But, I don't see the need for this, AAT is well established term,
you'll only introduce confusion, plus, the majority of proponents think
that it was fresh water
somebody:
But, I don't see the need for this, AAT is well established term,
you'll only introduce confusion, plus, the majority of proponents think
that it was fresh water
:-DDD
No, my boy.
Again, schematically:
0) apes-apiths = aquarboreal
1) early-Pleist.H.erectus slow+shallow shellfish-diving,
2) mid-Pleist.H.neand. seasonally coast/diving->river/wading,
3) late-Pleist.H.sapiens: wading->walking.
Okidoki??
Dokioki.
On 14.4.2022. 18:12, littor...@gmail.com wrote:
A transcript of my WhatTalks presentation has been written from the U Tube recording. Michel Odent
today.SELLING THE MARINE CHIMPANZEE CONCEPT
Thank you, Algis, for this comment about power points. People my age (I am 92) don’t like power points. They need to look at the faces of people, to establish eye to eye contact without being distracted by pictures. This is how I’ll talk with you
editor of “Mind/Body bulletin”, as if surprised, asked Elaine Morgan why she had published a book titled “The Aquatic Ape” after publishing “The Descent of Woman”. Elaine immediately, without thinking, replied: “Scientists did not like TheAs Algis said, our point of departure is the term “aquatic ape theory”. We’ll first wonder how marketable and mediatic this term can be. This is not a new question. About 30 years ago, at a seminar at San Rafael, in California, the clever
this issue, I suggest that we follow the advice given by Stephen Munro in the framework of Whats Talk. He started by saying: don’t lose time by listening to experts. He was probably suggesting that we never know about the ulterior motives of experts…There are therefore good reasons to wonder if the term “Aquatic ape” is marketable. Can it become better known and popular? Should we replace it?
Personally, I always try to avoid this term. Algis mentioned the title of one of my books: The birth of Homo, the marine chimpanzee. I suggest that we contrast “Aquatic Ape Theory” and “Marine Chimpanzee Concept”. To suggest a solution to
title would be “we are aquatic apes” and the other one “we are marine chimpanzees”. Within two seconds Lughan had enthusiastically replied: we are chimpanzees! I am fascinated by the work of Jane Goodall! Of course, we belong to the family ofI followed the advice of Stephen Munro and initiated a conversation with my friend Lughan, a clever 12-year-old boy. I started with a question: for your birthday, I am planning to give you a book as a present. You must choose between two titles: one
human nature. There are reasons to contrast the term “aquatic” with the term “marine”, the term “ape” with the term “chimpanzee” and the term “theory” with the term “concept” .After a series of conversations with my friend Lughan, I gradually found rational ways to support his point of view. Taking into account what I understood as a medical practitioner, I found reasons to clarify what we are currently learning about
caseosa. In textbooks, it was just mentioned that when babies are born at term, their skin is covered with a kind of cream “like cheese” (caseosa). It was also mentioned that only human babies were born with their skin covered by this cream. When IXxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Let us start with marine versus aquatic. I’ll reply as a doctor known for his practice of obstetrics. We’ll start with the mysterious issue of vernix caseosa. Until the 21st century, in the medical literature, there was no interest in vernix
programme was “The scars of evolution”. This how we learned that, according to Don Bowen, a marine biologist from Nova Scotia, seals are also born with their skin covered with vernix.As many of you know, the turning point took place during the 21st century, in 2005. It was not induced by the result of a study published in an academic journal. It was a programme presented by David Attenborough on BBC radio 4. The title of the
the root of word squalene is squalus, which means shark in latin). However, nobody thought, at that time, to compare human newborn babies and the new born babies of sea mammals. There was another missed opportunity in 2000. A team of AmericanWe must underline that before that time there had been missed opportunities to wonder if there are sea mammals born with their skin covered with vernix.
In 1979 and 1981, in West Australia, there have been studies evaluating the amounts of squalene in the amniotic fluid as a way to detect post mature foetuses. Let us recall that squalene is an oily substance abundant among marine living creatures (
like vernix. At the end of pregnancy, particles of vernix are detached from the skin and they enrich the amniotic fluid. This is how foetuses of sea lions and humans swallow molecules of branched chain fatty acids that will play an important role in theFinally, there was a last turning point in 2018. A team in California studied the particular case of sea lions. The authors were not aware of the observations by Don Bowen about seals. Foetuses of sea lions also have their skin covered with human-
common nutritional deficiency in the world, at such a point that many governments have established regulations so that table salt is enriched with iodine. It is a serious issue among pregnant and lactating women, when the need in iodine is multiplied byThere are many other reasons to contrast the terms aquatic and marine. One of them is the need in iodine. Most human beings - if they don’t have easy access to the sea food chain, - cannot consume a sufficient amount of iodine. It is the most
pregnant women should take a daily iodine supplement of 150 μg. According to a British study, when pregnant women take such a supplement, the average IQ of their children is multiplied by 1.22. So, when we consider the most common nutritional deficiencyWe know why it is serious. Homo is characterised by a huge brain. The development and the functions of the brain are highly dependent on thyroid hormones. Iodine is necessary for their synthesis. The American Thyroid Association (ATA) claims that
6 double bonds). The point is that the human enzymatic system is not very effective to synthesize DHA, which is preformed and abundant in the sea food chain only. If human beings don’t have access to sea food their enzymatic system (desaturase andThe brain is a fatty organ. This implies that it has specific needs in term of lipids. It has, in particular, specific needs in DHA (docosahexaenoic acid). DHA is a molecule of omega 3 fatty acid as long and as desaturated as possible (22 carbons and
elephants and hippopotamus. We don’t have many common points with them. When we claim that we are special compared with the other mammals, we find reasons to emphasize our common points with sea mammals rather than aquatic mammals in general. We haveA reference to our enzymatic system is providing another reason to develop the concept of “marine”. There are very aquatic mammals that do not have access to a marine environment. This is the case, for example, of water voles, otters, rhinoceros,
we are chimpanzees?”. He immediately replied: “Oh, chimpanzees! We look like chimpanzees! We are friends with chimpanzees! Apes … I don’t know exactly what it means!” As a matter of fact, it is difficult to translate “ape”. In the age ofXxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
“Ape” is the second term we have to discuss. Do we have reasons to replace the term “ape” by the term “chimpanzee”? Once more, I required the point of view of my friend Lughan. I asked him: “Do you prefer to say that we are apes or that
experts we separated 4 million years ago, or 5 according to others, or 6, etc. He was not interested in that at all. He wanted to know where the split took place. I could only say that it probably happened where the populations of chimpanzees wereAnother reason is to consider the chimpanzee-homo split. We are cousins. We probably separated at a precise time. This is accepted by many scientists today. I don’t want to discuss this issue. I just explained to Lughan that according to some
colonisation of our genes by viruses. For example, we may wonder why a virus called CERV2 has colonised the genes of chimpanzees, but not the genes of humans. It means that the contamination took place after the split. It also means that after the splitFrom our conversations we had realised that we must focus on what we don’t know. How can we know more? There are emerging disciplines that can help us in the future. This is the case of virology. There are mysterious questions about the
Xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
is not really serious. Finally, he would prefer the phrase “The marine chimpanzee concept”. From his point of view, “concept” is related to the way of thinking. Finally, when I consider what I learned from my conversations with a 12-year-old boy,There is another term we have to consider. I asked my friend: What do you think of the word “theory”? He was not interested in the topic, but he said that theory is about ideas. Theories come and go … and come back. What is purely theoretical
I’ll finish by emphasising that today, whatever the topic, we are in unprecedented situations. What can we do? We need to phrase appropriate questions.
I’ll show you the cover of a book, published not long time ago. You don’t need to read this book. Just look at the cover. We are in the age of question marks."...Chimpanzee..." simply cannot be, because for sure we are not chimpanzees, we are built completely different.
You can replace "ape" with "primate" (yes, there is not a word for
"ape" in Croatian, too).
But, I don't see the need for this, AAT is well established term,
you'll only introduce confusion, plus, the majority of proponents think
that it was fresh water, so there would be a split in the community.
While we are at viruses, as far as I know, we share more of those
things with orangs than with chimps. So, we did split from chimps, but
we lived closer to orangs. If you are searching for a place where you
can find traces of humans and apes at roughly the same time, take a look
at Europe.
And lastly, I am, just like a lot of smart people should be, allergic
to people who want to sell me something. This should be a scientific
topic, not a marketing topic. So, you'll cause the opposite effect,
people will turn away from you if you are trying so much to sell them something.
--
https://groups.google.com/g/human-evolution
human-e...@googlegroups.com
Op donderdag 14 april 2022 om 20:32:26 UTC+2 schreef Mario Petrinovic:
Dokioki.
Good boy.
Sysop: | Keyop |
---|---|
Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
Users: | 361 |
Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
Uptime: | 124:28:08 |
Calls: | 7,716 |
Files: | 12,861 |
Messages: | 5,728,053 |