The study of religious or heroic legends and tales. One constant rule of mythology is that whatever happens amongst the gods or other mythical beings was in one sense or another a reflection of events on earth. Recorded myths and legends, perhaps preserved in literature or folklore, have an immediate interest to archaeology in trying to unravel the nature and meaning of ancient events and traditions.
It's not my Occams razor, but Bednariks theory which I have maybe made a pig's ear of elucidating on. Essentially the message that I originally wanted to get to you (and others) was that the Chauvet art, considered by many to be the epitome of examples of the supposed superiority of HSS was most likely painted by HSN, of this there is now apparently little doubt. That I have then ended up revealing 10% of the content of the paper was as a result of then trying to put this comment in context and is my mistake. I can only advise to read the paper in full, and also point out that the "domestication" theory is something that Bednarik is apparently intent on publishing soon in fuller detail.
The essence is the that the CI and Heinrich 4 events would have caused a bottleneck that combined with genetic drift or introgression may have been enough to account for the rapid change (within 20 to 30 millennia) in all human populations of the time. He then says that evolution however cannot account for the gracilisation process because it runs counter to all we know about natural selection.
Therefore he proposes that only Mendels laws can suspend Darwinism and that this is what occurred.
Thanks Richard.
I am anxious to read Bednariks thoughts on gracilization. I don't know at this point if I agree with "domestication" as it spread so rapidly. I'm sure Bednarik will address my questions.
There has been a lot of "whispering" going on for a long time about the Aurignacian culture. Sometimes loud whispering. I'm thrilled that Bednarik has come out and laid it on the line. This is going to be met with a firestorm from the establishment. I can't wait.
Quote:
At the time we're talking about, physical robustness would have been a major prequisite for surviving
Why?
Com'on Digit,
Life was tough. No sipping cups of tea with feet up on a comfy sofa and central heating on. Going out for a meal had a whole different meaning back then.
BTW I forgot to mention that another indicator of "inferiority" is thickness of skull.
One would have thought that with this "new found" intelligence in a smaller brain that Nature would have wanted to protect it.
Last edited by Manystones on Fri Apr 25, 2008 1:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Beagle wrote:There has been a lot of "whispering" going on for a long time about the Aurignacian culture. Sometimes loud whispering. I'm thrilled that Bednarik has come out and laid it on the line. This is going to be met with a firestorm from the establishment.
Or ignored silently as is often the case.
Remember this article was published in the May issue of RAR last year.
It's not my Occams razor, but Bednariks theory which I have maybe made a pig's ear of elucidating on. Essentially the message that I originally wanted to get to you (and others) was that the Chauvet art, considered by many to be the epitome of examples of the supposed superiority of HSS was most likely painted by HSN, of this there is now apparently little doubt. That I have then ended up revealing 10% of the content of the paper was as a result of then trying to put this comment in context and is my mistake. I can only advise to read the paper in full, and also point out that the "domestication" theory is something that Bednarik is apparently intent on publishing soon in fuller detail.
The essence is the that the CI and Heinrich 4 events would have caused a bottleneck that combined with genetic drift or introgression may have been enough to account for the rapid change (within 20 to 30 millennia) in all human populations of the time. He then says that evolution however cannot account for the gracilisation process because it runs counter to all we know about natural selection.
Therefore he proposes that only Mendels laws can suspend Darwinism and that this is what occurred.
Thanks Richard.
I am anxious to read Bednariks thoughts on gracilization. I don't know at this point if I agree with "domestication" as it spread so rapidly. I'm sure Bednarik will address my questions.
There has been a lot of "whispering" going on for a long time about the Aurignacian culture. Sometimes loud whispering. I'm thrilled that Bednarik has come out and laid it on the line. This is going to be met with a firestorm from the establishment. I can't wait.
Thanks again.
Whoops, I think theyr're were some crossed wires there. I want to make sure that you saw my reply Richard.
Manystones wrote: He then says that evolution however cannot account for the gracilisation process because it runs counter to all we know about natural selection.
Therefore he proposes that only Mendels laws can suspend Darwinism and that this is what occurred.
I ain't not Welsh I'm English Ish and robustness in the context used MS means bone size etc. So why should a heavy boned individual have an advantage of a gracile form? What conditions would favour them?
Remember MS that HSN was robust and there is much evidence for fractures amongst them, perhaps they lacked the agility of the gracile people.
Mendel's Laws Ish are named for a Gregor Mendel, he was the man who established the manner in whuch inherited characteristics worked. Effectively he was the father of genetics.
Digit wrote:I ain't not Welsh I'm English Ish and robustness in the context used MS means bone size etc. So why should a heavy boned individual have an advantage of a gracile form? What conditions would favour them?
Remember MS that HSN was robust and there is much evidence for fractures amongst them, perhaps they lacked the agility of the gracile people.
Mendel's Laws Ish are named for a Gregor Mendel, he was the man who established the manner in whuch inherited characteristics worked. Effectively he was the father of genetics.
Yes, thanks Digit. I've found Mendel and am up to my neck in peas!
On your point about heavy-boned HSNs, I can see your point but, physically, the conditions hadn't changed hardly at all in tens of thousands of years. So they were thriving in an environment that originally suited the more robust Neanderthals. What happened to change that?
That was the question I put Ish. As the robust ones snuffed it and the gracile ones didn't then either something other than physique made the difference or some environmental change gave the advantage to the gracile forms.
