norseman Posted September 21, 2013 Admin Posted September 21, 2013 Right, and I understand the difference. And that is why I held up a Neanderthal woman as an example...........different species, same genus. The point being is that I doubt a Squatch belongs to our genus but if it does, it's far far removed on the other side of the spectrum. Very interesting on your marriage answer, also I'm sorry I mixed up your gender! As for smarts? I don't think it's a question of smarts, they live in the woods and seem to be rare, shy and nocturnal. With that said............two cowboys and three horses snuck up and "outsmarted" Patty at Bluff creek. She would have been dead if Bob Gimlin wanted her to be. So I think there are other factors at play here than just smarts or even bush craft. I think luck has a lot to do with it, as well as human intent. Most encounters are humans just going about their business with no thought at all towards Squatch. That's why we are stuck with showing skeptics grainy photos and foot casts........
Guest Posted September 21, 2013 Posted September 21, 2013 (edited) Haha, isn't it tho? We plan to do the Neandertal swabs next year.... I think those tests are down to about $100 now...no kidding. We are in our fourth decade together..so solid is a word I would use for him, not an excitable type really. Well, my perspective is..genus...I don't think we have enough data to go further with BFs...maybe, some certainly feel we do. We do have lots of bi-pedal BF tracks that look very similar to tracks made by ancient hominins, all in the genus Homo..... but none in Pan.... or other fossil apes right? The PG film is cool, and perhaps he could have shot her. But, he didn't, and almost fifty years have passed. Lots of accomplished persons out there since..... but not outsmarted. Ok? And,.the others all seem to say, I couldn't shoot, b/c it was too human.... who knows, maybe Dyer isn't hoaxing.... Edited September 21, 2013 by apehuman
southernyahoo Posted September 21, 2013 Posted September 21, 2013 Two? One of my favorite tests for species recognition for us is thus.........would you date Patty? As a male Homo Sapien do you watch her in that film and whistle to yourself that she is one hot babe? Me neither........... It's not an accurate test, because I wouldn't date all females from my own species, just not attracted to all of them. Not very sciencey either, too subjective. Recognition for species is in morphology, vocalizations, genetics, anatomy, locomotion etc. There are people who have lived and died but never made a tool in their life. This is because behavior and manufactured implements are not what determines species, they just often follow certain cultures. Some chimps smash nuts with rocks and some don't. That doesn't make them different species.
Guest Posted September 21, 2013 Posted September 21, 2013 (edited) great points SY.... ..we are picky even in our species or within tribes...well, most of us anyway...and then some aren't, or reach beyond their cultural mores..thankfully, or we all might not be here! Edited September 21, 2013 by apehuman
hiflier Posted September 21, 2013 Posted September 21, 2013 (edited) Hello apehuman, Alas,I am, once again, late to the party but it's great to see everyone going strong on a such a seductive topic. My thanks to the OP- CryptoEddie, Welcome to the Forum, nice beginning! -apehuman,I hear you on your interest in anthropology. It is vastly interesting and getting more so every year as the technology and the education becomes more refined. You mentioned the "great leap" in your post #40. That has been a quest of mine for an answer for more than three years since I began my own immersion in the climate sciences as well as all things geo/astrophysical in the effort at bringing a multidisciplinary approach to bear on the issue. Around 40,000 years ago the Earth was bombarded with a huge blast of cosmic particles from space. No kidding. Large or prolonged cosmic ray intrusions alter DNA in plants and animals and are being looked at as evolutionary catalysts for changes in cell structure and DNA alterations/mutations. THAT is something that changes the linear playing field that most folks think ancestry is. It is not. I think branching is a result of such cosmic incursions. Those incursions are in the ice core records and other borings/corings in different concentrations depending on which hemisphere or side of the Globe was subjected to the bombardment. Just thought I'd give a shot at freshening the mix a bit. Just my two rocks. Edited September 21, 2013 by hiflier
Guest Posted September 22, 2013 Posted September 22, 2013 (edited) And welcome! Do you have a link..maybe a nice review one? I am aware of the research in nanodiamonds, etc..as associated with meteors, but only just aware really and have not considered the impact of space.radiation..although we do know that UV can change DNA.... . But, yes, could be a game changer. And why not, we really don't yet have a good explanation.. I have seen some propose purposeful use of narcotics as an explanation for our awakening..the spirals and cross checking in cave art attributed to classic "altered state" visions..? Another interesting area, which I must work more to understand, are changes in DNA expression, but not the gene, the epigenetic sphere, and are still passed down as inherited..... I have a long way to go and thinking the internet and YouTube are pretty slick...ha. Yes, I want to expand my perceptions and this is an area unconsidered, by me anyway..thanks! Edited September 22, 2013 by apehuman
hiflier Posted September 22, 2013 Posted September 22, 2013 Hello apehuman, Thanks for the reply. I'll get some links up for you. One thing though that is important to keep in mind: A cosmic event doesn't have to actually CHANGE how the amino acid chain is linked or delete an aspect in the helix. A mutation can occur even if the order of the switching on and off of a gene is effected. Not only that, but the amount of TIME a gene is switched on or off can mean the difference between a wing or a stub of a wing. Other factors come into play of course but the idea is that what gets altered can be extremely subtle but the results can, in the long run, be rather obvious. I'm still learning this stuff myself but the law schools are onto the gene-on-off time switching for genetic patenting and copyrights as I understand it.
Guest Posted September 22, 2013 Posted September 22, 2013 (edited) Thanks, Yes, epigenetics.. fascinating.... and tough vocabularies too..But, the information is out there for the most part. (wikipedia helps with hyperlinks!).. the ENCODE stuff and all those instructional youtubes, and oh ..dense papers, many free.....it will eventually get me to a point of some appreciation for the complexity of these ideas and processes. Interesting on the gene regulation patents, I don't keep up, last I noticed was the S.Ct decision that the gene is not patentable..associated with the test for breast cancer It is kind of scary in some ways. This really powerful/potent knowledge is not understood by most of our citizens, or politicians..and technology screams ahead. Edited September 22, 2013 by apehuman
norseman Posted September 22, 2013 Admin Posted September 22, 2013 It's not an accurate test, because I wouldn't date all females from my own species, just not attracted to all of them. Not very sciencey either, too subjective. Recognition for species is in morphology, vocalizations, genetics, anatomy, locomotion etc. There are people who have lived and died but never made a tool in their life. This is because behavior and manufactured implements are not what determines species, they just often follow certain cultures. Some chimps smash nuts with rocks and some don't. That doesn't make them different species. So you would date Patty before you dated some women of your own species ? Very interesting. I think the test is very accurate and I do think it works in the aggregate. Your defining the term tool too narrowly within the context of a modern human. Any human that has created a spread sheet or a pie chart on a computer has made a tool in their lifetime. Any human that has developed a new math formula or written a self help book has developed a new tool in their lifetime. It's not flaking stone.......no. But it's used by others of your own species to advance the species as a whole non the less.
hiflier Posted September 22, 2013 Posted September 22, 2013 (edited) Hello apehuman, This is a good source as a beginning: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_ray This one goes into an event more specific to what the "great leap" might result from: http://www2.cnrs.fr/en/2139.htm And yes, genes cannot be patented last I read as well but the sequencing and results of splicing/engineering can be is how I understand it Edited September 22, 2013 by hiflier
Guest Posted September 22, 2013 Posted September 22, 2013 (edited) Plussed for the links. Thanks! Yeah, I really should know more about the legal goings on, and do resist reading anything legal these days, probably for the same reason we all do..it can be boring. But, important...so, I feel all small and irresponsible just now...geez!. I like thinking about bigfoots too much. Edited September 22, 2013 by apehuman
hiflier Posted September 22, 2013 Posted September 22, 2013 Hello apehuman, Ah, methinks a bit too much of the Hairy One as well. Too much time researching, too much time revising a database, too much time on the Forum, too much.....well you get the idea. Ol' hiflier probably should get a life LOL. See ya around, thanks for the converse.
Guest Posted September 22, 2013 Posted September 22, 2013 (edited) yep.. I am dropping in this YouTube link b/c it is one of a series of lectures on Human Origins, assuming little knowledge of the audience, they take the time to introduce vocabulary and concepts and then move on to current data. This is the first I am watching, but see there is one geared just to Paleo biology and also genetics.... all under this same YouTube channel.. They aren't as fun as the BBC docudramas....but, basic knowledge of what we think we know today.... the audience appear to be students, but some older folks there too... after the halfway mark he discusses specifically the archaeological material record from 5K ybp and back a few million years... Norse, you will appreciate his discussion of Chimp tool use. Edited September 22, 2013 by apehuman
Guest Posted September 22, 2013 Posted September 22, 2013 (edited) started this one and based on intro I think it will be relevant in more ways... and longer....but focused on the evolution, migration, climate, and biology..with I hope liberal graphics from the various sites and finds... cup 'o joe and settling in..this one is longer..1.5 hrs. haha ok, no more... I am still enamoured with what Youtube can bring me..on demand.. Edited September 22, 2013 by apehuman
Guest Posted September 22, 2013 Posted September 22, 2013 (edited) the first thirty minutes are background and review, concepts, etc..and finishing with the "peer review process" (I thought the first thirty minutes were worth watching) and citing the team of dozens who have papers published on this few decades project in Africa......but, it begins to get really interesting at minute 30 and forward. b/c he is is graphically integrating the skulls, time, geology, technology, location, etc and showing some great plots of the underlying data. And, moves on to world wide data... good stuff! So, thumbs up, the production value for a lecture series is top drawer and very recent...2011 duh. Edited September 22, 2013 by apehuman
Recommended Posts