$-embezzler (since 1971) US (with
Google/Youtube/CIA*) censors Peter Klevius who 1992/1994 solved "the
biggest mystery in science" - and after 2006** was 100% proven
empirically right - and now tries (in vain?) to make it accessible in
the ocean of AI produced nonsense boosted by US fight for continuing its
stolen $-hegemony, which sucks the blood of "allies" and "adverseries"
alike.
* Google has become part of US militant (and criminal) hegemony survival desperation.
*
The unique craniopagus Hogan twins were born 2006 with connected
thalami but separate cortices, and due separate personalities. In this
research Peter Klevius was aided by a good brain (father won
Gothenburg's chess championship many times over four decades, and sister
won IBM's talent test with IQ 167). Peter Klevius intelligence was
perhaps best described by the Finnish neuroscientist professor J.
Juurmaa, who in the 1990s wrote: "Ajatuksen kulkunne on ilmavan lennokas
ja samalla iskevän ytimekäs" which translated to English would mean
something like: "Your train of thought is spaciously high-flying and at
the same time punchily concise." This he wrote in a long letter
answering Peter Klevius question about the effects on the visual cortex
on individuals who have been blind from birth. This inquiry was part of
Peter Klevius check up of his already published 1994 EMAH theory (the
Even More Astonishing Hypothesis - alluding to Francis Crick's book The
Astonishing Hypothesis)), so to get a qualified confirmation that the
"visual cortex" in born blinds is fully employed with other tasks than
vision. Juurmaa's description of Peter Klevius is in line with
philosopher Georg Henrik von Wright's (Wittgenstein's self-appointed
successor at Cambridge) 1980 assessment, and more importantly with Peter
Klevius own experience, and perhaps most importantly when assessing
consciousness and AI. Only his 1981 article Resursbegär (Demand for
Resources) was paid for (Fmk 500) mainly because Georg Henrik von Wright
liked it and convinced the editor in chief (Jan-Magnus Jansson) to
publish it despite Peter Klevius lacking any academic credentials.
Peter
Klevius (and top science) is now censored from commenting anything on
Youtube because of these (now deleted by Youtube) comments and replies:
comment on US-China
ways to change the world dex hunter-torricke
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8aO_2ncAj9M&list=TLPQMDMwODIwMjYGtuPSzgDoYw&index=2
The
danger isn't AI or China, but US desperation because of US $-embezzling
since 1971 that has created a bubble hegemony that China's success now
challenges. US therefore wants to contain China while continuing
freeloading on the rest of the world. Do realize that China doesn't need
to aggressively/violently push itself because it has the attraction
that US lacks. So the only feasible solution is cooperation with China.
Comments on consciousness (the biggest mystery in science)
Peter
Klevius comment on Iain McGilchrist
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QNAC_QVY9BU&list=TLPQMDIwODIwMjZQMkTgNsxjDQ&index=3
that was repeatedly censored:
Halleluja!
What a Western missionary revival meeting of evil (ask Palestinians
etc.) irrational "God"/"soul" semantics padding overinflated egos who
think they're better than all incl. Atheist East Asians. The only
meaningful brain divide is the connected thalami of the unique Hogan
twins who proved Peter Klevius 1992/1994 consciousness theory correct
2006-. 1992 Peter Klevius introduced 'existencecentrism', i.e. the
undeniable fact that our reality is not only limited by our mind but
also determines our interpretation/understanding of whatever our senses
bring. Although language is great, it also opens up for irrationality
and "qualia" nonsense - feral humans and animals can only be rational.
Moreover, no other culture/society has ever come up with the silly (and
dangerous) idea of an "outside" the world "God" who created "out of
nothing", but instead have creation myths out of already existing
primordial beings (e.g. earth mating with heaven etc). And true religion
(re/back, ligare/bond) is ancestor worship in all societies - not
missionary evil.
reality hoffman
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GEtCYwr3quI&list=TLPQMjIwNzIwMjaIvArnp9cQWQ&index=4
Based
on my 1981 published evolution/devolution formula, I, Peter Klevius,
1992 introduced the concept of existencecentrism (instead of the
ambiguous anthropocentrism), which states that the only possible reality
is trapped inside the mind, and that whatever we think, it can only be
understood/distorted based on what's already in the mind.
Existencecentrism is based on the fact that all cultures - except the
irrationhal and self-asserting Judeo-Christian "God" delusion (which
defines "God" and "creation out of nothing" as "outside" human
understanding) - base their creation myths on something primordial
already existing but coming alive (e.g. earth mating with heaven etc.).
Existencecentrism made it possible for Peter Klevius to solve "the
greatest mystery in science" 1992-1994 with consciousness residing in
the thalamus with obligated connections to the neural circuit in the
cortex based on synaptic pruning - which eliminates the need for
memories, categories etc. which are all semantic products. Only humans
have the capacity to be irrational through language, while feral humans
and animals can only be rational. The 1992-1994 theory called EMAH (i.e.
the Even More Astonishing Hypothesis - alluding to Francis Crick's book
The Astonishing Hypothesis) was empirically proven right by the birth
of the unique craniopagus Hogan twins born 2006 with connected thalami
but separate cortices and due separate personalities.
rorty
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fn2F2BWLZ0Q
The
world isn't "out there" as Rorty wrote 1989. Our existencecentrism
makes it impossible to even talk about any other reality than the one
inside the mind, because that thinking can only happen inside the mind.
It's plain conceited arrogance to assume that Western Judeo-Christian
delusional belief in an irrational (i.e. "outside" the mind)
"monotheistic God" somehow would be superior to all other worldviews -
and therefore fit for missionary colonialism. In my 1992 book I, Peter
Klevius, pointed out that no other cultures have ever argued for the
senseless creation out of nothing by a "God" that's defined as outside
the world and incomprehensible and unreachable for the human mind.
Instead all other cultures/societies have various already existing
primordial beings that are then coming alive - compare e.g. heaven and
earth mating etc. And to blur the line between the impossible belief in
an irrational "monotheistic God" and more mindful worldviews, this
delusional narrative is then called 'religion' together with
non-monotheistic but sensible views. The word 'religion', i.e.
re-ligare, means 'tie back', i.e. ancestor worship, i.e. what all human
cultures practice. The Judeo-Christian hegemonism in modern times has
been led by US against Atheist countries, most recently against Japan
tech supremacy in the 1990s and now China,s dito. And behind it all is
US dollar theft 1971 that has made its hegemony possible - until China
(again) surpassed the West with superior R&D.
wittgensteins contribution
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sVKWlEq09tQ&list=TLPQMjMwNjIwMjY16P5uQWQLwg&index=1
A
good lecture. I, Peter Klevius, solved consciousness (the "RAM" in the
thalamus) in my book 1992 by introducing existencecentrism (the limit of
mind) and the stone example (irrationality made possible by language -
animals and feral humans cannot be irrational), told Francis Crick and
several magazines, and got it empirically confirmed through the 2006
birth of the unique craniopagus Hogan twins with connected thalami but
separate cortices and personalities. However, unfounded paranormal views
and "qualia" nonsense seem more popular. In summary it's all about the
pruning of synaptic connections by what the thalamus has projected into
the cortex, i.e. lived experience builds up our mind, of which we learn
to share parts of with others (compare Wittgenstein's 'language game').
Thalamus is like a camera sensor that has projected/pruned your synaptic
connections with the growing familiarity of incoming data (repetition
is the mother of education). So whatever you are conscious about it has
to be understood against the background of your previous experience.
This means that whatever sensory pattern hits you, it is determined to
point (roughly) to that same synaptic association pattern in the cortex -
much like the RAM is determined to address the proper parts of the
HD/SSD. There are no pics etc. planted in your neurons - only a chaotic
(for someone else looking into your brain) synaptic pattern that only
you have become familiar with. Running amok AI is no different from e.g.
running amok islamist "God" believers and "infidel" haters. And
although they've been more tolerated out of fear of "islamophobia"
accusations, let them and AI face the negative (individual, not
"community") Human Rights in the 1948 UDHR.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=41bIJ7hYbLs&list=TLPQMjcwNjIwMjZCjBMBKeZrxg&index=3
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u3zzSqloBBg
Peter Klevius comment (see Peter Klevius blogpost to get a better overview of the groundbreaking analysis).
Of
course there's no physical connection between key strokes and the
meaning of a sentence - other than the imprinted adaptation to
understand language. Reason and free will delusions are products of and
in language. No need for a "soul" etc. groundless magic to explain e.g.
how people with split corpus callosum can make sense of both parts.
According to Peter Klevius (1992, 1994), the thalamus coordinates it.
Sadly, the most important part of the brain has been treated as a simple
"relay station". According to Peter Klevius (1992,1994) the young brain
adapts to incoming longtime signals imprinted by the thalamus (synaptic
pruning), and later builds on top of this stock of neural circuitry -
which is chaotic for anyone else except the origo. However, except for
feral ones, human interaction is added, which includes language, which
introduces rational and irrational use of concepts - like e.g. "soul".
Although language is pruned into the mind as everything else, its pros
incl. improved communication while its cons incl. conceptual
ambiguities. According to existencecentrism (P. Klevius 1992), there
cannot be anything outside our mind/s - other than mind speculations
based on what's already inside the mind. Therefore anything "defined" as
being out of reach for the human mind is irrational semantics inside
the mind. I, Peter Klevius, solved consciousness (the "RAM" in the
thalamus) in my book 1992 by introducing existencecentrism (the
unreachable "outside" the limit of mind) and the stone example
(irrationality made possible by language - animals and feral humans
cannot be irrational), told Francis Crick and several magazines, and got
it empirically confirmed through the 2006 birth of the unique
craniopagus Hogan twins with connected thalami but separate cortices and
personalities. However, unfounded paranormal views and "qualia"
nonsense seem more popular. In summary it's all about the pruning of
synaptic connections by what the thalamus has projected into the cortex,
i.e. lived experience builds up our mind, of which we learn to share
parts of with others (compare Wittgenstein's 'language game'). Thalamus
is like a camera sensor that has projected/pruned your synaptic
connections with the growing familiarity of incoming data (repetition is
the mother of learning). So whatever you are conscious about it has to
be understood against the background of your previous experience. This
means that whatever sensory pattern hits you, it is determined to point
to that same association pattern in the cortex - much like the RAM is
determined to address the proper parts of the HD/SSD. There are no pics
etc. planted in your neurons - only a chaotic (for someone else looking
into your brain) synaptic pattern that only you have become familiar
with. Running amok AI is no different from e.g. running amok islamist
"God" believers and "infidel" haters. And although they've been more
tolerated out of fear of "islamophobia" accusations, let them and AI
face the negative (individual, not "community") Human Rights in the 1948
UDHR. However, militant Judeo-Christian values are now again peaking in
the West because the chickens of US enormous $-theft 1971 are coming
home to roost (because of China's success) in the form of renewed
anti-communist/anti-Atheist US led smear campaigns (compare Yellow Peril
and Red Scare). Chinese culture - like every other human culture before
contaminated with "monotheist" delusion (a "God" cannot exist "outside"
the mind) - rests on ancestor warship, i.e. the "soul" is the social
"after-life" of the dead among the still living. In the 1980s a dying
woman said to Peter Klevius that she was horrified of ending up in Hell
because of having had an illegitimate child. But death is the ultimate
anesthesia I tried to comfort her.
Peter Klevius,
solved consciousness (the "RAM" in the thalamus) in a book 1992 by
introducing existencecentrism (the limit of mind) and the stone example
(irrationality made possible through language - animals and feral humans
cannot be irrational), told Francis Crick and several magazines, and
got it empirically confirmed through the 2006 birth of the unique
craniopagus Hogan twins with connected thalami but separate cortices and
personalities. However, unfounded paranormal views and "qualia"
nonsense seem more popular. In summary it's all about the pruning of
synaptic connections by what the thalamus has projected into the cortex,
i.e. lived experience builds up our mind, of which we learn to share
parts of with others (compare Wittgenstein's 'language game'). Thalamus
is like a camera sensor that has projected/pruned your synaptic
connections with the growing familiarity of incoming data (repetition is
the mother of education). So whatever you are conscious about it has to
be understood against the background of your previous experience. This
means that whatever sensory pattern hits you, it is determined to point
(roughly) to that same synaptic association pattern in the cortex - much
like the RAM is determined to address the proper parts of the HD/SSD.
There are no pics etc. planted in your neurons - only a chaotic (for
someone else looking into your brain) synaptic pattern that only you
have become familiar with. Running amok AI is no different from e.g.
running amok islamist "God" believers and "infidel" haters. And although
they've been more tolerated out of fear of "islamophobia" accusations,
let them and AI face the negative (individual, not "community") Human
Rights in the 1948 UDHR.
Highlighted reply
@mbmb6743
14 hours ago
@peterklevius4566
It may be that the brain is conscious just as the elbow bends. To ask
"how" or "why" is it conscious, would therefore be as mundane as to ask
"how" or "why" does it bend. In other words I don't disagree. Of course
it's impossible to escape our own physicality; this, if I understand
aright, is what is meant by exiscentrism. Or, as Emerson says, "All the
thoughts of a turtle are turtle."
I peeked at your blog the
other day and it contributed to a feeling I had today (I say "feeling"
on purpose) - To really feel, to know, what consciousness is, is to have
a roof no higher than one's own height, over one's head. - This feeling
was uncanny, and only a little bleak; it was an almost mystical
feeling, though I'm referring to a kind of grounded mysticism, something
I think Wittgenstein had. It's easy to imagine a super-genius (an
"ubermensch"?) being in this state of mind at all times: someone who not
only knows but perhaps more importantly feels - again at all times -
the present moment, the eternal Now, call it whatever.
@mbmb6743
replied: "This would seem to have implications for deja vu. What's your
take on that? Btw, consciousness "grows" with experience, like a plant;
but how do we explain the seed?"
1 day ago
@peterklevius4566
0 seconds ago
@mbmb6743
The seed has a DNA blueprint. However, consciousness is built on our
heavily limited senses. Our biology restricts access to any "outside
reality", though inside our mind we may speculate abt "outside" but to
no worth. We simply need to accept not being allmighty gods as I wrote
in my 1992 book which introduced 'existencecentrism'' and the fallacies
of language. Many philosophers and scientists wrongly presume their
views being extravert, when they can only be introvert. Whatever our
instruments tell us, it can only be understood by what's already in the
mind.
Comments on
Youtube abt the completely unfounded "out of Africa" hoax
(https://peterklevius.blogspot.com/2023/01/how-pliocene-pleistocene-panama-isthmus.html).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1WWek0PhD-g
The
out of Africa delusion is really about racism, i.e. against the East
Asians. Just one of numerous examples: It took some 20 years for Chris
Beard to get Eosimias from China and Myanmar to be accepted as earliest
Anthropoids. The racist out of Africa and anti-Asia community's
subversive campaign is widely known but little talked about. Phylogeny
after phylogeny were in the 1990's desperately altered into out of
Africa and later always disproved in silence. Only Homo still clings on
without any reason to do so.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=spjH7wqms9g&list=TLPQMTEwNTIwMjbBCdZZ0Xtw5A&index=5
"Out
of Africa" emerged when the Piltdown scandal punctured Eurocentrism.
"Out of Africa" is PC biased pseudoscience eagerly trying to squeeze in
whatever simian and hominid fossils as evolved in Africa (e.g.
Aegyptopithecus etc.). In the 1990s (at a time of increased anti-East
Asian racism due to Japan challenging US and EU) much phylogenetics was
altered to fit "out of Africa". Cambridge still warns prospective
students that focus ought to be on Africa. However, fossils and old DNA
mutations in moderns aren't "cradles", and a continent cannot speciate
omnivorous and easily moving Homos. Already in my 1992 book's chapter
'Human evolution' I used Jinniushan's big brain, northern location and
flat face ("mongoloid"/cold adaptated), as pointing to early Homo
sapiens, while asking: 'Why didn't he (now she) go to the Moon with 200
kyr time to do so before HSS? According to Peter Klevius, SE Asian
volatile archipelago continuosly produced new species and hybrids to the
beat of climate (sea level) oscillations - the last one some 60-70 kyr
producing (selection via island/jungle brain dwarfing without losing
intelligence at times of high sea level) HSS which then conquered the
whole world after entering mainland at low sea level. Some followed the
tropics while others went to the fat and protein rich north filling big
relative's brains with the last updated "CPU" which then spread in
diluted form all over the world creating existing phenotype pattern.
Jinniushan and Homo floresiensis (LB1) women are the most important
evolutionary fossils so far - and the least discussed as perfectly
fitting out of SE Asia.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Txvxo7qMp_E
According
to Peter Klevius, it's neither Africa nor China because continents lack
enough isolation for successful anthropoid speciation - only occasional
hybridization. The cradle of hominines was the volatile SE Asian
archipelago. However, NE Asia hybridized the big-skulled "mongoloid"
(cold-adapted) phenotype that then conquered the world and explains the
phenotypical pattern still seen today. Homo sapiens spread from est to
west, which also explains how the chin is just a remnant of the jutting
jaw of the Neanderthals whom we genetically consumed (together we have
some half of their genome). Moreover, the oldest Khoisan DNA came from
Asia when smaller lightskinned "mongolized" H. sapiens followed a
subtropical path down to Africa possibly after 30,000 BP where they then
got stuck due to the Bantu expansion 4,000 BC to 500 AD. Also compare
similar looking Shompen and South American natives. Africa is a genetic
and fossil end station of species from SE Asia, the real cradle. This
explains the "puzzling" variety in space and time of hard to fit
overlapping fossil species and hybrids.
Peter Klevius:
Bipedal
apes were in Eurasia at least 12 MA, i.e. long before Sahelanthropus in
northern African Mediterranean river environment, but after climate
cooling only survived in more tropical environment. And of course there
are Australopithecine fossils all over South Asia yet to be found. Lack
of evidence is not the same as evidence of absence. Modern H. sapiens
have globular skulls. The oldest are from outside Africa, e.g. Apidima 1
in Greece which dates to more than 210,000 BP. However, this
globularity may be traced back a million years because H. floresiensis
also possessed it with additional modern feaures while also possessing
Australopithecine like post-cranial features. As Peter Klevius has
written since 2012, Homo could only have evolved on a tropical
archipelago with fluctuating landbridges due to increased sea level
oscillations (see flow chart on Peter Klevius anthropology). And every
time a new species landed on mainland Asia, the small skulled dark
skinned tropical ones continued along tropical lines while others went
to the fat and protein rich north and got bigger unrestricted brains and
"mongolized" (cold adapted) faces. This latter observation Peter
Klevius wrote about already in his book Resursbegär (Demand for
Resources) 1992 when comparing the big skulled Jinniushan fossil from
northern China with similarly "mongolized" (cold adapted) faces of
Khoisan people in southern Africa.
👍 Someone liked your
comment: "The oldest advanced HSS art and tools are found in Asia
(Sulavesi and Siberia). The "pan-African" model with multiple
speciations is hilarious! What stopped access to the Afro-Eurasian
continent for the most advanced Homos - and why would they fail where H.
erectus made it to China more than 2 MA?! And geneticists must
understand that archaic mutations in moderns lack "GPS". According to
Peter Klevius, we (HSS) clearly originated in SE Asian volatile
archipelago to the beat of accelerating climate oscillations in
Pleistocene, and are now alone after the latest brain update made us
fill the Earth and genetically consume the rest - so e.g., together
we've ~50% of the Neanderthal genome. Following the Mekong river (real)
HSS was in northern Laos at least 86,000 BP. The out of Africa PC
pseudoscience has no valid ground. According to Peter Klevius, the
Afro-Eurasian continent lacked enough isolation of its potential
"Mitochondrial Eves" for successful Homo speciation - only hybridization
(see flow chart on Peter Klevius Anthropology). And oldest DNA
mutations in modern African HSS ("mongoloid", i.e. cold adapted Khoisan)
don't prove an African origin (the recent s.c. Bantu expansion
hybridized the intruding Eurasians to look "African", and archaic
Pygmies to become modern HSS - however, their Ebola resistance wasn't
always transfered). Moreover, the most important "missing link", the
Homo floresiensis woman (with an advanced Homo head and advanced
Australopithecine body) didn't "raft" to Flores but evolved in SE Asia
and got stuck on the "wrong" side of the Wallace line. Out of Africa is
really about US boosted PC racism - spiced with "monotheistic"
anti-Atheism - , i.e. against East Asians. It emerged after the long
lasting Piltdown hoax eventually punctured British Eurocentrism. And in
the 1990s - at a time of increased anti-East Asian racism due to
Japanese tech challenging US and EU - phylogenetics etc. were eagerly
altered to fit "out of Africa" models and later disproved in silence.
Only Homo still clings on without any reason to do so. And Cambridge
still warns prospective students that focus ought to be on Africa. In
this headwind it took some 20 years for Chris Beard to get Eosimias from
China and Myanmar to be accepted as earliest Anthropoid fossils. The PC
racist out of Africa and anti-Asia community's subversive campaign is
widely known but sadly little talked about. However, according to Peter
Klevius, the cradle of hominines was the volatile SE Asian archipelago,
and NE Asia hybridized the big-skulled "mongoloid" (cold-adapted)
phenotype that then conquered the world and explains the phenotypical
pattern still seen today. HSS spread from east to west (just like other
s.c. "African animals"), which also explains how the Cro-Magnon chin is
just a remnant of the jutting jaw of the Neanderthal. Africa is a
genetic and fossil dump of species from SE Asia, the real cradle. This
explains the "puzzling" variety in space and time of hard to fit
overlapping fossil species and hybrids. Bipedal apes were in Eurasia at
least 12 MA, i.e. long before Sahelanthropus in northern African
Mediterranean river environment, but after climate cooling only survived
in more tropical environment. And of course there are Australopithecine
fossils all over South Asia yet to be found. Modern H. sapiens (HSS -
i.e. definitely not Jebel Irhoud) have globular skulls. The oldest are
from outside Africa, e.g. Apidima 1 in Greece which dates to more than
210,000 BP. However, this globularity may be traced back at least a
million years because H. floresiensis also possessed it with additional
modern feaures together with Australopithecine like post-cranial ones.
As Peter Klevius has written since 2012, Homo could only have evolved on
the SE Asian tropical archipelago with fluctuating landbridges due to
increased sea level oscillations. The back and forth from savannah to
jungle honed a better CPU without increasing the size. And every time a
new species landed on mainland Asia, the small skulled dark skinned
tropical ones continued along tropics while others went to the fat and
protein rich north and got bigger unrestricted brains and "mongolized"
(cold adapted) faces. This latter observation Peter Klevius wrote about
1992 in his book Resursbegär (Demand for Resources) when comparing the
big skulled Jinniushan fossil from northern China with similarly
"mongolized" (cold adapted) faces of Khoisan people in southern Africa."
6 days ago
@EvoBio-SJC
replied: "It not about race or PC... Humans coming from Africa is the
least controversial position based on most recent genetic data. Most
males who do not come from African descent, have the same mutation on
their Y chromosome. M168 specifically. This has been found in almost
100% of men from China, North America, Siberia, India, Australia... how
can they all share the same mutant version of the Y chromosome if they
do not share the same origin story?
African men, do no possess
this mutation (unless they have recent non-African ancestry). Also, yes
anatomically modern humans existed outside of Africa for possibly
100,000s of years prior to 60,000-70,000 years ago (likely, timeframe
for the Out-of-Africa Model).
But the anatomically modern humans
who lived outside of Africa, prior to 60,000-70,000, likely all died.
Some remnants may have been incorporated into the "successful" waves out
of Africa (occurring during or after 60,000-70,000).
I do
agree, that South East Asia was a lost cradle of human kind. I made a
video on this topic - https://youtu.be/igMv4yFjuOg. My thinking is that,
Homo erectus rafted to flores and luzon islands independently, and
there, evolved into Homo floresiensis and Homo luzonensis respectively.
Neither Flores or Luzon were connected by land, and there is no reason
to believe Homo erectus could not create simplistic water vessels. I
will read some of Peter Klevius recent articles as I am not familiar
with it. Thank you for your comment and discussions."
9 days ago
👍
Someone liked your comment: "A genetist must understand that old
mutations in modern Africans don't tell the birth location. According to
Peter Klevius, we (HSS) clearly originated in SE Asian volatile
archipelago to the beat of accelerating climate oscillations in
Pleistocene, and are now alone after the latest brain update made us
fill the Earth and genetically consume the rest - so for example,
together we've ~50% of the Neanderthal genome. Following the Mekong
river HSS was in northern Laos at least 86,000 BP, and 51,000 BP
produced the world's oldest realistic painting in Sulawesi. The out of
Africa PC pseudoscience has no valid ground. According to Peter Klevius,
the Afro-Eurasian continent lacked enough isolation of its potential
"Mitochondrial Eves" for successful Homo speciation - only hybridization
(see flow chart on Peter Klevius Anthropology). And oldest DNA
mutations in modern African HSS ("mongoloid", i.e. cold adapted Khoisan)
don't prove an African origin (the recent s.c. Bantu expansion
hybridized the intruding Eurasians to look "African", and archaic
Pygmies to become modern HSS - however, their Ebola resistance wasn't
always transfered). Moreover, the most important "missing link", the
Homo floresiensis woman (with an advanced Homo head and advanced
Australopithecine body) didn't "raft" to Flores but evolved in SE Asia
and got stuck on the "wrong" side of the Wallace line. Out of Africa is
really about PC racism, i.e. against East Asians. "Out of Africa"
emerged after the long lasting Piltdown hoax eventually punctured
British Eurocentrism. And in the 1990s - at a time of increased
anti-East Asian racism due to Japanese tech challenging US and EU -
phylogenetics etc. were eagerly altered to fit "out of Africa" models
and later disproved in silence. Only Homo still clings on without any
reason to do so. And Cambridge still warns prospective students that
focus ought to be on Africa. In this headwind it took some 20 years for
Chris Beard to get Eosimias from China and Myanmar to be accepted as
earliest Anthropoid fossils. The PC racist out of Africa and anti-Asia
community's subversive campaign is widely known but sadly little talked
about. However, according to Peter Klevius, the cradle of hominines was
the volatile SE Asian archipelago, and NE Asia hybridized the
big-skulled "mongoloid" (cold-adapted) phenotype that then conquered the
world and explains the phenotypical pattern still seen today. Homo
sapiens spread from east to west (just like other s.c. "African
animals"), which also explains how the Cro-Madnon chin is just a remnant
of the jutting jaw of the Neanderthal. Africa is a genetic and fossil
dump of species from SE Asia, the real cradle. This explains the
"puzzling" variety in space and time of hard to fit overlapping fossil
species and hybrids. Bipedal apes were in Eurasia at least 12 MA, i.e.
long before Sahelanthropus in northern African Mediterranean river
environment, but after climate cooling only survived in more tropical
environment. And of course there are Australopithecine fossils all over
South Asia yet to be found. Modern H. sapiens (HSS - i.e. not Jebel
Irhoud) have globular skulls. The oldest are from outside Africa, e.g.
Apidima 1 in Greece which dates to more than 210,000 BP. However, this
globularity may be traced back a million years because H. floresiensis
also possessed it with additional modern feaures together with
Australopithecine like post-cranial features. As Peter Klevius has
written since 2012, Homo could only have evolved on the SE Asian
tropical archipelago with fluctuating landbridges due to increased sea
level oscillations. And every time a new species landed on mainland
Asia, the small skulled dark skinned tropical ones continued along
tropical lines while others went to the fat and protein rich north and
got bigger unrestricted brains and "mongolized" (cold adapted) faces.
This latter observation Peter Klevius wrote about 1992 in his book
Resursbegär (Demand for Resources) when comparing the big skulled
Jinniushan fossil from northern China with similarly "mongolized" (cold
adapted) faces of Khoisan people in southern Africa.
https://peterklevius.blogspot.com/2023/01/how-pliocene-pleistocene-panama-isthmus.html"
9 days ago
👍
Someone liked your comment: "The "pan-African" model with multiple
speciations is hilarious! What stopped access to Afro-Eurasia?! And
geneticists must understand that old mutations in moderns lack "GPS".
According to Peter Klevius, we (HSS) clearly originated in SE Asian
volatile archipelago to the beat of accelerating climate oscillations in
Pleistocene, and are now alone after the latest brain update made us
fill the Earth and genetically consume the rest - so e.g., together
we've ~50% of the Neanderthal genome. Following the Mekong river (real)
HSS was in northern Laos at least 86,000 BP, and 51,000 BP produced the
world's oldest realistic painting - in Sulawesi. The out of Africa PC
pseudoscience has no valid ground. According to Peter Klevius, the
Afro-Eurasian continent lacked enough isolation of its potential
"Mitochondrial Eves" for successful Homo speciation - only hybridization
(see flow chart on Peter Klevius Anthropology). And oldest DNA
mutations in modern African HSS ("mongoloid", i.e. cold adapted Khoisan)
don't prove an African origin (the recent s.c. Bantu expansion
hybridized the intruding Eurasians to look "African", and archaic
Pygmies to become modern HSS - however, their Ebola resistance wasn't
always transfered). Moreover, the most important "missing link", the
Homo floresiensis woman (with an advanced Homo head and advanced
Australopithecine body) didn't "raft" to Flores but evolved in SE Asia
and got stuck on the "wrong" side of the Wallace line. Out of Africa is
really about PC racism, i.e. against East Asians. "Out of Africa"
emerged after the long lasting Piltdown hoax eventually punctured
British Eurocentrism. And in the 1990s - at a time of increased
anti-East Asian racism due to Japanese tech challenging US and EU -
phylogenetics etc. were eagerly altered to fit "out of Africa" models
and later disproved in silence. Only Homo still clings on without any
reason to do so. And Cambridge still warns prospective students that
focus ought to be on Africa. In this headwind it took some 20 years for
Chris Beard to get Eosimias from China and Myanmar to be accepted as
earliest Anthropoid fossils. The PC racist out of Africa and anti-Asia
community's subversive campaign is widely known but sadly little talked
about. However, according to Peter Klevius, the cradle of hominines was
the volatile SE Asian archipelago, and NE Asia hybridized the
big-skulled "mongoloid" (cold-adapted) phenotype that then conquered the
world and explains the phenotypical pattern still seen today. Homo
sapiens spread from east to west (just like other s.c. "African
animals"), which also explains how the Cro-Madnon chin is just a remnant
of the jutting jaw of the Neanderthal. Africa is a genetic and fossil
dump of species from SE Asia, the real cradle. This explains the
"puzzling" variety in space and time of hard to fit overlapping fossil
species and hybrids. Bipedal apes were in Eurasia at least 12 MA, i.e.
long before Sahelanthropus in northern African Mediterranean river
environment, but after climate cooling only survived in more tropical
environment. And of course there are Australopithecine fossils all over
South Asia yet to be found. Modern H. sapiens (HSS - i.e. not Jebel
Irhoud) have globular skulls. The oldest are from outside Africa, e.g.
Apidima 1 in Greece which dates to more than 210,000 BP. However, this
globularity may be traced back a million years because H. floresiensis
also possessed it with additional modern feaures together with
Australopithecine like post-cranial features. As Peter Klevius has
written since 2012, Homo could only have evolved on the SE Asian
tropical archipelago with fluctuating landbridges due to increased sea
level oscillations. And every time a new species landed on mainland
Asia, the small skulled dark skinned tropical ones continued along
tropical lines while others went to the fat and protein rich north and
got bigger unrestricted brains and "mongolized" (cold adapted) faces.
This latter observation Peter Klevius wrote about 1992 in his book
Resursbegär (Demand for Resources) when comparing the big skulled
Jinniushan fossil from northern China with similarly "mongolized" (cold
adapted) faces of Khoisan people in southern Africa.
https://peterklevius.blogspot.com/2023/01/how-pliocene-pleistocene-panama-isthmus.html"
13 days ago
@EvoBio-SJC
9 days ago
It
not about race or PC... Humans coming from Africa is the least
controversial position based on most recent genetic data. Most males who
do not come from African descent, have the same mutation on their Y
chromosome. M168 specifically. This has been found in almost 100% of men
from China, North America, Siberia, India, Australia... how can they
all share the same mutant version of the Y chromosome if they do not
share the same origin story? African men, do no possess this mutation
(unless they have recent non-African ancestry). Also, yes anatomically
modern humans existed outside of Africa for possibly 100,000s of years
prior to 60,000-70,000 years ago (likely, timeframe for the
Out-of-Africa Model). But the anatomically modern humans who lived
outside of Africa, prior to 60,000-70,000, likely all died. Some
remnants may have been incorporated into the "successful" waves out of
Africa (occurring during or after 60,000-70,000). I do agree, that South
East Asia was a lost cradle of human kind. I made a video on this topic
- https://youtu.be/igMv4yFjuOg. My thinking is that, Homo erectus
rafted to flores and luzon islands independently, and there, evolved
into Homo floresiensis and Homo luzonensis respectively. Neither Flores
or Luzon were connected by land, and there is no reason to believe Homo
erectus could not create simplistic water vessels. I will read some of
Peter Klevius recent articles as I am not familiar with it. Thank you
for your comment and discussions.
Peter Klevius answer:
Out
of Africa is a (fraudulent) patch work of uncertainties instead of
science. And the "genetic African descent" is an empty illusion lacking
any scientific value, because mutations have no location and because the
whole of Africa is a mess of immigration. And no, Homo floresiensis is
absolutely not Homo erectus in any sense because it got limbs for
climbing like australopithecines, and didn't shrink but actually grew in
size on Flores over a million years. Instead of drumming for the "out
of Africa" PC pseudoscience I suggest a more critical stance. But it
might be less good for monetizing though. But I think it could benefit
your reputation when the bubble inevitably bursts.
