On Thursday, March 30, 2023 at 11:44:48 AM UTC-7, littor...@gmail.com wrote:

netloon:

Lot's of species eat this diet, you fucking moron.

Speaking of fucking morons...
What percentage of the human brain is DHA? Where did it come from?

netloon:

Answer my question, you evasive piece of shit. Explain why the hundreds of DHA consuming species didn't develop hominid/human evolution?
Answer my question, you evasive twit.

My little little boy, why do evase the answers?? why don't you grow up??
Do you really believe the 100s of DHA-consuming spp were aquarboreal??
- Mio-Pliocene hominoid evolution, google "aquarboreal",
- Plio-Pleistocene Homo, google "coastal dispersal Pleistocene Homo".

Answer the question you evasive piece of shit. Explain why your theory that DHA causes hominid evolution doesn't follow for the hundreds species that eat DHA regularly.

Claudius Denk / Genius

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Claudius Denk wrote:

Answer the question you evasive piece of shit. Explain why your theory that DHA causes hominid evolution

That's a straw man.

Evolution happens. Environments change, species go extinct while others
have the genetic diversity necessary to adapt.

But DHA is necessary. We evolved to need it. And as lousy as we are at synthesizing it, men worse than women, our ancestors were a lot worse.

We have DHA dependent brains. We arose from an evolutionary process
where DHA was plentiful enough so that we could physically rely on it.

Where was that DHA coming from? What source could fuel this evolutionary adaptation of DHA for our brains, and do so regularly?

Aquatic Ape.





-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/tagged/AGW

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thursday, March 30, 2023 at 2:20:40 PM UTC-7, JTEM is so reasonable wrote:

Claudius Denk wrote:

Answer the question you evasive piece of shit. Explain why your theory that DHA causes hominid evolution

That's a straw man.

Evolution happens. Environments change, species go extinct while others
have the genetic diversity necessary to adapt.

You don't have an actual point, you convoluted nitwit.

But DHA is necessary. We evolved to need it.

So what?

And as lousy as we are at
synthesizing it, men worse than women, our ancestors were a lot worse.

So the fuck what. Answer the question. Why are there SO MANY small brained species that eat shellfish.

Answer the questions I asked, you goddam evasive, lying, piece of shit.

We have DHA dependent brains. We arose from an evolutionary process
where DHA was plentiful enough so that we could physically rely on it.

Same is true for hundreds of species.

Address the issue you evasive piece of shit.

You are a babbling moron that can hardly make a coherent point.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Claudius Denk wrote:

[...]

Again, DHA is the key. It's proof that Aquatic Ape is right. There was no
other source for the DHA other than Aquatic Ape, and we evolved in an environment with plentiful DHA.







-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/tagged/Neanderthals

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Thursday, March 30, 2023 at 7:40:18 PM UTC-7, JTEM is so reasonable wrote:

Claudius Denk wrote:

[...]

Again, DHA is the key. It's proof that Aquatic Ape is right. There was no other source for the DHA other than Aquatic Ape, and we evolved in an environment with plentiful DHA.

All you have proven is that you are an idiot with a one-trick pony of a hypothesis on hominid origins.

Reality is too complex for you.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Until we evolved a means to better synthesize DHA -- and we're not good at
it, merely "Better" than our deep ancestors were -- we were reliant on external sources.

Actually, humans are STILL reliant on external sources. We just plain don't make enough for optimum brain health...

Anyway, we all know what that external source was: Aquatic Ape.

They exploited marine resources.

And as lousy as we are at it, the molecular dating crowd says we only got
THIS good about 80k years ago. So for all of the history of our genus, up to
80 thousand years ago, we were dependent upon marine resources.

Aquatic Ape. There is no other explanation that comes close.





-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/712093348746362880

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Op vrijdag 31 maart 2023 om 20:38:25 UTC+2 schreef JTEM is so reasonable:

Until we evolved a means to better synthesize DHA -- and we're not good at it, merely "Better" than our deep ancestors were -- we were reliant on external
sources.
Actually, humans are STILL reliant on external sources. We just plain don't make enough for optimum brain health...
Anyway, we all know what that external source was: Aquatic Ape.
They exploited marine resources.
And as lousy as we are at it, the molecular dating crowd says we only got THIS good about 80k years ago. So for all of the history of our genus, up to 80 thousand years ago, we were dependent upon marine resources.
Aquatic Ape. There is no other explanation that comes close.

Well-said, JTEM.
Obvious (except to retarded PAs, of course), but
- marine resources? or more generally: aquatic resources, incl. freshwater?
- "aquatic ape" is a catchy term (coined by Elaine? :-)), but strictly speaking,
-- we were probably never 100 % aquatic,
-- we were never "apes" sensu "non-human hominoids": hairy arm-climbing creatures in tropical forests.

Perhaps "coastal dispersal" is a better term?
As you know, there are 2 overlapping hypotheses:
-on Mio-Pliocene Hominoidea, google e.g. "aquarboreal",
-on Plio-Pleistocene Homo, google "GondwanaTalks verhaegen English".

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Friday, March 31, 2023 at 11:38:25 AM UTC-7, JTEM is so reasonable wrote:

Until we evolved a means to better synthesize DHA -- and we're not good at it, merely "Better" than our deep ancestors were -- we were reliant on external
sources.

Actually, humans are STILL reliant on external sources. We just plain don't make enough for optimum brain health...

Anyway, we all know what that external source was: Aquatic Ape.

They exploited marine resources.

And as lousy as we are at it, the molecular dating crowd says we only got THIS good about 80k years ago. So for all of the history of our genus, up to 80 thousand years ago, we were dependent upon marine resources.

Aquatic Ape. There is no other explanation that comes close.

You are full of shit. You nosepickers have no understanding of DHA.

lying piece of shit.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

littor...@gmail.com wrote:

Perhaps "coastal dispersal" is a better term?

The problem very clearly isn't what term we use. It's a refusal to
think beyond the dogma.

I can imagine, these wingnuts, hearing "Coastal Dispersal" and
insisting that we're saying that their goal was to disperse
across the land masses, and exploiting marine resources was
a way they thought up to accomplish that...

The weren't "Dispersing." They were eating. They were living,
surviving on abundant protein. As a consequence to that groups
were going to get "Left Behind" -- push inland, following fresh
water outlets, transitional wetlands (etc) into the interior where
they adapted to the new environment.

As for "Two" hypothesis:

I'm incorporating Aquatic Ape, Multi Regionalism/Regional
Continuity, Punctuated Equilibrium, Interbreeding (Hybridization?).

I'm sure there's something I'm forgetting right now...

Oo! Even r/K Selection, though clearly not on the scale some folks
imagine. But there clearly were different "Reproductive Strategies."

These were culture, of course, but they shaped the physical...

So that's at least five.





-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/713529832816902144

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

Op maandag 3 april 2023 om 08:44:54 UTC+2 schreef JTEM is so reasonable:

littor...@gmail.com wrote:

Perhaps "coastal dispersal" is a better term?

The problem very clearly isn't what term we use. It's a refusal to
think beyond the dogma.

Yes. Refusal, short-sighted, fanatic, uninformed, prejudiced, or simply too stupid? :-D

I can imagine, these wingnuts, hearing "Coastal Dispersal" and
insisting that we're saying that their goal was to disperse
across the land masses, and exploiting marine resources was
a way they thought up to accomplish that...
The weren't "Dispersing." They were eating. They were living,
surviving on abundant protein. As a consequence to that groups
were going to get "Left Behind" -- push inland, following fresh
water outlets, transitional wetlands (etc) into the interior where
they adapted to the new environment.
As for "Two" hypothesis:
I'm incorporating Aquatic Ape, Multi Regionalism/Regional
Continuity, Punctuated Equilibrium, Interbreeding (Hybridization?).

Comparative anatomy, JTEM!

I'm sure there's something I'm forgetting right now...
Oo! Even r/K Selection, though clearly not on the scale some folks
imagine. But there clearly were different "Reproductive Strategies."
These were culture, of course, but they shaped the physical...
So that's at least five.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)