The Humane Hominid's Page

HH, thank you for your recent comments regarding algae.  

As we like to provide factual material to our members whenever possible rather than just "thou shalt nots," we'll be looking into a better link than the one we current have up.

If you're aware of superior information, by all means you're welcome to share with me, and we'll study it.  

Thanks 

Dude, Im loving your blog owning zombies left and right

Also - why do you think someone like Colin Groves would go out of his way to say this about Left in the Dark:

“This is a totally new way of looking at the evolution of the human brain. It is so totally fresh, unexpected and hitherto un-thought-of that it will probably take a long time before evolutionary anthropologists and psychologists begin to take it on board; but it will make an impact, of that there is no doubt. It will be, it must be, taken very seriously in any discussion of human origins.”

I mean, the idea that our brains aren't functioning particularly well is one thing, and it's relatively easy to come up with a multitude of pretty good explanations as to why; but why would someone like him even consider that this would be because of a lack of fruit in our diet?

Hey Robert,

There's an increasing tendency on this site to regard Left in the Dark and its idea of recent frugivorous recent human ancestry (not sure if you've read the book - basically that sapiens evolved in a rainforest and all our direct ancestors as well, and that every single hominin fossil found is an "uncle", not a direct ancestor). It seems that people are completely oblivious to the non-existent evidence that these wild ideas are founded on.

I think that a thread discussing the real facts would be in order, something like your 911 thread but on human evolution. I'd start it myself, but you're better at both the facts and the argumentation. I could contribute though.

My personal take is that although it is pretty obvious that most people are emotionally and cognitively lopsided these days, and though our brains have been shrinking in the past 10,000 years or so, there's nothing to suggest that anything Tony says should be anywhere close to truth. To suggest that we owe our large brains simply to fruit chemistry is, well, you know what it is.

Do you believe what the government tells you about nutrition? I would say obviously you don't since you are eating 811. You must work for the government and be part of the propaganda machine

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7726031384917866364&hl=en#

Hey Robert,

You have been asked before to keep your communications civil.  You may disagree with others regarding 9/11, but please keep it polite.  Calling Freelee's 9/11 thread, "the loonie thread" is over the line.  Please follow the 30BAD guidelines:

Please read Forum Guidelines before posting

Thanks,

The 30BAD Team

Thanks. As far as I understand, neanderthals evolved from homo erectus leaving Africa around 1 mya (via homo heidelbergensis etc.), but yeah - we must've been closely related if they could interbreed.

Thanks for your thoughts.

Robert,

There have been some recent studies confirming some neanderthal genes were passed on to the homo sapiens that left Africa - some genes have been found in populations outside Africa, while they haven't been found in genuinely African populations. Here's an article about one study:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8660940.stm

Do you think it would be safe to assume neanderthals were better adapted to meat and seafood consumption than homo sapiens? They evolved in Europe after all, and probably consumed far more animal products than our ancestors. While the genetic mixing between them and our ancestors seems to have been pretty minor, I wonder if some modern populations might be a tad better adjusted to meat/seafood consumption. I'd value your opinion.

Jack

robert, i just emailed your gmail address - about a reincarnation. if you didn't receive my email, let me know.

in friendship,

prad