Path: ...!Xl.tags.giganews.com!local-4.nntp.ord.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 05 Aug 2024 20:38:16 +0000 Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2024 13:38:16 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Subject: Re: The taxonomy of Sahelanthropus tchadensis from a craniometric perspective Content-Language: en-US Newsgroups: sci.anthropology.paleo,sci.bio.paleontology References: <7XidnXpGidjrUDL7nZ2dnZfqlJ-dnZ2d@giganews.com> From: John Harshman In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-ID: Lines: 108 X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com X-Trace: sv3-NM5lLoF6oHO7r0P0wFRhsTTJClr5QDBHf0zxtIjtIYyzDL/7DaPusNjJmH80Mgv3TPuytCR6zVUIiuW!QG//xn9jLtMcHTDm97oeaZMZKPADH+Pd+HV2IGn1yvVa9S2V24xjkz3OV2Vgf/RwLGB22xqTBNM= X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly X-Postfilter: 1.3.40 Bytes: 8468 On 8/5/24 12:03 PM, Mario Petrinovic wrote: > On 5.8.2024. 15:32, John Harshman wrote: >> On 8/5/24 4:03 AM, Mario Petrinovic wrote: >>> On 5.8.2024. 11:52, Mario Petrinovic wrote: >>>> On 5.8.2024. 6:40, John Harshman wrote: >>>>> On 8/4/24 8:48 PM, Mario Petrinovic wrote: >>>>>> On 4.8.2024. 20:50, John Harshman wrote: >>>>>>> Don't be shy. Just say what you mean. Preferably in a single post. >>>>>> >>>>>>          While we are at that, I will not be shy and I will ask >>>>>> you a question I always wanted to clear it up. >>>>>>          You have two situations. In Africa you have a lot of >>>>>> separated small tribes, so high genetic diversity. In India you >>>>>> have all humans connected in one big society, so genes exchange >>>>>> among the whole population, and they average over time, so we have >>>>>> low genetic diversity. Now, the question is, in the view of >>>>>> geneticists is India the bottleneck? >>>>> >>>>> If you just waited a while before posting and thought more about >>>>> what you wanted to say, you wouldn't have this problem. Consider that. >>>>> >>>>> Meanwhile, I don't understand the question. India is not a >>>>> bottleneck. What bottleneck? And you misunderstand the nature of >>>>> African genetic diversity. Most of it is within populations, not >>>>> between them. Africa has much higher within-population diversity >>>>> than does the rest of the world. >>>> >>>>          India - This is from Wikipedia: "A population bottleneck or >>>> genetic bottleneck is a sharp reduction in the size of a population >>>> due to environmental events such as famines, earthquakes, floods, >>>> fires, disease, and droughts; or human activities such as genocide, >>>> speciocide, widespread violence or intentional culling. Such events >>>> can reduce the variation in the gene pool of a population; >>>> thereafter, a smaller population, with a smaller genetic diversity, >>>> remains to pass on genes to future generations of offspring. Genetic >>>> diversity remains lower, increasing only when..." So, they say that >>>> India is a bottleneck, it is not me that is saying this, I know that >>>> India isn't a bottleneck. >>>>          Look, I am a retired train driver (who excellently >>>> understood simple mathematics when he was kid), I do understand that >>>> in homogeneous population genes average. How come scientists have a >>>> complete lack of understanding of this, and why their logic is so >>>> simple that even kids in kindergarten would be ashamed of it, is >>>> beyond me. In other words, when humans are the most advanced, when >>>> they have multiple trading connections, when they all live *as one*, >>>> then they have the least genetic variation. In other words, what in >>>> real life is the most prosperous situation scientists describe as >>>> the least prosperous situation. In the most prosperous situation >>>> humans advance, which is only logical. But scientists postulate that >>>> in the least prosperous situation humans advance. How come? There is >>>> few people, and then comes God and does his magic, and that magic >>>> advances those few. >>>>          Africa - Yes, of course, this is how variation emerges, you >>>> receive influxes from outside, and those influxes create genetic >>>> diversity. In a homogeneous population, without outside influxes, >>>> Actually, if those outside influxes are very small compared to your >>>> big size, you cannot have diversity. So, In Africa you have multiple >>>> (because they are separated) sources of genes, which receive, from >>>> time to time, influxes from other separated sources. >>>>          In other words, more separation, more genetic diversity, >>>> less separation, less genetic diversity. More separation equals less >>>> prosperous world, less separation equals prosperous world, just like >>>> we have today. Scientists turned everything upside down, and there >>>> isn't a single one among them who understands this. >>>>          So, to have genetic variation you got to have a lot of >>>> similar sizes separated gene pools. If you have a single gene pool >>>> there is no variation. >>> >>>          There is another thing those stupid scientists don't >>> contemplate, gene diversity doesn't necessarily mean bigger abilities. >> >> Nobody says it does. Where do you get all these strawmen? > >         I am just contemplating this. > >>> If animals are separated in two groups, and both groups separately >>> acquire the same ability, this ability will be represented with >>> different genes among each group. In general, one big gene pool can >>> acquire the same ability, and it will not have gene diversity. Then, >>> it is the question of compatibility. An organism functions as a >>> complete system. If you introduce components from the outside, it >>> will cause friction (although it can bring new abilities) among the >>> existing parts. It is similar to compiling a hi-fi system from >>> different manufacturers. Providing the quality is the same, a hi-fi >>> system sounds the best if it is made by one manufacturer. The >>> advantage of gene mixing is introducing new abilities, the >>> disadvantage, though, is that the whole system functions less fluidly. >>>          And so on, and so on, those geneticists (just like a lot of >>> other scientists) don't understand a lot of things, and simplify >>> everything (simply because only simple thinks are provable, and >>> scientists work only with provable things). The major problem with >>> them is that they are doing the reverse engineering. They are >>> convinced that genes are producing the changes (of course, because >>> the God is the one who affects the genes, in their christian view, >>> they want to involve God into the story, this way, or that way, this >>> is their only preoccupation), while the real truth is that genes are >>> just the reflection, the mirror image of what is going on, the >>> transporter of the message, not the originator. >> >> Sorry, but that's just incoherent. Who is it that wants to involve God >> in the story? Not geneticists, that's certain. What are your trying to >> say, and why are you so arrogant as to believe you know more than the >> people who actually study this stuff? > >         Who is it? Gregor Mendel and his followers. >         Why am I so arrogant? Because I am 62. Gregor Mendel is way older than you, so should be even more arrogant.