tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20398234528677589222024-02-18T17:41:16.042-08:00Pleistocene ArchaeologyRichard Wilsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09676973692398285795noreply@blogger.comBlogger26125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2039823452867758922.post-42074328530523586602017-10-26T03:28:00.000-07:002017-10-26T03:28:14.929-07:00Cook and the Löwenmensch<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>Creating the myths of
the past<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><br /></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
The current series ‘Objects in focus’ from the British
Museum provides a good example of the need to consider epistemology. The
British Museum refers to the Hohlenstein-Stadel ‘figurine’ as the “Lion Man”. However,
the German term ‘Löwenmensch’ is preferred since this was where it was
discovered. Löwenmensch literally translates as lion-human. The intended ‘sex’
of the item is not agreed upon by scholars, many of whom interpret it as
female. Schmid for example, who has studied the item in detail, suggests that
the ‘head’ of the item is comparable to a female European cave lion.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
In the British Museum blog <a href="http://blog.britishmseum.org/the-lion-man-an-ice-age-masterpiece/">post</a>,
Jill Cook goes a step further and states that the Löwenmensch is the oldest
known example of a symbol representing a supernatural being <!--[if supportFields]><span
style='mso-element:field-begin'></span><span
style='mso-spacerun:yes'> </span>ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION
{"citationID":"GhoVG6TG","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Cook
2017)","plainCitation":"(Cook 2017)"},"citationItems":[{"id":845,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/2545430/items/IAFXQTKW"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/2545430/items/IAFXQTKW"],"itemData":{"id":845,"type":"post-weblog","title":"The
Lion Man: an Ice Age
masterpiece","container-title":"Objects in
focus","URL":"http://blog.britishmseum.org/the-lion-man-an-ice-age-masterpiece/","author":[{"family":"Cook","given":"Jill"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2017",10]]},"accessed":{"date-parts":[["2017",10,24]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"}
<span style='mso-element:field-separator'></span><![endif]-->(Cook 2017)<!--[if supportFields]><span style='mso-element:
field-end'></span><![endif]-->. To many people this may seem like a reasonable
conclusion; it is possible, but is it probable?<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
A caption to a picture of the Löwenmensch figurine states
that it is “the oldest known evidence of religious belief in the world”. Yet, Cook
doesn’t frame her statement in terms of possibility, she simply proposes that
it is “a being that does not exist in physical form but symbolises ideas about
the supernatural”. How can Cook ‘know’ this; does she uniquely possess the ability
to ‘read’ the meaning of Palaeolithic art, has Cook developed this ability by studying
the same, and should we defer to her authority on the subject?<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Bednarik notes that the myths created by amateurs concerning
palaeoart (‘art’ of the Palaeolithic era) generally lack credibility but that
the interpretations offered by professionals tend to be more plausible <!--[if supportFields]><span
style='mso-element:field-begin'></span><span
style='mso-spacerun:yes'> </span>ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION
{"citationID":"BQXg9Lff","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Bednarik
2017)","plainCitation":"(Bednarik 2017)"},"citationItems":[{"id":775,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/2545430/items/VN5IXMVD"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/2545430/items/VN5IXMVD"],"itemData":{"id":775,"type":"book","title":"Myths
About Rock Art","publisher":"Archaeopress
Archaeology","publisher-place":"Oxford","source":"Gemeinsamer
Bibliotheksverbund
ISBN","event-place":"Oxford","ISBN":"978-1-78491-474-5","language":"eng","author":[{"family":"Bednarik","given":"R.
G."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2017"]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"}
<span style='mso-element:field-separator'></span><![endif]-->(Bednarik 2017)<!--[if supportFields]><span style='mso-element:
field-end'></span><![endif]-->. He suggests that the plausibility, or ‘reasonableness’
of these professional interpretations is an ‘insidious variable’. Moreover, he highlights a derivative issue;
whilst an amateur may readily admit their mistakes, a professional will more
often attempt to defend their hypothesis until the bitter end since the
academic system itself tends to discourage any admission of error. <o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><br /></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>Emic and etic
interpretations<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><br /></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
All interpretations concerning the meaning of palaeoart are
etic. This means that they are made from outside of the culture concerned in
their production. In contrast, emic meaning is only accessible by an
interpretant from within the culture concerned. Since no living human was alive
during the Palaeolithic it follows that none can access the emic meaning of any
surviving palaeoart.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Furthermore, although etic interpretations are suggested
to be more concerned with generalisations about human behaviour they are also
made from an emic perspective - therefore by their very nature etic
interpretations cannot be entirely objective.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Cook’s interpretation of the Löwenmensch is emic-etic. In
other words, it is observer-relative and provides no insight into the figurine.
Rather, it only provides an insight into how Cook herself thinks. Somewhat
ironically, it also serves to perpetuate the mythical type of thinking that
Cook suggests underpins the production of the figurine:<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
“Found in a cave in what is now
southern Germany in 1939, the Lion Man makes sense as part of a story that
might now be called a myth. The wear on his body caused by handling suggests
that he was passed around and rubbed as part of a narrative or ritual that
would explain his appearance and meaning. It is impossible to know what that
story was about or whether he was deity, an avatar to the spirit world, part of
a creation story or a human whose experiences on a journey through the cosmos
to communicate with spirits caused this transformation.”<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Whilst it may be possible that the wear was caused by being
passed around, it is equally possible that the wear was created by just one individual.
However, this does not deter Cook from then inferring that it was used in a
narrative ritual. By her own admission Cook concedes that “it is impossible to
know what that story was” but goes on to list several suggestions she has
conjured up concerning ‘deities’, ‘spirits’, and ‘transformation’.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
While the Löwenmensch may be some sort of creature that does
not exist in nature, it may also be a person with a lion headdress. Such images
of people are known to exist in rock art. The rock panel at Deer Rock,
Kimberley, depicts aboriginal dancers with headdresses on all fours, not deer <!--[if supportFields]><span
style='mso-element:field-begin'></span><span
style='mso-spacerun:yes'> </span>ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION
{"citationID":"P8J9smGk","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Bednarik
2017)","plainCitation":"(Bednarik 2017)"},"citationItems":[{"id":775,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/2545430/items/VN5IXMVD"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/2545430/items/VN5IXMVD"],"itemData":{"id":775,"type":"book","title":"Myths
About Rock Art","publisher":"Archaeopress
Archaeology","publisher-place":"Oxford","source":"Gemeinsamer
Bibliotheksverbund
ISBN","event-place":"Oxford","ISBN":"978-1-78491-474-5","language":"eng","author":[{"family":"Bednarik","given":"R.
G."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2017"]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"}
<span style='mso-element:field-separator'></span><![endif]-->(Bednarik 2017)<!--[if supportFields]><span style='mso-element:
field-end'></span><![endif]-->. This serves to illustrate the danger of
accepting etic interpretations as fact. The alien interpretant of palaeoart has
no means of testing their assumption of the subject least of all the meaning.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Likewise, although it may have served as part of a ritual,
we have no means of knowing what that ritual might have concerned, its
complexity, and if it did occur, how representative of a wider behaviour it may
have been.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<o:p><br /></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b>An aside - exograms<o:p></o:p></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Cook incorrectly suggests that what distinguishes humans from
other animals is the use of “tools and fire” which is easily disproven with
current evidence (apes have been observed to use fire, numerous animals use
tools, and have ‘cultures’). What may provide a distinction between humans and
other animals, is our use of exograms <!--[if supportFields]><span
style='mso-element:field-begin'></span><span
style='mso-spacerun:yes'> </span>ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION
{"citationID":"bU8sG36t","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Bednarik
2011)","plainCitation":"(Bednarik
2011)"},"citationItems":[{"id":218,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/2545430/items/2QJVFMEF"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/2545430/items/2QJVFMEF"],"itemData":{"id":218,"type":"book","title":"The
human condition","collection-title":"Developments in
primatology","publisher":"Springer","publisher-place":"New
York","number-of-pages":"207","source":"Library
of Congress ISBN","event-place":"New
York","ISBN":"978-1-4419-9352-6","call-number":"GN281.4
.B43
2011","author":[{"family":"Bednarik","given":"Robert
G."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2011"]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"}
<span style='mso-element:field-separator'></span><![endif]-->(Bednarik 2011)<!--[if supportFields]><span style='mso-element:
field-end'></span><![endif]-->. The practice of storing information outside of
the brain is what differentiates humans from all other animals, not the use of
tools and fire. Indeed, it is probable that this behaviour was the basis for
creating self-referential realities and shared frames of reference.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Cook continues to speculate upon the meaning of the item
asking rhetorical questions imbued with reference to religion and
transcendence. To support her ideas Cook suggests that the positioning of the
cave, and the scarcity of objects recovered, infers that it was a place where
people came together to “share a
particular understanding of the world articulated through beliefs, symbolised
in sculpture and acted out in rituals”. Whilst a few perforated arctic fox
teeth were found in the cave, the cache of reindeer antlers also recovered
suggests a utilitarian use for the cave. Again, we have no way of confirming or
disconfirming any such interpretation rendering all etic interpretations
worthless in the study of human behaviour during the Pleistocene. Furthermore, Cook
suggests that the figurine was “carefully put away” whereas, the figurine was
reconstructed from hundreds of broken pieces sifted from the cave sediments.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Contra Cook, the Löwenmensch is not the oldest known
evidence for religious beliefs however much she protests it to be. Neither does
the existence of the Stadel Cave suggest “that believing and belonging have a
deep history crucial to human societies” any more than any other Palaeolithic
occupation site does. The business of creating the myths of the past continues.
<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
References:</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoBibliography">
<!--[if supportFields]><span style='mso-element:field-begin'></span><span
style='mso-spacerun:yes'> </span>ADDIN ZOTERO_BIBL {"custom":[]}
CSL_BIBLIOGRAPHY <span style='mso-element:field-separator'></span><![endif]-->Bednarik, RG 2011, <i>The human condition</i>, Springer, New York.<o:p></o:p></div>
<div class="MsoBibliography">
Bednarik, RG 2017, <i>Myths About Rock
Art</i>, Archaeopress Archaeology, Oxford.<o:p></o:p></div>
<!--[if supportFields]><span style='font-size:11.0pt;line-height:115%;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin;mso-fareast-font-family:
Calibri;mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin;mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;
mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman";mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;
mso-ansi-language:EN-GB;mso-fareast-language:EN-US;mso-bidi-language:AR-SA'><span
style='mso-element:field-end'></span></span><![endif]--><br />
<div class="MsoBibliography">
<span style="mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri;">Cook, J 2017, ‘The Lion Man: an Ice Age
masterpiece’, <i>Objects in focus</i>, viewed 24 October 2017,
<http://blog.britishmseum.org/the-lion-man-an-ice-age-masterpiece/>.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
Richard Wilsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09676973692398285795noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2039823452867758922.post-70766325753929818822017-07-17T15:03:00.001-07:002017-07-17T15:06:53.026-07:00On Chris Stringer’s Tsunami Theory<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Periscope streamed a live question and answer with Chris
Stringer from the National History Museum over Twitter on 26</span><sup style="font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">th</sup><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"> June
this year </span><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">[1]</span><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">.
The full video can be watched here:</span><br />
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><a href="https://blog.nhm.ac.uk/2017/06/26/06-the-neanderthal-within-us-nhm_live/">https://blog.nhm.ac.uk/2017/06/26/06-the-neanderthal-within-us-nhm_live/</a><o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Frustrated by the predictable narrative Stringer was
presenting I submitted several questions via Periscope. One of these was selected and slightly
miscommunicated.</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Anticipating that Stringer would have to concede that early
Pleistocene hominins were capable of complex tasks comparable to those
undertaken by extant hominins I asked:</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<i><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><br /></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<i><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">“How
did hominins reach Flores 840,000 years ago if it was not by boat?”<o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">His answer, which I did not anticipate, can be seen twenty
one minutes into the video. Here is a transcript of his response:<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<i><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><br /></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<i><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">“Well
that’s a very good question too because we don’t know.<o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<i><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><br /></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<i><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">We
think that lineage arrived probably more than a million years ago on the island
of Flores. And the usual assumption is that you’d have to have boats to get there
because this island was never connected to the rest of South-East Asia there
was always deep water, but one possibility is rafting on debris.<o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<i><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><br /></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<i><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Now
it may seem extraordinary but of course that tsunami a few years ago in Asia,
people were found out at sea 100 miles away from where they had started, out at
sea on clumps of vegetation a week later.<o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<i><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><br /></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<i><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">So
this is a tectonically very active area. When you’ve got tens of thousands or
hundreds of thousands of years to play with, is it possible that the ancestors
of Homo floresiensis were in some mango swamps foraging, a tidal wave came
along and ripped that away and, somehow deposited them over on Flores? That’s a
possibility.<o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<i><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Having
boats, well you couldn’t exclude it but I think it is much less likely for
creatures with very small brains that are much more primitive.”<o:p></o:p></span></i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-left: .5in;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">To summarise: <o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><br /></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpFirst" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">·<span style="font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; line-height: normal;"> </span><!--[endif]-->Stringer suggests that given hundreds of
thousands of years the odds are more favourable that hominins populated Flores following
a freak accident(s) involving a tsunami like wave and a clump of vegetation rather
than the possibility of arriving by boat.<o:p></o:p></span><br />
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoListParagraphCxSpLast" style="mso-list: l0 level1 lfo1; text-indent: -.25in;">
<!--[if !supportLists]--><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">·<span style="font-size: 7pt; font-stretch: normal; font-variant-numeric: normal; line-height: normal;"> </span><!--[endif]-->He claims that their brains were very small and
more primitive in support of his proposition that boat building was beyond their
capabilities. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><br /></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Background<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Running between Bali and Lombok is the Wallace Line - the
most important biogeographical barrier (or filter) in the world. Geologically
the islands from Lombok to the east are relatively young having only formed a
few million years ago when the Australian plate slid under the Asian plate.
They were never part of any other landmass. Evidence for Lower and Middle Pleistocene
occupation beyond the Wallace Line by hominins is not limited to Flores but
also includes three islands of Nusa Tenggara, Roti, Selatan, and Timor. The
stone tools of Flores are up to 840,000 years old. Although this had been
reported as far back as 1958 it has only been in recent decades that academics
have become aware of this fact due primarily to the work of Bednarik <!--[if supportFields]><span
style='mso-element:field-begin'></span><span
style='mso-spacerun:yes'> </span>ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION
{"citationID":"lCUYiz26","properties":{"formattedCitation":"[2,3]","plainCitation":"[2,3]"},"citationItems":[{"id":404,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/2545430/items/FE54V4T4"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/2545430/items/FE54V4T4"],"itemData":{"id":404,"type":"article-journal","title":"The
maritime dispersal of Pleistocene
humans","container-title":"Migration and Diffusion","page":"6–33","volume":"3","issue":"10","source":"Google
Scholar","author":[{"family":"Bednarik","given":"R.
G."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2002"]]}}},{"id":218,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/2545430/items/2QJVFMEF"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/2545430/items/2QJVFMEF"],"itemData":{"id":218,"type":"book","title":"The
human condition","collection-title":"Developments in
primatology","publisher":"Springer","publisher-place":"New
York","number-of-pages":"207","source":"Library
of Congress ISBN","event-place":"New
York","ISBN":"978-1-4419-9352-6","call-number":"GN281.4
.B43
2011","author":[{"family":"Bednarik","given":"Robert
G."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2011"]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"}
<span style='mso-element:field-separator'></span><![endif]-->[2,3]<!--[if supportFields]><span style='mso-element:field-end'></span><![endif]-->.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><br /></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Small brains<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Stringer seems to imply that the so-called Hobbit arrived on
Flores in its small size rather than as a result of insular dwarfism. Ignoring
this lapse in thinking and giving Stringer the benefit of doubt we will assume
here that he refers to the small brain volume of Homo erectus one million years
ago.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Perhaps Stringer is unaware that modern aborigines’ brain
volumes are comparable to Homo erectus. Would he suggest that they too would
not be capable of maritime colonization? How would he explain a small brained
child achieving a high IQ? The naïve idea that brain volume can be simplistically
correlated with an abstract, observer-relative and etic measure of intelligence
or cognitive ability is surely long surpassed? This one-dimensional view does
not even withstand rudimentary testing. Numerous cases reported in scientific
journals report patients with substantial parts of their brain missing being
able to function normally. Furthermore, a scientifically informed model of early
hominin evolution suggests that by the Early Pleistocene the neural
architecture that is largely responsible for moderating behaviour patterns was
already firmly in place <!--[if supportFields]><span style='mso-element:field-begin'></span><span
style='mso-spacerun:yes'> </span>ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION
{"citationID":"S4K1oRQZ","properties":{"formattedCitation":"{\\rtf
[4\\uc0\\u8211{}10]}","plainCitation":"[4–10]"},"citationItems":[{"id":680,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/2545430/items/C7S8KSDB"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/2545430/items/C7S8KSDB"],"itemData":{"id":680,"type":"book","title":"The
psychology of human behavior","publisher":"Nova Science
Publisher's, Inc","publisher-place":"Hauppauge,
N.Y","number-of-pages":"276","source":"Library
of Congress ISBN","event-place":"Hauppauge,
N.Y","ISBN":"978-1-62257-901-3","call-number":"BF121
.P8273
2013","editor":[{"family":"Bednarik","given":"Robert
G."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2013"]]}}},{"id":658,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/2545430/items/5M6BG234"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/2545430/items/5M6BG234"],"itemData":{"id":658,"type":"article-journal","title":"The
symmetry of Acheulean handaxes and cognitive
evolution","container-title":"Journal of Archaeological
Science:
Reports","page":"204-208","volume":"2","source":"CrossRef","DOI":"10.1016/j.jasrep.2015.02.002","ISSN":"2352409X","language":"en","author":[{"family":"Hodgson","given":"Derek"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2015",6]]}}},{"id":683,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/2545430/items/PJGSBTM3"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/2545430/items/PJGSBTM3"],"itemData":{"id":683,"type":"chapter","title":"The
Earliest Manifestations of 'Art': An Attempted
Integration","container-title":"Exploring the Mind of
Ancient Man (Festschrift to Robert G.
Bednarik)","publisher":"Research India
Press","publisher-place":"New
Dehli","page":"25-34","event-place":"New
Dehli","editor":[{"literal":"P
Reddy"}],"author":[{"family":"Hodgson","given":"Derek"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2005"]]}}},{"id":513,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/2545430/items/PE76WKSZ"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/2545430/items/PE76WKSZ"],"itemData":{"id":513,"type":"article-journal","title":"The
Emergence of the Representation of Animals in Palaeoart: Insights from
evolution and the cognitive, limbic and visual systems of the human
brain","container-title":"Rock Art Research: The Journal of
the Australian Rock Art Research Association
(AURA)","page":"3-40","volume":"23","issue":"1","author":[{"family":"Hodgson","given":"Derek"},{"family":"Helvenston","given":"P.
A."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2006"]]}}},{"id":15,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/2545430/items/VPX3D44T"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/2545430/items/VPX3D44T"],"itemData":{"id":15,"type":"article-journal","title":"Beads
and Cognitive Evolution","container-title":"Time and
Mind","page":"285-317","volume":"1","issue":"3","source":"CrossRef","DOI":"10.2752/175169708X329354","ISSN":"1751696X,
17516978","language":"en","author":[{"family":"Bednarik","given":"Robert
G."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2008",11,1]]}}},{"id":266,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/2545430/items/KG4ADR3I"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/2545430/items/KG4ADR3I"],"itemData":{"id":266,"type":"chapter","title":"Hominin
Mind and Creativity","container-title":"The Genesis of
Creativity and the Origin of the Human
Mind","publisher-place":"Charles University in
Prague","event-place":"Charles University in
Prague","author":[{"family":"Bednarik","given":"R.
G."}],"editor":[{"family":"Putova","given":"B."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2015"]]}}},{"id":532,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/2545430/items/K87ZC8FP"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/2545430/items/K87ZC8FP"],"itemData":{"id":532,"type":"article-journal","title":"Doing
with less: Hominin brain atrophy","container-title":"HOMO -
Journal of Comparative Human
Biology","page":"433-449","volume":"65","issue":"6","source":"CrossRef","DOI":"10.1016/j.jchb.2014.06.001","ISSN":"0018442X","shortTitle":"Doing
with
less","language":"en","author":[{"family":"Bednarik","given":"Robert
G."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2014",12]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"}
<span style='mso-element:field-separator'></span><![endif]--><span style="line-height: 115%; mso-ascii-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family: Calibri; mso-bidi-font-size: 12.0pt; mso-hansi-font-family: Calibri;">[4–10]</span><!--[if supportFields]><span
style='mso-element:field-end'></span><![endif]-->. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Modern human brain volumes are, on average, approximately
13% smaller than so-called Neanderthals (robust hominins) living 50,000 years
ago <!--[if supportFields]><span style='mso-element:field-begin'></span><span
style='mso-spacerun:yes'> </span>ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION
{"citationID":"YVZEBBGu","properties":{"formattedCitation":"[3,11]","plainCitation":"[3,11]"},"citationItems":[{"id":218,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/2545430/items/2QJVFMEF"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/2545430/items/2QJVFMEF"],"itemData":{"id":218,"type":"book","title":"The
human condition","collection-title":"Developments in
primatology","publisher":"Springer","publisher-place":"New
York","number-of-pages":"207","source":"Library
of Congress ISBN","event-place":"New
York","ISBN":"978-1-4419-9352-6","call-number":"GN281.4
.B43
2011","author":[{"family":"Bednarik","given":"Robert
G."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2011"]]}}},{"id":590,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/2545430/items/G3CDTFMH"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/2545430/items/G3CDTFMH"],"itemData":{"id":590,"type":"article-journal","title":"Decrease
of human skull size in the Holocene","container-title":"Human
Biology","page":"395-405","volume":"60","issue":"3","source":"PubMed","ISSN":"0018-7143","note":"PMID:
3134287","journalAbbreviation":"Hum.
Biol.","language":"eng","author":[{"family":"Henneberg","given":"M."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["1988",6]]},"PMID":"3134287"}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"}
<span style='mso-element:field-separator'></span><![endif]-->[3,11]<!--[if supportFields]><span style='mso-element:field-end'></span><![endif]-->.
Applying his “small brain” logic to his own hypothesis that Neanderthals were
cognitively inferior to ‘modern humans’ Stringer needs to explain what
evolutionary advantage would lead to robust hominins having significantly
larger brains than extant hominins if they were mostly redundant?<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><br /></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Floating on a mat<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Stringer is not the first person to put forward the idea of
the floating vegetation mat. Regrettably, it appears that the more common (and
dare I suggest more comfortable) “assumption” of some academics in the fields
of Palaeoanthropology and Pleistocene archaeology, is the stance perpetuated by
Stringer here.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">There are various problems with his theory not least of
which is that no other large land mammal has crossed the Wallace Line in this
way. If large-bodied hominins could float across on vegetation mats then many other
species could too. There are hundreds of such possible species, many of which
are far better natural swimmers than extant hominins, but none have crossed the
Wallace Line. Proboscideans have crossed the Wallace Line, but not on
vegetation mats. They are excellent swimmers and hence also maritime colonisers
<!--[if supportFields]><span style='mso-element:field-begin'></span><span
style='mso-spacerun:yes'> </span>ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION
{"citationID":"4mii56n8n","properties":{"formattedCitation":"[2,3]","plainCitation":"[2,3]"},"citationItems":[{"id":404,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/2545430/items/FE54V4T4"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/2545430/items/FE54V4T4"],"itemData":{"id":404,"type":"article-journal","title":"The
maritime dispersal of Pleistocene
humans","container-title":"Migration and
Diffusion","page":"6–33","volume":"3","issue":"10","source":"Google
Scholar","author":[{"family":"Bednarik","given":"R.
G."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2002"]]}}},{"id":218,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/2545430/items/2QJVFMEF"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/2545430/items/2QJVFMEF"],"itemData":{"id":218,"type":"book","title":"The
human condition","collection-title":"Developments in
primatology","publisher":"Springer","publisher-place":"New
York","number-of-pages":"207","source":"Library
of Congress ISBN","event-place":"New
York","ISBN":"978-1-4419-9352-6","call-number":"GN281.4
.B43
2011","author":[{"family":"Bednarik","given":"Robert
G."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2011"]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"}
<span style='mso-element:field-separator'></span><![endif]-->[2,3]<!--[if supportFields]><span style='mso-element:field-end'></span><![endif]-->.
<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">More importantly perhaps, sea-narrows by their very nature cannot
be crossed simply by drifting. The passage from Bali to Flores is not simple.
It would either have been made first from Bali to Lombok and then from Lombok, to
Sumbawa, and then Komodo, or alternatively via Selatan. The distance from Bali
to Lombok would always have been at least 30km at any time during the Pleistocene.
All these crossings require watercraft, and in all cases the opposite shore line
would have been visible from departure <!--[if supportFields]><span
style='mso-element:field-begin'></span><span
style='mso-spacerun:yes'> </span>ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION
{"citationID":"2o3vn3fpq3","properties":{"formattedCitation":"[3]","plainCitation":"[3]"},"citationItems":[{"id":218,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/2545430/items/2QJVFMEF"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/2545430/items/2QJVFMEF"],"itemData":{"id":218,"type":"book","title":"The
human condition","collection-title":"Developments in
primatology","publisher":"Springer","publisher-place":"New
York","number-of-pages":"207","source":"Library
of Congress ISBN","event-place":"New
York","ISBN":"978-1-4419-9352-6","call-number":"GN281.4
.B43
2011","author":[{"family":"Bednarik","given":"Robert
G."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2011"]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"}
<span style='mso-element:field-separator'></span><![endif]-->[3]<!--[if supportFields]><span style='mso-element:field-end'></span><![endif]-->.
<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><br /></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">A genetically viable
population<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">The colonisation of islands by hominins is demonstrated
throughout the Pleistocene. Skeletal evidence comes from at least nine
individuals from Sardinia, Crete, Santa Rosa, Okinawa and also several hundred
from Australia. The settlement of over 20 islands known so far points to a long
tradition of sea-faring during this period. The maximal distances crossed can
be seen to increase steadily over the course of time culminating in crossings
over 200km by 50-60,000 years ago <!--[if supportFields]><span
style='mso-element:field-begin'></span><span
style='mso-spacerun:yes'> </span>ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION
{"citationID":"ip82fjoja","properties":{"formattedCitation":"[2,3]","plainCitation":"[2,3]"},"citationItems":[{"id":218,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/2545430/items/2QJVFMEF"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/2545430/items/2QJVFMEF"],"itemData":{"id":218,"type":"book","title":"The
human condition","collection-title":"Developments in
primatology","publisher":"Springer","publisher-place":"New
York","number-of-pages":"207","source":"Library
of Congress ISBN","event-place":"New
York","ISBN":"978-1-4419-9352-6","call-number":"GN281.4
.B43
2011","author":[{"family":"Bednarik","given":"Robert
G."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2011"]]}}},{"id":404,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/2545430/items/FE54V4T4"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/2545430/items/FE54V4T4"],"itemData":{"id":404,"type":"article-journal","title":"The
maritime dispersal of Pleistocene humans","container-title":"Migration
and
Diffusion","page":"6–33","volume":"3","issue":"10","source":"Google
Scholar","author":[{"family":"Bednarik","given":"R.
G."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2002"]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"}
<span style='mso-element:field-separator'></span><![endif]-->[2,3]<!--[if supportFields]><span style='mso-element:field-end'></span><![endif]-->.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">However, the most damning indictment of Stringer’s theory is
that it does not account for population viability. It requires more than a few
chance survivors of a tsunami to establish a viable breeding population on an
island. It would require many reproductively viable males and females to found
and sustain a population of sufficient genetic diversity to prevent collapse
within several generations. At this point it becomes fully apparent that the “floating
vegetation mat theory” sinks against the odds.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Even if we suppose that the extraordinary situation of a
tsunami occurred in this region on multiple occasions during the Pleistocene,
contra Stringer, the depth of time (“hundreds of thousands of years to play
with”) only increases the statistical odds against the possibility that such unlikely
events may have overlapped sufficiently to supply the island with enough
genetic diversity over time to sustain a breeding population.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><br /></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Conclusion<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><br /></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">The transportation of sufficient numbers of Pleistocene
people to colonise the island of Flores 840,000 years ago is very unlikely to
have occurred by a freak accident involving a tidal wave and a vegetation mat.
In fact, the colonisation of islands beyond the Wallace Line serve as one of
the few reliable objective technological indices by which the capacity for
innovation and creativity in hominins may be ascertained with some certainty
during the Pleistocene. <o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">Stringer has portrayed an extremely unlikely, and unsupported,
scenario as more probable than the well supported case for maritime exploration
and colonisation. The question is why? The answer lies in the teleological
narrative for “modern humans” and “modern human behaviour” Stringer espouses.
Evidence which contradicts this narrative cannot be accommodated and thus has
to be rejected no matter how unlikely the alternatively proposed scenarios are.
<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;"><br /></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">References:<o:p></o:p></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoBibliography">
<!--[if supportFields]><span style='mso-element:field-begin'></span><span
style='mso-spacerun:yes'> </span>ADDIN ZOTERO_BIBL {"custom":[]}
CSL_BIBLIOGRAPHY <span style='mso-element:field-separator'></span><![endif]--><span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">1. Richardson, A. <i>The
Neanderthal Within Us</i>; #NHM_Live;.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoBibliography">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">2. Bednarik,
R. G. The maritime dispersal of Pleistocene humans. <i>Migr. Diffus.</i> <b>2002</b>,
<i>3</i>, 6–33.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoBibliography">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">3. Bednarik,
R. G. <i>The human condition</i>; Developments in primatology; Springer: New
York, 2011; ISBN 978-1-4419-9352-6.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoBibliography">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">4. <i>The
psychology of human behavior</i>; Bednarik, R. G., Ed.; Nova Science
Publisher’s, Inc: Hauppauge, N.Y, 2013; ISBN 978-1-62257-901-3.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoBibliography">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">5. Hodgson,
D. The symmetry of Acheulean handaxes and cognitive evolution. <i>J. Archaeol.
Sci. Rep.</i> <b>2015</b>, <i>2</i>, 204–208, doi:10.1016/j.jasrep.2015.02.002.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoBibliography">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">6. Hodgson,
D. The Earliest Manifestations of “Art”: An Attempted Integration. In <i>Exploring
the Mind of Ancient Man (Festschrift to Robert G. Bednarik)</i>; P Reddy, Ed.;
Research India Press: New Dehli, 2005; pp. 25–34.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoBibliography">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">7. Hodgson,
D.; Helvenston, P. A. The Emergence of the Representation of Animals in
Palaeoart: Insights from evolution and the cognitive, limbic and visual systems
of the human brain. <i>Rock Art Res. J. Aust. Rock Art Res. Assoc. AURA</i> <b>2006</b>,
<i>23</i>, 3–40.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoBibliography">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">8. Bednarik,
R. G. Beads and Cognitive Evolution. <i>Time Mind</i> <b>2008</b>, <i>1</i>,
285–317, doi:10.2752/175169708X329354.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoBibliography">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">9. Bednarik,
R. G. Hominin Mind and Creativity. In <i>The Genesis of Creativity and the
Origin of the Human Mind</i>; Putova, B., Ed.; Charles University in Prague,
2015.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoBibliography">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">10. Bednarik,
R. G. Doing with less: Hominin brain atrophy. <i>HOMO - J. Comp. Hum. Biol.</i>
<b>2014</b>, <i>65</i>, 433–449, doi:10.1016/j.jchb.2014.06.001.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<div class="MsoBibliography">
<span style="font-family: "arial" , "helvetica" , sans-serif;">11. Henneberg,
M. Decrease of human skull size in the Holocene. <i>Hum. Biol.</i> <b>1988</b>,
<i>60</i>, 395–405.<o:p></o:p></span></div>
<br />
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
Richard Wilsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09676973692398285795noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2039823452867758922.post-10265237497556623962017-02-20T02:16:00.000-08:002017-02-20T02:16:36.970-08:00Neoteny, Manipulation and BipedalismThis is the abstract from an unpublished manuscript I wrote quite a while back (2015). The full article can be downloaded from Academia.edu<br />
<br />
<span style="color: #222222;">https://www.academia.edu/31526740/Neoteny_Manipulation_and_Bipedalism</span><br />
<span style="color: #222222;"><br /></span>
<br />
<span style="color: #222222;">
<br />
<div align="left" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: 28.35pt; margin-right: 28.65pt; margin-top: 12.0pt; text-align: left;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span lang="EN-US" style="mso-fareast-language: EN-US;"><span style="color: black;">Abstract: </span></span></b><span lang="EN-US" style="mso-fareast-language: EN-US;"><span style="color: black;">Although
there are many established hypotheses for bipedalism in hominins none
satisfactorily explain the basis for this development but rather propose
different explanations or motives for increasingly sustained periods of bipedal
behavior. The proposition here differs by suggesting an ontogenetic basis for
extended periods of bipedal locomotion. This theory parsimoniously explains the
underlying reason for the establishment of bipedalism by placing this
particular adaptation within the context of the neotenous developmental
trajectory of hominins. It is proposed that neotenous development and the
plasticity this process afforded provided the platform upon which adaptations
of the forelimbs supported increasingly refined manipulation. Natural selection
for the advantages of increased dexterity likely resulted in further
retardation of the hominin lineage by tending toward </span></span><span style="color: black;">favouring</span><span lang="EN-US" style="mso-fareast-language: EN-US;"><span style="color: black;"> progressively more neotenous
hands. In parallel, increasingly neotenous feet demanded more sustained periods
of bipedalism which indirectly conferred further self-selective advantages by
freeing the hands for longer periods of time. Morphological evolvability
conferred by neoteny may underlie both the evolution of the human hand and the
subsequent transition toward obligated bipedal locomotion. Ultimately it was
adoption of a bipedal stance which supported the accelerated encephalization
maintained over the course of several million years until the fairly recent
“self-domestication” of our species rapidly reversed this trend.</span></span></div>
<br />
<div align="left" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin-bottom: 0in; margin-left: 28.35pt; margin-right: 28.65pt; margin-top: 12.0pt; text-align: left;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span lang="EN-US" style="mso-fareast-language: EN-US;"><span style="color: black;">Keywords: </span></span></b><span lang="EN-US" style="mso-fareast-language: EN-US;"><span style="color: black;">bipedalism;
encephalization; ontogeny; manipulation; neoteny</span></span></div>
</span><br />
<br />Richard Wilsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09676973692398285795noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2039823452867758922.post-8531065769727866932016-02-03T09:01:00.003-08:002016-02-15T06:51:15.611-08:00Figure-stones at the RijksmuseumA good friend of mine alerted me to the Rijksmuseum whom now have a display of figure-stones from Fontmaure in the entrance hall. Whilst they are perhaps not all of the highest quality that I have observed from this particular occupation site (see <a href="http://www.palaeoart.com/">my web site</a> for more) this is a welcome move from a prestigious centre. It is time that the debate concerning the incorporation of exograms in lithics is moved on from the knee-jerk reaction to dismiss the idea as incredulous as many commentators still do.<br>
<br>
The figure-stone exhibition is open for viewing until March 13th 2016.<br>
<br>
Larger images of three of the artefacts are available on the Rijksmuseum web site.<br>
<br>
<span style="font-size: x-small;"><a href="http://www.rmo.nl/tentoonstellingen/figuurstenen">http://www.rmo.nl/tentoonstellingen/figuurstenen</a></span><br>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgvvlClq8Fc5zyOYwwjbm8p5hPjTbQe6LQKAitDtQs_WtIqeZLeWvESfp6yLjtjdqFTWSrVcSUCMU9ji-x76t7-iTAsI4oWMBs-mFmAb6Bsag-Kk4kOysQmGP8U5FHX-WR5fFicmBZcopU/s1600/figure_stones_rijksmuseum.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="356" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgvvlClq8Fc5zyOYwwjbm8p5hPjTbQe6LQKAitDtQs_WtIqeZLeWvESfp6yLjtjdqFTWSrVcSUCMU9ji-x76t7-iTAsI4oWMBs-mFmAb6Bsag-Kk4kOysQmGP8U5FHX-WR5fFicmBZcopU/s640/figure_stones_rijksmuseum.jpg" width="640"></a></div>
<br>Richard Wilsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09676973692398285795noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2039823452867758922.post-24442339645787081942015-12-10T04:33:00.000-08:002016-02-29T05:02:37.855-08:00Reflectance Transformation Imaging - Update 2Finally! The marbles arrived, sphere detection worked and I have created my first RTI....<br>
<br>
Some snapshots<br>
<br>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjGHbjwBu3jnhiXorSMxQw5sNJ9ee_EXKZgsrD6UafZxppdByozPsuWf7gOsys_O0Vo2vymX6YsUCvQp8UDfTicr-4DBX2GPRZk_VrXpyIasoMksEI0S9w8W5czlmMnIGuQcLUfaESclAA/s1600/FM001snapshot1spec.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="275" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjGHbjwBu3jnhiXorSMxQw5sNJ9ee_EXKZgsrD6UafZxppdByozPsuWf7gOsys_O0Vo2vymX6YsUCvQp8UDfTicr-4DBX2GPRZk_VrXpyIasoMksEI0S9w8W5czlmMnIGuQcLUfaESclAA/s320/FM001snapshot1spec.jpg" width="320"></a><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiAWtFM4mWjAQT6Azo9y5C-x6wNV-Afgf-yuiRZXjv4UyLISrCqGCrdmXxYNRW4tUzAHIhmR2SVH6E1KBVqDwbeGWuHaCTxmobm1l3Ff5MPA-WU8PmDxoEjoezDrSl2Y0nmZVWE067lU3w/s1600/FM001snapshot2spec.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="275" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiAWtFM4mWjAQT6Azo9y5C-x6wNV-Afgf-yuiRZXjv4UyLISrCqGCrdmXxYNRW4tUzAHIhmR2SVH6E1KBVqDwbeGWuHaCTxmobm1l3Ff5MPA-WU8PmDxoEjoezDrSl2Y0nmZVWE067lU3w/s320/FM001snapshot2spec.jpg" style="cursor: move;" width="320"></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
Using the HSS Fitter with specular enhancement</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjNFsw_4lvEzCJUndJsZYouiZlbMe_vJ1V_Yyyji-UwgYqMiiqQpGSisfPjfRJemGxtb9YSkks1CwbMYc38jIR5bxEY7mSEj1sR1YtrRwbHwKaHc36CwZ1MHfHrZu3wwGE6IsquZJsIWMY/s1600/FM001snapshot3spec.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="275" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjNFsw_4lvEzCJUndJsZYouiZlbMe_vJ1V_Yyyji-UwgYqMiiqQpGSisfPjfRJemGxtb9YSkks1CwbMYc38jIR5bxEY7mSEj1sR1YtrRwbHwKaHc36CwZ1MHfHrZu3wwGE6IsquZJsIWMY/s320/FM001snapshot3spec.jpg" width="320"></a></div>
<br>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjHlKWmDYheBOH0EQtepL8MBtLnBM3u6nv_dN8UWTo0_ACTZwwppBT8Fy9DhpBXsiJKf-xFCyfDQlMJoQWHn-S45i2rH6V9YV6iHjg911q7uGAaYxI7wKiVwOgWfmfRnZe_GDz3aomJkMg/s1600/FM001snapshot4spec.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="275" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjHlKWmDYheBOH0EQtepL8MBtLnBM3u6nv_dN8UWTo0_ACTZwwppBT8Fy9DhpBXsiJKf-xFCyfDQlMJoQWHn-S45i2rH6V9YV6iHjg911q7uGAaYxI7wKiVwOgWfmfRnZe_GDz3aomJkMg/s320/FM001snapshot4spec.jpg" width="320"></a></div>
<div>
<br></div>
<div>
<br></div>
<div>
And then with the PTM algorithm....</div>
<div>
<br></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjn7m7cV1-GC0XWsAhnDL6SVZAyDnw1JMiz9TvGXWPiVVcv6_UQ4ra799gKf-ll4tsqwlXLQw_vxzwb41SkcHLps_9FdYwxWah_K49MuQZMYhQqHndOf96bCY1TqwALIO6rn45lVhUZVFw/s1600/PTMsnapshot_StaticML.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="241" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjn7m7cV1-GC0XWsAhnDL6SVZAyDnw1JMiz9TvGXWPiVVcv6_UQ4ra799gKf-ll4tsqwlXLQw_vxzwb41SkcHLps_9FdYwxWah_K49MuQZMYhQqHndOf96bCY1TqwALIO6rn45lVhUZVFw/s320/PTMsnapshot_StaticML.jpg" width="320"></a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
Static Multi Light</div>
<div>
<br></div>
<div>
<br></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgbgVHZ71CAybjF03zHaJxsn5bAqO4KRw1wLjjvGjcH0u2p-JhNZMBla1xQeapk2Zt0hDTQiZ2RwmWi94RJ4y0BQMf1rJqHx3dqERqZ6RUrnsDG-2JJRri97neRfQFRVHkV2wrzK1-rf8U/s1600/PTMsnapshotCoEffUnsharpMask.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="241" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgbgVHZ71CAybjF03zHaJxsn5bAqO4KRw1wLjjvGjcH0u2p-JhNZMBla1xQeapk2Zt0hDTQiZ2RwmWi94RJ4y0BQMf1rJqHx3dqERqZ6RUrnsDG-2JJRri97neRfQFRVHkV2wrzK1-rf8U/s320/PTMsnapshotCoEffUnsharpMask.jpg" width="320"></a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
Coefficient Unsharp Masking</div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br></div>
<div>
<br></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhl6xD7YK_l1EXVEcyZc-_FORO3PEf28dzsytd55HEIgFhABixPI7poUrA_tAQx0JS0WOmabHakIDRWSyGE7WJJWvq2mb3yt6q0kZNshL9Tbq027EllaIGCivaEP4FQZG9T41QDSpNTIkc/s1600/PTMsnapshotImagUnSharpMask.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="241" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhl6xD7YK_l1EXVEcyZc-_FORO3PEf28dzsytd55HEIgFhABixPI7poUrA_tAQx0JS0WOmabHakIDRWSyGE7WJJWvq2mb3yt6q0kZNshL9Tbq027EllaIGCivaEP4FQZG9T41QDSpNTIkc/s320/PTMsnapshotImagUnSharpMask.jpg" width="320"></a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
Image Unsharp Masking</div>
<div>
<br>
<br></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
I've uploaded a couple of ptm files to my website http://www.palaeoart.com (beware they are large files) for anyone interested in seeing the end result. Additionally the first eight or so pictures were rendered from PTMs and then cut out in Adobe Photoshop.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">I have also reduced the overall processing time by using only PTMfitter in conjunction with a single 'lp' (light profile) file. I am quietly pleased with the dome - it does everything I wanted it to do.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">Finally, a photo of the finished dome - with protective covering.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjYZuulQEPz33fnVOssk_Ou7kQfn2M22qiF8WBPQiUXf4QevF5J3eWhH-0D6tkIyoiTEnP93ZbuxO1VjplVhwq7x3vfXxjf2e8GcylTsCpT5OFUuZ0FfqIyDDTIisskdg3dB5w3w-MlmFw/s640/blogger-image--979061267.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjYZuulQEPz33fnVOssk_Ou7kQfn2M22qiF8WBPQiUXf4QevF5J3eWhH-0D6tkIyoiTEnP93ZbuxO1VjplVhwq7x3vfXxjf2e8GcylTsCpT5OFUuZ0FfqIyDDTIisskdg3dB5w3w-MlmFw/s640/blogger-image--979061267.jpg"></a></div><br></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiAWtFM4mWjAQT6Azo9y5C-x6wNV-Afgf-yuiRZXjv4UyLISrCqGCrdmXxYNRW4tUzAHIhmR2SVH6E1KBVqDwbeGWuHaCTxmobm1l3Ff5MPA-WU8PmDxoEjoezDrSl2Y0nmZVWE067lU3w/s1600/FM001snapshot2spec.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<br></div>
<br>Richard Wilsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09676973692398285795noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2039823452867758922.post-46943022962114750602015-12-07T15:14:00.001-08:002015-12-10T04:33:39.227-08:00Reflectance Transformation Imaging - UpdateFinally working. Some issues tackled in the process, including:<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The Canon EOS Utility doesn't work on my Windows 10 platform (it appears that I am not alone in this experience). I eventually resigned myself to finding an alternative piece of software to capture and control images directly from the camera.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
I made a bracket that I plan can be modified if I use a different camera. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhF5Vm9Ohw1A7jAJrUPGdJITXBQ-vhblG8hS7jzaFqfKI3bYAP5kpzahCAJ8o4fVFf9Qlum5ch7JOilNede4JScBXABpmevtu2qv0S1K0a6SBihBj07oVFk78eTlKeoa7UatpOW4_V8-5M/s640/blogger-image-208527971.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhF5Vm9Ohw1A7jAJrUPGdJITXBQ-vhblG8hS7jzaFqfKI3bYAP5kpzahCAJ8o4fVFf9Qlum5ch7JOilNede4JScBXABpmevtu2qv0S1K0a6SBihBj07oVFk78eTlKeoa7UatpOW4_V8-5M/s640/blogger-image-208527971.jpg" /></a></div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
I changed the configuration of the LEDs slightly. Originally evenly spaced at 10, 30, 50 and 70 degrees, I've moved the top row down to 65 and the bottom row up to 15 - according to CHI the optimum angles at which to set exposure and aperture settings. <span style="font-family: "helvetica neue light" , , "helvetica" , "arial" , sans-serif;">The picture below shows the dome after these mods.</span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: "helvetica neue light" , , "helvetica" , "arial" , sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-family: "helvetica neue light" , , "helvetica" , "arial" , sans-serif;"></span><div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<span style="font-family: "helvetica neue light" , , "helvetica" , "arial" , sans-serif;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhObrIS4566kI2dfuCS5lQVYPBHPVN3ybTFurflAEw-nszgJGSKCpcEt6AyDFFLHdNrxpmH-ItSuyQTpbwEUGqjn-U88ZzgPDY8IjOcV3SqO5MIp5nfeq0plNfk9oYxx4eBwOP0fmIdJ0U/s640/blogger-image-639144582.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhObrIS4566kI2dfuCS5lQVYPBHPVN3ybTFurflAEw-nszgJGSKCpcEt6AyDFFLHdNrxpmH-ItSuyQTpbwEUGqjn-U88ZzgPDY8IjOcV3SqO5MIp5nfeq0plNfk9oYxx4eBwOP0fmIdJ0U/s640/blogger-image-639144582.jpg" /></a></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<span style="font-family: "helvetica neue light" , , "helvetica" , "arial" , sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<span style="font-family: "helvetica neue light" , , "helvetica" , "arial" , sans-serif;">I did a trial run and found that sphere detection in the Builder process wouldn't work.... Presumably because the black sphere (a pool ball) was too big relative to the highlights. I will test this assumption when the black marbles I have ordered arrive.</span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<span style="font-family: "helvetica neue light" , , "helvetica" , "arial" , sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<span style="font-family: "helvetica neue light" , , "helvetica" , "arial" , sans-serif;">Back soon.</span></div>
<span style="font-family: "helvetica neue light" , , "helvetica" , "arial" , sans-serif;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
Richard Wilsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09676973692398285795noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2039823452867758922.post-77553560413638364622015-11-03T06:00:00.001-08:002015-11-21T04:22:49.099-08:00Reflectance Transformation Imaging - Dome construction<div><span style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue Light', HelveticaNeue-Light, helvetica, arial, sans-serif;">Today my Cree LEDs and Arduino-type board arrived in the post, closely followed by the 600mm diameter acrylic dome.</span></div><div><br></div><div>Let the build begin....</div><div><br></div><div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjhcZUdwcNwmhaj-5hzso2hNxl8YEnwKl8Hu6_Ryu3HUKwB_ynCXZA4QDiMEW9G9ERueMCBkcuJ1Del1_5KtsYbvBGaM3n9riYTOD8Ma5JY3k9yk-9Do5bI2JRdmtA_2i40st8iZrvQZTU/s640/blogger-image-597531755.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjhcZUdwcNwmhaj-5hzso2hNxl8YEnwKl8Hu6_Ryu3HUKwB_ynCXZA4QDiMEW9G9ERueMCBkcuJ1Del1_5KtsYbvBGaM3n9riYTOD8Ma5JY3k9yk-9Do5bI2JRdmtA_2i40st8iZrvQZTU/s640/blogger-image-597531755.jpg"></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><br></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;">600mm acrylic dome with flange, 4mm.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><br></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj3Vzm7rLF6SqctObE7uvfpaXqIkpEbx5IiU-nk_Q3d9g3qQA7PqII-RRdrN0wPf2p5XuCxVsoxoe1lzPyQamZGB_PKf7OaSdj1z5r-zBTms0bWYgW-I7KPj97_u8RdyqjjBBytUDrJ5zw/s640/blogger-image-1673423868.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj3Vzm7rLF6SqctObE7uvfpaXqIkpEbx5IiU-nk_Q3d9g3qQA7PqII-RRdrN0wPf2p5XuCxVsoxoe1lzPyQamZGB_PKf7OaSdj1z5r-zBTms0bWYgW-I7KPj97_u8RdyqjjBBytUDrJ5zw/s640/blogger-image-1673423868.jpg"></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><br></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;">Arduino clone</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><br></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjNaim84MpXdjRhY9beKzZzs-USnrum6hBOrbTEg01EU_hmRNY7pHMp1gdnQje4GOt2SRW9_XpvCbjWQhu_C3kI_lMRmSMFy3emSiI00oydRF39FOmXaSw-ZMzQT2izFUqq-GX0SOutXPk/s640/blogger-image-1017063257.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjNaim84MpXdjRhY9beKzZzs-USnrum6hBOrbTEg01EU_hmRNY7pHMp1gdnQje4GOt2SRW9_XpvCbjWQhu_C3kI_lMRmSMFy3emSiI00oydRF39FOmXaSw-ZMzQT2izFUqq-GX0SOutXPk/s640/blogger-image-1017063257.jpg"></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><br></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;">Cree LEDs. I've gone for 4v through the hole for this initial prototype, sacrificing shorter exposure times since I understand the primary constraining factor will be the speed at which the camera will save pictures in RAW format.</div><br></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh2vbpe1H9_nR6dzlzjOmL6TDBwhgdCv5f2x_ZdM58B9zOLRAJ1eCS4dgCRctsr7GGMRRmh8SAO0AMIBQEWly2ALkPOxhj6Yclvi3Evx747fTZz2p2Px-5MWOrR2LsrUiowjn0AEKqVgD0/s640/blogger-image-2040624722.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh2vbpe1H9_nR6dzlzjOmL6TDBwhgdCv5f2x_ZdM58B9zOLRAJ1eCS4dgCRctsr7GGMRRmh8SAO0AMIBQEWly2ALkPOxhj6Yclvi3Evx747fTZz2p2Px-5MWOrR2LsrUiowjn0AEKqVgD0/s640/blogger-image-2040624722.jpg"></a></div><br></div>Marking the dome up. This dome will have 48 LEDs, so there are four rows of lights. From the top 8, 12, 16 and 12 in the bottom row.</div><div><br></div><div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiyGC4GZ3GtKcD3ratRKS1WBEoQFMqxs7ZbnBukPY7xc_70SRxmhQZelr57_A3grd6_r4Xd6Ga90QrLqUFEkeotSrGEwZevveV2-Lvj9kpqFJHLQDh9cO-Hm1bvPTHBQOMflyq9EyfDSo4/s640/blogger-image-2086314025.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiyGC4GZ3GtKcD3ratRKS1WBEoQFMqxs7ZbnBukPY7xc_70SRxmhQZelr57_A3grd6_r4Xd6Ga90QrLqUFEkeotSrGEwZevveV2-Lvj9kpqFJHLQDh9cO-Hm1bvPTHBQOMflyq9EyfDSo4/s640/blogger-image-2086314025.jpg"></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><br></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;">All 48 holes marked up.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><br></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh5qi0Pey1hLeKdw2u_LHKFXr4enkptN_yUBhgS-C__oyX07NUKVWl0knhFvP8LS_b7lFqnDK5d8zlz11_y4Hkz61DV0s9P2BRYO4qvdPmZhHGo7s-BWJ1VoowHUs1Xf3ct8G4mwOihrBA/s640/blogger-image--212261982.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh5qi0Pey1hLeKdw2u_LHKFXr4enkptN_yUBhgS-C__oyX07NUKVWl0knhFvP8LS_b7lFqnDK5d8zlz11_y4Hkz61DV0s9P2BRYO4qvdPmZhHGo7s-BWJ1VoowHUs1Xf3ct8G4mwOihrBA/s640/blogger-image--212261982.jpg"></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><br></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;">This is the clone wired up to the bread-board with three LEDs to test my programming skills! Wired to the board, the jack end of the remote (now cut in two) successfully focuses and then triggers the shutter whilst each LED is lit in turn. I plan to use the remote switch to a) start the sequence or b) manually advance through the sequence.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><br></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhxvBwG3f56RpH5jYvn51pHEntyZWWP-0XFrQ8ApFOkVO6MIHFbJqt70t5sqbpU9zK0eG3OGypoCnjt-m12Vifag79d0GmqgJlMTQoMJ1Qdy3NFaaapnCyZT2VUrH_Ncs47Sf1NbGbqrT8/s640/blogger-image--271116813.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhxvBwG3f56RpH5jYvn51pHEntyZWWP-0XFrQ8ApFOkVO6MIHFbJqt70t5sqbpU9zK0eG3OGypoCnjt-m12Vifag79d0GmqgJlMTQoMJ1Qdy3NFaaapnCyZT2VUrH_Ncs47Sf1NbGbqrT8/s640/blogger-image--271116813.jpg"></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><br></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;">LEDs and resistors soldered to boards.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><br></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjCcsRY4PtVASgIUCMzExopQ5JmTI3Ss3kCKefBBDhG1hrshyphenhyphen7ZCSdcFSh0gY7UaZTuCFtatydFWyFWwj-SCYNyVx9e2-gOo4K1Fl-198eCT6hTBZHF1lhweCoqQTXKKSw1yz_BcsWCFCo/s640/blogger-image--95670934.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjCcsRY4PtVASgIUCMzExopQ5JmTI3Ss3kCKefBBDhG1hrshyphenhyphen7ZCSdcFSh0gY7UaZTuCFtatydFWyFWwj-SCYNyVx9e2-gOo4K1Fl-198eCT6hTBZHF1lhweCoqQTXKKSw1yz_BcsWCFCo/s640/blogger-image--95670934.jpg"></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><br></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;">Drilling holes into the dome. A jig is used to obtain the correct angle.</div><br></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEglz-QUR-x6XsQ8Tow8trmmyEWJr-BA87uG6DcMoTuCTtVcvLVTxFHcgjeZI6Tn7lMqP_KZgBJLfw5bc5Mw10cGRpIRpO_jODSFtBP0kiPyo6dZpiLaLgXWhJSizuCBJCs6YSZ1EUA4RU0/s640/blogger-image-128442793.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEglz-QUR-x6XsQ8Tow8trmmyEWJr-BA87uG6DcMoTuCTtVcvLVTxFHcgjeZI6Tn7lMqP_KZgBJLfw5bc5Mw10cGRpIRpO_jODSFtBP0kiPyo6dZpiLaLgXWhJSizuCBJCs6YSZ1EUA4RU0/s640/blogger-image-128442793.jpg"></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><br></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;">Soldering the ground...</div><br></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgzhLjLxIWdVmSreVpArLOyMTOiDFQIagMmBrLn4AptD-cQ1MVok5O1tzo9tiVLJz5zgsmGCn3grOgnzWyV1zuTYPv9cD7PFOyz6OJjeBzHaY2-rYPh-1TUjjla2pLLgEZaeD2VKBVlhEE/s640/blogger-image--49929233.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgzhLjLxIWdVmSreVpArLOyMTOiDFQIagMmBrLn4AptD-cQ1MVok5O1tzo9tiVLJz5zgsmGCn3grOgnzWyV1zuTYPv9cD7PFOyz6OJjeBzHaY2-rYPh-1TUjjla2pLLgEZaeD2VKBVlhEE/s640/blogger-image--49929233.jpg"></a></div><br></div>And the live wire</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><br></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjqbiI_OETKo5a3lgVPO_AKx2q82n0yAMjoeJynhzTgIo2T6oVxyC3YVr5fgPUuX6sk86i1KP2XPKs2fw7ZuCmwLsCes_dY-cv6HIVNnKc_1gSVwRTm8tHvATCRxXMUmP1YF1iIkQIY52c/s640/blogger-image-1527972009.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjqbiI_OETKo5a3lgVPO_AKx2q82n0yAMjoeJynhzTgIo2T6oVxyC3YVr5fgPUuX6sk86i1KP2XPKs2fw7ZuCmwLsCes_dY-cv6HIVNnKc_1gSVwRTm8tHvATCRxXMUmP1YF1iIkQIY52c/s640/blogger-image-1527972009.jpg"></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><br></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;">Ta-da! Camera hole cut and first coat of black.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><br></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj1pnRV3k-slSThU-NT104Mc1EkuxM_88GMUk1YUeGmuRTodpFfQgnIoPk19VhktsUr_S0pZAG-9teGzRA2vNpc5UZg544kgOMX4aIazF1GXtNUKHgYTWsLo2cuvWI20EqJOerwujj86hI/s640/blogger-image--480966548.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj1pnRV3k-slSThU-NT104Mc1EkuxM_88GMUk1YUeGmuRTodpFfQgnIoPk19VhktsUr_S0pZAG-9teGzRA2vNpc5UZg544kgOMX4aIazF1GXtNUKHgYTWsLo2cuvWI20EqJOerwujj86hI/s640/blogger-image--480966548.jpg"></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><br></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;">Wired up, painted and the clone is in a case... Next step is to test (and debug I expect).</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><br></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhI4-bneoWpC2nkNYjqeJcYtdE9Us3k1RQfCjnizg3_gi9sZJXlrSNGyWbO2FB6CUaiVfmfy0lDgTFPh9r0XGvEdnzvMVj5SzcghcZHusO4_JSo2LfezC59cOX5A0vKJ8Qrp-Ta4m5JS7s/s640/blogger-image-1396438554.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhI4-bneoWpC2nkNYjqeJcYtdE9Us3k1RQfCjnizg3_gi9sZJXlrSNGyWbO2FB6CUaiVfmfy0lDgTFPh9r0XGvEdnzvMVj5SzcghcZHusO4_JSo2LfezC59cOX5A0vKJ8Qrp-Ta4m5JS7s/s640/blogger-image-1396438554.jpg"></a></div><br></div><br></div><br></div><br></div><br></div>Richard Wilsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09676973692398285795noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2039823452867758922.post-43623088656552287872015-07-01T05:30:00.001-07:002015-09-12T14:35:29.401-07:00Neanderthal Art IINow closed. An exhibition of figure-stones and Mousterian tools from the Palaeolithic site of Fontmaure in France.<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjxtDON1BAamPbukIL-ihXmj6GcaQyRSW4AazmicfZeGl06fvhcFXNh-K-CQ3eZvJJor6C_58LQy_ITbelalubOgBxKWp3StlhnWXLS2heJWiSSBmW2XFsNgZOA5EA1RNmjhSHLkbzv04E/s640/blogger-image-213232079.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjxtDON1BAamPbukIL-ihXmj6GcaQyRSW4AazmicfZeGl06fvhcFXNh-K-CQ3eZvJJor6C_58LQy_ITbelalubOgBxKWp3StlhnWXLS2heJWiSSBmW2XFsNgZOA5EA1RNmjhSHLkbzv04E/s640/blogger-image-213232079.jpg" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
</div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">Watford Museum,</span></div>
<div>
<span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">194 High Street,</span></div>
<div>
<span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">Watford</span></div>
<div>
<span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">Hertfordshire</span></div>
<div>
<span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">WD17 2DT</span></div>
<div>
<span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">Opening times: Thursday-Saturday 10:00-17:00</span></div>
<div>
<span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">Free Admission</span></div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"><br /></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"><br /></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiRqOMtY20L3UJxNNtM-y9ZJYM_LTtQhUVuywTEHiFMeH3y-F6k0XExBYt5bCHXuc04sSse-epSTTwEoCeP9Rn_4qCT8AnGLVrkywD6o3DA7iUfGsPmSgbJ2DmzEvLvgDJIhafVwBgOZOE/s640/blogger-image-941648287.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0); margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><span style="color: black;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiRqOMtY20L3UJxNNtM-y9ZJYM_LTtQhUVuywTEHiFMeH3y-F6k0XExBYt5bCHXuc04sSse-epSTTwEoCeP9Rn_4qCT8AnGLVrkywD6o3DA7iUfGsPmSgbJ2DmzEvLvgDJIhafVwBgOZOE/s640/blogger-image-941648287.jpg" /></span></a></div>
<br /></div>
Richard Wilsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09676973692398285795noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2039823452867758922.post-32411250043418802602015-06-23T07:05:00.001-07:002015-06-23T15:50:27.584-07:00Modern humans and refuted hypothesesThis week Chris Stringer tweeted his response to the Nature paper "An early modern human from Romania with a recent Neanderthal ancestor".<br>
<div>
<br></div>
<div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhTIDajNFTr-Y2zSPRLGjk0Wu0GCW3581go-vO-UYmi7j5JJ7Ns5qzU8ncakZOZ5xbSN1XrStRDFwe7dCQ_PAxkniFq_ZVLLVExmXxqQTMzIMEwXBV978TbpjCk9b6JT19jfqkS9GeTMZw/s640/blogger-image-88946156.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhTIDajNFTr-Y2zSPRLGjk0Wu0GCW3581go-vO-UYmi7j5JJ7Ns5qzU8ncakZOZ5xbSN1XrStRDFwe7dCQ_PAxkniFq_ZVLLVExmXxqQTMzIMEwXBV978TbpjCk9b6JT19jfqkS9GeTMZw/s640/blogger-image-88946156.jpg"></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
Chris Stringer's comments come as no surprise to those closely following his shift in position: from proposing that so-called "anatomically modern humans" originated as a separate species from Africa who upon migrating into Europe were unable to interbreed with the resident Neanderthals which they soon "replaced", to a position which fundamentally refutes this theory.</div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
Stringer may be one of the last anthropologists to be surprised by the results. By referring to the "belief" of a Neanderthal extinction he implies that the results are extraordinary, or in other words not to be expected to be representative of a wider pattern. Of course by applying taphonomic logic it is evident that the results add further to the evidence refuting the idea that Neanderthals became "extinct".</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><br></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">But before examining his comments closer it is important to scrutinise the facts as they are presented. It is implicitly claimed in the title of the Nature paper that Oase 1 is a "modern human" yet even the description of the mandible by Trinkhaus et al cited (<a href="http://m.pnas.org/content/100/20/11231">http://m.pnas.org/content/100/20/11231</a>) makes it clear that whilst there are some modern features there are also archaic and derived Neanderthal features. At best, the individual could be considered to be transitional (from robust to gracile) but by no stretch of the imagination could it be concluded that they were a "modern human". Indeed if we assume that Oase 1 was indeed a Neanderthal then the results only add to the evidence for continuity between the robust populations of the past and the gracile populations of the present.</span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<br></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
Not unusually but rather typically, Neanderthals are presented by the professor as being cognitively inferior to "modern humans" although no evidence is presented to support this claim. Moreover, there is no explanation for why these hypothetical Neanderthals, who if they are assumed to lack "complex technology" or "more complex behaviour", should want to mimic behaviour or adopt technologies that they had no need for. Not only is there no evidence which places a "complex technology" directly with a specific species or even group of humans, all the evidence suggests that wherever this technological development arose it developed in-situ and over a long period of time (see blogs passim). There simply was no "replacement" of one technology by another. Indeed mounting evidence refutes the previously favoured hypothesis which strangely starts from a premise that denies Neanderthals were capable of a range of behaviours observed in modern day humans until presented with overwhelming evidence to the contrary.</div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><br></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><br></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><br></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><br></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><br></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><br></div>
</div>
Richard Wilsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09676973692398285795noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2039823452867758922.post-68678941949425210472015-06-11T06:32:00.001-07:002015-06-11T06:32:45.262-07:00Rabbit, rabbit, rabbit, rabbit, rabbitAnd again!<div><br></div><div>New research suggests that archaeologists are leading scientists astray again...</div><div><br></div><div>This time, Dr John Stewart Associate Professor in Palaeoecology and Environmental Change from Bournemouth Uinversity heads up a team who have published a paper <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0047248413000079" style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue Light', HelveticaNeue-Light, helvetica, arial, sans-serif;">http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0047248413000079</a> <span style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue Light', HelveticaNeue-Light, helvetica, arial, sans-serif;">apparently demonstrating that in Iberia at least those super smart (but elusive) "modern humans" survived where those "slightly smarter than we'd previously given them credit for" Neanderthals "disappeared". Or something like that.</span></div><div><span style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue Light', HelveticaNeue-Light, helvetica, arial, sans-serif;"><br></span></div><div><span style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue Light', HelveticaNeue-Light, helvetica, arial, sans-serif;">What the paper hinges on is the idea that stone tool "typologies" can be used as a proxy for cultural or biological markers - which of course they can't. At best they are technological indices, at worst these classifications exist only within the context of Pleistocene archaeology and are not falsifiable. </span></div><div><span style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue Light', HelveticaNeue-Light, helvetica, arial, sans-serif;"><br></span></div><div><font face="Helvetica Neue Light, HelveticaNeue-Light, helvetica, arial, sans-serif">What is apparent from the archaeological record - which can no more be expected to be representative of a wider cultural pattern than a household bin might be expected to be - is that stone tools became smaller over time, with a focus on blade production. Where this development has been documented in-situ in regionally diverse areas across Europe, it ranges from as early as 52,000 years ago to as recently as 8,000 years ago and shows no evidence of a "replacement" of one set of humans with another. See comments and references in past blogs for further info.</font></div><div><font face="Helvetica Neue Light, HelveticaNeue-Light, helvetica, arial, sans-serif"><br></font></div><div><font face="Helvetica Neue Light, HelveticaNeue-Light, helvetica, arial, sans-serif">Picture, blade production at Fontmaure. Top left blade cores. Jasper and Sandstone.</font></div><div><font face="Helvetica Neue Light, HelveticaNeue-Light, helvetica, arial, sans-serif"><br></font></div><div><font face="Helvetica Neue Light, HelveticaNeue-Light, helvetica, arial, sans-serif"><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjhpAxY08MpLtZUPfMQxdiNw5VcubWFf-71ToAxeP8oIgxOfkGcQxmD2aIyrpdRhttKMk1i040EAH_KmrlaK4dIzb8f_0ZzwVJUHwEllJp82AeZL7Hbbv59X3tpF9bxgMFQNAPBE5jpUUM/s640/blogger-image-1567874109.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjhpAxY08MpLtZUPfMQxdiNw5VcubWFf-71ToAxeP8oIgxOfkGcQxmD2aIyrpdRhttKMk1i040EAH_KmrlaK4dIzb8f_0ZzwVJUHwEllJp82AeZL7Hbbv59X3tpF9bxgMFQNAPBE5jpUUM/s640/blogger-image-1567874109.jpg"></a></div><br></font></div><div><span style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue Light', HelveticaNeue-Light, helvetica, arial, sans-serif;"><br></span></div><div><span style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue Light', HelveticaNeue-Light, helvetica, arial, sans-serif;"><br></span></div><div><span style="font-family: 'Helvetica Neue Light', HelveticaNeue-Light, helvetica, arial, sans-serif;"><br></span></div>Richard Wilsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09676973692398285795noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2039823452867758922.post-57076167793348608062015-05-10T09:42:00.001-07:002015-06-10T04:24:53.443-07:00Exhibition @ Watford Museum<div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><div><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">Exhibition 9th July to 1st August.</span></div><div><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"><br></span></div><div><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">Figure-stones of Fontmaure.<br></span><div><div><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"><br></span></div><div><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">Watford Museum,</span></div><div><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">194 High Street,</span></div><div><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">Watford</span></div><div><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">Hertfordshire</span></div><div><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">WD17 2DT</span></div><div><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"><br></span></div><div><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">Opening times: Thursday-Saturday 10:00-17:00</span></div><div><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">Free Admission</span></div></div></div></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><br></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><br></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiRqOMtY20L3UJxNNtM-y9ZJYM_LTtQhUVuywTEHiFMeH3y-F6k0XExBYt5bCHXuc04sSse-epSTTwEoCeP9Rn_4qCT8AnGLVrkywD6o3DA7iUfGsPmSgbJ2DmzEvLvgDJIhafVwBgOZOE/s640/blogger-image-941648287.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiRqOMtY20L3UJxNNtM-y9ZJYM_LTtQhUVuywTEHiFMeH3y-F6k0XExBYt5bCHXuc04sSse-epSTTwEoCeP9Rn_4qCT8AnGLVrkywD6o3DA7iUfGsPmSgbJ2DmzEvLvgDJIhafVwBgOZOE/s640/blogger-image-941648287.jpg"></a></div><br></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhYzWUKoxy1ZWeLUXa4Gm__SZquPThxA4KaSNtOlpXF9jQinIIepPhacEWuQb9voEz6eH4oYRNJLBxj_FliNFV2dodVkwp5it1n_o5EymW9hbeiyuZy-FqNWOds__0EabxEMuKwZtcYPV4/s640/blogger-image--1385894132.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhYzWUKoxy1ZWeLUXa4Gm__SZquPThxA4KaSNtOlpXF9jQinIIepPhacEWuQb9voEz6eH4oYRNJLBxj_FliNFV2dodVkwp5it1n_o5EymW9hbeiyuZy-FqNWOds__0EabxEMuKwZtcYPV4/s640/blogger-image--1385894132.jpg"></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><br><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhYzWUKoxy1ZWeLUXa4Gm__SZquPThxA4KaSNtOlpXF9jQinIIepPhacEWuQb9voEz6eH4oYRNJLBxj_FliNFV2dodVkwp5it1n_o5EymW9hbeiyuZy-FqNWOds__0EabxEMuKwZtcYPV4/s640/blogger-image--1385894132.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"></a><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEixlOirhfIe6_ysZ1T8-nUrUMFo8Q2fA3OFRFjSJ0LL1psTyCXKsEmu7kolWK5FbdZqt0qzq2dX3guh2qgiuijThrT03v1uNPUwiOU_q2ummefYZl2on4Ir3wCDvDT11pCZEWNhxDI-2Os/s640/blogger-image--1849269294.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEixlOirhfIe6_ysZ1T8-nUrUMFo8Q2fA3OFRFjSJ0LL1psTyCXKsEmu7kolWK5FbdZqt0qzq2dX3guh2qgiuijThrT03v1uNPUwiOU_q2ummefYZl2on4Ir3wCDvDT11pCZEWNhxDI-2Os/s640/blogger-image--1849269294.jpg"></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><br></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjn5f8O3IKlbfVD4odBElnjmUAZgtoXLQgL0dvOTz4wmTBBnlwk7C3NGH_CJvBdeQt97hhEAXpuG-No-SsuGdWoADSkjO8tWR3iy_7X0jtJZO6HE0QfbvA6dMDC1s3e9-13SpkVVZfpYHQ/s640/blogger-image-1982703603.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjn5f8O3IKlbfVD4odBElnjmUAZgtoXLQgL0dvOTz4wmTBBnlwk7C3NGH_CJvBdeQt97hhEAXpuG-No-SsuGdWoADSkjO8tWR3iy_7X0jtJZO6HE0QfbvA6dMDC1s3e9-13SpkVVZfpYHQ/s640/blogger-image-1982703603.jpg"></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><br></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi23lLonwJvu-yGdEyndrUA_rmlZMMPvkac5XRerKkD8sI9mU9n_OmRSs-uSazqn_JWwdZMd9L4TfcJYbZtLv88qvhbn49ir7sbbjF2jw6gMU8WF_V5y9_ePbo0oYxeHqJzYgZ-izs9nWg/s640/blogger-image-1768484777.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi23lLonwJvu-yGdEyndrUA_rmlZMMPvkac5XRerKkD8sI9mU9n_OmRSs-uSazqn_JWwdZMd9L4TfcJYbZtLv88qvhbn49ir7sbbjF2jw6gMU8WF_V5y9_ePbo0oYxeHqJzYgZ-izs9nWg/s640/blogger-image-1768484777.jpg"></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><br></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><br></div><br></div><br></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><br></div></div><br></div><br>Richard Wilsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09676973692398285795noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2039823452867758922.post-82262925712770684252015-04-15T05:56:00.000-07:002015-04-15T06:17:19.983-07:00Not by the hair on your chinny chin chinNew research reported in the Journal of Anatomy from the University of Iowa reaches an unsurprising conclusion: that the development of the chin did not result from mechanical forces such as chewing.<br />
<br />
<br />
In fact, the prominence of the chin in present day humans is well documented and understood.<br />
<br />
<br />
<em>"Compared to chimpanzees and macaques, human skulls exhibit a derived spatial distribution of growth fields, especially in the face (Enlow, 1990). While the internal (basicranial) surface of the maxilla grows via interosseous bone deposition (sutural bone growth), the external (facial) surface of the maxilla as well as the external symphyseal area of the mandible exhibit resporptive fields. As an effect, the human face grows inferiorly and anteriorly through maxillobasiocranial bone apposition, but forward growth is counteracted by maxillofacial resportive growth fields. The combination of these processes results in a retracted, vertically oriented face in which the chin represents the most prominent (i.e., least resorbed) part."</em><br />
<br />
<br />
Zollikofer C., 2012,<em> Evolution of hominin cranial ontogeny</em>, Progress in Brain Research, 195: 273-289.<br />
<br />
<br />
Clearly the chin is a neotenous feature but Robert Franciscus from the University of Iowa proposes that it is evidence of so-called "modern humans" replacing "Neanderthals" around 60,000 years ago. Past horizons (<a href="http://www.pasthorizonspr.com/index.php/archives/04/2015/our-chins-developed-when-we-started-to-build-social-networks">http://www.pasthorizonspr.com/index.php/archives/04/2015/our-chins-developed-when-we-started-to-build-social-networks</a>) quote him saying:<br />
<br />
<br />
"<em>What we’re arguing is that modern humans had an advantage at some point to have a well-connected social network, they can exchange information, and mates, more readily, there’s innovation</em> <em>and for that to happen, males have to tolerate each other. There had to be more curiosity and inquisitiveness than aggression, and the evidence of that lies in facial architecture</em>.”<br />
<br />
<br />
So in a desperate bid to support the contention that "modern humans" outcompeted or absorbed Neanderthals Franciscus turns incredibly to face architecture. Whilst it is probably correct to imply that the transition from the robust hominins of the past to the gracile hominins of the present day may be in part explained by changing hormone levels (as a result of increasingly culturally mediated mating behaviour for neotenous features) there is no evidence to support the contention that the chin is a feature found only in populations exiting Africa, or indeed that there were well connected social networks exclusive to these groups.<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Scott elaborated on her research at the AAPA 2015 conference which refutes the suggestion that the prominent chin observed in extant humans is an autapomorphy upon which to differentiate between "modern humans" and "Neanderthals".<br />
<em>"...this research, demonstrating overlap in overall anterior symphyseal shape between H. sapiens and Neandertals, raises questions about the distinctiveness of the human chin."</em><br />
<br />
<a href="http://meeting.physanth.org/program/2015/session39/scott-2015-the-phylogenetic-utility-of-mentum-osseum-morphology-in-pleistocene-homo.html">http://meeting.physanth.org/program/2015/session39/scott-2015-the-phylogenetic-utility-of-mentum-osseum-morphology-in-pleistocene-homo.html</a><br />
<br />
As noted on numerous occasions on this blog there is no evidence of a "replacement" of Neanderthals in Europe by "modern humans" let alone evidence for the "well connected social networks" that Franciscus refers to. Past Horizons have confused matters further by referring to work that does not support an evidence base for morphological distinction between so called species but rather underlines the key learning: extant autapomorphies are a result of pedomorphosis through neoteny, a heterochronic process.<br />
<br /></div>
Richard Wilsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09676973692398285795noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2039823452867758922.post-68330492445240377982015-03-27T10:22:00.001-07:002015-06-10T04:26:03.702-07:00#FlintFriday<div><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"><br></span></div><div><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0); font-family: 'Helvetica Neue Light', HelveticaNeue-Light, helvetica, arial, sans-serif;">Exhibition 9th July to 1st August.</span></div><div><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"><br></span></div><div><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">Figure-stones of Fontmaure.<br></span><div><div><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"><br></span></div><div><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">Watford Museum,</span></div><div><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">194 High Street,</span></div><div><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">Watford</span></div><div><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">Hertfordshire</span></div><div><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">WD17 2DT</span></div><div><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"><br></span></div><div><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">Opening times: Thursday-Saturday 10:00-17:00</span></div><div><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">Free Admission</span></div></div></div><div><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"><br></span></div><div><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjTUzPJptomy7LF94xCXT2ENcVBNZ5y4LfEp1s5nMzG9TSGFuUxjh8tn7KZKHjmzVnvfdqnktA35oJ0nU9PnUDSCj-vkF-3xZwO1HLs1s7M7tWxDSAAwPOVLwmg_ctLW7u_Z7lKqgKz0FU/s640/blogger-image--1792122446.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjTUzPJptomy7LF94xCXT2ENcVBNZ5y4LfEp1s5nMzG9TSGFuUxjh8tn7KZKHjmzVnvfdqnktA35oJ0nU9PnUDSCj-vkF-3xZwO1HLs1s7M7tWxDSAAwPOVLwmg_ctLW7u_Z7lKqgKz0FU/s640/blogger-image--1792122446.jpg"></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><br></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgN5z_-meGQFpo5FJkc-O89PrecAftbPrSYmuYWsh24M1Esz2yUZtlTRd6NDc1adLCOhG2C5cgDUesLuGC_VTA7q8pkz7kBilowEl7NJzWYo0Ldj75WkQVWVz6QEyluIsvxbtWsJFyFqVk/s640/blogger-image-1754916328.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgN5z_-meGQFpo5FJkc-O89PrecAftbPrSYmuYWsh24M1Esz2yUZtlTRd6NDc1adLCOhG2C5cgDUesLuGC_VTA7q8pkz7kBilowEl7NJzWYo0Ldj75WkQVWVz6QEyluIsvxbtWsJFyFqVk/s640/blogger-image-1754916328.jpg"></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><br></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEghvVtpcBZlG03QGA-7FY7lSYxg_MTtb_JIyyuZMU7Jim4j2KTQZimZ682wdEzURloov0lnglHix0XL1qfCS0ka3TOnFhN6e734bLYZbyD6PC3KNUfvQ-qaa7pO8CLUYE4OBqXBVKde20c/s640/blogger-image-1740343496.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEghvVtpcBZlG03QGA-7FY7lSYxg_MTtb_JIyyuZMU7Jim4j2KTQZimZ682wdEzURloov0lnglHix0XL1qfCS0ka3TOnFhN6e734bLYZbyD6PC3KNUfvQ-qaa7pO8CLUYE4OBqXBVKde20c/s640/blogger-image-1740343496.jpg"></a></div><br></div><br></div><br></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><br></div><br></div><br></div><br></span></div>Richard Wilsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09676973692398285795noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2039823452867758922.post-90450278976481888572015-03-06T05:19:00.001-08:002015-03-06T05:19:55.636-08:00#FlintFriday<div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><div><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">Exhibition 9th July to 1st August.</span></div><div><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"><br></span></div><div><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">Figure-stones of Fontmaure.<br></span><div><div><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"><br></span></div><div><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">Watford Museum,</span></div><div><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">194 High Street,</span></div><div><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">Watford</span></div><div><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">Hertfordshire</span></div><div><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">WD17 2DT</span></div><div><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"><br></span></div><div><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">Opening times: Thursday-Saturday 10:00-17:00</span></div><div><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">Free Admission</span></div></div><div><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"><br></span></div></div></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><br></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgrZRZV7cPh4NapKQyG48QuTI1Hropoi9sYYsF74Hh0HWwFY1h8ulRdadfLUIR07kC-7GMl0RjOq722B5qAjiY_gfMJUC_KO6PIHgVe9f3XOTp880JFMJghffjWoCoMMnclZzR_oxmldwQ/s640/blogger-image--1987037660.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgrZRZV7cPh4NapKQyG48QuTI1Hropoi9sYYsF74Hh0HWwFY1h8ulRdadfLUIR07kC-7GMl0RjOq722B5qAjiY_gfMJUC_KO6PIHgVe9f3XOTp880JFMJghffjWoCoMMnclZzR_oxmldwQ/s640/blogger-image--1987037660.jpg"></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><br></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgKbzXqtHnEi4atZCvV7omrSlLqPs0jQTuUwhXlvBDumfwfpkH0ILwMxYvundoQsLuMVbdVLzexHmVXhvuHImN5CG3wh87Tma2JhQISlVAM236zmhmJYFzlum6m1mr0jodcSbJiaf3IMkg/s640/blogger-image-1317460300.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgKbzXqtHnEi4atZCvV7omrSlLqPs0jQTuUwhXlvBDumfwfpkH0ILwMxYvundoQsLuMVbdVLzexHmVXhvuHImN5CG3wh87Tma2JhQISlVAM236zmhmJYFzlum6m1mr0jodcSbJiaf3IMkg/s640/blogger-image-1317460300.jpg"></a></div><br></div>Richard Wilsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09676973692398285795noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2039823452867758922.post-88618442186645261912015-02-27T08:15:00.001-08:002015-06-10T04:33:21.488-07:00#FlintFriday<div><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0); font-family: 'Helvetica Neue Light', HelveticaNeue-Light, helvetica, arial, sans-serif;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjUJ9-VzOWJpZb6O8tLNb2ssJUANqOHdrgr_QHG9VopfblJ87LtpcHiFkbIkSYhGPG9CnjpomcWsWk5JqAE4v0HhLDvnl0Aqm-VNXBPnbW_ufZbMuoF5dvPbYbx3MJLvRLbgsjnnh8gtPs/s640/blogger-image--2025095042.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"></a><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><br></div></div>Exhibition 9th July to 1st August.</span></div><div><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"><br></span></div><div><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">Figure-stones of Fontmaure.<br></span><div><div><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"><br></span></div><div><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">Watford Museum,</span></div><div><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">194 High Street,</span></div><div><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">Watford</span></div><div><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">Hertfordshire</span></div><div><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">WD17 2DT</span></div><div><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"><br></span></div><div><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">Opening times: Thursday-Saturday 10:00-17:00</span></div><div><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);">Free Admission</span></div></div></div><div><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"><br></span></div><div><span style="-webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0);"><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEitn5S4FhQDBiqGSrzJ3OtgvRm7OIrjySWOqpzob5lfus345Rjz1VcingrbzvYuGm4oOQTLittYkX3mFI7ZOUF1R9so2iT-_dh_rqsidAHw_Xe1NVATcCsfh3IRRUoedl2PigWOo3kq3Bs/s640/blogger-image--787138346.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEitn5S4FhQDBiqGSrzJ3OtgvRm7OIrjySWOqpzob5lfus345Rjz1VcingrbzvYuGm4oOQTLittYkX3mFI7ZOUF1R9so2iT-_dh_rqsidAHw_Xe1NVATcCsfh3IRRUoedl2PigWOo3kq3Bs/s640/blogger-image--787138346.jpg"></a></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><br></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgo1jfhBzuAgAPWVTSpvzhJ3YrhC6DKlvyh0V3ihsgYLNBmAnlhZ9KNFiGxoctuPWfCIHr8I5DUm754a1eHs96-UMfjQnCPBLUKqRddaJlFIWkmTVIaM4YynPtyasyKYeEzhj9BdNd0vHE/s640/blogger-image--1497930592.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgo1jfhBzuAgAPWVTSpvzhJ3YrhC6DKlvyh0V3ihsgYLNBmAnlhZ9KNFiGxoctuPWfCIHr8I5DUm754a1eHs96-UMfjQnCPBLUKqRddaJlFIWkmTVIaM4YynPtyasyKYeEzhj9BdNd0vHE/s640/blogger-image--1497930592.jpg"></a></div></div></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><br></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiObG21fNc_5V8k_HcEfZqIXL8oRLsMEASKcLmm5VNalCK6vBKLgCGinIlrTBdNzBA2vvUEgqwyuyefrEgaE04WHuZ6kJRASOGhWCJIT-OUvs8dbXHcdBQrpGpzDoQ5bSMxJUSyCGoQI5I/s640/blogger-image--1282918116.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiObG21fNc_5V8k_HcEfZqIXL8oRLsMEASKcLmm5VNalCK6vBKLgCGinIlrTBdNzBA2vvUEgqwyuyefrEgaE04WHuZ6kJRASOGhWCJIT-OUvs8dbXHcdBQrpGpzDoQ5bSMxJUSyCGoQI5I/s640/blogger-image--1282918116.jpg"></a></div><br></div><br></div><br></span></div>Richard Wilsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09676973692398285795noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2039823452867758922.post-85808071670391377682015-02-23T14:23:00.002-08:002015-02-23T14:25:06.749-08:00Oxford University - right behind the mainstream narrative<div align="LEFT">
<span style="font-family: AdvOT863180fb; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: AdvOT863180fb; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: small;">Stone tool assemblages and models for the dispersal of Homo sapiens out of Africa, 2015, Quaternary International (in press), by Groucutt et al purports to test models for the dispersal of Homo sapiens out of Africa.</span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: AdvOT863180fb; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: AdvOT863180fb; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: small;"><a href="https://www.academia.edu/10985350/Stone_tool_assemblages_and_models_for_the_dispersal_of_Homo_sapiens_out_of_Africa">https://www.academia.edu/10985350/Stone_tool_assemblages_and_models_for_the_dispersal_of_Homo_sapiens_out_of_Africa</a></span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: AdvOT863180fb; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: AdvOT863180fb; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: small;"><strong>Consider this for a moment. The mostly Oxford based researchers contend that analysis of stone tools can yield information relating to biological or cultural dispersion.</strong></span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: AdvOT863180fb; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: AdvOT863180fb; font-size: medium;"><span style="font-family: Calibri; font-size: small;">Even if the authors of the paper were able to reliably identify the culture or "species" of human responsible from a given assemblage of stone tools, any analysis concerning the distribution or "pattern of dispersal" would relate only to preservation conditions and chance detection. The idea that a species could be tracked by simply referring to a set of etically described stones is critically flawed and therefore the results are untestable and unscientific.</span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Any (subjectively) perceived similarities between so called East African lithic assemblages and those from elsewhere is moot in the face of the continuity of in-situ technological development evident from the Middle Palaeolithic into the Upper Palaeolithic at sites throughout Europe.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">The assertion that "Most researchers accept that Homo Sapiens evolved in Africa during the late Middle Pleistocene" is <span style="font-family: Times New Roman;"><strong><em>argumentum ad populum </em></strong><span style="font-family: Calibri;">and ignores the mounting genetic, fossil, stone tool and cultural evidence which refutes it.</span></span></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"><br /></span></div>
Richard Wilsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09676973692398285795noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2039823452867758922.post-51389630483708808072015-02-20T06:27:00.001-08:002015-06-10T15:53:02.882-07:00#FlintfridayHertfordshire Exhibition venue to be announced<div><br></div><div><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhewOVa3vAn58KAXrKO3wEpr4-rIRsPJqhu8XXcHyuzM0y_acdAARQixHmKG1K0jsI2KCJc26SARsA7qspUZKpMpoBi3xaRQeFvCk3INn5pJzkz3VvZ60M6TCDYypBH5WEnqfgmv7OUpEc/s640/blogger-image-1641170553.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhewOVa3vAn58KAXrKO3wEpr4-rIRsPJqhu8XXcHyuzM0y_acdAARQixHmKG1K0jsI2KCJc26SARsA7qspUZKpMpoBi3xaRQeFvCk3INn5pJzkz3VvZ60M6TCDYypBH5WEnqfgmv7OUpEc/s640/blogger-image-1641170553.jpg"></a></div><br></div><br></div>Richard Wilsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09676973692398285795noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2039823452867758922.post-21198637381688327422015-02-07T09:22:00.000-08:002015-02-07T11:57:38.591-08:00Right or wrong?<br>
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Published recently by the authors (Holliday, Gautney and Friedl) and Jean-Jaques Hublin (one of the commentators) on Academia.edu is Right for the Wrong Reasons: Reflections on Modern Human Origins in the Post-Neanderthal, 2014, Current Anthropology: 55(6), pp. 696-724. <br>Genome Era.</span><span style="font-family: Calibri;"><br></span><br>
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"><a href="https://www.academia.edu/9697813/Right_for_the_Wrong_Reasons_Reflections_on_Modern_Human_Origins_in_the_Post-Neanderthal_Genome_Era">https://www.academia.edu/9697813/Right_for_the_Wrong_Reasons_Reflections_on_Modern_Human_Origins_in_the_Post-Neanderthal_Genome_Era</a></span><br>
<br>
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">The authors contend that the persistence of Neanderthal genes is more readily explained by the Assimilation (AM) model than the Replacement with Hybridization (RWH) model and reject Multiregional Evolution (MRE).</span></b><br>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"><em>"We argue this because we reject one of the major tenets of MRE: global gene flow that prevents cladogenesis from occurring. First, using reconstructions of Pleistocene hominin census size, we maintain that populations were neither large nor dense enough to result in such high levels of gene flow across the Old World."</em></span></blockquote>
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">All scenarios suggested for population sizes are at best untestable and at worse entirely fictitious (Bednarik 2013). The failure of many Pleistocene archaeologists to comprehend the implications of taphonomic logic are readily illustrated by the tendency to base these population estimates on the archaeological record. Of course this record is not a record of human population sizes and/or distribution but rather is representative of where the best preservation conditions occur and where researchers have looked. For instance, some estimates assume that there were large unpopulated regions. However, as Bednarik (2013) suggests, a sensible null hypothesis would be to assume that by 45,000 years ago all environments of four continents were as densely occupied as their carrying capacities allowed for. In other words, that there was a contiguous population from Africa to Asia. In such a scenario, following thousands of years of regionalisation reticulate introgression, genetic drift and episodic genetic isolation may all have occurred as suggested by Franz Weidenreich's in 1946. Note that the multiregional model of polycentric human evolution has diagonal lines (Figure 1) which accommodate these conditions.</span><br>
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">The Assimilation theory (AM) concedes the occurrence of genetic exchange between so-called "Neanderthals" and "Modern Humans", i.e. it accepts that they are conspecific - able to produce fertile offspring (Bednarik 2011). AM merely claims an in-flow of African genes. All models of reticular gene flow are in fundamental agreement with the original "trellis" diagram of Weidenreich and AM is no exception however positioned. Wrong isn't right.</span><span style="font-family: Calibri;"><br></span><br>
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"></span><br>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhKKnyA-LLeoXBxNWYP0IM3iXbGmjhNj9-q4Xe-OQ6QEfGr0y9RmS-OKibWQU1rI4Fwhs2XNLkWGCLeFj87uzrjCnx3-3sLJHe8Rrfsew145yox0g2bAahW0Mo1T42lMNOkUzsv_T1qTs8/s640/blogger-image--687887281.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="" border="0" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhKKnyA-LLeoXBxNWYP0IM3iXbGmjhNj9-q4Xe-OQ6QEfGr0y9RmS-OKibWQU1rI4Fwhs2XNLkWGCLeFj87uzrjCnx3-3sLJHe8Rrfsew145yox0g2bAahW0Mo1T42lMNOkUzsv_T1qTs8/s320/blogger-image--687887281.jpg" title="Franz Weidenreich's "trellis" model of polycentric human evolution 1946" width="320"></a></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"><em>Figure 1. Franz Weidenreich's trellis diagram 1946.</em></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both;">
<em><span style="font-family: Calibri;"><br></span></em></div>
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">What the authors attempt to do is show that these population estimates, which more often than not are simply circular references to the dominant and false Pleistocene archaeological narrative, support the idea that cladogenesis may have occurred - resulting in "modern humans". The duration of time required for reproductive isolation to have occurred is suggested to be in the region of 1 million years and therefore the conclusion of the authors' is at odds with their own estimate as Wolpoff notes in his commentary. They are right and wrong for the right reasons.</span><br>
<br></div>
Richard Wilsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09676973692398285795noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2039823452867758922.post-27286351869760348102014-10-07T16:09:00.004-07:002014-10-07T16:09:56.347-07:00Human Universe with Professor Brian Cox<span style="font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;">Apeman to Spaceman in 250,000 years</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;"><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/proginfo/2014/40/human-universe-1">http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/proginfo/2014/40/human-universe-1</a></span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;">Professor Brian Cox opened his new BBC Two series by doing a great injustice to our ancestors.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;">His statement that human development was an "ascent" from our ape roots is both anthropocentric and Euro-centric inferring as it does that humans were somehow "chosen" for this adventure, perhaps by god? Furthermore, it fails to recognise that from a biological perspective the evolution of humans is a process of fetalization or more precisely neoteny in chordates (DeBeer, cited in Bednarik 2011). It implicitly perpetuates the idea that evolution is teleological when it is dysteleological. The biological trajectory of the human species, a process marked most recently by a transition from strong to weak, can more accurately be described as a "descent" from our ape ancestry.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;">As the BBC web site reveals, Professor Brian Cox presents a new theory, which I shall refer to here as the "Large Brain Hypothesis (LBH)". According to the LBH model, the earth's 400,000 year orbital wobble in combination with the precession and rapidly changing environmental conditions in the African rift valley precipitated punctuated increases in brain volume resulting in the present human condition. The examples the professor provided to illustrate his case were the brain cases of Australopithecus, Homo Erectus, Homo Heidelbergensis and Omo II perhaps unaware that Omo II was a surface find and is certainly not representativ</span><span style="font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;">e of a "modern human" skull having some very robust features. His suggestion of an accelerated development in brain volume coinciding with the events and scenario outlined are simply not supported by the meagre hominin fossil record. Further it fails to account for the average 13% decrease in brain volume from 50,000 years ago to the present day, following a steady course of expansion over a much longer period . If such investment in brain size was so central to our evolution what conditions occurred to cause natural selection to be halted and for the rapid decrease in brain size and 50% reduction in robusticity which followed? Unfortunately LBH provides no answers to this basic question, no surprises.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;">Instead, Professor Cox parrots the usual Pleistocene archaeological narrative that in just "10,000 generations" we can all trace our ancestry back to one point. That we are "all related to Africans from the Rift Valley". BS. His and my genealogy, as white Europeans, is very unlikely to be traceable to an African ancestry. The genetic data, both Y chromosome and mtDNA suggest that the haplogroups of African and Non-Africans split from a common ancestor of around 160,000 years ago. The origin of this common ancestor is unknown at present (Klyosov 2014).</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;">He pinpoints the "road to civilisation" (from Africa - of course!) beginning at 60,000 years ago although why this date was chosen on this occasion by this professor is unclear citing the forging of Bedouin routes as evidence. </span><span style="font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;">No material evidence (for example the obsidian "spearpoints" he makes much ado of) supports this assertion. More critically, cultural evidence which is at odds with the suggestion that these 250,000 year old spear-points are a manifestation of a uniquely African/modern human trait was not presented. For instance, the finely crafted wooden spear from Clacton dated to around 400,000 years old or the javelin-like spears from Schoningen to name two of many more which contradict this mythical narrative.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;">But more to the point, implying that the human journey to space occurred in a matter of 250,000 years is simply incorrect. The most comparable journey is of course seafaring which probably began over a million years ago but certainly by 840,000 years ago as attested to by the evidence of hominin occupation at the island of Flores amongst others. These journeys, which by all accounts were a much more dangerous and therefore greater step for humankind, occurred without the global resources and expert scientific support that the first journey to the moon benefitted from. The journey to the moon was a precisely calculated exercise that by comparison with the first journeys across the sea was relatively safe (Bednarik 2011). These early journeys may have had failure rates in excess of 50%.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="font-family: "Calibri","sans-serif"; font-size: 11pt; line-height: 115%; mso-ansi-language: EN-GB; mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family: "Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-language: AR-SA; mso-bidi-theme-font: minor-bidi; mso-fareast-font-family: Calibri; mso-fareast-language: EN-US; mso-fareast-theme-font: minor-latin; mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;">So, as Professor Brian Cox dismisses several million or so years of archaeological evidence of developing culture as irrelevant, he arrives at writing which he proposes was the next "big step" to the moon following spear-points. He suggests that it is at this moment that humans really came into their own. Whilst he may have support in indicating that "writing freed the acquisition of knowledge", contrary to his case, I would counter that the production of exograms (the externalisation of memory traces) was fundamentally more important than writing since it underpins our construction of a "shared" reality and a frame of reference from which volition arises. What he appears to be doing is conflating the culturally accumulated knowledge which allowed for space travel with the conceptual idea of a "modern mind" which empirically does not exist.</span>Richard Wilsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09676973692398285795noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2039823452867758922.post-85815554395515301772014-09-27T14:56:00.000-07:002014-09-27T15:04:16.454-07:00The "Aurignacian" and the Humpty Dumptys of Pleistocene archaeology<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Amongst a plethora of papers of a similar nature it appears
that in the absence of cultural, genetic or fossil evidence to support either the Out Of Africa
(OOA) or Recent African Origin (RAO) models archaeologists and
palaeoanthropologists are scrambling to find data from elsewhere which supports the idea that 'Neanderthals' were replaced with 'modern humans'. A
pre-publication release from PNAS continues this trend and the mainstream media obediently
take up the baton, for example see </span><a href="http://phys.org/news/2014-09-modern-humans-migrated-austria-years.html"><span style="color: blue; font-family: Calibri;">http://phys.org/news/2014-09-modern-humans-migrated-austria-years.html</span></a><br />
<br />
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Early modern human settlement of Europe north of the Alps occurred 43,500 years ago in a cold steppe-type environment.</span></b></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Philip R. Nigst, Paul Haesaerts, Freddy Damblon, Christa Frank-Fellner, Carolina Mallol, Bence Viola, Michael Götzinger, Laura Niven, Gerhard Trnka and Jean-Jacques Hublin.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Quoted below in bold are the Abstract and a shorter summary
titled Significance from PNAS </span><a href="http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2014/09/16/1412201111.abstract"><span style="color: blue; font-family: Calibri;">http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2014/09/16/1412201111.abstract</span></a></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt 36pt;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">“Significance</span></b></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt 36pt;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Modern humans dispersed into Europe and replaced Neanderthals at least
40,000 years ago. However, the precise timing and climatic context of this
dispersal are heavily debated. Therefore, a new project combining
paleoenvironmental and archaeological fieldwork has been undertaken at
Willendorf II (Austria), a key site for this time period. This project has
concluded that modern humans producing Aurignacian stone tools occupied Central
Europe about 43,500 years ago in a medium-cold steppe environment with some
boreal trees along valleys. This discovery represents the oldest
well-documented occurrence of behaviorally modern humans in Europe and
demonstrates contemporaneity with Neanderthals in other parts of Europe,
showing that behaviorally modern humans and Neanderthals shared this region
longer than previously thought.</span></b></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt 36pt;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Abstract</span></b></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt 36pt;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">The first settlement of Europe by modern humans is thought to have
occurred between 50,000 and 40,000 calendar years ago (cal B.P.). In Europe,
modern human remains of this time period are scarce and often are not
associated with archaeology or originate from old excavations with no
contextual information. Hence, the behavior of the first modern humans in
Europe is still unknown. Aurignacian assemblages—demonstrably made by modern
humans—are commonly used as proxies for the presence of fully behaviorally and
anatomically modern humans. The site of Willendorf II (Austria) is well known
for its Early Upper Paleolithic horizons, which are among the oldest in Europe.
However, their age and attribution to the Aurignacian remain an issue of
debate. Here, we show that archaeological horizon 3 (AH 3) consists of faunal
remains and Early Aurignacian lithic artifacts. By using stratigraphic,
paleoenvironmental, and chronological data, AH 3 is ascribed to the onset of
Greenland Interstadial 11, around 43,500 cal B.P., and thus is older than any
other Aurignacian assemblage. Furthermore, the AH 3 assemblage overlaps with
the latest directly radiocarbon-dated Neanderthal remains, suggesting that
Neanderthal and modern human presence overlapped in Europe for some millennia,
possibly at rather close geographical range. Most importantly, for the first
time to our knowledge, we have a high-resolution environmental context for an
Early Aurignacian site in Central Europe, demonstrating an early appearance of
behaviorally modern humans in a medium-cold steppe-type environment with some
boreal trees along valleys around 43,500 cal B.P.”</span></b></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">The definitive statement of the first sentence (1) conflicts with the first line of the abstract (2).</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt 36pt;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">“Modern humans dispersed into Europe and replaced Neanderthals at least
40,000 years ago.” (1)</span></b></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt 36pt;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">“The first settlement of Europe by modern humans is thought to have
occurred between 50,000 and 40,000 calendar years ago (cal B.P.).” (2)</span></b></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">The abstract states that the first settlement of Europe by
modern humans is thought to have occurred between two dates whereas (1) states categorically that 'Neanderthals' were replaced by 'modern humans' by 40,000 years ago. The argument by consensus is expanded upon further in the abstract:</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt 36pt;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">“Aurignacian assemblages—demonstrably made by modern humans—are
commonly used as proxies for the presence of fully behaviorally and
anatomically modern humans.”</span></b></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">'Aurignacian' assemblages are not demonstrably made by 'anatomically and behaviourally modern
humans' and herein lies the problem for the paper's authors. Since so-called 'Aurignacian' assemblages have not been
shown to signify the presence of a particular species, or sub-species the
very foundation of the paper's assertion crumbles. That artefacts are used in this context as proxies for cognition, behaviour or anatomy would have been, I suggest, a more productive course of study. By definition no persons living during the Pleistocene were "fully behaviourally modern" since modern cognition can only be assumed to have arisen several centuries ago at most (Bednarik 2012a) and by definition no persons living during the Pleistocene were "fully anatomically modern" since the transition from robust to gracile continues to this day. If, as we are told, 'fully anatomically modern humans' replaced 'Neanderthals', then why do 'Neanderthal' genes and autapomorphies persist in present day humans?</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">The association of this so-called typology with 'anatomically
modern humans' is painted as if it were a given. Crania from
sites such as Vogelherd, Cro-Magnon and Mladeč are often cited as proof of
'modern humans' association with the 'Aurignacian'.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Vogelherd – The four Stetten specimens once regarded as
evidence of modern humans are now recognised to be later intrusive Neolithic
internments dated to between 4,000 and 5,000 years ago.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Cro-Magnon – This group of fossils is actually quite robust. The pronounced supraorbital torus,
projecting occipital bone of cranium 3 are 'Neanderthal'. Despite this they ended up being the type fossil for all 'anatomically modern humans'. Regardless of their attribution to either classification, direct dating to around 27,000 years ago places the 'Cro-Magnon'
fossils with the 'Gravettian' rather than the 'Aurignacian' industries (Bednarik 2011).</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Mladeč – These specimens are not 'fully anatomically modern
humans' and appear to show pronounced sexual dimorphism. Male crania are
characterised by thick projecting supraorbital tori, Neanderthaloid posterior flattening,
low brain cases, and very thick cranial vaults – typically features of robust
not gracile hominins. The Mladeč specimens appear to
represent an intermediate stage between robust and gracile. Their occurrence in a cave in indirect association with a handful of supposedly 'Aurignacian' artefacts found is not at all reliable though (Bednarik 2011).</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">There is no sudden change reflected in the hominin fossil record that would either support or suggest a replacement of one species by another. What can clearly be ascertained from the available archaeological record is that over a period of tens of thousands of years beginning around 50,000 years ago there was a gradual transition from robust to gracile individuals (Bednarik 2012b).</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">In terms of artefacts, the term ‘Aurignacian' simply refers to the etic interpretation of a loosely defined transition in stone artefact technology deemed to be of particular importance by archaeologists. It is an observer relative institutionalised fact - an archaeofact - having no independent existence outside of the discipline that coined the term.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"><br /></span><br />
<br />
<br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">The 'Aurignacian' is one of fifteen different <strong>locally</strong> developing 'cultural' traditions recognised within what is termed the EUP (European Upper Palaeolithic - generally regarded to span a period from about 45,000 to around 27,000 years before present) None of these recognised traditions have a precedent in Africa and nowhere in Europe do stone technologies suddenly appear or replace the pre-existing technology (Bednarik 2013). At Theopetra Cave, Greece, this technological transition was recorded in-situ and in association with 'Neanderthal' footprints of small children. ‘EUP’ industries arise at sites from as early as 54,000 years ago (e.g. Senftenberg), to as late as just 8,000
years ago (e.g. Abric Agut) (Bednarik 2011).</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">The observed transition presents a mosaic of
geographically, technologically and chronologically diverse changes in knapping methods across
a large region with a tendency toward miniaturisation and increased blade production, none of which are biological markers, and none of which can be assumed to be cultural or ethnic markers either.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> Once again then, Nigst et al make the common mistake of conflating technological markers with cultural, biological and behavioural markers.</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span></span><span style="font-family: Calibri;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt; text-align: center;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"><strong><em>“In the case of the rejection of symbolic evidence predating the “Aurignacian,” the Humpty Dumptys of Pleistocene archaeology, whose entirely etic terms (of tool types, cultures, traditions, peoples, ethnic groups, etc.) mean whatever they choose them to mean, have collectively fallen off the wall they had erected and sat on for far too long. All the king’s horses and all the king’s men cannot change that the entire replacement hypothesis, particularly the African Eve version, is nothing more than an academic sham. It is bereft of any real substance, was originally based on fake datings of fossils, was then transferred to unsupported genetic claims, sustained by accommodative hypotheses about invented and named tool industries and purported and named cultures, and was presented as a narrative rationalizing racism and genocide. But what is most disturbing about this incredibly naïve notion is that the primary reason for its existence is simply archaeological ignorance.” Bednarik 2011, The Human Condition.</em></strong> </span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"><br /></span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">References</span><br />
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span><br />
</span><br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Bednarik, R. G. 2011. The
Human Condition, Developments in Primatology, Progress and Prospects,
Springer, New York.</span></div>
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">
</span><div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span></span></div>
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
Bednarik, R. G. 2012a. An aetiology of hominin behaviour. HOMO -
Journal of Comparative Human Biology 63: 319-335.</div>
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span></div>
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">Bednarik, R. G. </span>2012b.
The origins of human modernity. Humanities 1(1): 1-53,
<a href="http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/1/1/1/">http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0787/1/1/1/</a></div>
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
Bednarik, R. G. 2013. Creating the human past: an epistemology of Pleistocene archaeology. Archaeopress, Oxford.</div>
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span></div>
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<br /></div>
<span style="font-family: Times New Roman;">
</span></span><br /></div>
Richard Wilsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09676973692398285795noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2039823452867758922.post-18065766169800531922014-09-23T14:23:00.001-07:002014-09-27T14:53:49.832-07:00A 5,400 year "overlap" of Neanderthals with Modern Humans<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Regarding “The timing
and spatiotemporal patterning of Neanderthal disappearance”.</span></b></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Tom Higham et al. Nature<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;">
</span>512, 306–309 (21 August 2014) doi:10.1038/nature13621</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">I don’t have access to the full article yet, but judging by
the abstract (<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">bold italic</i></b>) this is not an issue. My comments are provided in
plain type, I also quote from the supplementary information (<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">italic</i>). The authorship of the Chauvet Cave until recently was widely claimed to be attributable to AMH however this has been extensively refuted in part by the association of the paintings with Neanderthal footprints. The dating of this site alone poses a serious challenge to the hypothesis presented.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">"The timing of Neanderthal disappearance and the extent to which they
overlapped with the earliest incoming anatomically modern humans (AMHs) in
Eurasia are key questions in palaeoanthropology."</span></i></b></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">They are indeed “key” questions for the discipline; however that
it is so, illustrates the depth of the problems facing Palaeoanthropology and
Pleistocene Archaeology. Even establishing the basis of discrete separation
between so-called “AMH” and so-called “Neanderthal” is far from satisfactorily
concluded. Such a distinction, made subjectively, on the grounds of morphology
alone, is an unstable orthodoxy (Thompson 2014), more so given that species are
more commonly separated on a biological basis – the ability to interbreed. Apparently
it has not occurred to the referees that the authors most basic assumptions are
observer-relative institutionalised facts having no independent existence
outside of the discipline and questionable worth with regard to the past that
they attempt to describe. Further, a “Neanderthal” disappearance has not been
proven, indeed the opposite appears to be the case. It has now been amply
demonstrated that “Neanderthal” genes and autapomorphies persist to the present
day. This presents a big problem for the discipline because until recently it
has largely subscribed to the theory that AMH developed out of Africa unable to
interbreed with their contemporaries which is clearly no longer a sustainable
position. All models of a reticular gene flow are in fundamental agreement with
Weidenreich’s original trellis diagram of 1946 and are therefore multi-regional
(Bednarik 2011).</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The original
“replacement theory” has now been replaced with a new “replacement theory”; the
“idea” that AMH replaced the resident population, “albeit with some interbreeding”.
This is the idea that the paper reviewed here appears to seek to prove and
since the referees are likely to also subscribe to the consensus view this
unscientific approach has not been challenged. The very premise of the paper is
false and unscientific since it sets out to prove rather than test. Genetic
analysis suggests that “Neanderthal” genes persist in Europeans, Asians and
Papuans but not Africans (Green et al 2010, Gibbons 2010). Klyosov (2014) demonstrates
that the genetic data only shows that the Non-African and African haplogroups
had a common ancestor 160,000 years ago. In other words it appears that it is
precisely Africans that had the least contact with Europeans. Countless palaeoanthropologists,
archaeologists and geneticists are either misunderstanding or deliberately misrepresenting
the genetic data, in a series of publications essentially regurgitating the now
thoroughly discredited work described in the 1987 Cann et al paper which also
appeared in… Nature! For instance, the Cann team made the unsubstantiated and thoroughly
mistaken assumption that genetic diversity equated to ancestory. (See also my
first blog post for more criticism of the Cann paper in<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span><a href="http://pleistocenearchaeology.blogspot.co.uk/2014/09/where-did-modern-humans-come-from.html"><span style="color: blue; font-family: Calibri;">“Where
did modern humans come from”</span></a><span style="font-family: Calibri;">). <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>To
add insult to injury, a follow up paper by several of the Cann team (but absent
Cann) whilst recognising many of the weakness of the original paper, still got
it wrong. According to Klyosov:</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt 36pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>“This is again a repetition of the common
fundamental mistake by the proponents of the OOA concept, that if one
population is more ancient then the other, the first must be an ancestral with
respect to the second one. My uncle is older than me, but he is not my
ancestor.” </span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">As he explains, later migrations into Africa (3,000 years
ago and less) deal further irrecoverable blows to the Cann paper: </span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt 36pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">“Did they add to the “genetic
diversity” in Africa? Sure they did. Furthermore, they migrated to the
Sub-Saharan region, where Cann et al. (1987) sampled mtDNA and found a “high
genetic diversity.”” </span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Oh dear.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">One of the key reasons that the OOA theory gained such
popular support (putting aside for a moment the reference to the bible) was the
idea that it underpinned the concept of a single humanity. However, as Bednarik
and Kuckenburg noted it does so with frightening implications (Bednarik 2011).
At best this “triumph” would have come at a terrible cost to other humans and
at worst it endorses competition to the point of extinction carrying with it the
potential to rationalise genocide. The “Leaky replacement” theory whilst
conceding that there was some “gene flow” still implies that “anatomically
modern humans” out competed Neanderthals to the point of extinction.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;"><em>"Determining the spatiotemporal relationship between the two populations
is crucial if we are to understand the processes, timing and reasons leading to
the disappearance of Neanderthals and the likelihood of cultural and genetic
exchange."</em></span></b></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Had Professor Higham et al applied taphonomic logic here
they soon would have realised their fundamental error. The archaeological
“pattern” of evidence is nothing more than a reflection of environmental
degradation, research biases, random uncontrolled chance findings, etc., and
should NOT be assumed to be representative of any “real” pattern. Even if
Higham et al were able to correctly identify the emic properties of remnant
artefacts which would allow them to confidently ascribe them to separate ethnic
cultures, any “overlap” identified is meaningless.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Assuming that there were two distinct or discrete
populations how would Higham et al be able to tell them apart from their
respective archaeological signatures? They use technological indices and
conflate these designations not only with distinct ethnic cultures, but
remarkably biological separation. </span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">The caveat underpinning the paper is revealed in the
supplementary information:</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">“The majority of
specialists agree that the European Mousterian technocomplex was probably
produced by Neanderthals. In other parts of Eurasia this association is also
accepted, although the link remains to be proven, since it is known that AMHs
and Neanderthals produced similar Mousterian lithic tools in the Near East
prior to the initial Upper Palaeolithic. This is unsurprising given the Middle
Stone Age record in Africa. For the purpose of this paper, however, we have
assumed that Neanderthals produced Mousterian industries.”</span></i></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Incredibly then according to their own conclusions the
authorship of “Mousterian” artefacts from Mount Carmel alone undermines their fundamental
assumption: that is, the key finding of the paper is made worthless! <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>The authors have done nothing to demonstrate “the
disappearance of Neanderthals” but rather performed some dating of Palaeolithic
sites across Europe. </span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">With regard to the “likelihood of genetic exchange”, it is
noteworthy that Higham and colleagues fail to propose a parsimonious scenario
which would account for the extent of preservation of “Neanderthal” DNA and autapomorphies
in present day humans.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">“Serious technical challenges, however, have hindered reliable dating
of the period, as the radiocarbon method reaches its limit at ~50,000 years ago.
Here we apply improved accelerator mass spectrometry 14C techniques to
construct robust chronologies from 40 key Mousterian and Neanderthal
archaeological sites, ranging from Russia to Spain. Bayesian age modelling was
used to generate probability distribution functions to determine the latest
appearance date. We show that the Mousterian ended by 41,030–39,260 calibrated
years bp (at 95.4% probability) across Europe.”</span></i></b></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Let’s rephrase that, Higham et al show that for the narrow range of sites
sampled those attributed to the “Mousterian” are mostly dated to before 40,000 years ago and those commonly not attributed to this typology are mostly dated to after about
40,000 years ago. That’s to say they have measured the probability that
institutionalised researchers can conformably identify stone artefacts
according to the preferred unstable orthodoxy of constructed typological
chronologies.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>“We also demonstrate that
succeeding ‘transitional’ archaeological industries, one of which has been
linked with Neanderthals (Châtelperronian)4, end at a similar time.”</span></i></b></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">‘EUP’ industries arise at sites throughout Europe (Bednarik
2011) ranging from 54,000 years ago (e.g. Senftenberg) to as recently as 8,000
years ago (e.g. Abric Agut). This technological transition, observed in cases
in-situ (for example at Theopetra Cave, Greece, in association with
“Neanderthal” footprints of small children) can be seen as a mosaic of geographically
and chronologically diverse change in knapping methods across the region
tending toward miniaturisation and increased blade production – hardly
biological markers!<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">“Our data indicate that the disappearance of Neanderthals occurred at
different times in different regions. Comparing the data with results obtained
from the earliest dated AMH sites in Europe, associated with the Uluzzian
technocomplex, allows us to quantify the temporal overlap between the two human
groups. The results reveal a significant overlap of 2,600–5,400 years (at 95.4%
probability).”</span></i></b></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Regrettably for Higham and the team their subjective
interpretations of data as technological markers does not imply either the
disappearance of “Neanderthals” or indicate the arrival of “AMH” in Europe at
different times in different regions They simply perpetuate the litho-centric
interpretations and narratives of the mainstream Pleistocene Archaeological
paradigm by finding “patterns” in data which support their view. In doing so,
Higham and colleagues have had to ignore all fossil evidence which does not
support the contention that AMH and Neanderthals are a single contiguous
species which have transitioned from robust to gracile (i.e. domestication
theory, Bednarik 2011). More critically, they have succeeded in demonstrating
that taphonomic logic has not been applied.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">“<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">This has important implications for models seeking to explain the
cultural, technological and biological elements involved in the replacement of
Neanderthals by AMHs. A mosaic of populations in Europe during the Middle to
Upper Palaeolithic transition suggests that there was ample time for the
transmission of cultural and symbolic behaviours, as well as possible genetic
exchanges, between the two groups.”</i></b></span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">A mosaic of features in fossil skeletons, morphological
transitions from robust to gracile are parsimoniously explained with recourse
to the biological data which indicate neoteny or foetalisation occurring at an
unprecedented rate in the course of hominin history (Bednarik 2011).</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">By talking about “possible genetic exchanges” Higham et al
indicate that they do not understand the implication of the current genetic
evidence which shows continuity between “Neanderthals” and so-called “modern
humans” living in Europe and Asia and clearly shows a common ancestor for both
Africans and Non-Africans (Kylosov 2014).</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">The cultural evidence has never supported the idea that
“AMH” arrived in Europe with “modern cognition”. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Only the bias filtering of the archaeological
evidence practiced over the last few decades has allowed for the conditions in
which a distorted interpretation of the past has been sustained in academe
(Bednarik 2011, Thompson 2014). <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>All the
indications are that this practice continues unabated in influential journals
such as Nature.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> That Higham and colleagues can arrive at such a precise calculation for the perceived "overlap" of two archaeo-facts illustrates the depth of the problems facing Pleistocene Archaeology.</span></span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;"> </span></i></b></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">References</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Bednarik, R. G. 2011. The
Human Condition, Developments in Primatology, Progress and Prospects,
Springer, New York.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Cann, R. L., M. Stoneking and A. C. Wilson 1987,
Mitochondrial DNA and human evolution. <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Nature</i>
325: 31-36.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Green et al 2010, cited in Bednarik 2011.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Gibbons 2010, cited in Bednarik 2011.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Higham et al 2014. Supplementary Information, Nature. doi:10.1038/nature13621</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Klyosov, A. A. 2014. Reconsideration of the “Out of Africa”
Concept as Not Having Enough Proof. <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Advances
in Anthropology</i> 4(1): 18-37.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Thompson J. R. 2014, Archaic modernity vs the High
Priesthood: on the nature of unstable archaeological/palaeoanthropological
orthodoxies. <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Rock Art Research</i> 31(2):
131-156.</span></div>
Richard Wilsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09676973692398285795noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2039823452867758922.post-25296167366900806352014-09-16T09:59:00.006-07:002014-09-16T10:01:27.004-07:00Rabbits, neoteny and “modern humans”<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;"><br /></span></i></div>
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt 36pt;">
<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;"><strong>"I don't see much sense in that," said Rabbit. </strong></span></i></div>
<strong>
</strong><br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt 36pt;">
<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;"><strong><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>"No," said Pooh
humbly, "there isn't. But there was going to be when I began it. It's just
that something happened to it along the way."</strong></span></i></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">I was looking for a tenuous link to rabbits and happened
upon this quote from Pooh, apparently describing the course of Pleistocene
Archaeology.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Rabbits featured in the news recently but anthropologists
and archaeologists may have missed the relevance.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<a href="http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/08/140828142744.htm"><span style="color: blue; font-family: Calibri;">http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/08/140828142744.htm</span></a></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Science Daily announced:</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt 36pt;">
<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">“An international team of scientists has now made a breakthrough by
showing that many genes controlling the development of the brain and the
nervous system were particularly important for rabbit domestication. The study
is published today in Science and gives answers to many genetic questions.”</span></i></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">The domestication of rabbits took place fairly recently,
purportedly in the last 1,400 years. This has made the task of unravelling the genetic
changes that took place less complex than for other animals domesticated much
earlier, for instance, humans.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt 36pt;">
<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">“We predict that a similar process has occurred in other domestic
animals and that we will not find a few specific "domestication
genes" that were critical for domestication. It is very likely that a
similar diversity of gene variants affecting the brain and the nervous system
occurs in the human population and that contributes to differences in
personality and behaviour, says Leif Andersson”.</span></i></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Indeed, 50,000 years of domestication brought about major changes
that are observed in the hominin fossil record, many of which were deleterious
and contrary to natural selection. Only sexual selection can trump natural
selection and therefore if the discipline of Pleistocene Archaeology is sincere
in its’ quest to unravel the early history of “modern humans” it desperately
needs to acknowledge that the “Leaky replacement theory”, “Mostly Out of Africa”
and other such models fail to address those changes which are most central to
the current “human condition” (Bednarik 2011). Culturally determined sexual
selection was ultimately responsible for the rapid decrease in brain volume (37
times that of the previous expansion over the course of millions of years) and
50% reduction in robusticity. These are just two of the traits which are frequently
observed in the domestication of animals.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt 36pt;">
<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>“The study also revealed which
genes had been altered during domestication. The researchers were amazed by the
strong enrichment of genes involved in the development of the brain and the
nervous system, among the genes particularly targeted during domestication.”</span></i></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Considered in the context of human domestication this makes perfect
sense of “brain re-organisation” especially when the selection is moderated by
culturally determined significance. Indeed this process of selection for
culturally perceived values continues to the present day and reflects many
different pressures and influences including dominance and compliance.</span></div>
Richard Wilsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09676973692398285795noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2039823452867758922.post-88606020014896605482014-09-15T14:34:00.000-07:002014-09-27T14:54:27.069-07:00Where did "modern humans" come from?<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Mostly Out Of Africa,
or mostly making it up as we go along…</span></b></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Where did modern humans come from? A frequent question, the lead response to which that Google users are referred towards is from the National History Museum web site. So directed,
readers will learn that:</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt 36pt;">
<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">“The latest genetic evidence is putting an intriguing twist on current
thinking about how our species evolved. While an increasing wealth of data
supports a recent African origin, new studies suggest that when Homo sapiens
left Africa, rather than simply replacing archaic human species such as
Neanderthals in other parts of the world, they interbred with some of them.”</span></i></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt 36pt;">
<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><a href="http://nhm.ac.uk/nature-online/life/human-origins/modern-human-evolution/where/index.html"><span style="color: blue; font-family: Calibri;">http://nhm.ac.uk/nature-online/life/human-origins/modern-human-evolution/where/index.html</span></a></i></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">Recent African Origin
Model</span></b></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Let us examine some of the “evidence” offered up in support
of the standard dogma regarding “modern human” origins.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt 36pt;">
<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">“The Recent African Origin model was given a huge boost in 1987, when a
paper published in the scientific journal Nature, Mitochondrial DNA and Human
Evolution, rocked the palaeoanthropology world. It showed that part of our
genome, inherited only through mothers and daughters, derived from an African
ancestor about 200,000 years ago. This female ancestor became known as
Mitochondrial Eve.”</span></i></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Whilst no reference is supplied for the 1987 paper it is
probably safe to conclude that it refers to the work of Cann et al (1987). Alluding
to the significant resistance generated in response to the Nature paper the
Natural History Museum does not report that the results were flawed from start
to finish but rather that the results reported supported their in-house “expert”
Chris Stringer and “others”.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt 36pt;">
<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">“Although the paper was contested, the results strongly supported the
views that the Natural History Museum’s human origins expert Chris Stringer and
others had been developing that we had a recent African origin.”</span></i></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">In fact, at that point Stringer was still peddling the older
Out Of Africa (OOA) model which insisted upon a replacement of all hominins by “modern
humans” out of Africa. No mention is made of the false datings created by
Protsch which were in no small part the basis of this theory which was
questionable even then given the existing evidence.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Contrary to the claim of the article the data did not show
that part of our genome derived from an African ancestor about 200,000 years
ago, although this was the authors’ interpretation. For example, Maddison
(1991) demonstrated that a reanalysis of the data could produce <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">10,000 haplotype trees that were more parsimonious
than the one selected by Cann</b> et al in 1987. Not only this, but the more
likely candidates tended to have <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">basal
branches that were non-African</b>.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Further, Dr. Alan Templeton, who designed the program used
by Cann et al to produce the erroneous results, soon pointed out that the same
data could have produced 10<sup><span style="font-size: x-small;">267</span></sup> alternative and <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">equally credible</b> haplotype trees (by comparison there are 10<sup><span style="font-size: x-small;">70</span></sup>
elementary particles in the universe) (Bednarik 2011).</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Whether by design or by error Cann et al also miscalculated the
results by over-estimating the genetic diversity of Africans compared to
Europeans and Asians: thereby <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">skewing
the results in favour of an African origin</b>. </span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">As if these errors were not bad enough, Cann et al made a fundamental
mistake. They conflated genetic diversity with more ancient origins for which
there is no evidence (Klyosov 2014).</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt 36pt;">
<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">“In the following decade, more genetic data both from recent human
people and Neanderthal fossils were collected supporting the Recent African
Origin model. The idea gained momentum and with it the view that when modern
humans began to leave Africa around 60,000 years ago they largely or entirely
replaced other archaic human species outside the continent.”</span></i></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">At least here the Natural History Museum report accurately
what happened. “…<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">data… …were collected supporting
the Recent African Origin model”</b>.<b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;"> </b>Science
however does not work by collecting data to support a theory. Science works
when it attempts to refute hypotheses, by collecting data that challenges a
theory (refutation) which was amounting in the background. Pleistocene Archaeology
historically works by suppressing data that challenges the dominant narrative
and in this instance the behaviour of the discipline was not an exception to
the rule. It is no exaggeration to conclude that the “idea” that modern humans
originate from Africa around 60,000 years ago caught on, precisely because it
was not rigorously tested in any of the leading journals. Any challenges to the
dominating narrative are ignored, ridiculed or marginalised.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Amongst the most vociferous promoters of the African Origin theory
was Chris Stringer and he subsequently presented the theory as fact, as did
many of the “others”. Consequently the mainstream media dutifully echoed the conclusions
of the High Priesthood of Archaeology regarding “modern human” origins and the
gullible masses followed suit consuming and imbedding another factoid into
their belief systems.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">It is worth pausing here for a moment to consider where the
figure of 60,000 years springs from? Your guess is as good as mine. Various unsupported
dates were touted in support of a migration from Africa replacing the extant
population of Europe, e.g.;</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt 36pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">“50 thousand years ago” (Jobling
& Tyler-Smith, 2003). “50 thousand years ago” (Thomson et al, 2000). “50 -
60 thousand years ago” (Shi et al., 2010). “50 - 60 thousand years ago”
(Mellars, 2011). “50 - 70 thousand years ago” (Hudjasov et al., 2007). “50 - 70
thousand years ago” (Stoneking & Delfin, 2010). “60 thousand years ago” (Li
& Durbin, 2011). “60 thousand years ago” (Henn et al., 2011). “60 thousand
years ago” (Wei et al., 2013). “60 - 70 thousand years ago” (Ottoni et al.,
2010). “60 - 80 thousand years ago” (Forster, 2004). “54 ± 8 thousand years
ago” (Forster et al., 2001). “60 thousand years ago” (Stewart & Stringer,
2012). “45 - 50 thousand years ago” (Fernandes et al., 2012). “50 - 65 thousand
years ago” (Behar et al., 2008). “50 - 60 thousand years ago” (Cann, 2013). “60
thousand years ago” (Chiaroni et al., 2009). “50 - 75 thousand years ago”
(Patin et al., 2009). “50 thousand years ago” (Edmonds et al., 2004). “45
thousand years ago” (Moorjani et al., 2011). “50 - 70 thousand years ago” (Xue
et al., 2005). “70 - 80 thousand years ago” (Majumder, 2010). “40 thousand
years ago” (Campbell & Tishkoff, 2010). “50 thousand years ago” (Poznik et
al., 2013). “60 thousand years ago” (Rito et al., 2013). “55 - 70 thousand
years ago” (Soares et al., 2009). “between 40 and 70 thousand years ago” (Sahoo
et al., 2006). “between 35 and 89 thousand years ago” (Underhill et al., 2000).
“between 80 and 50 thousand years ago” (Yotova et al., 2011). “between 50 and
100 thousand years ago” (Hublin, 2011). “between 27 - 53 and 58 - 112 thousand
years ago” (Carrigan & Hammer, 2006). “70 - 60 thousand years ago” (Curnoe
et al., 2012). “~110 thousand years ago” (Francalacci et al., 2013). “200
thousand years ago” (Hayden, 2013).” List from Klyosov (2014).</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Somewhere along the line a figure of “around 60-80,000 years
ago” appears to have been settled on by consent. Another grand example of the
scientific precision applied by Pleistocene Archaeology in its’ attempts to describe
the human past by moderating popular opinion.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">The Multiregional Model is described only briefly with
little enthusiasm whereas the Assimilation Model (which is really nothing more
than another attempt to salvage OOA) is implicitly given more credence, even
going to the extent of highlighting certain text:</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt 36pt;">
<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">“Another group of scientists embraced a third theory – the Assimilation
model. Like the recent African origin model, this <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">gave Africa a key role</b> as the place where modern human features
evolved, but it imagined a much more gradual spread of those features.”</span></i></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Under the title “New insights from DNA evidence” it is
explained that “Neanderthal” DNA is present in present day Europeans, however,
what is not explained is that this refuted the original Out Of Africa theory
which demanded that these Africans were unable to interbreed with all other
contemporary hominins. The same of course goes for the evidence of “Denisovan”
DNA.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Recent Out Of Africa, by conceding that “modern humans”
interbreed with “Neanderthals” and indeed “Denisovans” is essentially in accordance
with Weidenreichs original trellis diagram of 1947 which is… multiregional.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">The page concludes by stating:</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt 36pt;">
<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">“The Neanderthal and Denisovan genetic studies have given our
understanding of our ancient past an exciting twist. Both indicate that modern
humans did not completely replace other human species, as had once been
suggested. Instead there was some interbreeding. This model has become known as
replacement-hybridisation, ‘leaky replacement’, or ‘mostly out of Africa’.”</span></i></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Since Stringer (and others) have painted themselves into a
corner by stating such things as “we now know” that “modern humans” originated
from Africa it is critical that the final point should be made that this is NOT
a scenario the genetic data supports. Klyosov (2014) demonstrates that (see Figure 4, my
highlighting):</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt 36pt;">
<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">“The tree shows the α-haplogroup, which is apparently equivalent to
haplogroup A1b in the current nomenclature, <b style="mso-bidi-font-weight: normal;">and is ancestral to both the African and non-African haplogroups</b>
(its common ancestor lived 160,000 ± 12,000 ya), and the β-haplogroup, which is
equivalent to haplogroup BT in the current classification (its common ancestor
lived 64,000 ± 6000 ya).”</span></i></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">The genetic data therefore shows only that Non-Africans and
Africans descend from a common ancestor at approximately 160,000 years ago. Any other interpretation is mostly
making it up as we go along.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"> </span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">References:</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Bednarik, R. G. 2011. The
Human Condition, Developments in Primatology, Progress and Prospects,
Springer, New York.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Cann, R. L., M. Stoneking and A. C. Wilson 1987,
Mitochondrial DNA and human evolution. <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Nature</i>
325: 31-36.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Klyosov, A. A. 2014. Reconsideration of the “Out of Africa”
Concept as Not Having Enough Proof. <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Advances
in Anthropology</i> 4(1): 18-37.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Maddison, D. R. 1991. African origin of human MtDNA
re-examined. <i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;">Systematic Zoology</i> 40:
355.</span></div>
Richard Wilsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09676973692398285795noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2039823452867758922.post-63134343152672856452014-05-03T05:02:00.000-07:002014-09-30T05:08:49.800-07:00The Modern Human Superiority Complex
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Neandertal Demise: An Archaeological Analysis of the Modern
Human Superiority Complex by Paola Villa and Wil Roebroeks published recently
in PlosOne represents an extraordinary feat of accomplishment by relinquishing
the argument that a cognitive advantage previously held to characterise the
quintessential difference between Homo sapien sapiens and Homo sapien
neanderthalis can be observed from the truncated archaeological record. They do
this in a manner which ensures that the fundamental premises of the Out of
Africa replacement hypothesis are not challenged and neatly conclude that what
they perceive as the demise of Neanderthals was “more complex” than previously
suggested. </span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">This demise or disappearance perceived in the archaeological
record is pinned down by Villa and Roebroeks to a period “between approximately
45 and 35 thousand years ago”. The references provided in support of this particular
assertion include Douka et al (2013) which concerns only the chronology of Ksar
Akil, Lebanon, and the Zilhao piece on issues with dates, taxonomy and cultural
associations in supposed Neanderthal-Modern human contact neither of which
identify a clear or convincing picture of Neanderthal extinction or
disappearance. They further state that in western Eurasia Middle Palaeolithic
technologies associated with archaic populations (Neanderthals) are replaced by
a population of “modern humans (Homo sapiens) with Upper Palaeolithic
technologies. The first reference cited in support of this claim is Higham et
al (2011) which only refers to the earliest inferred examples of evidence for
“anatomically modern humans” (AMH) in northwestern Europe. This is based on the
circular assumption that the scant evidence of etic stone tool artefact types
found are diagnostic of "AMH". Likewise Higham et al (2012) only
tests the dates at one site within a narrow context concerning art and music.
Even combined, all three references referred to do not persuasively support the
aforementioned claim that there was a replacement of technologies and/or
populations during the time frame quoted. No evidence disputing this supposed
replacement of technologies and/or populations is considered although of course
there exists plenty. </span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Contrary to the authors assertions, the study of the “transition”
process in Eurasia does not integrate the data coherently across a wide range
of disciplines or at least not according to the dominant narrative of the
replacement hypothesis and hence partially explains the reason for publishing
their own paper in an attempt to salvage some credibility. Amongst the
shortcomings of this mythical-like narrative are the key failures to; </span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt 36pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Account for the reduction in
brain size observed occurring during this period at a rate 37 times that of the
previous encephalization, </span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt 36pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Provide any evidence of a direct
replacement of technology , </span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt 36pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Account for in-situ development
from Mode 3 to 4, </span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt 36pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Reconcile dates which do not
accord with this model, (e.g. Mode 4 developing in some areas as early as
54,000 years ago and in others as late as 8,000 years ago) </span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt 36pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Or likewise explain away the
abundance of evidence for art, culture and technology that preceed and
therefore do not accord with this model. </span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">In case there is any doubt, Villa and Roebroeks have
clarified that the wide acceptance of the genetic argument is largely on the
basis of the botched work of Cann et al which was refuted soon after it was
first published. Of course they fail to mention any of the major problems with
the genetic model put forward. This “genetic evidence” was they claim, later
supported by fossils which showed that African were “far more modern looking”
than their Neanderthal counterparts. </span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Omo Kibish 1 and the Herto skulls are cited as evidence of
this perceived but ill-defined “early modern human morphology” emerging in East
Africa 195 kya. </span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt 36pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">The Omo Kibish fossils offer
some modern features, but also substantially archaic ones too, especially Omo 2
which is very robust. The dating is insecure, the latter a surface find. </span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt 36pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">The Herto skull (BOU-VP-16/1) is
outside the range of all recent humans in several cranial measurements and is
essentially archaic also. </span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Whilst on the one hand it may seem reasonable to suggest
that some characteristics of “modern human morphology” (whatever that may be)
are visible in these fossils such a claim fails to address the more important
and fundamental criticisms that these characteristics are juvenile ancestral
traits, and conversely, also fails to account for supposedly “Neanderthal”
traits persisting in present day humans. More specifically Villa and Roebroeks
do not demonstrate any sharp morphological or genetic separation between the
gracile Homo sapiens and the robust Neanderthals as is required to support the
replacement hypothesis. </span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">By implication recognising that archaeologists “began
looking for modern behavioural markers” at African sites (to confirm their
pre-established belief systems?) Villa and Roebroeks proceed to test the
evidence of this exercise in confirmation bias within the boundaries of a
framework that does not challenge the core hypothesis of the OOA replacement
model as they openly acknowledge. </span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Transitional industries and indeed any evidence (such as
in-situ development from Mode 3 to 4) which counters the underlying premise of
this poorly defined and dated replacement is specifically avoided on the
grounds that it does not support the hypothesis - this appears remarkable in a
peer-reviewed journal such as PlosOne. Likewise Châtelperronian dating
conflicting with this narrative is also rejected on the same basis. The full
implications of taphonomic logic have not been considered and it appears that
Roebroeks and Villa make the common mistake of assuming that the earliest
evidence is evidence of the earliest occurrence whilst compounding their errors
by referring to a very limited set of data concerning the aetiology of hominin
behaviour.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">The body of the work therefore is based on the futile task
of disproving the claim that the relatively few “modern behavioural markers”
perceived to exist in support of a qualitative cognitive difference exemplified
in the elusive “anatomically modern humans” were valid when it was perfectly
apparent all along to anyone studying the epistemology of Pleistocene
archaeology and particularly Palaeoart that examples to the contrary abounded.
With observations such as “no clear archaeological signature” the paper’s
authors offer excuses referring to new data some of which is already more than
twelve years old and of which represents only a fraction of the evidence which
has refuted this claim for many more years such as seafaring in Wallacea, etc.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Tellingly they refer to the “impossible coincidence” that
what they still perceive to be a period of stasis spanning 300,000 years and
including the use of hafting, personal ornaments, etc., is described as “rather
monotonous” (despite the broad range of the Neanderthal “repertoire” acknowledged)
was apparently interrupted by the arrival of AMH of which they can provide no
clear evidence either in the fossil, genetic, stone-tool or cultural record. </span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">This paper has a narrow frame of reference which renders it
largely redundant in the wider context of Pleistocene archaeology. In fact, it
was refuted before it was published.</span></div>
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"><br /></span></div>
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">This blog first appeared on <a href="http://www.palaeoart.com/">www.palaeoart.com</a> 03/05/2014</span></div>
Richard Wilsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09676973692398285795noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2039823452867758922.post-52375879999475729352014-04-12T05:09:00.000-07:002014-09-30T05:23:43.679-07:00Why are we not all logical when it concerns multiregionalism?
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">The evidence as set forth by Chris Stringer (2014) in his
opinion article in the journal Cell “Why we are not all multiregionalists now” makes little sense.
Consider the second sentence of the first paragraph.</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt 36pt;">
<i style="mso-bidi-font-style: normal;"><span style="font-family: Calibri;">“The fact that small portions of the DNA of recent Homo sapiens derive
from ancient populations in more than one region of the world makes our origins
‘multiregional’, but does that mean that the multiregional model of modern
human origins has been proved correct?” </span></i></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">By recognising that the evidence supports a multiregional
origin Stringer implicitly contradicts the title of his own piece. This is
nonsensical and he proceeds to provide a humpty dumpty argument in favour of
his “personal thoughts” about whether or not multiregionalism has been proven
correct when what science demands is refutation. Multiregionalism does not
imply unconstrained interbreeding but recognises that it occurs. Any model
involving reticular introgression is essentially in accordance with
Weidenreich’s 1946 “trellis” model of polycentric human evolution (Bednarik
2011). The “personal view” put forward seems hardly relevant in the context of
the biological definition of distinct species. It relies on a perceived
morphological separation between ancient hominin fossils and so-called modern
humans. Stringer presents this idea by hypothetically juxtaposing archaic
characteristics with modern, suggesting this would result in simultaneously
opposed features. Indeed this ignores completely the abundant fossil evidence
presenting a mosaic of archaic and modern features (Bednarik 2011).
Foetalization (neoteny) and self-domestication as advanced by Bednarik (2011)
are not addressed providing as they do the only coherent explanation for the
rapid gracilisation evident in the fossil record occurring as it did at
approximately the same time in all four continents. A period which saw brain
volume decrease at a rate 37 times that of the previous expansion observed
throughout the latter part of the Pleistocene at a time (between 50-30,000
years ago) when brains size was supposedly at a premium (Bednarik 2014). </span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Stringer attempts to ridicule Bednarik’s suggestion that Out
of Africa models were formulated on the basis of a hoax by quoting a 1975 paper
by Protsch instead of the original hypothesis of 1973 cited by Bednarik (2011).
Bednarik notes that it was Brauer who “recycled” the ideas and fake data of
Protsch in 1984 by using these and other unsound and since refuted information.
It was Brauer’s work which according to Bednarik inspired the “replacement
hypothesis” later dubbed the African Eve theory by the media. And it was the
replacement model or Eve theory that Stringer so actively promoted. Critically
this model categorically excludes the possibility of any genetic contribution
from robusts (archaics) once these “moderns” had arisen. In other words, the
claim that these “African ancestors” were incapable of interbreeding with
contemporaneous hominins was central to the specific ‘version’ of OA Chris
Stringer promoted across the mass media and now firmly entrenched in the
Anglo-American Pleistocene archaeological narrative. Stringer fails to address
why these false datings were not picked up earlier by either himself or his
colleagues, especially when as Bednarik (2011) reminds us, that concerning the
Stetten specimens from Vogelherd “…it had always been perfectly transparent
that they were much younger deriving from intrusive Neolithic interments”. </span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Fundamental errors, such as drawing inference from direct
comparisons between the genes of present day humans and ancient humans living
20-30,000 years ago, escape discussion. Yet it is clear that neither could
interbreed because they did not exist at the same time. We now have
confirmation that there was no biological barrier and this is exactly what the
Eve theory could not tolerate. Further inference is made to perceived
behavioural gaps in the archaeological record between perceived groups of
archaic hominins which pays no heed at all to taphonomic logic nor accumulating
evidence that there was never a “replacement” as demanded by Eve theory. The
Aurgnacian has now been demonstrated to be directly associated with
Neanderthals (Bednarik 2011) but it seems Stringer may be one of the last to
comprehend the full ramifications and extent to which the dominant Pleistocene
archaeological narrative he has been spearheading has lead the Anglo-American
school so far astray. </span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Ultimately Stringer makes another stab in the dark to
salvage the genetic argument by making an un referenced claim that several
thousand genetic mutations fixed in present populations are further evidence of
modern human’s uniqueness rather than accept the most parsimonious explanation
that culturally determined sexual selection guaranteed the survival of these
and other maladaptive mutations contrary to natural selection. There is no
refutation to the detailed examinations of many of these deleterious mutations
and their often very recent aetiology in the history of the human species as
put forward by Bednarik (2011, 2012). </span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">One of the key issues is the failure of Stringer to
recognise that the hominin fossil record cannot be considered to be
representative of population sizes or distribution and therefore it should come
as no surprise to learn that he concludes the piece by surmising that in the
“big picture” we are predominantly of Recent African Origin, a position he has
in many ways ungracefully cornered himself into. </span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"> </span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">This commentary was first published on </span><a href="http://www.palaeoart.com/"><span style="color: blue; font-family: Calibri;">www.palaeoart.com</span></a><span style="font-family: Calibri;"> 12/04/2014</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;"> </span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">References</span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Bednarik, R. G., 2008. The Mythical Moderns. Journal of
World Prehistory: 1-18. </span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Bednarik, R. G., 2011. The Human Condition, Springer, New
York. </span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Bednarik, R. G., 2012. Aeitology of Hominin behaviour,
HOMO—Journal of Comparative Human Biology 63: 319-335. </span></div>
<br />
<div style="margin: 0cm 0cm 10pt;">
<span style="font-family: Calibri;">Bednarik, R. G. 2014. Exograms, Rock Art Research 31(1):
47-62.</span></div>
Richard Wilsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09676973692398285795noreply@blogger.com0