court it's called "Established" -- and yet here you
are upset over the quoting of a quote because... because... well, who
cares? Your reasoning could only be ridiculous so best not to dwell on
it.

But YOU established ONCE AGAIN that it is a quote. It's not anything
that someone here made up, it is a legitimate quote.

So what's your issue?

"You can't quote something if someone really said it!!!!"

Like always, your so called "Arguments" are pointless. You don't even
seem to be aware of what if anything you want to challenge, much less
how.

So can you move on now? Thanks in advance.

-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/688075122732597248

littor...@gmail.com wrote:
> Op maandag 27 juni 2022 om 00:45:59 UTC+2 schreef Primum Sapienti:
>
>
>>>> And let's not forget you believe nostrils on TOP of the neanderthal nose...
>
>>> :-DDD My little little boy, you're becoming more+more infantile.
>>> The nostrils of the big neandertal nose + prognathism were closed by the upper lip, of course: philtrum!
>
> No answer, only this nonsense:
>
>> Not possible. If those nostrils were on TOP of the nose, how could the
>> upper lip go that far to cover them????
>
> ???
> Are you really that stupid??
> Again, my litle boy:
> If you put your 2nd & 3rd fingertops 1 or 2 cm apart underneath your upper lip, and then try to inhale through your nose, your lip perfectly closes your nostrils.
> Didn't you know??

You have to hold the lip in place? :=}

> The human philtrum (very unlike the monkey's) fits perfectly at the underside of our nose if we had been more prognathous (as H.neand. were):
> IOW, our upper lip in the early- & mid-Pleistocene could easily close our nostrils.
> It's difficult to find another functional explanation for the *human* philtrum in our upper lip: a nostril-closing device, that beautifully fits the columella.
> Okidoki?

How does that work with a mustache? Ever consider that?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philtrum

The philtrum (Latin: philtrum from Ancient Greek φίλτρον phíltron, lit.
"love charm"), or medial cleft, is a vertical indentation in the middle area
of the upper lip, common to many mammals, extending in humans from
the nasal septum to the tubercle of the upper lip. Together with a glandular
rhinarium and slit-like nostrils, it is believed to constitute the primitive
condition for at least therian mammals."

In most mammals, the philtrum is a narrow groove that may carry dissolved
odorants from the rhinarium or nose pad to the vomeronasal organ via ducts
inside the mouth.

For humans and most primates, the philtrum survives only as a vestigial
medial depression between the nose and upper lip.

The human philtrum, bordered by ridges, also is known as the infranasal
depression, but has no apparent function. That may be because most higher
primates rely more on vision than on smell.[4] Strepsirrhine primates, such
as lemurs, still retain the philtrum and the rhinarium, unlike monkeys and
apes.

https://advetresearch.com/index.php/AVR/article/view/487/432

The philtrum is a median groove in the upper lip of domestic animals
(Nickelet al.,1979). It usually found in animals that possessed a
rhinarium or a nasalplane (NP) such as carnivores and small ruminants
(Nickelet al., 1979; Evans and Christensen, 1979). The nasal plane is a
wet glabrous skin area, which covers the medial wings of the nostrils
(Nickelet al., 1979). The philtrum in such species is deep and sometimes
extends to the nostrils. On the other hand, it’s shallow or absent in
animals that lack NP, a sequine (Nickelet al., 1979). This anatomical
association is also indicating functional correlations between the
philtrum and the NP (Hillenius and Rehorek, 2005). The philtrum proposed
to drain the odoront molecules that dissolved in the fluid covering the NP
to reach the incisive papillae and then into the nasopalatine ducts
(Wöhrmann-Repenning and Bergmann, 2001). While the nasopalatine ducts or
incisive ducts are the oro-nasal passage of the vomeronasal duct system
(VNO), the philtrum thereby is considered the communication canal between
the NP and the VNO (Hillenius and Rehorek, 2005; Eshrah, 2019).

Some kudu runner:

....
> The human philtrum, bordered by ridges, also is known as the infranasal
> depression, but has no apparent function.

any more...

The function of human "infranasal depression" (different from non-hmuan philtrum") was clear:
+ prognathism + moustache = closing nostrils.

littor...@gmail.com wrote:
> Op maandag 27 juni 2022 om 00:45:59 UTC+2 schreef Primum Sapienti:
>
>
>>>> And let's not forget you believe nostrils on TOP of the neanderthal nose...
>
>>> :-DDD My little little boy, you're becoming more+more infantile.
>>> The nostrils of the big neandertal nose + prognathism were closed by the upper lip, of course: philtrum!
>
> No answer, only this nonsense:
>
>> Not possible. If those nostrils were on TOP of the nose, how could the
>> upper lip go that far to cover them????
>
> ???
> Are you really that stupid??
> Again, my litle boy:
> If you put your 2nd & 3rd fingertops 1 or 2 cm apart underneath your upper lip, and then try to inhale through your nose, your lip perfectly closes your nostrils.
> Didn't you know??

No answer, only nonsense. So this aquatic ape would have to swim and dive
with one
arm while the other holds the lip against the nose? LOL

> The human philtrum (very unlike the monkey's) fits perfectly at the underside of our nose if we had been more prognathous (as H.neand. were):
> IOW, our upper lip in the early- & mid-Pleistocene could easily close our nostrils.
> It's difficult to find another functional explanation for the *human* philtrum in our upper lip: a nostril-closing device, that beautifully fits the columella.
> Okidoki?
>

Many mammals have a philtrum.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philtrum

"In most mammals, the philtrum is a narrow groove that may carry dissolved
odorants from the rhinarium or nose pad to the vomeronasal organ via ducts
inside the mouth.[4]

"For humans and most primates, the philtrum survives only as a vestigial
medial depression between the nose and upper lip.

"A flattened or smooth philtrum may be a symptom of fetal alcohol syndrome
or Prader–Willi syndrome.[7][8]

"A study of boys diagnosed with autism spectrum disorders found that a
broader than average philtrum is one of a cluster of physical attributes
associated with autism."

Okidoki?

I Envy JTEM wrote:
> Primum Sapienti wrote:
>
>> mv did quote that.
>
> Think of this like a court of law, where facts have to be established: You
> just established that you are an goddamn nimrod.
>
> I mean, you read a quote, you confirm it was a quote -- when both sides
> agree on something in court it's called "Established" -- and yet here you
> are upset over the quoting of a quote because... because... well, who
> cares? Your reasoning could only be ridiculous so best not to dwell on
> it.
>
> But YOU established ONCE AGAIN that it is a quote. It's not anything
> that someone here made up, it is a legitimate quote.
>
> So what's your issue?
>
> "You can't quote something if someone really said it!!!!"
>
> Like always, your so called "Arguments" are pointless. You don't even
> seem to be aware of what if anything you want to challenge, much less
> how.
>
> So can you move on now? Thanks in advance.

Exhibit A: mv DID quote that.

I Pity JTEM wrote:
> Primum Sapienti wrote:
>
>> And let's not forget you believe nostrils on TOP of the neanderthal
nose...
>
> According to you, not that you can keep track of your idiocy but,
according
> to you he quoted someone who claimed to observe it at the time of the
> discovery of the remains.

mv did quote that. And he believes it. Ask him.

<https://www.academia.edu/9566466/Marc_Verhaegen_1985_1995_Medical_Hypotheses_papers_on_AAT>

"When the Moustier Neandertal was excavated (1908), the nostrils, which
could still be discerned then, were situated at the top instead of
underneath the nose as in H.sapiens(55)."

"In a Neandertal swimmingon his back, the large nose with distal
nostrils and
the protruding midface surrounded by large air sinuses functioned as a
snorkel."

55. Moerman P. In het spoor van de Neanderthal-mens. Boekerij, Baarn, 1977

> So what you would do, if you weren't a mouth breather, is try to come up
> with something to verify or falsify the claim. Because that's precisely
> what science is: A process that eliminates the human element, such as
> your idiotic response here.

If only mv would do that, it's his belief.

Primum Sapienti wrote:

> I Envy JTEM wrote:
> > According to you, not that you can keep track of your idiocy but,
> > according to you he quoted someone who claimed to observe it
> > at the time of the discovery of the remains.

> mv did quote that.

So you're an idiot... "Only stupid people quote witnesses!"

You can disagree with the quote, but it's a quote. It is in fact
a "Cite."

-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/726557549488439296

some idiot:
> >> And let's not forget you believe nostrils on TOP of the neanderthal
> nose...

> > According to you, not that you can keep track of your idiocy but,
> according
> > to you he quoted someone who claimed to observe it at the time of the
> > discovery of the remains.

the same idiot:
> mv did quote that.

idiotic liar