littor...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't understand your Yellowstone argument
If Yellowstone touches off tomorrow it would (conservatively
estimated) release the energy equivalent of about 100,000
nuclear weapons. It would plunge the entire globe into a
"Volcanic Winter" as all that ash/smoke AND ESPECIALLY
THE SULFUR fill our atmosphere. Temperatures would
plummet.
The eruption of some 8.7 million years ago would have
been larger.
It would have been on the order of the Toba eruption, which
was maybe 74k years ago.
The Younger Dryas Cooling lasted for over a thousand
years. The Yellowstone Eruption would have taken at least
that long to clear out of our skies.
The northern hemisphere takes the brunt. Yes, even if the
eruption happens in the southern hemisphere. It's just the
way the earth ends up distributing things.
The equator is probably the best place to be, as that is
where most of the energy of the sun falls.
The coast is vastly more survivable than inland. The sea
is a great moderator of climate. It takes a lot of energy
to heat up the water, so it's cooler, and the sea is holding
so much energy (if it weren't it would be ice, not liquid)
that it makes the climate a little warmer, when it gets
cold.
This is how heat works: It from from warm to cold. So
if the sea is colder than the air, it absorbs energy. If the
sea is warmer than the air, it releases energy.
Yes. For real: Water is an actual battery, storing energy!
So when Yellowstone exploded 8.7 million years ago,
conditions favored equatorial coastal populations, and
actively selected AGAINST inland groups.
Get into the center of continents and that's where you're
coldest...
This isn't a one-time deal. It's the reason why we say "Out
of Africa."
Toba exploded like 74k years ago. Africa was the best
place to be. Sundaland would have been good but it was
Ground Zero for Toba, so that nixed that.
We're talking like 250x the Krakatoa eruption...
Toba would have virtually wiped out any inland groups
of Neanderthals. Or Denisovans, etc.
I've argued that Hss -- the population or "ethnicity" that
we call modern humans -- were sexually selected, likely
matriarcal.
Why?
Because there was more than one African population!
So the sexually selected group, with a Quantity over
Quality reproductive strategy won. They could bounce
back FIRST and fill the vacuum left by Toba. And because
they were sexually selected they were more attractive,
displayed more neonatal traits... like hairlessness.
There's even one study that says penis size correlates
to this!
Google: Penis size and r/K selection
It raised quite a fuss. And it's all so very, Very, VERY not
allowed to be spoken of...
This would have sped the demise of the Neanderthals,
as the males would have preferred mating with Hss
females... unless they were gay. In which case they
would have preferred Neanderthal females.
(Not as much sexual dimorphism there)
I always speculated that Neanderthals were patriarchal,
and monogamous but not in a way that we think of as
monogamous. It was more a case of sperm competition,
where Neanderthals had a lot less than Hss, they weren't
sexually selected. They were probably closer to
Gorillas: One male and a troupe of females.
Polygamy is actually a much better model here,
evolutionarily speaking, than is monogamy. This is
because a male could switch to another female while
the first is breast feeding. It allows for the maximum
child-rearing time and commitment.
Many ancient cultures -- i.e. the ones that are old but
not so old that we can't know about them -- had
prohibitions against sex with a nursing women. This
made sense, at if a women had a second baby while
still nursing the first, one or both of those babies
was in trouble.
Plus the more time and attention you can give a
child, the more successful it's going to grow up to
be: Safety. Learning. nutrition.
OK, but apparently early-Pleist."archaic"Homo became *more*aquatic: + diving:
You say "More Aquatic" I say "Less infused with the
DNA from inland-adapted populations."
We split clean into Homo & Pan about 3.7 million
years ago, population wise (not necessarily two
full blown species), but the same dynamics that
lead to African apes in the first place would have
continued, so it wouldn't be until erectus and the
chromosome fusion when what we think of as
"Humans" arose.
-- --
https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/721305588274987008
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)