Ainsley Broussard's List: The World That Was

• A civilisation as old as Indus valley?
• Friday, May 27, 2011
• Did the coastline of the Konkan, from Shrivardhan in Raigad to Vengurla in Sindhudurg, have human habitation around 8,000 years ago?
• Was there a unique Konkan culture in existence in 6,000BC?
• below the sea waters of Konkan coast, could answer these questions with a big resounding‘Yes!’
• In what could turn out to be a major discovery,researchers have found a wall-like structure, which is 24km long, 2.7m in height, and around 2.5m in width.
• It has been found 3m below the present sea level.
• This joint expedition carried out by Deccan College, Pune and Department of Science and Technology, Central Government, has been in progress since 2005
• Based on the calculations, experts from the National Institute of Oceanography (NIO) pegged the age of the wall at around 6,000 BC,” Marathe informed.
• If the date of the wall is accurate, then is it the same age as the Indus civilisation?

8 more annotations...

•  

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   

   <!-- corrects IE6 width calculation --> 

   

   

   

   

   <!-- google_ad_section_start(name=default) -->  

     

  Thursday, 19 May 2011
• A Different Face For Neanderthals
• I happened across a site, which belongs to Danny Vendramini, a TV producer and scriptwriter, with an interest in evolutionary biology.
• It is:
  
  
  
  http://themandus.org/index.html
• He has written a book called “Them and Us”, in which he advances the hypothesis that Neanderthals were:
• •Very different looking from most modern representations – much uglier, hairier, and far less human-like.
• •That they were brutal, intelligent, tool-using predators, who preyed upon modern man in the areas where they came in contact, specifically, the Levant.
• •That being the prey of Neanderthals was the most important factor in human evolution, and that it was responsible for the flowering of art and sculpture, the technological innovations in the tool making industry, perhaps even the flowering of language – all of which happened around 40,000 to 50,000 years ago.
• •And not only that, it was responsible for the evolution of the human body type, including features that distinguish us from other apes, such as decreased hairiness, the development of a prominent and protruding nose, different body posture and gait, etc.
• •Finally, he lists a whole range of human behavioral traits, such as preference for symmetrical faces, fear of the dark, abominable snowman myths across various cultures, etc. as some sort of racial memory of Neanderthals, whom we fear and despise, because they preyed upon us.
• The author seems to have no formal qualifications in biology or paleo-anthropology, and is self-taught. That is in itself not necessarily to be counted against the possible validity of the theory.
• Themandus' Press Release 1 reads:
  Neanderthals hunted, raped and ate humans
• Neanderthals were not the gentle, almost-human creatures portrayed in the media over the last 150 years.
• New Australian research reveals they were aggressive, powerful and terrifying carnivores—ruthless and efficient apex predators, who hunted, raped and ate early humans for over 50,000 years.
• The Neanderthal’s daily diet of nearly 2 kg of meat—the equivalent of 16 Quarter Pounders—included human flesh.
• Based on the research, Australian independent scholar Danny Vendramini has developed “Neanderthal predation theory”, which argues that the evolution of modern humans— including our unique physiology, sexuality and human nature—is the result of a reaction to this systematic long-term sexual predation and cannibalism by Eurasian Neanderthals...
• http://themandus.org/news_release_1.PDF
• Now whether or not ALL of the theory is true, I am quite willing to concede several of Danny Vandramini's points,
• in particular when he says that there must have been some obvious visual differences between Neanderthals and the ancestors of Modern Man which kept them from regular, usual sexual interaction.
• I have reasons of my own tio believe that they were normally hairy all over and thus resembled his reconstructions.
• And I will go so far as to say that there is something spectacularly different with the structure of Neanderthaler's eye sockets and that the shape could indicate an adaptation to stronger night vision.
• That much might be speculative, but the other points about Neanderthal's heightened sense of smell and superhuman strength are not mere speculation: their fossils show the indications of those points quite definitely.
• So as far as the first major point goes, that of the physical appearance of Neanderthals, I see no major objections as to why that should not be acceptable from a scientific point of view.
• As far as reconstructions go, we are talking what I refer to as "Upholstery", and that part does not preserve on fossils.
• Fot the time being I am going to put up Danny's theory and let that stand on its own. I do not need to discuss ALL of the points beyond that because ALL that I am interested in at this point is the matter of the reconstructions themselves.
• Neanderthal reconstruction courtesy of themandus.org
• Photographs from the site themandus used for review purposes only and should not be construed as indicating that site endorses this one, or even necessarily the reverse.
• comments:
• Brett said... 

   

   

   Well since they could interbreed with modern humans that sort of rules out anything too different. Especially visually, humans tend to shun and avoid the different.
  
  And his lack on knowledge on he subject does rule this out as anything but whimsy. Neanderthals were not superhumanly strong, modern humans are just weak for apes. How about doing some actual scientific research before posting things.
  
  Brett 

   

   

     20 May 2011 11:21 
• Dale Drinnon said... 

   

   

   The degree to which we demonstrably did breed with them stll remains largely a matter of opinion. Twenty years ago the majority opinion would have been "we absorbed them completely and that is why they are gone as a species". Ten years ago the penduluum had swung the other way and the majority opinion was "We obviously did not and could not have interbred" and now there is a vocal minority opinion that says "probably there was a little intermixing going on after all."
• Which is a good deal different than the way you put it. Actually, the big problem is how the two types spent several tens of thousands of years together in the Mideast before modern Homo sapiens entered Europe and neither one appreciably intermingled with the other. That is something central to the "Themandus" theory and it otherwise is something of a quandry.
• By definition, anything stronger than a human is superhumanly strong. You have just negated your own statement. And Neanderthals were uncommonly strong in the structure of their muscular, not only as compared with us but also to some extent when compared to other early humans. The Turkana boy's skeleton is once again attenuated and fragile by comparison, although the long bones are a good deal sturdier than in modern man.

• All theories begin pretty much as flights of fancy. In this case we do have some valid questions raised at this the introductory level only. Whether the sequel of the theory turns out to hold any water is not the question at this point.
  
  Best Wishes, Dale D. 

   

   

     20 May 2011 11:52 
• Dale Drinnon said... 

   

   

   Another notice which came to my private email this morning reads thusly:
  
  Thanks for forwarding these links. The "rethinking Neanderthals" is definitely food for thought, especially what this fellow theorizes corresponds with many aboriginal legends about Sasquatches.
  
  Mary 

   

   

     20 May 2011 12:00
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

33 more annotations...