Fish!

https://phys.org/news/2022-11-oldest-evidence-cook-food.html

Evidence for the cooking of fish 780,000 years ago at Gesher Benot
Ya’aqov, Israel

Abstract

Although cooking is regarded as a key element in the evolutionary
success of the genus Homo, impacting various biological and social
aspects, when intentional cooking first began remains unknown. The
early Middle Pleistocene site of Gesher Benot Ya’aqov, Israel (marine
isotope stages 18–20; ~0.78 million years ago), has preserved evidence
of hearth-related hominin activities and large numbers of freshwater
fish remains (>40,000). A taphonomic study and isotopic analyses
revealed significant differences between the characteristics of the
fish bone assemblages recovered in eight sequential archaeological
horizons of Area B (Layer II-6 levels 1–7) and natural fish bone
assemblages (identified in Area A). Gesher Benot Ya’aqov
archaeological horizons II-6 L1–7 exhibited low fish species richness,
with a clear preference for two species of large Cyprinidae
(Luciobarbus longiceps and Carasobarbus canis) and the almost total
absence of fish bones in contrast to the richness of pharyngeal teeth
(>95%). Most of the pharyngeal teeth recovered in archaeological
horizons II-6 L1–7 were spatially associated with ‘phantom’ hearths
(clusters of burnt flint microartifacts). Size–strain analysis using
X-ray powder diffraction provided evidence that these teeth had been
exposed to low temperature (<500 °C), suggesting, together with the
archaeological and taphonomic data, that the fish from the
archaeological horizons of Area B had been cooked and consumed on
site. This is the earliest evidence of cooking by hominins.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41559-022-01910-z

On Monday, November 14, 2022 at 1:36:30 PM UTC-5, Pandora wrote:
> Fish!
>
> https://phys.org/news/2022-11-oldest-evidence-cook-food.html
>
> Evidence for the cooking of fish 780,000 years ago at Gesher Benot
> Ya’aqov, Israel
>
> Abstract
>
> Although cooking is regarded as a key element in the evolutionary
> success of the genus Homo, impacting various biological and social
> aspects, when intentional cooking first began remains unknown. The
> early Middle Pleistocene site of Gesher Benot Ya’aqov, Israel (marine
> isotope stages 18–20; ~0.78 million years ago), has preserved evidence
> of hearth-related hominin activities and large numbers of freshwater
> fish remains (>40,000). A taphonomic study and isotopic analyses
> revealed significant differences between the characteristics of the
> fish bone assemblages recovered in eight sequential archaeological
> horizons of Area B (Layer II-6 levels 1–7) and natural fish bone
> assemblages (identified in Area A). Gesher Benot Ya’aqov
> archaeological horizons II-6 L1–7 exhibited low fish species richness,
> with a clear preference for two species of large Cyprinidae
> (Luciobarbus longiceps and Carasobarbus canis) and the almost total
> absence of fish bones in contrast to the richness of pharyngeal teeth
> (>95%). Most of the pharyngeal teeth recovered in archaeological
> horizons II-6 L1–7 were spatially associated with ‘phantom’ hearths
> (clusters of burnt flint microartifacts). Size–strain analysis using
> X-ray powder diffraction provided evidence that these teeth had been
> exposed to low temperature (<500 °C), suggesting, together with the
> archaeological and taphonomic data, that the fish from the
> archaeological horizons of Area B had been cooked and consumed on
> site. This is the earliest evidence of cooking by hominins.
>
> https://www.nature.com/articles/s41559-022-01910-z

Is this evidence of non-piscivorous diet in Archaic Homo?
How many piscivores cook their fish?
Did they eat marine fish raw, and freshwater fish cooked?
These species can tolerate brackish water, but live in freshwater.

Carasobarbus, the himris, is a small genus of ray-finned fishes in the family Cyprinidae. Its species are found in rivers, streams, lakes and ponds in Western Asia and Northwest Africa. C. canis can reach 66 cm (26 in) in total length

On Mon, 14 Nov 2022 18:37:41 -0800 (PST), "DD'eDeN aka
note/nickname/alas_my_loves" <daud.deden@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Monday, November 14, 2022 at 1:36:30 PM UTC-5, Pandora wrote:
>> Fish!
>>
>> https://phys.org/news/2022-11-oldest-evidence-cook-food.html
>>
>> Evidence for the cooking of fish 780,000 years ago at Gesher Benot
>> Ya’aqov, Israel
>>
>> Abstract
>>
>> Although cooking is regarded as a key element in the evolutionary
>> success of the genus Homo, impacting various biological and social
>> aspects, when intentional cooking first began remains unknown. The
>> early Middle Pleistocene site of Gesher Benot Ya’aqov, Israel (marine
>> isotope stages 18–20; ~0.78 million years ago), has preserved evidence
>> of hearth-related hominin activities and large numbers of freshwater
>> fish remains (>40,000). A taphonomic study and isotopic analyses
>> revealed significant differences between the characteristics of the
>> fish bone assemblages recovered in eight sequential archaeological
>> horizons of Area B (Layer II-6 levels 1–7) and natural fish bone
>> assemblages (identified in Area A). Gesher Benot Ya’aqov
>> archaeological horizons II-6 L1–7 exhibited low fish species richness,
>> with a clear preference for two species of large Cyprinidae
>> (Luciobarbus longiceps and Carasobarbus canis) and the almost total
>> absence of fish bones in contrast to the richness of pharyngeal teeth
>> (>95%). Most of the pharyngeal teeth recovered in archaeological
>> horizons II-6 L1–7 were spatially associated with ‘phantom’ hearths
>> (clusters of burnt flint microartifacts). Size–strain analysis using
>> X-ray powder diffraction provided evidence that these teeth had been
>> exposed to low temperature (<500 °C), suggesting, together with the
>> archaeological and taphonomic data, that the fish from the
>> archaeological horizons of Area B had been cooked and consumed on
>> site. This is the earliest evidence of cooking by hominins.
>>
>> https://www.nature.com/articles/s41559-022-01910-z
>
>Is this evidence of non-piscivorous diet in Archaic Homo?

No, early Homo may have already exploited fish and other aquatic
resources 1.95 mya in the Turkana Basin:
https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1002181107

The point is that you don't have be in the least aquatic in order to
exploit aquatic resources.
Even chimpanzees have recently been observed crab-fishing,

"in primary riverine forest, characterized by shallow permanent
streams with sandy, rocky soil, and some larger boulders. Our data
thus show that aquatic fauna can be regularly exploited in a
rainforest habitat with only small streams."

https://sci-hub.se/10.1016/j.jhevol.2019.05.002

>How many piscivores cook their fish?

Only Homo.

....

> Even chimpanzees have recently been observed crab-fishing

Of course, thanks: google our TREE paper "Aquarboreal Ancestors?".

....
> > Even chimpanzees have recently been observed crab-fishing

Of course: evolution is gradual:
human evolution:
arboreal->aquarboreal->littoral->wading->walking.

Google e.g.
"bonobo wading",
-"aquarboreal ancestors".

Op maandag 14 november 2022 om 19:36:30 UTC+1 schreef Pandora:

> Fish! https://phys.org/news/2022-11-oldest-evidence-cook-food.html
> Evidence for the cooking of fish 780,000 years ago at Gesher Benot Ya’aqov, Israel

:-) Yes!
From Stephen Munro (who found the shell engravings (José Joordens cs 2014 "Homo erectus at Trinil on Java used shells for tool production and engraving" Nature doi 10.1038/nature19362)):
GBY is also the site where highly nutritious nuts from the aquatic plant Euryale ferox were exploited.
"Irrespective of the depth of the water, hominins would have had to collect nuts from beneath the lake surface, entailing some amount of time spent under water."
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/265605768_Beneath_Still_Waters_-Multistage_Aquatic_Exploitation_of_Euryale_ferox_Salisb_during_the_Acheulian

Pandora wrote:

> No, early Homo may have already exploited fish and other aquatic
> resources 1.95 mya in the Turkana Basin:

And how did they get there, you suppose?

God knows what a paleoanthropologist might claim but allow me to
assure you: They did not fall out of the sky!

Well it turns out that it's actually a very likely destination for any
Aquatic Ape population. They've found everything up to whale
fossils in the Turkana Basin, for Christ's sake!

One way you can tell someone is insane is that they keep repeating
(regurgitating) the exact same idiocy even long after it's been
refuted..

https://groups.google.com/g/sci.anthropology.paleo/c/VgQb3EP8k6c/m/gwTJ73b0CgAJ

Previously I introduced the Stingrays:

https://groups.google.com/g/sci.anthropology.paleo/c/bJo--WnrIRs/m/svZoubf0CgAJ

So Stingrays could swim there from the ocean, but an Aquatic Ape
following the coast couldn't follow that same water inland?

Oh, come on! That's idiocy!

-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/701137037768753152

On Thursday, November 17, 2022 at 6:20:36 PM UTC-5, JTEM is so reasonable wrote:
> Pandora wrote:
>
> > No, early Homo may have already exploited fish and other aquatic
> > resources 1.95 mya in the Turkana Basin:
> And how did they get there, you suppose?
>
> God knows what a paleoanthropologist might claim but allow me to
> assure you: They did not fall out of the sky!
>
> Well it turns out that it's actually a very likely destination for any
> Aquatic Ape population. They've found everything up to whale
> fossils in the Turkana Basin, for Christ's sake!
>
> One way you can tell someone is insane is that they keep repeating
> (regurgitating) the exact same idiocy even long after it's been
> refuted..
>
> https://groups.google.com/g/sci.anthropology.paleo/c/VgQb3EP8k6c/m/gwTJ73b0CgAJ
>
> Previously I introduced the Stingrays:
>
> https://groups.google.com/g/sci.anthropology.paleo/c/bJo--WnrIRs/m/svZoubf0CgAJ
>
> So Stingrays could swim there from the ocean, but an Aquatic Ape
> following the coast couldn't follow that same water inland?
>
> Oh, come on! That's idiocy!
>
>
>
>
> -- --
>
> https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/701137037768753152
GIGO.

DD'eDeN aka note/nickname/alas_my_loves wrote:

> GIGO.

Ironically, you are an excellent example of GIGO.

-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/701137037768753152

On Thu, 17 Nov 2022 15:20:35 -0800 (PST), JTEM is so reasonable
<jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:

>Pandora wrote:
>
>> No, early Homo may have already exploited fish and other aquatic
>> resources 1.95 mya in the Turkana Basin:
>
>And how did they get there, you suppose?
>
>God knows what a paleoanthropologist might claim but allow me to
>assure you: They did not fall out of the sky!
>
>Well it turns out that it's actually a very likely destination for any
>Aquatic Ape population. They've found everything up to whale
>fossils in the Turkana Basin, for Christ's sake!

17 Ma ago, stranded up-river.
https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1421502112

>One way you can tell someone is insane is that they keep repeating
>(regurgitating) the exact same idiocy even long after it's been
>refuted..
>
>https://groups.google.com/g/sci.anthropology.paleo/c/VgQb3EP8k6c/m/gwTJ73b0CgAJ
>
>Previously I introduced the Stingrays:
>
>https://groups.google.com/g/sci.anthropology.paleo/c/bJo--WnrIRs/m/svZoubf0CgAJ

Freshwater stingray:
https://sci-hub.se/10.1111/j.1502-3931.1993.tb01542.x

So, it's obvious that the Turkana Basin at times had a drainage to the
Indian Ocean.

>So Stingrays could swim there from the ocean, but an Aquatic Ape
>following the coast couldn't follow that same water inland?

The problem is that while the stingray and whale have well-established
ancestral marine source populations, no such thing is known for
hominins. On the other hand, the Turkana Basin has a long sequence of
sediments that record the evolution of hominins within the basin, from
Australopithecus anamensis through Homo habilis, H. erectus/ergaster,
to Homo sapiens (and the parallel branch of Paranthropus). No "sudden
appearance" as in the case of the stingrays and whale.

On Monday, November 14, 2022 at 1:36:30 PM UTC-5, Pandora wrote:
> Fish!
>
> https://phys.org/news/2022-11-oldest-evidence-cook-food.html
>
> Evidence for the cooking of fish 780,000 years ago at Gesher Benot
> Ya’aqov, Israel
>
> Abstract
>
> Although cooking is regarded as a key element in the evolutionary
> success of the genus Homo, impacting various biological and social
> aspects, when intentional cooking first began remains unknown. The
> early Middle Pleistocene site of Gesher Benot Ya’aqov, Israel (marine
> isotope stages 18–20; ~0.78 million years ago), has preserved evidence
> of hearth-related hominin activities and large numbers of freshwater
> fish remains (>40,000). A taphonomic study and isotopic analyses
> revealed significant differences between the characteristics of the
> fish bone assemblages recovered in eight sequential archaeological
> horizons of Area B (Layer II-6 levels 1–7) and natural fish bone
> assemblages (identified in Area A). Gesher Benot Ya’aqov
> archaeological horizons II-6 L1–7 exhibited low fish species richness,
> with a clear preference for two species of large Cyprinidae
> (Luciobarbus longiceps and Carasobarbus canis) and the almost total
> absence of fish bones in contrast to the richness of pharyngeal teeth
> (>95%). Most of the pharyngeal teeth recovered in archaeological
> horizons II-6 L1–7 were spatially associated with ‘phantom’ hearths
> (clusters of burnt flint microartifacts). Size–strain analysis using
> X-ray powder diffraction provided evidence that these teeth had been
> exposed to low temperature (<500 °C), suggesting, together with the
> archaeological and taphonomic data, that the fish from the
> archaeological horizons of Area B had been cooked and consumed on
> site. This is the earliest evidence of cooking by hominins.
>
> https://www.nature.com/articles/s41559-022-01910-z

This is evidence of communal cooking & controlled fire, plausibly indicating fully nomadic small portable shelters aka domeshields. When hearths became inherent to later nuclear family larger semi-sedentary dome huts, communal cooking was done only for ceremonial gatherings aka feasts.

Pandora wrote:

> 17 Ma ago, stranded up-river.

When did the outlet to the sea end?

> Freshwater stingray:

"The ray apparently evolved into an endemic freshwater species derived from a
stock which entered the Turkana Basin from the Indian Ocean at about 1.9 Ma"
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/229993415_Freshwater_stingrays_from_the_Plio-Pleistocene_of_the_Turkana_Basin_Kenya_and_Ethiopia

Wow. You really stepped into that one!

But why would I even have to point this out? You didn't seriously
believe a "Freshwater Stingray" fell out of the sky one day, landing
in the Turkana Basin.

Or did you?

> So, it's obvious that the Turkana Basin at times had a drainage to the
> Indian Ocean.

Go back and read your initial post, for the first time. Check your dating.

> >So Stingrays could swim there from the ocean, but an Aquatic Ape
> >following the coast couldn't follow that same water inland?

> The problem is that while the stingray and whale have well-established
> ancestral marine source populations, no such thing is known for
> hominins.

Except for coastal dispersal, the fact that we have 2-million-plus year
old tools in China, and they're not even basal tools...

So let me spell it out for you: Waterside, Aquatic Ape, littoral, whatever
you want to call it; it's fact. It's how they got across the world.

-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/701231935675121664

On Saturday, November 19, 2022 at 12:13:18 AM UTC-5, JTEM is so reasonable wrote:
> Pandora wrote:
>
> > 17 Ma ago, stranded up-river.
> When did the outlet to the sea end?
>
> > Freshwater stingray:
>
> "The ray apparently evolved into an endemic freshwater species derived from a
> stock which entered the Turkana Basin from the Indian Ocean at about 1.9 Ma"
> https://www.researchgate.net/publication/229993415_Freshwater_stingrays_from_the_Plio-Pleistocene_of_the_Turkana_Basin_Kenya_and_Ethiopia
>
> Wow. You really stepped into that one!
>
> But why would I even have to point this out? You didn't seriously
> believe a "Freshwater Stingray" fell out of the sky one day, landing
> in the Turkana Basin.
>
> Or did you?
> > So, it's obvious that the Turkana Basin at times had a drainage to the
> > Indian Ocean.
> Go back and read your initial post, for the first time. Check your dating.
> > >So Stingrays could swim there from the ocean, but an Aquatic Ape
> > >following the coast couldn't follow that same water inland?
>
> > The problem is that while the stingray and whale have well-established
> > ancestral marine source populations, no such thing is known for
> > hominins.
> Except for coastal dispersal, the fact that we have 2-million-plus year
> old tools in China, and they're not even basal tools...
>
> So let me spell it out for you: Waterside, Aquatic Ape, littoral, whatever
> you want to call it; it's fact. It's how they got across the world.
>
>
>
>
> -- --
>
> https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/701231935675121664
Silk road.

On Fri, 18 Nov 2022 21:13:17 -0800 (PST), JTEM is so reasonable
<jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:

>> >So Stingrays could swim there from the ocean, but an Aquatic Ape
>> >following the coast couldn't follow that same water inland?
>
>> The problem is that while the stingray and whale have well-established
>> ancestral marine source populations, no such thing is known for
>> hominins.
>
>Except for coastal dispersal, the fact that we have 2-million-plus year
>old tools in China, and they're not even basal tools...

You're using tool as a verb: Not a noun but a verb. AND THEN you are
pretending that this makes it a noun.

They are "relatively simple stone tools", Oldowan type or Mode 1, and
that's pretty basal:
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-05696-8

https://sci-hub.se/10.1038/s41586-018-0299-4

>So let me spell it out for you: Waterside, Aquatic Ape, littoral, whatever
>you want to call it; it's fact. It's how they got across the world.

Shangchen is not exactly a coastal site.
And the oldest stone artifacts are from inland Africa.

Pandora wrote:

> You're using tool as a verb

No. You're a fucking idiot. I disgraced you in the past, pointed out
a stupid mistake you made, and you think your embarrassment
was the result of my words -- hence your parroting them -- instead
of your inability to discern an object from an action.

Typical narcissist.

-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/701385772541050880

On Sat, 19 Nov 2022 13:38:16 -0800 (PST), JTEM is so reasonable
<jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:

> Pandora wrote:
>
>> You're using tool as a verb
>
>No. You're a fucking idiot.

Goosfraba.

Pandora wrote:

> Goosfraba.

If you're not a screeching narcissist, all you have to do is point
out what ACTION I was identifying as an object. Here. I'll quote
my words:

: Except for coastal dispersal, the fact that we have 2-million-plus year
: old tools in China, and they're not even basal tools...

"Tool" isn't an action here -- as it is in your "He hammered the nut with
a rock." Tool is being used as a noun. So if you're not a screeching
narcissist, admit your stupid mistake.

And I'm sorry for putting you on the line here (no I'm not) but if you're
going to play (f)Lame warrior you need to expect this stuff.

-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/701137037768753152

On Mon, 21 Nov 2022 08:49:12 -0800 (PST), JTEM is so unreasonable
<jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:

> Pandora wrote:
>
>> Goosfraba.

I thought you could use a little anger management, because you sound
so pissed-off all the time. Everything OK at home?

>If you're not a screeching narcissist, all you have to do is point
>out what ACTION I was identifying as an object. Here. I'll quote
>my words:
>
>: Except for coastal dispersal, the fact that we have 2-million-plus year
>: old tools in China, and they're not even basal tools...
>
>"Tool" isn't an action here -- as it is in your "He hammered the nut with
>a rock." Tool is being used as a noun. So if you're not a screeching
>narcissist, admit your stupid mistake.

O, you thought I was engaging you in your conceptual confusions?
Nah dude, just jerking your chain, trolling the troll.

Pandora wrote:

> O, you thought I

Honest to God, you're a screeching narcissist -- Narcissistic Personality
Disorder. It's a waste of time trying to discuss anything with you. You're
not even capable of explaining what YOU mean, as you just demonstrated.

Again.

-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/701569038790377472

On Tue, 22 Nov 2022 20:57:10 -0800 (PST), JTEM is so unreasonable
<jtem01@gmail.com> wrote:

> Pandora wrote:
>
>> O, you thought I
>
>Honest to God, you're a screeching narcissist -- Narcissistic Personality
>Disorder. It's a waste of time trying to discuss anything with you. You're
>not even capable of explaining what YOU mean, as you just demonstrated.

Let's see what DSM-5-TR has to say about that:

A pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior), need for
admiration, and lack of empathy, beginning by early adulthood and
present in a variety of contexts, as indicated by five (or more) of
the following:

1. Has a grandiose sense of self-importance (e.g., exaggerates
achievements and talents, expects to be recognized as superior without
commensurate achievements).
2. Is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power,
brilliance, beauty, or ideal love.
3. Believes that he or she is “special” and unique and can only be
understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status
people (or institutions).
4. Requires excessive admiration.
5. Has a sense of entitlement (i.e., unreasonable expectations of
especially favorable treatment or automatic compliance with his or her
expectations).
6. Is interpersonally exploitative (i.e., takes advantage of others to
achieve his or her own ends).
7. Lacks empathy: is unwilling to recognize or identify with the
feelings and needs of others.
8. Is often envious of others or believes that others are envious of
him or her.
9. Shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes.

Hmm,"grandiose sense of self-importance", arrogant, haughty behaviors
or attitudes".
Nosce te ipsum, JTEM.

The kudu runners:

> A pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior), need for
> admiration, and lack of empathy, beginning by early adulthood and
> present in a variety of contexts, as indicated by five (or more) of
> the following:
> 1. Has a grandiose sense of self-importance (e.g., exaggerates
> achievements and talents, expects to be recognized as superior without
> commensurate achievements).
> 2. Is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power,
> brilliance, beauty, or ideal love.
> 3. Believes that he or she is “special” and unique and can only be
> understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status
> people (or institutions).
> 4. Requires excessive admiration.
> 5. Has a sense of entitlement (i.e., unreasonable expectations of
> especially favorable treatment or automatic compliance with his or her
> expectations).
> 6. Is interpersonally exploitative (i.e., takes advantage of others to
> achieve his or her own ends).
> 7. Lacks empathy: is unwilling to recognize or identify with the
> feelings and needs of others.
> 8. Is often envious of others or believes that others are envious of
> him or her.
> 9. Shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes.
> Hmm,"grandiose sense of self-importance", arrogant, haughty behaviors
> or attitudes".

:-DDD
Nosce te ipsum, kudu runner.

On Wednesday, November 23, 2022 at 9:22:10 AM UTC-5, Pandora wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Nov 2022 20:57:10 -0800 (PST), JTEM is so unreasonable
> <jte...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Pandora wrote:
> >
> >> O, you thought I

Bait one, caught two, a bignose mermaid & a buttnose jermyertle!

> >
> >Honest to God, you're a screeching narcissist -- Narcissistic Personality
> >Disorder. It's a waste of time trying to discuss anything with you. You're
> >not even capable of explaining what YOU mean, as you just demonstrated.
> Let's see what DSM-5-TR has to say about that:
>
> A pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior), need for
> admiration, and lack of empathy, beginning by early adulthood and
> present in a variety of contexts, as indicated by five (or more) of
> the following:
>
> 1. Has a grandiose sense of self-importance (e.g., exaggerates
> achievements and talents, expects to be recognized as superior without
> commensurate achievements).
> 2. Is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power,
> brilliance, beauty, or ideal love.
> 3. Believes that he or she is “special” and unique and can only be
> understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status
> people (or institutions).
> 4. Requires excessive admiration.
> 5. Has a sense of entitlement (i.e., unreasonable expectations of
> especially favorable treatment or automatic compliance with his or her
> expectations).
> 6. Is interpersonally exploitative (i.e., takes advantage of others to
> achieve his or her own ends).
> 7. Lacks empathy: is unwilling to recognize or identify with the
> feelings and needs of others.
> 8. Is often envious of others or believes that others are envious of
> him or her.
> 9. Shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes.
>
> Hmm,"grandiose sense of self-importance", arrogant, haughty behaviors
> or attitudes".
> Nosce te ipsum, JTEM.

Pandora wrote:

> JTEM is so unreasonable

> >Honest to God, you're a screeching narcissist -- Narcissistic Personality
> >Disorder. It's a waste of time trying to discuss anything with you. You're
> >not even capable of explaining what YOU mean, as you just demonstrated.

> Let's see what DSM-5-TR has to say about that:

You can't admit errors, no matter how stupid. You run -- flee -- whenever you
are put on the spot, like right now, because underlying narcissism in an
inferiority complex. You can't rise to any challenge because, underneath it
all, you know you're going to fail.

You seek to control conversations, not participate.

In this example you pretending that I was using the word "Tool" as a verb, and
when I quoted myself -- copied & pasted my words -- and challenged you to
either identify what action I was calling an object or admit your stupid mistake,
that led you down this ill conceived path you are now on.

Just admit it: You said something stupid.

Go on. It wasn't your first time, not by any stretch of the imagination, and it sure
won't be your last, so face your flaw instead of deluding yourself into believing
that you are flawless... again.

-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/701569038790377472