How can a whole science be (remain!) so wrong???

Traditional paleo-anthropologists are incredibly wrong in believing that
-they needed the term "hominin" (instead of "hominid"),
-australopiths are closer relatives of us ("hominins"!?) than of Pan or Gorilla,
-our ancestors ran after antelopes over Afr.savannas! :-DDD
-Plio?Pleistocene Homo were "endurance" runners :-DDD
-human ancestors came from Africa (the "Out of Africa" slogan),
-only "hominins"(??) were "bipedal",
-bonobos & chimps & low- & highland gorillas - all lack fossil relatives,
-our Pliocene ancestors could not have lived in S-Asia,
-we never had semi-aquatic ancestors,
-Miocene Hominoidea were not "bipedal",
-etc.etc.

Geological "plate tectonics"
= PA "coastal dispersal".

What really happened is not so difficult IMO:
late-Miocene hominids lived in Red Sea coastal forests,
when the Red Sea opened into the Gulf (?5.33 Ma)
-Pan went right -> E.Afr.coastal forests,
-Homo went left -> S.Asian coasts
where they (early-Pleist.?) frequently dived for shellfish:
this explains Homo's stone use, extreme handiness, large brain (DHA), pachyosteosclerosis, fur loss, SC fat layer, voluntary breathing (speech) etc.etc.

Simple, no? (although there are still a lot of question marks...)

Google e.g.
-aquarboreal,
-human evolution Verhaegen.

:-)

On Wed, 18 Jan 2023 02:09:22 -0800 (PST), "littor...@gmail.com"
<littoral.homo@gmail.com> wrote:

>How can a whole science be (remain!) so wrong???

Yeah, and how can Einstein be so wrong?

kudu runner believes he's Einstain!! :-DDD

> >How can a whole science be (remain!) so wrong???
> Yeah, and how can Einstein be so wrong?

Pandora wrote:

> "littor...@gmail.com"
> >How can a whole science be (remain!) so wrong???

> Yeah, and how can Einstein be so wrong?

Einstein was wrong, here & there, as was Newton. But paleo anthropology
isn't even a science. It's an insult to real science to even apply the term.

Again, do the Google on: Selection bias. Sample Bias. Preservation bias.

In all fairness, quite legitimately is FAILS to qualify as "Science." It simply
does not adhere to sound scientific practices, "Methodology."

"The light over here is better."

And we haven't even touched on how goddamn circular it is! It BEGINS
with the approved answers -- African origins, Out of Africa purity -- only
to interpret everything within their conclusions before finally pretending
to have "Arrived" at the conclusions they departed with...

Einstein broke the mold. Take a stroll down Google Lane in the direction
of "Aether," why don't you?

I spit on your paleo anthropology! I piss on it! I write "Paleo Anthropology"
on little bits of paper and leave them strewn upon the bottom of the
bird cage!

Okay, maybe I don't do that but it sure ain't science...

-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/706729227436900353

Op woensdag 18 januari 2023 om 21:58:11 UTC+1 schreef JTEM is so reasonable:

> > "littor...@gmail.com"
> > >How can a whole science be (remain!) so wrong???

> > Yeah, and how can Einstein be so wrong?

> Einstein was wrong, here & there, as was Newton. But paleo-anthropology
> isn't even a science. It's an insult to real science to even apply the term.

Yes!
The imbecilic savanna-believers reason:
1) of all primates, only humans & australopiths are bipedal (anthropocentrism), hence australopiths are our ancestors...
How can one be so stupid??
They reason:
2) primates are QP in forests, humans are BP outside forests, hence we became BP when we left the forest...
How can one be so stupid??
They reason:
3) our nearest relatives Pan & Gorilla live in Africa, hence Homo comes from Africa... (afrocentrism).
How can one be so stupid??
They reason:
4) Pan knuckle-walks, Gorilla knuckle-walks, hence we had KWing ancestors...
How can one be so stupid??
They reason:
5) we became BP when we left the forest, ouside the forest is the savanna in Africa, hence we were savanna-dwellers...
How can one be so stupid??
They reason:
6) we became BP on the savanna, possible food in savannas are antelopes, hence we must have hunted antelopes...
How can one be so stupid??
Etc.
This ridiculous nonsense can indeed not be called "science".

1) Miocene Hominoidea were already BP (wading-clmibing): google "aquarboreal".
2) Evolution is gradual: climb -> climb+wade -> wade+walk -> walk.
3) Orangs & gibbons live in SE.Asia, H.erectus lived in SE.Asia. (Besides, Homo lacks African retrovirus.)
4) Monkeys palm-walk, KWing = dorsal-hand-walking: hands were not used pronogradily between.
5) & 6) are even more stupid than the previous!

> Again, do the Google on: Selection bias. Sample Bias. Preservation bias.
> In all fairness, quite legitimately is FAILS to qualify as "Science." It simply
> does not adhere to sound scientific practices, "Methodology."
> "The light over here is better."
> And we haven't even touched on how goddamn circular it is! It BEGINS
> with the approved answers -- African origins, Out of Africa purity -- only
> to interpret everything within their conclusions before finally pretending
> to have "Arrived" at the conclusions they departed with...
> Einstein broke the mold. Take a stroll down Google Lane in the direction
> of "Aether," why don't you?
> I spit on your paleo anthropology! I piss on it! I write "Paleo Anthropology"
> on little bits of paper and leave them strewn upon the bottom of the
> bird cage!
> Okay, maybe I don't do that but it sure ain't science...

Yes, it ain't science.
And the solutions (in general at least) are not so difficult:
google "aquarboreal" & read my 2022 book... :-)

On Wed, 18 Jan 2023 11:09:07 -0800 (PST), "littor...@gmail.com"
<littoral.homo@gmail.com> wrote:

>kudu runner believes he's Einstain!! :-DDD
>
>> >How can a whole science be (remain!) so wrong???
>> Yeah, and how can Einstein be so wrong?

Just emphasizing that only the lunatic fringe at the side lines tend
to disqualify an entire science and believe theirs is the only
alternative.

Pandora wrote:

> Just emphasizing that only the lunatic fringe at the side lines tend
> to disqualify an entire science and believe theirs is the only
> alternative.

"Science by declaration," is it?

Nope.

Science is in the method, and paleo anthropology is not science.

Legitimately, it is not science.

It's a circular argument "supported" by improperly collected evidence.

"But.. but.. BUT THE LIGHT OVER HERE IS BETTER!"

-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/706729227436900353

JTEM is so reasonable wrote:

> Einstein broke the mold. Take a stroll down Google Lane in the direction
> of "Aether," why don't you?

Add "Physics."

(I should have checked first)

If you do the Google on Aether you're going to get ancient pseudo science.
You need to Google: Aether physics

You can also spell it 'ether'.

-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/79820453598