What's your ideal scientist? Filled with super intelligence and intellect, and lacking bias, right?
The popular but miserably wrong PC idea is that it was somehow "cooperation", not intelligence, that sparked the birth and spread of modern humans and our technology. Both Svante Pääbo and Peter Klevius think not. Peter Klevius even questions the very concept 'cooperation' because he can't comprehend how it would be even possible in any 'social group' not to cooperate without losing membership in it - even temporarily. Peter Klevius exemplified it in Demand for Resources with reports about "evil bushmen" individuals who were actually outcasts and therefor no longer San in any meaningful sense (1992:66).
Resursbegär (Demand for Resources by Peter Klevius 1992, ISBN 9173288411).
The civilized human walks
back in her/his foot steps,
strikes a light and lets her/himself be enlightened
and glorified
Only the forgotten suffering,
and the shadow behind her/him,
hovering over the future,
are greater (P. Klevius 1992).
The archeologist of knowledge finds
in his/her digging
often him/herself (P. Klevius 1992)
The concept of freedom is created,
like diamonds,
only under pressure (P. Klevius 1992).
* In Demand for Resources (Klevius, 1992 - original title Resursbegär) - and resting on Claude Levi-Strauss' use of terminology from thermodynamics in cultural anthropology - Peter Klevius defines 'civilization' as an ordered investment (warm) society which, precisely because of its dynamics, produces disorder (also described as 'uncertainty' in P. Klevius 1981) - unlike doxic (cold) hunter-gatherer societies. According to Peter Klevius definition of science as 'lack of bias', we ought to do our best as scientists to reject bias whenever we spot it, and in this strive (we can of course never be fully unbiased but our strive ought to be - if deserving the title 'scientific') we also need to include the whole of humankind - because which non-human could we possibly use as reference (1992:36-39). Basic research is dynamic and consists of throwing unrelated thoughts (often, but not necessarily, born out of anomalies) into an existing discourse or paradigm where they can reveal new directions. Peter Klevius' critical use of the concept 'evolution' makes it nonsensical to attribute it with anything else than back projection. And on that route there are no meaningful stops called 'life' or 'human'. However, when we talk 'anatomically modern' we shouldn't include anatomically archaics but rather the average of whatever human group of today. And when it comes to modern brains we ought to check the top of the pile, not the bottom. Evolution can't be said to have "a will of its own", "fail" or be "successful". Evolution is the history of the contemporary state of the world. But a history that can't be biased without losing its very meaning (Klevius 1992, scattered all over the book).
Women from the north spred high IQ over the world
Like Svante Pääbo, but unlike most other anthropologists, Peter Klevius sees a clear jump in intelligence some 50,000 or more years ago. And based on artefacts, genes etc. the location seems to have been in the northern and eastern part of Eurasia as well as in SE Asia. And according to Peter Klevius, something like Homo floresiensis produced a better functioning brain that via temporal landbridges entered mainland Asia and spread into big northern skulls. Unfortunately we don't know anything about the genetics of Homo sapiens sapiens (HSS) before Ust-ishim man from Russia 45,000 bp. Did the new brain setup enter the Liujiang line before, or after the mixing we see in the Denisova cave? However, the new human was born and spread all over the world while the very edge of the new setup became diluted, hence leaving most of it in the sparsely populated north.
Peter Klevius to James P. Mallory*: How the tall "Finland-Swedes"** conquered the world - and why tall and blonde Finns share linguistic roots*** and yDNA with short and darkhaired Sami.
* In a lecture 2011 James Mallory was asked whether he saw any connection between the spread of Indo-European languages and the much earlier Aurignacian culture (see what Peter Klevius wrote about Aurignacian on his web-museum before he heard about Homo floresiensis 2004). He answered by asking whether it would be likely that the Irish and the Tocharians could have come up with the same proto-words. Of course not. However, there is indeed a connection that Peter Klevius has proposed since 1979-80 - first in a correspondence with Georg H. von Wright (whom Wittgenstein chose as his successor at Cambridge) in which he pointed out the fact that intellectual traces didn't point out of "the cradle of civilization" but rather into it and from the north.** The north Europeans who in wave after wave conquered the south - ending with colonialism and the spread of the global industrial/techno complex.
*** The Finns are basically Kurgan leftovers in the woodlands between northern tundra mongoloid females and southern steppe males (see below) and Finnish - which consists of more than 99% loanwords - isn't a proper language. However, some 200-300 Finnish words still in use are more or less identical to proto-Uralic. As James Mallory has pointed out, PIE is mostly artificial compared to proto-Uralic. In other words, when you see the * sign in front of an IE word it's usually construed by linguists whereas a * in front of a PU word is usually discovered by linguists.
Acknowledgement: Peter Klevius main scientific asset (except for his brain) is his lack of ties to universities, corporations, politics, religion etc. This is why Peter Klevius has to refer to himself all the time, because no one else does - no matter how good science he produces. Even his approved thesises in universities have been left in complete silence. I mean, who'd like a guy who says islam is bad, that we didn't come out of Africa, that humans aren't "special", and that everyone, incl. women, should have the same rights (as stated in the anti-fascist Universal Human Rights declaration of 1948). It's also a tactics to distinguish himself from charlatans - both those inside the so called "scientific community" who get their names published for no reason whatsoever, as well as from those outside who don't, yet who mimic the former. Anyone who follows Peter Klevius will sooner or later get hurt, not because of flaws in Peter Klevius logic but because what it reveals in themselves. So for example, who can deny Peter Klevius analysis on negative Human Righst without hurting themselves? Yes, curing ones racism and sexism incl. fascist tendencies, will of course hurt. Hand on heart, have you ever realized that the fascists were like you? Or have you just avoided the problem by pointing to Hitler and/or just using the N word on ordinary Germans back then?
So why is Peter Klevius - "the extremely normal" - constantly referring to himself? Isn't it selfish? Not at all because Peter Klevius doesn't have a "self"*. Nor does he like to refer to himself (sic) as 'it'.
* From Peter Klevius web museum from 2003: Although it might be convincingly argued that Peter Klevius has created the thoughts below, he would have been completely helpless in this task without an assisting world*). Because Klevius is a product of his environment history we might argue that there is no principal (only qualitative) difference between his (i.e. the "person"/social coordinate, we use as a center for particular sets of arbitrary interpretations) "original" thoughts and his thoughts after corrections via others on this Internet web. It's only an on-going evolution/change. What is qualitatively new is his role as a "starting point" (source code) for this particular strain of thoughts in the fast growing global brain (Internet), which is progressively eating up much of what we have used to consider human thinking (just as math was expanded by calculators, but at a much larger scale). Furthermore Internet has shortened the distance for "historical socialization", i.e. the discursive process whereby we use to create "social sense", i.e. making/living the world (see EMAH - the Even More Astonishing Hypothesis).
Why it's important - especially for "Africans" and "native" peoples - to debunk the out-of-Africa modern myth and replace it with reality, not PC.
Is there a country where Peter Klevius wouldn't be told to 'go home'?
Someone stole Peter Klevius "white privileges" already when he was born, and as a teenager he was multiple times and completely unprovokedly told to 'go home' both in his country of birth and the country he worked and studied in, and as an adult he was again repeatedly told to go home from two additional countries. However, Peter Klevius was stupid enough not to ever consider himself as part of his type of "lives matter" "community". Yes, it's indeed less visible than the black, female, muslim etc. "communiities". So what! It's probably bigger than any of those - but less suitable for political race propaganda.
So where are Peter Klevius "sacred places" and how are they "protected"? Or are Peter Klevius fiktive connections to the past less important than fictive connections to the past of other "indigenous" peoples? The web defines "indigenous peoples" as 'inheritors and practitioners of unique cultures and ways of relating to people and the environment. They have retained social, cultural, economic and political characteristics that are distinct from those of the dominant societies in which they live'. Exactly! Fits Peter Klevius perfectly - and a couple of billion others. Just asking...
Peter Klevius in the wonderland of evolution.
Talking about segregating people in "sacred" and not so "sacred", Peter Klevius was really happy when his research first brought him away from Europe. A "white" European male finding something in Europe was tabu already in the 1970s. And he became even more happy when he (1992) connected the east Asian looking Jinniushan skeleton from northern China with mongoloid Khoisan in southern Africa. And the very climax came with the revelation of Homo floresiensis* 2004, which gave the answer to Peter Klevius question (1992) why the Jinniushan people never went to the Moon despite having bigger brains than most humans today. The answer was that Homo floresiensis had a much better packed brain, and that the new brain setup hadn't arrived as yet.* Although Homo floresiensis is the most revolutionary anthropological find ever, it was dismissed and ridiculed as just a weird "Hobbit puzzle", and even declared by many so called "scientists" as not a discovery at all - ranging from that it was a sick modern human who had visited a dentist, to silent denial. However, do consider that when a roughly similar sized and bodied - but with an apelike skull - was found in Africa in the 1970s, it was immediately elevated as the mother of humankind - as was mtDNA from modern Africans in the 1980s said to point to "an African Eve".
And when in 2008 Peter Klevius heard about the Denisova bracelet he immediately connected it to Homo floresiensis whom the "scientific community" considered either having a too small a brain to make the tools it really made, or just being a "puzzling hobbit". Again Peter Klevius seems to have been the first one to realize that Homo floresiensis was the answer to the question why Jinniushan didn't go to the Moon (Klevius 1992). For that to happen a modern brain setup was needed. Homo floresiensis had it, and although it itself may never have contributed directly by crossing the Wallace line, its relatives on the other side (the volatile Sundaland) did.
Homo floresiensis evolved from scratch in SE Asia, and its relatives north of the Wallace line became us* - after repeated evolution back and forth and spiced with hybridization and local adaptation.
* Every serious anthropologist has to admit that against the background of what we know today Homo floresiensis can't possibly have come out of Africa (or Eurasia). Its modern head and its primitive (but bipedal) morphology from the neck down doesn't fit with any out-of-Africa fantasy.
Homo floresiensis exposed the true "missing link" in the out-of-Africa dogma, i.e. how repeated back migration and isolation explains both body morphology (a mix of australopithecus and Homo habilis)* as well as a better packed brain (more IQ per volume and a rounded human like skull). The former as a result of repeated explorations outside the jungle (Sahul) and the latter the result of size reduction due to jungle isolation where only those survived who could keep the same intelligence in a smaller brain case.
* All these supposedly African "species" are just remnants from the in-flow from outside Africa. Just take a look at the timeline of African fossils and you'll see an undeniable pattern from the north-east to the south.
Proto-Homo floresiensis type apes must have been widespread all over south-east Asia. This would mean that Homo floresiensis type of Hominines evolved both in Sahul as well as Sundaland. However, only those (e-g- Homo erectus) in Sundaland spred over (and came back from) the world. This is just one reason why the existence of Homo floresiensis behind the Wallace line disproves any out-of-Africa fantasy - not to mention that Africa is a continent that never has had enough isolating borders to evolve primates - and even less so for those with long-distance terrestrial bipedal locomotion. The "proto-type" always needs to come from somewhere else. And the very thought that Africa could hide and evolve bipedal genes to become modern humans is simply ridiculous. Its only merit is its PC value.
The spurious view that a predecessor to Homo floresiensis left Africa - without any trace whatsoever in the fossil etc. records - crossed Asia and then took the boat over the Wallace line is just, admit it, a scientific joke at best.
"Out of Africa" is equally holy and hollow as "islam is a peaceful religion".
Peter Klevius Unifying Theory on Human Evolution
Orangutans and humans shared a common ancestry more than 14 Mya, i.e. long before African apes. Some 12 Mya Danuvius guggenmosi, a possible ancestor to the lineage that includes Homo floresiensis, walked on two legs and climbed like an ape in what is now Germany.
Gigantopithecus is most closely related to Orangutans. The two species last shared a common ancestor 10–12 million years ago in the Miocene, a time when a burst of new great ape species evolved
Homo floresiensis, which has lived for at least a million years on both side of the Wallace line, is a bipedal ape with a Homo skull and with enough other Homo features to classify it as Homo. It must have evolved in SE Asia on the "wrong" side of the Wallace line. Homo habilis, which is the youngest possible morphological relative to Homo floresiensis can't have come from Africa to Flores later than 1.5 mya because it went extinct by then.
Oldest African dna is mongoloid (Khoi-San), i.e. not from Africa.
Whole genome molecular dating analyses indicate that the gibbon lineage diverged from that of great apes around 16.8 Mya (95% confidence interval: 15.9 – 17.6 Mya; given a divergence of 29 Mya from monkeys). Adaptive divergence associated with chromosomal rearrangements led to rapid radiation of the four genera <7 br="" mya.="">
Within apes (superfamily Hominoidea), the gibbons diverged during the early Miocene (between 19.7 and 24.1 mya, according to molecular evidence) and the orangutans split from the African great ape lineage between 15.7 and 19.3 mya
According to genetics—when combined with known fossils—the lineage that led to humans, chimps, and gorillas evolved from a common ancestor about 10 million years ago. However, part of the gorilla genome doesn't fit with the current structure of the great ape evolutionary tree.
The closest relatives of gorillas are the other two Homininae genera, chimpanzees and humans, all of them having diverged from a common ancestor about 7 million years ago.
Humans share at least 28 unique physical characteristics with orangutans but only 2 with chimps and 7 with gorillas
Features shared by both orangutans and humans include:
- thickly enameled molar teeth with flat surfaces,
- greater asymmetries between the left and right side of the brain,
- increased cartilage-to-bone ratio in the forearm,
- similarly shaped shoulder blades.
- a hole in the roof of the mouth that was supposedly unique to humans is also present in orangutans.
- humans and orangutans have the widest-separated mammary glands, and they grow the longest hair, and orangutans actually have a hairline, in contrast to virtually all primates, where the hair comes down to the top of the eyes.
- humans and orangutans share a common ancestor that excludes [living] African apes.
- a widely distributed orangutan-like ancestor of humans lived in Africa, Europe, and Asia some 13 million years ago.
- there are very few physical features linking chimps and humans
The continuous emergences and disappearances of land bridges throughout the Pleistocene in Southeast Asia vary dependent on various sea bottom depth and changes in overall sea level.
Shifts in forest habitats across land bridges spred over generations explains continental movements by primates already long before any monkeys and apes appeared.
Evolution of bipedalism
Some 12 Mya Danuvius guggenmosi walked on two legs and climbed like an ape in what is now Germany.
Evolution of the brain
The last model of the human brain came out of south east Asia less than 100,000 bp and made a revolution in Siberia. We know it because of genetic as well as cultural evidence. And according to Svante Pääbo, something must have happened with the brain setup some 50-60,000 bp. And according to Peter Klevius, this change was brought up from SE Asia, and may be represented by one of the two Denisovan lineages already documented.When the new brain setup reached big Homo sapiens skulls it resulted in a demographic "big bang" that spred mongoloid (cold adapted) Homo sapiens sapiens (HSS)* all over the world. As a consequence we got a racial pattern resulting from older Homo sapiens mixing with the mongoloid HSS.
* We used to distinguish between archaic Homo sapiens (HS) and ourselves, i.e. HSS. However, due to the lack of enough old HSS in sub-Saharan Africa, PC "science" blurred the line between them so to give Africa a better appearance. However, this also allowed to call a primitive skul from M2orocco 'modern'.
Because the north has been less populated than the south the new brain setup became genetically less diluted in the north. HS from the south stayed put while HSS didn't.
The "kurgan" giants and the daughters of the North*.
* Compare e.g. the Finish/Karelian Kaleva epos.The origin of tall "Kurgan people" is still a mystery. Already Turkana boy seems to have been quite tall and at a time relatively soon after the birth of HSS there were tall people in both Australia and Africa. The pattern throughout is one with short and tall populations living almost side by side. There are still today very short and very tall people living in Africa and the same was true for Australia less than 100 years ago.
And then Peter Klevius met the mongoloid woman whose brain power fueled some big "Kurgan" bodies in their endevours - i.e. repeatedly raiding from the north to the wealthy south.
And the password for entry was Finnish. No wonder because Finnish happens not to be a proper language (because 99% is loanwords) but certainly a gold mine when it comes to proto-Uralic words still in use.
Precisely because of the (understandable) neglect of the mostly cold, dark and sparsely populated mainly northern Russia and Finland, scientific bias created a puzzle with the key hidden in the evolution of Uralic-Finno-Ugric and the N R I yDNA triangle drama.
The elusive but interesting Proto-Baltic was created in the fault line between the rest of IE and Uralic-Finno-Ugric.
This part will be explored more in depth in the next part.
"Out of Africa" is equally holy, hollow and ridiculous as "islam is a peaceful* religion".
* How could the basic ideology of islam possibly be "peaceful" when it started under a hateful and violent supremacist "conquerer" and enslaver, who's still seen as infallable among his followers?Peter Klevius Unifying Theory on Human Evolution
Rudapithecus hungaricus was a chimpanzee-like ape which inhabited Europe during the late Miocene more than 10 Mya, i.e. 4 Mya before the chimp even existed.Following the pathetic PC creed that "we are all Africans", then lions, giraffes, schakals, hyenas, bovids, etc. "are all Eurasians" because that's where they originally came from. Same holds true for the lineage that led to humans.
Oldest African dna is mongoloid (Khoi-San), i.e. definitely not from Africa. They entered Africa from NE and were pushed to the south by Bantu colonizers.
Background
Primate evolution started in SE Asia with tarsiers. Although media is full of misleading pro-Africa statements, just scratch the surface and you will soon see that "oldest found in Africa" titles are built on sand.Strepsirrhines diverged from the haplorhine primates near the beginning of the primate radiation, especially after the asteroid impact 66 mya which erased most insects in north America (and possibly elsewhere). According to Peter Klevius, this event may have contributed to primate evolution, although the main evolutionary factory was in the SE Asian archipelago. Mediterranean and Caribbean may or may not have contributed in some part other than hybridization and local adaptation.
Arboreal Carpolestes (a distant relative of the Plesiadapiforms) is a genus of extinct fruit-eating primate-like mammals from late Paleocene and represented by a 58 Mya fossil from North America. It had flattened fingernails on its feet but with claws on its grasping digits and no forward-facing eyes. One large, nail-tipped toe opposed other toes, allowing a firm grip on branches. Dental morphology suggests it was adapted for eating fruit, seeds, and invertebrates.
The simians are sister to the tarsiers, together forming the haplorhines. The radiation may have occurred before or some 66-60 Mya and, according to Peter Klevius, may have been affected by asteroid impact on insects and flowers.
Already in Demand for Resources (1992:28) Peter
Klevius took the view that tarsiers are at the root of the human
lineage. This view was proven genetically correct 2016. Peter Klevius
thinks tarsiers as well as Homo floresiensis lineages originally evolved
in SE Asia. Against this background fhe feet arrangement is intriguing,
to say the least.
Tarsiers and simians are both Haplorhinis as opposed to Strepsirrhinis. In Anthropoidea (monkeys, apes, and humans), evidence indicates that Old World and New World primates went through parallel evolution. This may be due to a connection to the asteroid event in north America. Monkeys went to south-America from the north, not the fanciful trip over the Atlantic ocean from Africa.
Monkeys and apes have a common ancestor and diverged in the Oligocene.
Whole genome molecular dating analyses indicate that the gibbon lineage diverged from the great apes around 17 Mya and divergence from monkeys 29 Mya.
Orangutans and humans shared a common ancestry more than 14 Mya, i.e. long before African apes. Some 12 Mya Danuvius guggenmosi, a possible ancestor to the lineage that includes Homo floresiensis, walked on two legs and climbed like an ape in what is now Germany.
Gigantopithecus is most closely related to Orangutans. The two species last shared a common ancestor 10–12 mya in the Miocene, a time when a burst of new great ape species evolved.
Sivapithecus is a genus of extinct apes with fossils from 12.2 Mya found in the Siwalik Hills, India.
The dryopithecine is an Afrocentric naming of apes that existed from 12 to 9 Mya. These apes were of course connected to similar ones coming out of Eurasia to Africa.
Within apes (superfamily Hominoidea), the gibbons diverged during the early Miocene (between 19.7 and 24.1 mya, according to molecular evidence) and the orangutans and African great ape lineage split between 15.7 and 19.3 mya.
Chimps, and gorillas evolved from a common ancestor about 10 mya. However, part of the gorilla genome doesn't fit with the current structure of the great ape evolutionary tree.
Homo floresiensis, which has lived for at least a million years behind the Wallace line, is a bipedal ape with a Homo skull and with enough other Homo features to classify as Homo. It must have evolved in SE Asia on the "wrong" side of the Wallace line. Homo habilis, which is the youngest possible morphological relative to Homo floresiensis can't possibly have come from Africa to Flores (and by boat) later than 1.5 Mya because it went extinct by then.
The out-of-Africa fact deniers preach that 'the closest relatives of gorillas are the other two Homininae genera, chimpanzees and humans', all of whom diverged from a common ancestor some 7 mya.
However, humans share at least 28 unique physical characteristics with orangutans but only 2 with chimps and 7 with gorillas.
Some features shared by both orangutans and humans include:
- thickly enameled molar teeth with flat surfaces,
- greater asymmetries between the left and right side of the brain,
- increased cartilage-to-bone ratio in the forearm,
- similarly shaped shoulder blades.
- a hole in the roof of the mouth that was supposedly unique to humans is also present in orangutans.
- humans and orangutans have the widest-separated mammary glands, and they grow the longest hair, and orangutans actually have a hairline, in contrast to virtually all primates, where the hair comes down to the top of the eyes.
- humans and orangutans share a common ancestor that excludes [living] African apes.
- a widely distributed orangutan-like ancestor of humans lived in Africa, Europe, and Asia some 13 mya.
- there are very few physical features linking chimps and humans.
However, this doesn't necessarily mean that the orangutan linage was next in line before the human lineage. What we should be expecting is some really primitive but decently upright walking evolved predecessor to Homo floresiensis who managed to reach mainland Asia from time to time.
The continuous emergences and disappearances of land bridges throughout the Pleistocene in Southeast Asia vary dependent on various sea bottom depth and changes in overall sea level.
Shifts in forest habitats across land bridges spred over generations explains continental movements by primates already long before any monkeys and apes appeared.
Evolution of bipedalism
Already some 12 Mya Danuvius guggenmosi walked on two legs and climbed like an ape in what is now Germany. It was proably not the first and it was probably followed by series of slightly evolved ones who sometimes managed to successfully hybridize, and at other times didn't but just acted as new species.
Evolution of the brain
The last model of the human brain came out of SE Asia less than 100,000 bp and made a revolution in protein and fat rich big skulled Siberia. We know it because of genetic as well as cultural evidence. And according to Svante Pääbo, something must have happened with the brain setup some 50-60,000 bp. And according to Peter Klevius, this change was brought up from SE Asia, and may be represented by one of the two Denisovan lineages already documented.
When the new brain setup reached big Homo sapiens skulls it resulted in a demographic "big bang" that spred mongoloid (cold adapted) Homo sapiens sapiens (HSS)* all over the world. As a consequence we got a racial pattern resulting from older Homo sapiens mixing with the mongoloid HSS.
* We used to distinguish between archaic Homo sapiens (HS) and ourselves, i.e. HSS. However, due to the lack of enough old HSS in sub-Saharan Africa, PC "science" blurred the line between them so to give Africa a better appearance. However, this also allowed to call a primitive fossil from Morocco 'modern'.
Peter Klevius wrote:
Thursday, June 15, 2017
Why were tall men from the south dumber than tall men from the north?
Why has the tallest region in Europe (parts of Balkan) also been the poorest when the next tallest region (Northern Europe) has been the most affluent?
Answer: It's got absolutely nothing to do with tallness - and everything to do with brainpower. Oops, did Klevius say something "blasphemic"? Ok, here's Klevius' defense.
So what if Väinö Myllyrinne had been born into a warrior family some 5,000 ybp and equipped with a brain like, say Klevius (but way more aggressive)? Oops, Klevius did it again.
Height is genetically determined. Stunting because of malnutrition is only between 1-2 cm in a study of the Chinese famine 1959-1961. What has previously been assigned to malnutrition is in fact selection. Growth hormone irregularities are relatively rare.
There's a distinct genetic growth stop at around age 14 for a huge (?) part of the world's population, while others continue growing until the age of 16-18. Mixing of these genes give results that no one so far has studied in more detail. This is the basic reason for height variation among today's humans. Klevius strongly suggests that someone starts a research project based on this Klevius' problem formulation.
However, some continue growing also after their growth spurt. One such an example was the world's tallest healthy man (most exceptionally tall people are sick and die young) the Finnish Väinö Myllyrinta.
Peter Klevius' (who isn't tall) analysis: Because the northerners had access to short and intelligent women to the north of themselves among the hunter-gatherer population, they also got closer to the genetic background of modern humans. So some kids became short, others average, and some tall - and some even blond. Likewise, some got average IQ while a few got the genius gene. And a few became highly intelligent giant warriors at a time when size mattered - especially in sparsely populated areas where hit and run attacks were easy and where they could gather more of the same while going southward. One may assume that these phenomena happened more frequently during bad farming times - which occurred quite often in the vulnerable climatic borderland of farming, and dwelling in dark woodlands in the extreme north added blondness and fair skin.
The tallest people seem to have followed part of haplogroup I-M170. And when it comes to aDNA there are hints that point to the same direction, e.g. some tall ancient human remains in the southern Gravettian ice-age refuges (e.g. Italy).
However, it's mainly tall people from Fennoscandia/Russia (Indoeuropeans and Uralics) who - together with shorter people - constituted the stock from which the technological expansion of the West emanated. This has also led to many misconceptions, i.e. that being tall would somehow be connected to intelligence - no matter how many short geniuses (Einstein etc.) there are. Looking back in prehistory it seems more likely that the opposite is true. However, luckily today we've already messed everything up globally to an extent that it's impossible to tell anything for certain based on physical appearance. So why not just follow James Mallory's Bhuddist advise in the context of Tocharians: Don't believe what you see!
The Vikings, Goths, the Seima-Turbino, phenomenon, Kurgan people etc. are all example of movements of mainly tall male warriors in the first stages. And all of them were closely connected to Uralic speaking cultures.
The unfortunate belittling of first the steppe people and then the Uralic speakers has blindfolded many theories - and maps. Here the Corded Ware culture well overlaps later Uralic areas. Klevius assumes the people there must have spoken relaed languages at the time of Corded Ware.
Haplogroup U descends from a woman in the haplogroup R mtDNA branch of the phylogenetic tree, who is estimated to have lived around 55,000 years ago. An Upper Palaeolithic human who lived in Western Siberia c. 45,000 years ago has been shown to belong to the U* mitochondrial haplogroup. Haplogroup U has also been found among ancient Egyptian mummies excavated at the Abusir el-Meleq archaeological site in Middle Egypt, which date from the Pre-Ptolemaic/late New Kingdom, Ptolemaic, and Roman periods.
Red hair distribution from a northern heartland. The Uralic speaking Udmurts have been described as the "most red-headed" people in the world and having "deep blue eyes".
Blond hair distribution was connected to southern Fennoscandia being
the northernmost place were small scale farming was possible due to the
Gulf stream. However, this part of the farming world was also the
darkest, hence putting immense pressure on vitamin D uptake - resulting
in survival advantage for fair skinned people in the farming/hunting
communities. The northern hunter-gatherers, like Inuits, Sami etc., got
their vitamin D from other sources. 
If, as Klevius working theory suggests, the boost in intelligence, that created the unique paleolithic Eurasian art etc. track from Mal'ta Buret to the Pyrenees, was the result of a Homo floresiensis like tropical island dwarfed brain genetically flowing up in the form of Denisovan to big skulled northern homos, then we would expect a concentration of intelligence genes in the sparsely populated north (because those going back south were diluted by the mass of people already there). Most of these moderṇ (<50 and="" are="" br="" central="" compared="" e.g.="" europeans="" fair="" haired.="" half-northern="" iberians="" most="" nbsp="" nor="" north="" northerners="" not="" of="" relatively="" short="" skinned="" stature="" still="" to="" very="" were="" ybp="">
The tallest people used to live in Australia - already some 40-60,000 ybp.
There are two main unsolved mysteries about height:
1 Where did the tall genes originate?
2 Which genes determine earlier and later growth stop?
Mungo Man's "wife" was found 400 m away from him.
These guys from the Burrup peninsula (Western Australia), photographed in the 1920s, were 200.6 cm and 195.5 cm.
However, most Aborigines are of relatively short stature, and the tall guys above were reportedly even less intelligent than other tribes the Western "conquesters" - to use a word commonly used about muslim colonizers - had met with.
Southern farmers were short and not particularly intelligent
It's a myth that - as Klevius still thought 1992 - that farming caused civilizations. It was only when the gains of farming was utilized by non-farmers that the so called "civilizations" emerged in Mideast. Long before this time there had already been advanced civilizations from Ural to Ukraine.Klevius theory on IQ and human evolution and its relation to stature - the first truly intelligent humans weren't tall.
As you dear reader already know, until proven wrong Klevius analysis of the evolution of modern humans is in its shortest form as follows:1 The early IQ track visible through the Aurignacian art/technology track from Baikal/Siberia to the Pyrenees means something extraordinary happened in the Altai region more than 50,000 ybp when the first sewing needles were already in use.
An extremely sophisticated stone bracelet was produced in Siberia/Altai more than 40,000 ybp. Both the needle above and the stone bracelet were found in the Denisova cave.
2 DNA analysis from the Denisova cave has revealed both hybridization between so called Neanderthals, Homo sapiens sapiens, and a third party, the so called Denisovan who in turn is also linked to Australia, Papua New Guinea and Melanesia.
3 Homo floresiensis proves that a bigger skull can shrink in a tropical jungle/island environment without loosing IQ. So if a similar but opposite (i.e. expanding skull while keeping up the per cm3 IQ) process was at stake among the so called Denisovans when they managed to re-enter mainland Asia during lower sea level, they would sooner or later meet with their big skulled northern relatives in the Altai area. As a resukt some of their kids would get both a big skull as well as high IQ. How many of them is up to guesswork so far but there must have been quite a few (proportionally - considering small population) of them to cause such a rapid spread of what we might call the truly modern human over the world.
However, this spread was far from even. Climatic as well as geographical factors played an important role - compare e.g. Mammoth fluctuation, migration and extinction.
When farming emerged population rapidly increased while stature and intelligence decreased (e.g. compared to the early geniuses in Altai). So when the tall Kurgan people from the Russian steppe met the southern farmers the difference in height could be up to half a meter - and some of the Kurgans also possessed superior intelligence due to their mating connections to the north. So whereas mating with average farmer girls didn't produce many geniuses, the opposite was true when it comes to girls/women from the north.
Klevius will teach you more about this scenario later on but in the meantime he suggests you read the Finnish/Karelian epic Kalevala where
Louhi is a "wicked queen" with magical power of the land known as Pohjola (the North). Louhi promises her eldest and most magnificent maiden daughter to the smith Ilmarinen if he forges a Sampo (or Sammas) which was a magical artifact constructed by Ilmarinen that brought riches and good fortune to its holder.
Klevius wrote:
Friday, March 25, 2016
Klevius' Finland-Swedish Hobbit story
The Dragon of Evil, Tolkien, and Moomin Mum
Everyone (except islamist muslims) seem to agree that islamism is evil. However, many, especially politicians and muslims, claim that islam is "a great and peaceful religion". From this we may conclude that islamism contains both islam and evil in an inseparable connection which poses the question how islam could possibly be without evil. Even more so when considering that the original spread of islam during more than hundred years (before it settled as sultanates simply sponging on slave business - the so called "golden age") was completely based on evil religiously "justified" robbery, slaughtering, raping and enslavement of the "infidels". Islam's problem is it foundation in evil medieval parasitism that it has now brought to the modern society.
The twisted logic that evil islam should be blinked as "islamism" has led to a variety of incomprehensible stand points. For example and ironically, because of muslim terrorists muslims now ask for extra protection against "anti-muslim sentiments" - on top of the general protection already in place. Why? Does this mean that non-muslim right-wing politicians also should get extra protection because of right-wing extremists? However, the worst twist of all is by far the Saudi based and steered (by the Saudi dictator family) all muslim's world organization OIC and its sharia declaration via UN.
Klevius has no knowledge about J R Tolkien's view on islam. However, Klevius is convinced that J R Tolkien would have shared Klevius definition of evil based on Human Rights equality.
J R Tolkien's main hero since he was a boy and throughout his entire life was Kullervo in the Finnish epic Kalevala. Many characteristics of Kullervo can also easily be traced in Beowulf and Hamlet both of whom were Scandinavians from a time when Fennoscandia was known as Kvenland (see further down). This period is called Vendel time after a small village near Uppsala in eastern Sweden which at that time was populated by Finns and some old Nordic speaking bi-lingual "Finland-Swedes" (see more about this further down).
Klevius is convinced that Tove Jansson would have full heartedly approved of Tolkien's choice of such an ambiguous hero as Kullervo.
The official Tolkien calendar of 2016 (left) is illustrated by Finland-Swedish Tove Jansson (aka Moomin Mum).
Tove Jansson has also illustrated Swedish and Finnish books by Tolkien (right). However, she is most famous for her Moomin books and illustrations.
Klevius wrote:
Sunday, August 10, 2014
Finland-Swedish Moomin Mum Tove Jansson 100 years
Back then Hitler (the Germans) cried for more cake - today islam (the muslims) do the same!
A brave caricature, 'more cake' was made by Tove Jansson in Finland during a time when Hitler (the Germans) were considered friend of Finland in its war against Stalin's communist Soviet-union.
Tove Marika Jansson (9 August 1914 – 27 June 2001) was a Swedish-speaking novelist, painter, illustrator and comic strip author from Finland. For her contribution as a children's writer she received the Hans Christian Andersen Medal in 1966.
Tove Jansson is best known as the author of the Moomin books for children and the astonishing The True Deceiver for adults. The first Moomin book, The Moomins and the Great Flood, appeared in 1945, i.e. the same year Astrid Lindgren, an other world famous Swedish speaking author, published her first book about the Tomboyish Pippi Longstocking.
Like Klevius, Tove Jansson belongs to the tiny bilingual Finland-Swedish minority. In fact, access to her summer house on the pic passes a nearby place where Klevius used to live, neighboring a carpenter who used to build Moomin furnitures for Moominland.
However, unlike Klevius, Tove Jansson never had kids. It's even alleged that she felt slightly uncomfortable with kids. So where Klevius has been a family man in practice, Tove Jansson created her family environment as a fiction.
For more on this topic do visit Klevius' Love Letter to Edith Södergran (an other world famous Finland-Swede).
The little bright Hobbit girl and the giant blonde warrior
The people who got the new brain set up were short in stature as most Siberian people were until recently. However, when Seima-Turbino like phenomenons started (possibly even long before Seima-Turbino) big guys who had become blond in the north hunted for cute mongolic looking girls (compare Kalevala). Some of those girls possessed still a great chunk of the original super brain (compare the Denisova cave etc) so some of the kids produced with the blond giants turned up really smart. Their smartness together with a strong physical constitution in a sparsely populated river way landscape with small villages/camps constituted an ideal environment for nomadic robbery. And after some time some of these guys had collected enough financial and man power to go further south. Klevius will in detail explain this development later. Suffice to say that this is also the explanationary basis for why the Goths from the north managed to conquer the whole of Europe.
Klevius wrote:
Saturday, June 20, 2015
Klevius Midsummer quiz: How come that Klevius can read Beowulf but modern Brits can not?!
Klevius question to BBC: Why so much focus on Muhammad and so little on Beowulf?
The epic poem Beowulf, the masterpiece of Anglo-Saxon literature, was composed in pre-Viking time by an anonymous poet. It tells the story of a Scandinavian hero whose feats include battles with the fearsome monster Grendel and a fire-breathing dragon. It survives in a single manuscript dating from around 1000 AD. In form (e.g. alliteration) and content it follows much of the Finnish Kalevala (pictured below). Not the least as how it's influenced by later Christian material.
The simple answer is that as a Finland-Swede Klevius happens to master not only Swedish and Finnish but also old Finland-Swedish dialects - and in an extension most old wordings based on Old Nordic (aka Old Norse) over an area covering all the Nordic countries (incl. Gotland) plus Netherlands, England, Scotland plus most of the north Atlantic islands east of Iceland.
In the 1990s when Klevius studied English at Stockholm University they offered a video recording of a play based on thousand year old English texts. To Klevius astonishment he immediately recognized many familiarities with the East-Nyland dialects Klevius had grown up with. So when two Norwegian linguists a couple of years ago stated that English is a Scandinavian language Klevius applauded them.
So what does this have to do with Midsummer? Well, it's not just linguistics but a load of other familiarities as well, not to mention the fire feasts which may even be traced back to the Celts. And remember that much/most pre-Christian cultural influences are shared within all the Nordic countries.
For a background take a look at Kvenland:
