biases (Re: MV is the most published author of SAP

From: Marc Verhaegen (fa204466_at_skynet.be)
Date: 12/18/04 

Date: Sat, 18 Dec 2004 20:29:25 +0100

"Philip Deitiker" <Donevenask@worlnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:2H_wd.1117731$Gx4.998697@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> "Charles" <lmno@mindspring.com> says in
news:V8Zwd.3464$yK.2217@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net:

> > seems to me that just about everybody here in sap, including myself, has
at one time or another had a hissy fit. we are just so damn
territorial! --charles

> Well at 7000 posts regarding a singular topic, I would say some of us are
much more territorial than others. I think if we added up all the post from
algis, mario, pauline, marco you would find that their 'territory' covers
most of s.a.p. Unfortunately the science of paleoanthropology as 95%
nothing to do with ape theories at all. Its about recent migrations,
molecular evolution, archaeological hotspots, divisions between species,
etc.

Fortunately, the science of PA has everything to do with apes. After all
Homo is an ape species, and if somebody wants to understand anything on how
humans evolved, he has to study the physiology, anatomy & behaviour or apes.
And then it's clear that humans are curiously different from chimps in
having evolved very long legs, straight body, external nose, very large
brain, SC fat layer, olfactory reduction, masticatory reduction, climbing
reduction, fur reduction, high needs of water, sodium, iodine, PUFAs, etc.
The only scenario that accounts for these features is that of a
Plio-Pleistocene littoral dispersal of Homo along the Med.Sea & the Indian
Ocean. Whoever believes this scenario is wrong should be able to give at
least *some* arguments...

Marc Verhaegen
http://www.onelist.com/community/AAT

http://allserv.rug.ac.be/~mvaneech/Verhaegen.html

"Truth is the intersection of independent lines" R.Levins 1966

_________

>
> So lets just be clear, when some of us present here we are talking,
> fairly about that other 95% and probably not enough at that. Whereas
> my guess is that the 60% share (discounting the completely OT stuff
> from World Class Net Loons) they are 12 fold overrepresenting a
> particular aspect, in essence they are trying to dominate the group
> and turn it in to their group.
>
> The same thing goes on in sci.archaeology, except there, there are
> a variety of completely squirreled out nuts. Most notably are the
> hyperdiffusionist who make claims like the Irish discovered Vanuatu
> eons before the columbus did.
>
> Disliking what someone is talking does not make a person
> territorial anymore than the disliked topic is marking off
> territorial. Territory is gained and lost in quantities.
> The people who would have presented and discussed the other 95% of PA
> that's not discussed here have mostly left. THAT is how territorial
> they are, so don't hand me some bull*** about us being all
> alike. Clearly it is the wanted intent for the AAT group to dominate
> this newsgroups, but also realize that in the evolution of all things
> good, every species has its day, s.a.p. not to be left out, and
> that day gone, the discussion has moved elsewhere and will never
> return.
> Algis for instance talking about how well he was taken at a
> conference where he spoke and people listened. But one on one with
> another science, he pulls every childish propoganda ploy in the book.
> That is an attempt to mark off territory, any such person should be
> summarily rejected as a scientist.
>
> --
> Philip
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> ____Groups_____
> Mol Anthro http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DNAanthro/
> Pal Anthro http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Paleoanthro/
> Arch. Aux http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sciarchauxilliary/
> Gliadin Sci http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/GliadinScience/
>
> ____Sites_____
> Mol. Evol. Hominids http://home.att.net/~DNAPaleoAnth/
> Evol. of Xchrom. http://home.att.net/~DNAPaleoAnth/xlinked.htm