[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Possible interbreeding of HS and preexisting populations

Subject: Re: Possible interbreeding of HS and preexisting populations
From: "Paul Crowley"
Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2006 21:54:37 +0100
Newsgroups: sci.anthropology.paleo
"Lee Olsen" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]

>> No mammal loves permafrost.  Some animals
>> endure it when they are going from one place
>> to another, living off their fat, but they must
>> find fresh growth on fertile land to survive.
> I'm sure your are an expert on what animals love having so much
> direct experience with them and your  thinking being so closely related
> to that of a musk ox.
> Looks pretty in love with the cold  to me.

'Permafrost' is something that applies to
G R O U N D -- not to water.  Polar bears
live on seals.

> Find yourself a good mental institution and check yourself into it. You
> are delusional, you need help.

You need a lot of education -- both in
natural history and in manners.

> "There are believed to be ten million mammoths buried in the
> permafrost in Siberia, but because of the sparse population in the
> region only around one hundred specimens have been recovered."

So what?

>> > These cold adapted creatures were painted on the walls of
>> > caves, thus  demonstrating contact and extreme cold.
>> The iconography of a culture is not a good
>> guide to its natural history.  Using your
>> 'system' you'd conclude that medieval
>> England was full of lions, unicorns, griffins,
>> caley-greyhounds and the like, and had no
>> chickens, cows or pigs.
> You said "stone-age Europeans" above. Do you think medieval England was
> in the stone age?  I don't remember any chicken bones being noted from
> excavations in stone age Europe, so how could Cro-Mag. paint them on
> cave walls?

The point is that created images DON'T
reflect the mundane boring reality.  They
show dreams, fears, hopes and ambitions.
Obviously you have never experienced
any kind of culture: books, TV, films.
Or somehow you've been trained to shut
your brain down 100% of the time.

>> Uncles sometimes travelled into the barren
>> cold mountains -- for all the usual reasons:
>> trade, diplomacy, war, as refugees or outlaws.
>> Sometimes they died (or were killed), and
>> they were buried near where they fell.
> You just shot yourself in the foot. If Uncle Joe went inland to fight a
> war, that suggests a lot of people inland to fight with.

It suggests that that's where they are to be
found -- on the boundary of their territory
-- very often on waste land; commonly a
mountain pass.   You probably think that
Utzi lived where he was found.

>> But, as has long been noted, there was a
>> remarkable sex-distribution in such fossils.
> And from that you jumped to the conclusion that there were more males
> than females around to fight this imaginary inland- war? Well clown,

You are the clown.  It STILL does not even
occur to you that you should provide an
explanation.  Astounding.  How did PA
manage to drain from you every slight
inclination towards anything resembling
science?  You have not one ounce of
curiosity.  You don't know what integrity is.

> if
> that were the case, juveniles also outnumber female graves two to one.
> Males graves only outnumbered juveniles 32 to 25 (Riel-Salvatore and
> Clark 2001:454-57). Buy your idiot thinking then, juveniles
> "travelled into the barren cold mountains" to fight wars, outlaws,
> and to do trading.

Juveniles were presumably stone-age 'canon-
fodder' -- much as they always have been.
What age do you think soldiers were in
WW1 and WW2?   They may also have
been 'migrants' or refugees.  As in ALL
species, it is mostly the juveniles who leave
home, seeking fresh territory.


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>