tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post3632218909400620926..comments2024-03-19T02:31:02.140-07:00Comments on Steve Sailer: iSteve: Domestication GenesUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger55125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-55914252034117578992011-02-27T14:33:03.365-08:002011-02-27T14:33:03.365-08:00Excuse my ignorance but isn't the DNA like a p...Excuse my ignorance but isn't the DNA like a piano keyboard while RNA is like instructions for playing the notes? So, the idea that 'race doesn't exist' cuz everyone is 99.99% the same in their DNA seems to ignore the power of the RNA. After all, suppose there are two nearly identitical pianos. But one is played by RNA that is jazzy and another is played RNA that is classical. They will play different music. <br /><br />Also, since men and women are 99.99% the same in their DNA, I guess sexual differences are a myth too(also because some men have 'tits' while some women are flatter than most men). And since the DNA of adults and children are the same, there are no adults and children either. <br /><br />PS. Is it true that shrews have virtually no eyes? Yet they are mammals. As mammals, they are closer to cats than to birds, but cats and birds have eyes. There's proof that species is a myth just like race.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-90966892497196708512011-02-27T14:18:20.056-08:002011-02-27T14:18:20.056-08:00"Robert Sapolsky: Are Humans Just Another Pri..."Robert Sapolsky: Are Humans Just Another Primate?<br />http://fora.tv/2011/02/15/Robert_Sapolsky_Are_Humans "<br /><br />A somewhat related issue. <br /><br />http://nationalinterest.org/bookreview/of-skulls-and-buttocks-3388?page=4<br /><br />"MODERN GENETICS has demonstrated conclusively that no such thing as race exists. Thanks to the mapping of the human genome, we now know that each person shares 99.99 percent of his or her genetic material with everyone else...<br />Fingerprints link Europeans, black Africans and East Asians together in one group; Mongolians and Australian Aborigines, in another. Cerumen (earwax) is of two types-wet and sticky, controlled by a dominant gene; and dry and waxy, controlled by a recessive gene."<br /><br />If race doesn't exist, how can new species develop through evolution? No species can just turn into another species. It has to first turn into a different racial variation of its original self before eventually turning into a separate species.<br /><br />Also, focusing on fingerprints--sticky or dry or whatever--seems to miss the broader picture. True, Mongol fingerprints may be closer to that of Australoids, but don't Mongols have more in common with most respects with East Asians than with Australoids? <br /><br />After all, a similar argument could be made to argue that species also don't exist. For example, most of us believe that monkeys are, as a species, closer to humans than to dogs. But monkeys and dogs have tails, humans do not. So, are we to assume that the whole category of specie-groups of primates and canines is bunk? If monkeys are closer as a species to humans, how can they have tails like dogs? <br />And chimps seem to have fur than human-like hair. Chimps are very close to humans but possess fur akin that those of non-primates. So, are we to toss out the entire concept of species and groups of species(such as primates, rodents, canines, etc)since some members of one species group seem to share more in common with members of other species groups than with others within the same group? <br /><br />This is like throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Because Mongols share a very trivial trait with Austraolids than with other East Asians, we are to toss out the entire category of race even though Mongols have much more in common with Chinese than with Australoids? Ridiculous. <br /><br />(Not sure on this, but could it be possible that cats' eyes are closer to those hawk's eyes than to eyes of certain mammals such as mice or whales? If so, how can a mammal have a feature more in common with a bird than with other mammals. I suppose it means the whole concept of mammals and birds is also false.)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-79653565682825090512011-02-27T07:25:54.657-08:002011-02-27T07:25:54.657-08:00"It's like in the movie APOCALYPTO. There..."It's like in the movie APOCALYPTO. There were civilizations in the pre-Columbian Americas, but they were surrounded by primitive hunter-gatherer folks. I heard many of the human sacrifices carried out by Aztecs involved primitives captured by the Aztecs."<br /><br />The Aztecs themselves came from that primative hunter-gatherer group not long before they built their empire. I believe they originated in Nothern Mexico or even the SW United States, migrated southwards and conquered the more advanced peoples living in Central Mexico. They appropriated the conquered people's advanced culture, but also added their own particular brand of primitive brutality into the mix (human sacrifice, cannibalism).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-39203882115946031162011-02-26T13:40:21.652-08:002011-02-26T13:40:21.652-08:00"Any aggressivness the mestisos have must com..."Any aggressivness the mestisos have must come from their white heritage."<br /><br />Huh.<br /><br />The pueblo Indians of the Desert Southwest, being settled, were much more domesticated than the Apache / Comanche who, as nomadic Plains Indians, lived, at least in part, by raiding settled tribes.<br /><br />Many of the mestizos from Mexico are part Euro Spanish and Aztec. <br />The bloodthirsty Aztecs committed human sacrifice by ripping out the still-beating heart -- which is a good part of the reason Cortez could conquer them with just a few men and horses. The tribes living near the Aztecs were darn tired of being volunteered for sacrificing to the gods, so when Cortez showed up, they helped him.<br /><br />....<br /><br />I wonder, Steve, how much effect the last 120 years on reservations has had in "taming" the Plains Indians? Drunkenness is rampant, but theft levels aren't shocking, contrary, it seems to me, to what you'd expect amongst people who raided for a living just a handful of generations ago.<br /> <br />Suicide, however, IS shockingly common, which I think is surprising. <br /><br />Suicide is something you'd expect in high-shame, high-compliance societies like Japan, not amongst peoples who actively sought glory in war, as did the Plains Indians. Warriors don't kill themselves. They kill other people.<br /> <br /><br />Is it possible that the reservations have already selected for, to a small extent, domestication?JSMnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-29952083306320621972011-02-26T08:43:56.638-08:002011-02-26T08:43:56.638-08:00A larger issue embracing this matter is the genera...A larger issue embracing this matter is the general lack of a clear, well-illustrated history<br />of the effects of selective breeding of animals (animal<br />husbandry). Such a history would include reliable estimates of how selective breeding increased both the volume and quality of cow's milk, for example; egg production, etc.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-67517395760292644952011-02-26T04:59:59.699-08:002011-02-26T04:59:59.699-08:00Robert Sapolsky: Are Humans Just Another Primate?
...Robert Sapolsky: Are Humans Just Another Primate?<br /><br />http://fora.tv/2011/02/15/Robert_Sapolsky_Are_Humans_Just_Another_Primate#What_Separates_Us_from_Chimps_As_It_Turns_Out_Not_MuchAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-16461964183241720742011-02-25T15:15:45.566-08:002011-02-25T15:15:45.566-08:00When it came to learning new commands with the lea...<i>When it came to learning new commands with the least number of repetitions,</i><br /><br />Interesting list, and not too surprising. <br /><br />But they also say:<br /><br />"According to S. Coren, author of "The Intelligence of Dogs", there are three types of dog intelligence:<br /> - Adaptive Intelligence (learning and problem-solving ability). This is specific to the individual animal and is measured by canine IQ tests.<br /> - Instinctive Intelligence. This is specific to the individual animal and is measured by canine IQ tests.<br /> - Working/Obedience Intelligence. This is breed dependent."<br /> <br />The last one - Working/Obedience Intelligence - is the one listed in your tables.<br /><br />Our dog averaged out to 70th place, because she's not obedient; not real smart, either, but much smarter when obeying-against-impulse isn't involved.<br />We used to have a Malamute that seemed incapable of learning anything she didn't want to do, but I'd vote her the dog most likely to suvive in the wild because she seemed to know how to act - like a coyote - with porcupines, snakes and skunks...before killing them. Two much smarter dogs (hunting lab and alsatian) got stuck with quills because they were too trusting.Fernandinandehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11253225431705407699noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-625461573460137212011-02-24T22:31:18.340-08:002011-02-24T22:31:18.340-08:00"Pretty much all peoples on earth have been d..."Pretty much all peoples on earth have been dispossesd and opressed to an extreme degree at some point in their history."<br /><br />Of course, of course. My point is that some people develop a powerful and longlasting grudge over having been oppressed. Romans oppressed lots of different peoples, but the only people who still retain a victim-mentality from that period are the Jews. We don't hear modern Egyptians, Syrians, Germans, etc gripe about how the Romans mistreated them, but there is still a Jewish memory of the fall of Jerusalem and exile. Jews are like elephants. With a long continuous historical/spiritual mindset, they never forget.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-59796515430159483632011-02-24T17:53:58.888-08:002011-02-24T17:53:58.888-08:00"Though Amerindians in North and South Americ..."Though Amerindians in North and South Americas have been among the most oppressed and dispossessed people on Earth, there hasn't been much in the way of Amerindian uprising though in some Latin American nations, the indigenous folks outnumber the whites." <br /><br />- Pretty much all peoples on earth have been dispossesd and opressed to an extreme degree at some point in their history. It just serves the left's purpose of pretending American white men are some kind of special evil for overemphasizing the narrative of Amerindians, to suppress the resistance to dispossession of whites by the Elites. The Celts were heavily decimated by the Romans. The Turkic people were wanderers because they were pushed from their lands. They in turn stole Constantinople. The Chinese feel oppressed by barbarian peoples, the British were invaded numerous times through the ages, to the point where much of the current British DNA is invader. The list goes on and on. No Amerinds were not docile little dogooders who were crushed by the evil white man. Amerindians ruthlessly attacked each other, and attacked the white man from practically day 1 here,with brutal savagery,through any way possible, no matter how much whitey tried to make peaceful deals with them. The first recorded instance of biological warfare in the Americas was by Amerinds intentionally poisoning the wells of European soldiers who were their allies against other Europeans. Its pretty much a given that all groups of people feel special in some way, even if they maintain it by delusions. Even the Amerind tribes tended to refer to themselves as "the people" in their own languages, with the implicit meaning that everyone else was inhuman.Samuelnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-45030608800738654022011-02-24T16:35:45.453-08:002011-02-24T16:35:45.453-08:00That's funny. I once worked in the Emergency R...<i>That's funny. I once worked in the Emergency Room at SF General Hospital. I don't remember any cases of frostbite of the dick.</i> <br /><br />Well, how much frostbite of any kind did you see in temperate San Franciso? <br /><br />I know you were joking, but it doesn't seem unreasonably speculative to think that penises could be frostbitten during prolonged exposure to very cold air. If that never happens, then presumably we evolved to keep the blood and the warmth flowing to our genitals even when freezing to death. That's sort of comforting, I guess.Steve Woodnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-69271121766907803802011-02-24T16:02:28.804-08:002011-02-24T16:02:28.804-08:00If you want undomesticated people look no farther ...If you want undomesticated people look no farther than Eastern European Roma (gypsies).<br /><br />Almost all the problems they have (and cause) come down to the fact that they're not domesicated in the way that their host populations are.<br /><br />I remember seeing two gypsy girls (probably no more than 10 years old each) distract and flank an overwhelm a 20 something male body builder, take his food (Mickey D) from him and send him running away like a frightened 6 year old. Then it hit me - I'd seen exactly the same tactics used by predators who feed on ungulates on the discovery channel a few days before).<br /><br />I assume that gypsies lose a fair amount of pre-pubescent children to various predators and accidents but there's no population in Europe that tests (with no conscience) the survival skills of their children like gypsies who reoutinely leave them in the middle of urban (predator rich) enivornments for hours or days at a time.<br /><br />In my weaker moments I almost feel sorry for western governments that want to treat gypsies as post-modern equals.Michael Farrishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07724169255162493473noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-43192870027068661302011-02-24T12:32:26.695-08:002011-02-24T12:32:26.695-08:00"it's funny, you have two modes: you can ...<i>"it's funny, you have two modes: you can speak objectively about biology and race. in this sense you are not picking sides,<br /><br /> and then tere is other mode u ooperate: that of spokesperson for white racialism natonalism."</i><br /><br />Whereas you are Johnny One Note pointing out (again and again and again) this alleged "contradiction" where there is none. Hint: it is normal for people to have different "modes" and there's no contradiction involved. Also it is rather laughable to call Steve a "spokesperson for white racialism nationalism". <br /><br />Also, learn to spell, capitalize, punctuate, etc., properly. If you are going to be a troll, try to at least act like a literate troll.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-91656688147097557232011-02-24T12:19:12.870-08:002011-02-24T12:19:12.870-08:00Now, take China. Traditionally the Middle Kingdom,...Now, take China. Traditionally the Middle Kingdom, so great that it had nothing to learn from the barbarians. But Chinese were humiliated in the 19th and 20th centuries, and this led to a lot of anger. Though many Chinese learned to blame their own culture/history for the decline, there is a lot of nationalist rage abou how barbarian races had humiliated the great civilization/people of China. Many Americans don't understand the nature of this rage, no more than whites understand the real nature of Jewish and black rage. And many Anglos in the 1920s and 30s didn't understand the nature of German rage. They thought Germans under Nazi rule just wanted to be like everyone else, when in fact, Germans were once again looking to secure their rightful 'place in the sun'. <br />Maybe Muslims feel a similar kind of rage. They believe their religion to be the best and Muhammad to be the final and most perfect prophet, yet the Muslim world has been getting its ass whupped by Christians, western decadents, and Jews/Zionists. <br /><br />Though Amerindians in North and South Americas have been among the most oppressed and dispossessed people on Earth, there hasn't been much in the way of Amerindian uprising though in some Latin American nations, the indigenous folks outnumber the whites. <br />Maybe it's because Amerindians never developed a culture of superiority like the Jews, Chinese, and Germans. Though some Amerindian civilizations may have had a supremacist ideology, the pride rested with the elites--warrior chieftains and priestly caste--than with the entire population(as with Jews, Chinese, or nationalistic Germans). So, when the elites were overthrown by the Europeans, the masses just bowed down to the new masters. <br /><br />Also, Amerindians don't have an intellectual basis for superiority(like Jews) or physical basis for superiority(like blacks). <br />When a smart Jew had to work under a less smart white goy, he felt anger. When a strong black slave had to take orders from a white guy, he felt anger. But when a mediocre Amerindian takes orders from a white man, he feels it makes perfect sense. <br />There has been some political activism in Latin America, but most of the leaders were whites like Che Guevara or Guzman(of Peru). There is Morales in Bolivia but his impact has proven to be less serious than expected. <br /><br />A humiliated wolf or wolvernine is more dangerous than a humiliated dog.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-56644423759304874032011-02-24T12:18:55.046-08:002011-02-24T12:18:55.046-08:00"If you talk with a lot of Mexicans of Indian..."If you talk with a lot of Mexicans of Indian descent, they are actually very Asiatic."<br /><br />"Amerindians have been separated from Asians long enough that they no longer cluster genetically with Asians:<br />http://infoproc.blogspot.com/2010/08/connect-dots.html<br />The big difference between the two groups, as pointed out by Cochran and Harpending, is that North Asians evolved over the last 10,000 years in agricultural societies, while Amerindians did not. Amerindians were still in the hunter-gatherer stone age when found by Europeans."<br /><br />One thing about Amerindians. They may be inept, into crime, and have a host of other problems, but they are not as 'dangerous' as groups such as Germans, Jews, blacks, or Chinese. <br />Though no people like to be oppressed and/or dispossessed, some people could probably bear it better than other peoples. I think this has a lot to do with self-perception based on cultural, intellectual, and physical factors. <br /><br />The most 'dangerous' kind of people are those who are convinced of their greatness/specialness but who feel oppressed, marginalized, or wronged. <br /><br />Take the Jews. Since the beginning, they saw themselves as the Chosen People. Even the poorest Jew felt he was special, favored by the one and only God. So, when Jews were wronged or oppressed by other people, their anger and rage were bound to be much more intense. Jews, like their God, were likely to be very vengeful. Another reason for Jewish anger is the perception that they are more intelligent than goyim--which is true enough. So, the fact that Jews had to live under the thumb of less inteligent goyim filled them with anger too. <br /><br />Now, take the Germans. A very proud people with great history and cultural achievement. Also, a people who consider themselves to be handsome and healthy. This later became the basis of German nationalism. In the 19th century, Germans were pissed that they didn't have a proper place in the sun. So, they sought an empire of their own. When that failed with WWI, it led to the rise of Hitler who played on humiliation of the Weimar period. Many nations were defeated and humiliated, but Germans took it especially hard cuz they regarded themselves as a great people. So, Nazism sought to counter the humiliation with a very vengeful German Power Ideology. <br /><br />Now, take the blacks. If blacks had the physiques and musical stiffness of South American Indians, they might have accepted their lot in the white-controlled order with resignation. But blacks felt that they are stronger than the 'slow white boy', more charismatic with bellowing voices, more musical with rhythm and funk. So, black rage isn't only about the denial of equality by white 'racists' but about how an inferior punkass race of white boys kept the superior black man down. Black rage seeks not so much equality with whites as domination over whites. A rapper doesn't wanna be the equal of a polka player or country singer. He wants to show the world that he be da greatest.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-16011647871043089442011-02-24T11:46:34.566-08:002011-02-24T11:46:34.566-08:00"I haven't read the Cochran/Harpending bo..."I haven't read the Cochran/Harpending book, but I don't understand how one can work from the assumption that Amerindians were hunter-gatherers. Mexico City was significantly larger than any city in Europe at the time of the Conquest, for example. Then there's Inca culture, Cahokia, the Anasazi, etc. etc. What's the thinking here?"<br /><br />It's like in the movie APOCALYPTO. There were civilizations in the pre-Columbian Americas, but they were surrounded by primitive hunter-gatherer folks. I heard many of the human sacrifices carried out by Aztecs involved primitives captured by the Aztecs. <br />So, before white civilization destroyed Aztec civilization, Aztecs were destroying they primitives. <br />If Christianity sought to save souls among Germanic barbarians, Aztecs sought to steal the hearts of primitive savages.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-23578365637767526612011-02-24T11:34:18.183-08:002011-02-24T11:34:18.183-08:00I haven't read the Cochran/Harpending book, bu...<i>I haven't read the Cochran/Harpending book, but I don't understand how one can work from the assumption that Amerindians were hunter-gatherers. Mexico City was significantly larger than any city in Europe at the time of the Conquest, for example. Then there's Inca culture, Cahokia, the Anasazi, etc. etc. What's the thinking here?</i><br /><br />I may get 10,000 Year Explosion down from my bookcase later, but if I remember correctly I think Cochran and Harpending sort of conflate for the purposes of a brief discussion large and agriculturally intensive states with strong states that ruthlessly punish and otherwise discourage violence (i.e. states with a strong degree of control over violence within them and strong power to ruin the Darwinian fitness of murderers and bravos) and technologically complex states to some degree.<br /><br />Which works fine in Eurasia and in the broad abstract because these three things tend to have a fairly uniform correlation, but can be a bit more fuzzy close up.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-66776772185674474742011-02-24T11:28:16.752-08:002011-02-24T11:28:16.752-08:00Neoteny is actually a theory of how the human spec...<i>Neoteny is actually a theory of how the human species developed in the first place. We do look like very young apes. And we are "hairless" and "trusting" compared to other apes. Even our huge head compared to bodysize fits the embryonic profile.</i><br /><br />Depends on how you think about it. Cranially, humans are neotenous in some ways compared to ancestral hominids, but not in others:<br /><br />-Midfacial shortening is neotenous.<br />-Cranial globularisation is not neotenous (contrary to repeated assertion - ).<br />-Lower facial (nose down) flattening and smaller teeth are neotenous.<br />-Human jaw shape is not neotenous.<br />-The formation of an external and less flat nose during the evolution of Homo Erectus from his -predecessors is not neotenous.<br />-Chins are not neotenous.<br />-Secondary sexual hair (sexually dimorphic) in humans is not neotenous at all, but derived (this seems likely when we weight humans, chimps AND bonobos).<br /><br />-Human adult bodies are not really well described neotenous AFAIK - compare a young chimpanzee neonate body to an adult human body. It's a really bad description to try and call the long legged, short armed, narrow torsoed adult human body in any way like a chimp neonate. The only thing in common is the large brain to body ratio.<br /><br />-Human cranial gracility seems neotenous, but this isn't really a linear trend in human evolution - Erectus is more robust than his predecessor, for example.<br /><br />So it's a mixed bag. Obviously it's OK to generally describe humans as neotenous, or we wouldn't do it (we're more neotenous than we're not!), but I think it's less illuminating than describing humans as simply having broken things which allowed them to develop as apes and broken the off switches for certain things that apes stop developing when younger, with some elements which are wholly new to humans.<br /><br />Which makes sense, when you think about it, as most rapid evolution (which our evolution from our chuman predecessors was) proceeds simply by quickly and dirtily breaking some things while exaggerating others. It's really hard to evolve new developmental pathways de novo (possibly slightly easier now that the "10,000 Year Explosion" in population numbers has happened, but not majorly). For a break, think of skin colour in Eurasian peoples (outside South Eurasia) - the melanin storage/production mechanism is simply broken - and the break in the switch which turns lactase production off in Europeans (and to a lesser extent other pastoral and semi-pastoral populations). While for an exaggeration/increase in expression, think of the increase in copy number of amylase producing genes in agricultural populations.<br /><br />When we think about differences in neoteny in human populations which exist in the present day, I'd place high weight on the features of neoteny that show long trends in the human lineage (cranial globularity, short midface, lower facial flatness, small teeth) and low weight on the parts that while neotenous, don't (body hair, flat nose, broadness of face, chin size, cranial rugosity, &c.).On Neoteny:noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-67173972360810001622011-02-24T10:50:36.305-08:002011-02-24T10:50:36.305-08:00smaller penises, which was an advantage since havi...<i>smaller penises, which was an advantage since having a long penis could lead to painful death by frostbite and gangrene.</i><br /><br />That's funny. I once worked in the Emergency Room at SF General Hospital. I don't remember any cases of frostbite of the dick.<br /><br />AlbertosaurusAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-67102012222975079422011-02-24T09:51:57.357-08:002011-02-24T09:51:57.357-08:00when people say a fox that interacts with us is sm...<i>when people say a fox that interacts with us is smarter they aren't saying anything about its brains but just that it interacts better.</i><br /><br />Experiments with tame foxes seem to show that they are truly "smarter". They respond to human cues about hidden food - much like dogs do. Notably, as a rule chimps fail to do so.Nanonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-90134493626392306352011-02-24T09:15:25.563-08:002011-02-24T09:15:25.563-08:00And though American Indians led a savage existence...<i>And though American Indians led a savage existence and could be brutal, they were not a funky out-of-control people. </i><br /><br />You don't know the first thing about American history and American Indians, do you?Paulhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13416435375174809618noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-33872964562247233672011-02-24T07:51:45.194-08:002011-02-24T07:51:45.194-08:00I think you are right that when people say a fox t...I think you are right that when people say a fox that interacts with us is smarter they aren't saying anything about its brains but just that it interacts better. I suspect that the same fox would be less "smart" in surviving in the wild.neil craighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09157898238945726349noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-29180976535225166382011-02-24T04:48:04.588-08:002011-02-24T04:48:04.588-08:00@Little John
I haven't read the Cochran/Harpe...@Little John<br /><br />I haven't read the Cochran/Harpending book, but I don't understand how one can work from the assumption that Amerindians were hunter-gatherers. Mexico City was significantly larger than any city in Europe at the time of the Conquest, for example. Then there's Inca culture, Cahokia, the Anasazi, etc. etc. What's the thinking here?slumber_jnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-58472540244019924092011-02-24T04:26:12.356-08:002011-02-24T04:26:12.356-08:00"..just look at the little penis of the Eskim..."..just look at the little penis of the Eskimos in FAST RUNNER. In that cold, it was surely a blessing."<br /><br />No thanks, I'll just take your word for it...Manuelnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-18327373505485211582011-02-24T04:02:16.382-08:002011-02-24T04:02:16.382-08:00My hunch is that domestication selects for neoteny...<i> My hunch is that domestication selects for neoteny, i.e. childlike traits, which encourages friendliness and openness to strangers or different species (humans). I think if our social engineers had their way they'd have us all be hairless, childlike and trusting. Retaining some of our wild and fierce characteristics is not always a bad thing -- do we really want to be like so many Jersey cows? </i><br /><br />Neoteny is actually a theory of how the human species developed in the first place. We do look like very young apes. And we are "hairless" and "trusting" compared to other apes. Even our huge head compared to bodysize fits the embryonic profile.Thomasnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9430835.post-29817798343987487372011-02-24T01:33:21.032-08:002011-02-24T01:33:21.032-08:00"I think climate played a key role in cooling..."I think climate played a key role in cooling the aggression(at least the individualistic kind) of the Asiatics, and this includes Amerindians. In cold climate, people have to huddle closely and learn to cooperate. "<br /><br />I'm surprised no one ever considers brain damage caused by an aggressive parent or sibling as a possible source of aggression in someone who may not actually carry an aggression gene. Some family violence goes way beyond being hit on the legs with a belt. Considering new studies on concussions in football players, I think commenters at iSteve should be thinking forensically as well as genetically.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com