Re: To the real anthropologists (you know who you are)


Comm wrote:
"A." <atalanta.brilliante@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1148356629.220707.236320@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Comm wrote:
0
"A." <atalanta.brilliante@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1148153811.748622.82060@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Unless you're completely amused by it, there's no point
in this evolution debate.

What debate? Where? I'll guess: Do you mean scientists versus
religious
people? HA! That's no debate.

They don't know what the word
means, don't care to find out. They don't know what cells
are, and I am not sure they understand what sperms may
be, or eggs. I don't think they understand what a gene is,
or what a point mutation is. I don't think they know these
things can be measured (mutations, alleles, etc.) And
counted. I don't think they truly believe that identical twins
have identical DNA, or that the rest of us have body parts
created in many ways by DNA. They don't know how
genes are marked off, or what chromosomes really are.
They don't know about random assortment or crossover or
any of the common mechanisms of biologic change. They
can't define the term "species," and couldn't if their asses
were set on fire. They don't know what to do with modern
views on gene splicing or speciation. No one cares, but them,
about absolutely strict species lines - so let them prove
to me that they are NOT chimps. They are not the same
species as the rest of us. They simply aren't - and I'm going
by brain parameters, now.

Heh, well, like it or not, H. sapiens got to where we are today without
knowing ANYTHING about such things, dear.

And your point in saying that would be....?
And as if I didn't know. Why so condescending?

So then, you know. Why ask me what my point is? Wait. ME condescending?
ME? And you are NOT condescending to just about everyone you post to (you
were so much so with me that you earned the nik Ms. V - and I'm still
waiting for your pictures - I showed you me, deary - and you sure did a
WHOLE LOT of bragging....). And now you are NOT condescending to these
religious people that you want to call subhumans cuz they don't know, or
don't want to know, about genes?? You aren't? HA!! Maybe you really don't
get my whole point. H. sapiens got to where we are today by not knowing a
whole LOT of stuff we know today. H. sapiens might not get thru the next
100 years with all mankind has made in terms of weapons - or even cars. We
are not evolved to "Know Truth." We are evolved to survive - and religion
is a very cohesive force in the lives of human beings.

But to your point: not mankind. No no. Only a very very few people on the
planet were able to figure out on their own (not learn in school ahem) "what
underlies this creation, exactly HOW did God (sic) make it all" (that's what
inspired them, btw, Farraday even wrote that - and so did some others in
various ways) - and so, they figure out all kinds of hidden things about the
nature of the reality we live in - and figured out how to convert mass into
energy. Damn. Why not instead turn sound into light? That's more
fundamental, but basically the same premise. OH, wait. That's been done.
But it never got funded after it was shown to be doable. Too bad. And
what, pray tell, have YOU invented? What have YOU figured out all on your
own? You know, the way these others figured it out, what have YOU
discovered? You are no Lynn Margulis, no Einstein, no Farraday. I use the
Hellenic term then: Margulis, Einstein, Farraday, etc - they were Daimonic.
They had daimonic genius. Did you ever really think about how humans ever
managed to figure out, to a fine art, making alloys out of metal? Where
would they even get the idea to "make fire hotter that it already is" and
then melt metals like that? Mix them? Mix them so they are just right?
There are things that humans do that are 100% animal: we write cuz we have
hands that can make marks, dextrous fingers (all fingers, not just thumb and
pointer finger), we speak cuz we can - so we form words and etc. All these
things are animal. We make shelters, homes, still animal. Like, dolphins
use sonar cuz they have it in their brains TO use. But making metal alloys
is NOT animal at all. It's Something Else. Do you understand? That kind
of knowledge is not the same KIND of knowledge as say, making up an alphabet
or syllabary or characters. It's Daimonic, as the Hellenics meant the word.
But once one makes it, the many learn HOW to make it. It's not like the
many figured it out. NO. Not at all. The many just learn it. I assume
you know how shelled sea animals evolved these shells like weapons,
defensive weapons over the many years? Humans took to making
hand-extensions - or tools. But the point comes when what humans are doing
is no longer animal. It's outside the animal nature. Do you understand?
Now - the question overall is - is this good or bad? In the long run, I
mean for the species. Ford goes and invents something that will make life
easier for farmers. Did he envision the network of highways? The billions
of cars? The gasoline/oil war we are now facing? No. He didn't. People
used to live in communities and work close to home - horses were fine. Now
people work miles away from home - everyone is rushed. Technology was
SUPPOSED to give us more leisure. But it has given is the complete
opposite, A. So was Ford's invention good or bad? THAT is the kind of
question maybe you need to ask - about genetics - or anything else out
there. Consider, we can't see genes without these daimonic inventions the
very few have invented. What are we going to DO with this knowledge, A?
What have we done so far with it? Not much! Wrecked some farmers. Screwed
up some tomatos. A few other bloopers that we have no idea the effects of
YET. And the plutonium oxide in the atmosphere? Good? Bad? Nuclear
energy - it's not feasable - not workable. Dead end. But it's been tried
and the *** all buried. Good? Bad? DO you see where I'm going with this?

And to what end genetics? Thus far, not one god damned thing has come of
all that genetic-ISM out there. Humans have been successfully breeding
things, animals and plants, for a very long time - and that's what we still
eat. Geneticists can take credit by explaining these practical things in a
"genetic way" but can they DO IT? *** no. They gave us the corn disaster
that ruined farms, the screwed up tomato and whatever else. And they are
too freaking STUPID to realize that experiment in lab AINT like what happens
in the wild? Yup, they are THAT stupid. Oh yeah, some wide crossed animal
that they tried to patent - and the damned thing was sick as ***, useless.
So what good is this knowledge? I mean to say, what USE is it? Lemme
guess. In an already way overpopulated planet, it keeps people that would
have long died alive and able to breed in a dysgenic manner? Yup. Um...
OOO, I KNOW. Tinker with bacteria (hope they don't use a virus) - so that
it can target this or that population with "xyz003" gene(s) or whatever. HA
HA - a weapon. Wanna BET on it? (Hint - I knew a Soviet neurotoxicologist
that worked in chemical weapons). I.e., don't bet me. Yeah, he was a VERY
dangerous person, imo. Indeed.

That is, it is not necessary to
know any of it to survive - to continue.

Nope.

H. sapiens even got to the moon -
did any of the astronauts know any of this about biology?

Yes, some of them did. Are you kidding? The knowledge
that "something is inherited" was known by then.

The knowledge that something is inherited was known to - who was that guy in
your enemy's favorite book (the bible)? Uh, the guy that bred those sheep I
think? I don't know the damned book. Inheritance was known to my people -
the Tatars. My people also had very little use for written language - being
nomadic. But we made really GOOD warriors :) Best strategies on the planet
:) That wasn't my point. I mean the nitty gritty nuts and bolts of
biology, genetics, all of that. Did these astronauts know any of that? I
really do doubt it. The knowledge that INTELLIGENCE is inherited is also
known to people - but some folks want to vehemently deny that (and no, they
ain't the bible thumpers - they are those other fanatics as
religious/ideological as the religious fundies). The knowledge that heh,
dogs come in breeds is common knowledge too and they behave differently - in
fact, ALL animals come in breeds (and we are animals too). But that also
tends to get denied lately by people WORSE than bible thumpers. These
people are worse because they are DANGEROUS to the one society that has
GIVEN us all this precious knowledge: WESTERN CIVILIZATION AND ITS MAKERS.

After the heights
of the mid 60s, when, by the way, religion was dying a slow and quiet
death
in the USA - well, after that, the later 60s and what came next - that
heralded the rise and banding together of the fundamentalist groups. I
know
why. One does not need to know biology to know why that happened. One
only
needs to know HUMAN NATURE - and yes, Ms. V - it was ALL 100%
PREDICATABLE.
In writing, I freaking predicted every step of it.

Well, aren't you the cat's meow, then. Wow. What more do you predict?

I'm serious. I'm not you. I'm not a braggart. I DID predict it because it
was LOGICAL. Nothing supernatural at all. Pure logic. What happened is
exactly what I said would happen - the backlash. Deal with it.

You are so full of yourself (and involved in the revelation of your
own personal details), it's amazing. So sorry that you can't handle
anyone else posting anything. Anyway, it's a shame, because you
sometimes do make sense.

The word "backlash" seems odd - when _you_ are the only
person involved in this "backlash." The usual oddballs respond
to me in the usual way, but you love to write long detailed
responses (is that what you're calling backlash?) I love
writing long detailed responses too, but I really don't care
whether you have a nickname or not. Personalizing people
on usenet just doesn't get that involved, for me.


The dumbing down of
America, the reaction to it.

Predict something specific, sweetie. People becoming dumber
isn't very impressive, now, is it?

People have not become dumber.

I have no idea what you mean. Are you referring (for example)
to results on tests like the Stanford-Binet? Or are you referring
to the SAT's? What?


They have been MADE dumb by uneducation.
What the hell do you think happens when you put a huge guilt trip on one
group of people and hold another group up over them as flawless and let them
get away with brutality asocial destructive behavior and CONTINUE to blame
the first group for all of it?

No idea, again, what you're talking about. Which is too bad,
since I think you probably are trying to say something.


What the *** do you think is going to
happen? And when they find out WHO did it and WHY? HO HO. I know what
will happen. You should know too. No need for rocket science to figure
it out. I've been doing that in my posts all along - pay attention.

Why in hell would I "pay attention" to your body of posts? That's
hilarious. Usenet is a giant bulletin board (or graffiti tunnel).
Your
desire to be a character here is touching, but it has nothing to do
with the points you try to make (at least, I think not - it's hard to
tell. I know you are very interested in race and ethnicity, when
I do read your posts, that's what they _appear_ to be about). Perhaps
I don't really know how to read you. OTOH, why would I want
special reading lessons to understand you?


The
only thing, it sure took a lot LONGER for the backlash than I expected. And
it's not nearly done, either. You haven't seen anything - NOT YET. I said
it pretty much in that article you claimed you read. What WILL people do
when.... go read it again. Humans, when they can, they usually DO.

Disagree. Anyway, the verb "can" means nothing in this last sentence.
Are you saying that humans could have (for example) invented the wheel
many times, and far earlier - but didn't? Or are you using the word
"can" to encompass nearly infinite amounts of conditions that precede
"humans" doing something. I can't think of ANYTHING that "humans"
do as a group - we act as individuals. "Humans" didn't invent writing,
SOME humans did. Whether they are the same as the ones who invented
nothing (genetically, culturally, psychologically, you name it), no one
knows. (Oh, except perhaps you).

They certainly don't know about genes that can go on and off,
the nature of polygenic physiology, developmental genes,
potential gene switches/dials, or about how genetic distance
between any two beings could be studied, much less measured.

Ahem, I'd agree except that some of "them" are biologists, geneticists,
other kinds of scientists. But most people don't know such things. Most
people don't need to know such things, Ms. V. (didn't figure out what
got
you that nick yet?)

I'm not talking about them, but go ahead and go there.

You were talking about them. THEM. The religious people. Some of them are
also scientists. Or so I've heard. (I have NO idea what they say, btw -
but I do know their creds).

I'm not interesting in knowing how you gave me that nickname.
I find it offensive for reasons of my own. Until today, I was keeping
you apart from Ed Conrad in my mind. I don't know why I made
the effort.

Ed Conrad believes human beings were on the planet 600 million years ago. I
never said anything of the sort. I'm not a wack job - but I AM a ball
buster and a joker. You haven't figured it out yet: this is usenet.

You are a parrot. And yes, that's part of usenet. You want to be
seen as a ballbuster? How quaint.

Heh.
But you - you have been condescending and looking down your
wannabe-superior nose at everyone - even E. Kurtz (that gave me a BIG
laugh).

No, I'm not looking down at Kurtz - have no idea who Kurtz is.
However, when I have questions, I ask them.

I have no clue what you think I want to be. But, again, that's
your parrot-style - you like saying that (just as Ed likes mentioning
coal). Usenet could have been so much more than this, but I
agree it was predictable that it would become exactly what it is.

They don't know when their "Bible" was written down,
or where its earliest scraps are located or who supposedly
translated/transcribed most of it, where and why. God created
something, let's just let them go with that - but not homo
sapiens. God created Adam and Eve, then killed off their
progeny (except maybe not - those Cain/Canaanites seem
awfully pesky, even after the Flood) except Noah and his three
sons. ALL of us except a few Middle Easterners are descended
from one of those sons, and that started happening - according
to their belief - about 4,400 years ago. Those of us who
claim ancestors living, say, in China already at the time,
are wrong. The fact that our ancestor's housing was not
wiped out by the flood by seems to have been continuously
occupied is false to them. Farming was invented by the
very first generation of people to exist on earth, and pigs are
filthy.

HA, I knew it. I guessed right. Call it then, Serpents VERSUS Adamites -
in
the religious sense.

I have no clue what you are talking about.

Another origin myth - what else?

But why? Okay, I'll bite. Are you saying there is actually
no reality at all? That all views are equally mythic? Fine.
That would provide me a clue as to your mental universe,
which I find somewhat fascinating. How you came to think
you are talking about anthropology is also fascinating. I'm
glad you feel at home claiming anthropology for yourself
on usenet. I'm sure you'll get all miffed and go off on my word
choice, as if you can't understand what I say (perhaps you
can't, I can't tell). No reality at all is as good as anyplace to
start non-anthropology.


Come on - this has to be genetic. No one could be
in that mentality and have normal homo sapiens brains.

Listen to what you are saying. Farraday was a Homo sapien. He was
extremely religious. Most peoples in the world have an origin story -
and
they are all H. sapiens. The origin story of my people is very different
from the OT version - makes me wonder if a group of THEM ran into a group
of
US (Naga people? Serpents? Kundalini practitioners - knowledge of good
and
evil? - it kinda fits) and learned something that ruined their lives -
like
agriculture. Perhaps so. That's how such stories start up, btw.

We're speciating. You aren't the same as me. You would not
be treated, by me, as the same species if I knew you.

I probably wouldn't want to know you. You have WAY too many issues - and
this latest one with the fundies is definitely an "exit stage anywhere" clue
if it was real life offline.

Again, you make no sense to me. The linguistic differences between
us are vast. The issue of the fundies is quite potent in our world,
right now. But, you'd rather talk about your ancestors. And myth.
I think you should continue - but I don't think it has much to do
with anthropology.

You would never know that I was the person
posting on here if you knew me or met me. I don't talk about this kind of
*** offline.

So? Who cares? Why would I care what you talk about offline?
Are you trying to provide me with data about your thought processes?
Why? Why do you need to talk about the differences between yourself
online and offline? To me? Are we becoming friends? Is this how
you go about getting to know people? Or not.

Both my husband and I (married over 25 years) can tend to get
egg-heady in person.

Relevance?

Can. Sometimes. But we are leisure folks, very easy
going. But I'd wager good money that both our IQs are higher than yours -
clue - 99% percentile. Both of us. The computer for me is a toy, nothing
but a freaking toy.

So, you like the attention you get from me. And you like feeling
superior to me. You have few issues, you're nearly perfect.

My husband has no use for a computer, waste of time.

Relevance? Are you lonely? Do you wish your husband would
use the computer? I don't get it.

One of my fave hang outs where good convo goes on is the sci fi channel
boards. I don't poke fun of people on there, or semi-flame them at all.
Nice people there. You are not a nice person, imo.

Nice is one quality that people can have. You're right, I'm not
particularly "nice," (although my ratings on rateyourprofessor.com
are hilarious - the confusion about my niceness is rampant). Is
there now an obligation to be "nice"? To whom? Everyone?



I'm retired - I don't
have to work.

Good for you.

I play - play - play and play. Usenet is a playground -
tending toward a slum.

This is the third time you've said this to me. You like to say it.

When I'm home, I might come on here. I worked in a
medical school, dept of epidemiology, for about 10 years under Donald B.
Louria - so you can figure the rest out from there.

Apparently, you got tired of doing real academic work. I understand.

I find egg heady convos
on usenet tedious - and they have to be TYPED (arrgh) and thought out - like
a freaking essay.

I love writing. I love essays. I love typed conversations. Many
anthropologists do, as in the old days, letter writing was just about
the only way to communicate ideas in their early formation.

They are a waste of freaking time. If I wanted that kind
of serious convo, I'd not be on THIS newsgroup. Catch a clue.

I've had good conversations with people on this group in the past.
And on other groups where most conversation sucks. There's no
law that this newsgroup HAS to suck - but, it does now, and
that's the way it is.


I do enjoy the fact that we now live on a planet where there
are several similar species who can type posts, though.

You sound delusional. I seriously DO think that humans do come in types -
and that those incapable of inventing the wheel are not the same clade,
breed, whatever you want to call it - as ME. So, while we are at it, why
don't you explain to all what cytoplasmic inheritance is - and no, I DO NOT
mean mtDNA. I mean something botanists know about.

I don't do botany.


But while I'm at it, perhaps I can explain the religious lobotomies you seem
to be engaging in conversations with lately:

Two or three posts constitutes "lately"? Nope, I've just decided
to post occasionally in a way that can be seen by newcomers (such
as the students who end up here briefly), that this group has nothing
to do with anthropology.

the religion is like a fasces,
it holds them together, makes them stronger. Anything that diverts them from
that (even if it's common sense) is going to be rejected. Why have they
gotten this way? Because of the backlash - their world was turned upside
down - and this one thing, this religion they now embrace, IS turning it
right side up again - even if they have to reject knowledge.

Interesting perspective - but no data to support it. So many of these
New Christians are either new converts, A.A. converts, or returning
to a religion they really never knew.

Rejecting knowledge came first, in my opinion - and religion suits
that endeavor. I come from a long line of fundamentalists on one
side of my family, but they aren't stupid like Ed Conrad.

People would
rather have their lives back - than have knowledge.

SOME people.

What you don't seem to
grasp is that these christian fanatics with their fasces-like banding
together are STRONG,

What you don't seem to grasp is that I've known that since
I was about two. Yes, they are STRONG. And they are
very similar to fascists.


they behave as a collective and they actually GAIN
things from this cohesiveness, things that better their real lives.

Like what? Name some of the ways in which their lives
are better? Are you taking their own viewpoint? Try an etic
viewpoint, it would suit you better. How are their lives better?
Are you saying that they like the idea of going to heaven and
having eternal life? That sounds plausible - but why can't
you just say what you mean?

You
claim to be so smart, yet you can't figure that out? You might be a student
of biology, but you are no authority on human nature or you TOO would be
able to predict the oh-SO-predictable.

Your predictions are things that people have been saying, in print,
on usenet, elsewhere, for hundreds of years. How is that proof
that you're so smart or that you understand human nature?

I'll tell you one of my predictions: the world you will live in for
the rest of your life will not contain only people who are nice
to you. I'd be interested to know what you think should be
done about this - and why you even bring niceness up as a value
if you are talking to a not-nice person like me. Are you trying
to convert me to your form of niceness? Because, frankly,
your predictions are made daily in undergraduate newspapers
and opinion sections all across the nation. And on usenet by others.
I've never really thought much about being a sybil, as you have.



It's only natural that this is
happening now.

What do you mean by nature? Are you able to say or will
that send you off into another diatribe?

Try getting outside yourself (considering your ego is as
big as the cosmos, it might be a hard thing for you to do) - and seeing the
bigger picture without sticking your feelings/ego into it.

You're using newsnet as a form of therapy for yourself.
I hope it's helping.

It's not that
they don't want to know biology and etc. It's what agenda (IDEOLOGY) is
attached to all of it that they reject. And I see WHY they reject it. You
don't? Try. I've only been spelling it out for the last few weeks on here,
here and there in posts.

I don't read most of your posts. I do try and respond to people
who post directly to me, although many posts slip through the cracks.
I'm not interested - at all - in discussing ON THIS BOARD why
the fundies have their ideology. Of course we can all see it.


These people are not like
us. They simply are a different species, someday we'll find
a way of making that clearer (as though we need one). Who
would interbreed with them? Not a single one of us.

Actually, all of our ancestors had such origin stories of one variety or
another. All of them. None of them knew about genetics.

Do you just randomly generate answers to posts? Or do you
read them.

I read your post. I know what you are whining about. Do you know what an
origin story is?

We're back to this again. You like asking me that over and over too.

It's a myth - you know, like when those Native Americans
get up in court with that super-slow speech they tend to have..... and talk
about what their ancesters told them of their origins. They don't want to
hear what the anthropologist has to say. They don't care. They don't want
their ancestors dug out of their graves. Period. Like that.

I've seen Native Americans argue all kinds of things in court. Some
argue their own creation myths, which is of course quite typical in the
world (which is what you seem to be saying over and over as if you
just discovered it). I've also been in many courtrooms where Native
Americans argued science and in favor of studying bones, with strong
interests in human evolution. In fact, that's been more my experience
than the slow-talking thing you are familiar with. Where I live,
Native
Americans speak at the same rate as anyone else.


Now to address your "stupid people" (that's what you are talking about)
subject - if you want to base that on IQ, heh, then I know which species -
er - I mean which "groups" would be eliminated. Forget about understanding
the nucleus of a cell or whatever else. There be those that never even
figured out how to make a wheel. Go ahead, make excuses for them:.... doh
de doh.... they didn't NEED wheels. Uh huh. It's called IQ. It's real.

Yes, it is real. But, so far, I've never been able to get anyone
on usenet to tell me what exactly they expect to do about the
situation or how they would reorganize their own lives, society,
the state, or anything else - based on this rather obvious knowledge
that people differ in intelligence, and that IQ tests refer to some
sort of intelligence that can be measured and is generally valued.
By general, I mean that the value of IQ transcends modern Western
culture.

I'm trying very hard to be "nice" here and not accuse you of
yammering, but really - what's your point? Some people are
smarter than others. You claim to be smarter than me. So?
You obviously like posting to people stupider than yourself. It's
fun for you (play). What's the point?


In what way does knowledge of genetics preclude people having
other types of origin stories? You've got your bull***, obviously.

It doesn't, imo. But that's imo. You know, you want it both ways tho. You
want there to be knowledge genetics - but oh wait - not TOO much knowledge
of genetics cuz it might turn out to be very un-PC.

No. There is never too much knowledge. What a crazy thing to say.
Or to read into someone else's posts.

You posted about
Christian or Jewish origin stories. Read your own post. Perhaps you need
to stop listening to their words and consider what their words-made-deeds
would give us in terms of results: eg RAMPANT spread of STD - uh, among
some folks, not all folks.

Are you saying that Jews and Christians have more STD's? Once
again, your topic sentence seems unrelated to the next one. I truly
can't understand what you're trying to say.

Lots of babies? Things like that. Carry it
out.

Christians have more babies? Yes - in the south. Catholics - yes,
everywhere. Jews, not so much.

Forget the words. The words made manifest - what would the RESULTS
be? Do they really want STDs to rampantly spread? Obviously, heh, THEY DO.
Go from there. OF COURSE they don't say that. But gimme a break. Their
desires, their fanatical laws - put into practice? Result: rampant spread
of STD among some people (they'd be weeded out).

Is your claim that these particular religions have always had
the same goals? To spread STD's? This is sounding very odd.


You don't think it is.

You think mine is.

You just lost me on that. I don't think what is? - and I think your what
is? Clarify that (it's been days since this post..... but I reread - and
you lost me here).

You're right. It's unclear. And I see no point in clarifying it.
You're
right, you're always right.


You are (once again) bashing someone, looking down your nose at someone, a
group of people, this time the christians I guess.

Nope. It's fine with me that they have their religion.

YOU are superior. Heh.

Nope. But I value what I value.

And so.... I figured I'd say something. Do you conclude from that, that I
like the fundies?

No. Are you forgetting that my original post was NOT addressed to you?
You like personal attention though. I think a lot of people have
killfiled
you, and it retards your playing process. I haven't. So you get to
respond (apparently endlessly) to me. I haven't decided yet whether
I'm enjoying this. You do remind me a lot of someone I know, and
it's been interesting to read your posts, stylistically. You reveal
quite a bit about how your mind works (and I like that). I just never
get what you're actually trying to say, except that you obviously have
everything all figured out.

HA!!! That would be TOO funny. I don't run into such
people in real life - they avoid me - I've seen the at times, approaching
people with their preachy ***, and they look at me and pass me by. I just
never meet them. OK? I would never go out of my way to know them. OR
ARGUE WITH THEM. OR try to talk science of any kind to them. ***, I
wouldn't even tell them it's raining on the beach today IF I ran into one.

Me neither. I don't meet them IRL either. Except for the ones
who are in my family, whom I've met, but with whom I have no contact.


Or one
of us who caught swept up in some unusual event, perhaps
random gene drift (women get pregnant sometimes because
of a guy's lovely warm body, and they forget to check out his
brain - the speciation isn't complete, but the kids need to be
raised by the homo sapiens parent).

So there's homo sapiens and there's the Jepeth/Ham people
(I can never remember which they claim to be - but at
any rate, aside from a few Semites, most of these folks
are from Jepeth/Ham - you know, the bad seed).

I think Ham is the bad seed. Japhet and Shem are OK :) But they are
Adamites - or Seth's people. I'm not one of them - my folks don't even
FIT
into the myth.

I can't remember. You're making my point though. No one's
folks "fit the myth." But, you'll never convince people who believe
the myth of that.

I don't know when or who, but the myth was expanded as other races were
encountered. No one fits? The book is the book of the Hebrew people - and
it is about them. It's their origin mythology.

Sort of. It's astonishing, actually, how little of it was invented by
the
Hebrews. The same stories, as I'm sure you know, could well be
attributed to other groups of people in the region, from whom the
Hebrews
acquired the taste for genealogy, law-giving, and their origin myths.

Actually, it's tribal and
that means it is legit, as legit as my dad's mom's tribe is Uzbeki (a name
derived from the PERSON named Uzbek Khan) - and so forth.

Yes, I too am related to people who are Uzbeki. So, as stupid as I
may be, I do know a little bit about Uzbek Khan.

Shem was a
person. So was Japhet. So was Ham. That's where the tribal names come
from. Hebrew tribal names. Jew - Judah - the name of a man that had a
tribe. So the names DO define a specific group of people - or they did long
ago. Imo, it's really a shame that the European peoples, so long ago,
borrowed that mythology and made it their own, combined with paganism (sons
of god, queens of heaven, all that) and Manichaeanism (dualism). It held
back Europe for almost 2000 years. But even with that - Europe excelled.
Stop tangent.

See, I think the stuff you just posted is quite good - and does need
to be said (perhaps over and over).

I agree about it being a shame that Europe got so wrapped up in
that mythology. Would you say that happened because of Imperial
Rome? Isn't that mythology quite well-adapted to social control
of stupid people - and the dumbing of people?

I agree that Europe excelled, and regard the total silence on what
Europe actually accomplished in paleolithic times as bizarre. I am
speaking of your average "peoples of the world" textbooks here. Or
your average high school/undergraduate curriculum. We've demolished
courses in Western Civilization for no good reason, and those courses
never did a great job on prehistory to begin with. Sad. But the
prehistory
of Europe holds the answers to many questions that apparently shall
be ignored by Euro-Americans, while they hold onto the cosmology of
an ancient goatherding people.

Now, you are missing my point. WHY WOULD I want to convince them of
anything of the sort? WHY? It's not possible. So why would I try to do
what is not possible? I can not breath water. When I swim, I do not TRY to
breath water. Got it? Get that, and you'll get my point.

I am not really all that interested in your personal motivations, Comm.
Can you think of a reason why I would be? But I am interested in
whether other people who might be reading understand what you
seem to be trying to say. I really do think you have some interesting
ideas (and
arguments) to make in between the personal invectives you enjoy
creating. I understand (I guess) that you feel compelled to oppose
mean people. I feel compelled to oppose the use of sci.anthropology
as a forum for debates on evolution vs. mythology. It's not a
popularity
contest and if I am arrogant or pompous, I'm sure it's merely because
I'm not as smart as you (although, seriously, 99%ile for IQ isn't that
great - that just means you're smarter than 99 people in a randomly
selected group of 100). Surely you must be smarter than that.



You can't possibly make them sit and study all the biology
they need, via the internet. They won't do it, and they will
drag you down. They'll pretend to have learned that they
know what oxygen is and that we breath it, but they'll
gleefully insist that's not true the next day, if they need to.
They'll pretend to have learned about rates of atomic decay,
when it suits them - but they'll deny it the next minute.

So why are you frustrating yourself, concerning yourself with things you
need not be concerned with - and bothering with "THEM?" You do that a
lot,
btw.

I hardly post here at all anymore. I've posted here off and on
for years. I'm giving up. It used to be an okay newsgroup,
and it used to have some real anthropologists in it. If I weren't
bored and sitting on a layover, I wouldn't be posting.

THIS newsgroup, in 2000, is the first newsgroup I ever saw - and I
literally, laughed howling, doubled over for about 8 hours reading what I
saw on here. FLAMES - oh my god, the flames. I came here thinking (HA) to
get the latest info on the Stringer versus Wolpoff fight. No such luck.
You can't find out anything correct on the internet - not even science
articles. I get the originals and find out that what was on the internet
was altered.

Excuse me, dear, but you CAN find original articles on the internet.
You may have to pay a small fee. Or, if you have a college education,
your alma mater may allow you to use their library resources. Or,
you can email authors of articles and most are happy to send copies
of their works. Flattered, even. But I have access to thousands of
journals online, and also the popular periodicals like Scientific
American
(which is about as academic as I would expect a newsgroup to get).

I've been on sci.anthropology off and on since 1992. It used to be
better.

Listen, the christian fundie phenomena has nothing to do with religion.
Just keep that in mind at all times, no matter WHAT they say. They are
going so far as to try to FIND some justification for their agenda in that
bible of theirs - to make it religion. Even when there is NONE in there,
they'll squeeze something out. It's all POLITICAL.

ITA.

What I have found out from some of these people who get over the "super
preachy defensive stage" (which means that I have dealt with them and they
didn't say a WORD about religion to me) is that they REALLY do help each
other - one plumber knows the electrician, who knows the painter and - go
from there. They keep it inside, in-house so to speak, LIKE WE DID when I
grew up in ethnic community for a while. Collective action. Do you have
any idea how powerful that is in advancing your group when the rest of
society if individualistic?

I think I do. I actually was raised in human society, as well. How
about
that. I don't think you're using the word "advancing" in the way that
I would
(they think they're advancing their cause, I don't think they're
advancing
in any way). Are they forcing others to bend to their will? You bet -
but
not where I live and not in my life. I'm over it - but I won't stop
posting
here with headers that point out that this group is not functioning. I
really don't intend anyone to respond to them (you seem to be about the
only one who doesn't get that). Anyway - I'm NOT posting to you. I'm
posting to some other people, for my own reasons.

Clue: Islamic people are also collective.
Jews living there never made high advancements and they are also collective.
Here, Jews rise to the top in just about everything. My people come here
from Stalinist Russia with nothing - we are literally ALIENS culturally -

Yeah - well, you're not the only one.

and in 5 years everyone owns a home and is doing really well. I retired at
36. I had MONEY. I also get rental income. I started out with NOTHING.
OK? That is how powerful collectives are in the midst of individualistic
societies. They support each other - and things really DO get much much
better in their lives for them. THAT is the reason to stick with it. And
yeah, to hell everything else! IF sticking with it means "say no to
biology" then they WILL say no to biology. Got it?

Brag, brag, brag. Yes, I do have it. But it interests me that no
matter what, you, Comm, will iterate and reiterate.

I've seen people 100% down and out, downsized to the point of sleeping in
their cars. They get found by the Jesus freaks and oh, they find Jesus
too - now they own homes, have jobs ALL because of that fundie church. That
there IS reason to stick with it. They have a party line - at first, they
are oh...heh, INSANE, like crazy people. Later on, they lax off as they
feel more secure and comfortable. But they have very real reasons to reject
what you want to "teach" them and stick with what they are doing. They
don't have to know biology, A. They DO have to have a good life. They WANT
a good life. They do NOT want to be ostracized and alone again.

If you are a teacher in a school, teaching them biology - or anywhere else
(on the internet? if you are trying on the inet, then you are not as bright
as you think...), then they will be suspicious because 1. it's a school and
they KNOW what to expect after all the *** that has come down in the last
few decades. 2. they are HIGHLY suspicious, even suspicious about listening
to any of it. WHY, you might ask? Are they stupid? NO - and stop thinking
that - it's disgusting and makes YOU seem so noxioux that I have the urge to
flame you, LOL. It's why I bought up our H sapien ancestors in the first
place. I'll tell you WHY they reject it all:

Actually, I find it quite possible to teach ANYONE the basics of
biology -
as the test results from my courses show. And without offending the
fundies. But on this ng, no. If I wish to keep posting with headers
of
my own choosing, you will not be able to stop me. Got that?

The brunt is this: if we are animals that evolved from an ancestor that both
us and chimps evolved from, something presumably chimp-like, then - what
happens to morality? We are animals - so where is morality? They see the
PC *** that has happened here for decades, like tyranny (and it WAS
tyranny) - and they see it as IMMORALITY. And whether you understand or
know this or not, the entire field of science, especially biology, and now
some genetics, and what got taught in public about it was guided by an
IDEOLOGY as strong as religion - and it is that ideology that they REACT to
with a force-shield around them, LOL. Get that. Understand that. It's
like a woven cloth - pull out a string and you unweave the cloth.
Evolution - and what it has COME to symbolize in action and deeds, has
unwoven THEIR cloth - and the cloth was not religion. The cloth was their
lives and well-being. It's not evolution pure in itself that did this -
it's what got attached to it - the evolution.... ergo man is, and ergo this
is ok and that is ok, ergo ergo. THAT is what they react to. And yeah, I
include the pc version of genetics that tries to deny what every doctor on
the planet knows is a reality - ESPECIALLY the epidemiologists!

BLAH BLAH BLAH. As I said, this is just the kind of thing that ceases
to be interesting - which is why (and I'm trying to point it out
kindly)
no one else is responding much to your posts. This shall likely be
the last time I do, unless I am amused by doing so.

They know what I know about this gene testing too. Test YOU for p3 - and if
you lack it, hey, you don't get insurance. How's that! Right now, it's
illegal I think, to test for such things and screen out people - but they
already put burdens on smokers - so then, here comes the logic: WHY NOT
refuse to insure people whose lifestyles point to risky behavior? WHY NOT?
Well,
they don't. But should they? I'd bet a Christian insurance company would
try to do that. You might think I'm all over the planet with these
examples, but no. I'm talking about ONE THING - and maybe you should try to
see that ONE THING - cuz that is what they react to.

Having been raised primarily by fundamentalists (the other parts of
my family ran off and became successful, as I have) I think I
understand them pretty well. If I mentioned their names, you'd have
heard of them. I'm also related to some well known public Buddhists.
I think I understand their brand of Buddhism as well (and not just
from reading their books).



I don't even have proof that these people are conscious,
that they have minds capable of creating a field of experience
wherein they can actually hear anything outside their own
heads.

They are klippoth. They are of the pretaloka. :-D. Since you have
consumed time and energy dwelling in their pond...... well.. heh.

Yeah - they raised me. I can't help that.

Oh. Hmm. Well, they didn't raise me or mine. I never knew people like
that and well, they didn't exist when I was a kid at all, not even when I
was a teen (I'm old, :)

I'm not young. But they did raise me. And they still exist. My
parents have been educated (by me), but were never as stupid as
the people I see on usenet.

As I said, I don't tend to run into them or people
like them. I know what makes them tick, tho. Perhaps it is because I see
them from really way outside the fishtank they are in.

Most anthropologists would insist you need both an emic view
AND an etic view (at the least) to make sense of things. But
of course, doing anthropology is the last thing we'd want to do here.

Always been outside
it, too. When they get to the point of literally "NOT hearing anything
outside their heads" it is because what they feel they might hear is
threatening on some level - and the level is 100% practical - you'll have to
trust me on that insight. That's all that is. If something threatens to
derail them from collective purpose and feeling, they'll shun it. It if
even hints of going near "that which ruined quality of life" they'll call it
the devil - and for them IT IS the devil. It's evil. FOR THEM, for their
LIVES. Practical. Can't you see that's what this is? How stupid can they
be if they raised you? And always remember this too - a wise person can
play the fool. Just as the strong person can play weak. But NOT vice
versa.


Now, I do believe that the nature of the delusions
they hold is in part due to culture, but I don't really care to
investigate it further.

The nature of the delusions they hold is familial and cultural. It's
also
old old old. As said above, all people have origin stories.

Yes, and they modify them however they wish to suit their own ends.

YES - of course they do! Cultures evolve too. They adapt to situations.
So do religions. Why shouldn't they?

I suppose you think genetic research is exactly and precisely the
same.

HUH? No. Well, in the most ideal situation, Ms. A, genetic research is
science - subject to strict sci method. It can be falsified. Tested. God
can NOT be falsified, tested. People don't seem to grasp what "it can be
falsified" means. It means simply that "it can be TESTED - and tested, it
can be proven right or wrong." Religion can not be tested. My culture is
Shamanic - I'm still very much that way in knee-jerk views, too - seriously
so. I also sometimes slip into what people say is like code talk, symbolic
language. The problem with science is that he HAS been MODIFIED in the same
way as religion many many times (research the history!) - modified to FIT
into some ideology or dogma. See above on evolution - it's not "JUST"
evolution - it has agendas attached to it that are IDEOLOGICAL agendas.
Remember the old "NOTHING outside the nucleus of the cell means anything,
ONLY the nucleus is important?" dogma - BIG fights over that with the
cytoplasmic guys, especially botanists. Well, heh, the dogma was wrong, but
how LONG did people have to be derided, poked fun of, ignored, BEFORE it was
shown to be true? Just the mtDNA was a BIG discovery and no, not in the
nucleus after all. And then the "jumping genes" thing - god how they mocked
that woman out, McKlintock I think? (forgot) - UNTIL someone found it to be
important in yeah yeah, PEOPLE. Did they actually think and believe that
what applies to one species genetically does NOT apply to another? Science
is ALSO subject to religious-type dogma - via ideologies. I'm surprised you
don't know this. Maybe you are too young to know this - to have SEEN it all
transpire. These religious people DO know this! So they rather ignore all
of it, fluff it all aside and stick to their holy books. Ideology is
religion without the supernatural beings. The predominant ideology that
religious people react to is based on Marxism or some distortion of Marxism
(like Frankfurt School stuff). THAT is what they are reacting to. That has
ruined their lives. That, in fact, ruined what was once MY HOME too, my
community. Destroyed it. I'd love to exterminate those responsible for
it - and if you think this feeling is not shared by a VAST majority of
people these days, heh - think again. There are many ways to exterminate
something you hate. No weapons required, either.

It's hopeless to try and teach them anything, much less
argue with them. If they sit quietly in a circle in front of you
and promise to take careful notes, to be tested often,
and to not stray from their task of learning biology, then
MAYBE you can interact with them - if you want to. Or
you can weed 'em out.

Or you can avoid what bothers you - which people in the pretaloka NEVER
do.
HA!!

In case you wonder, you don't "bother" me at all. I notice some stuff
tho.
Call it.

I still don't get your use of language. I suppose somewhere,
someone does. You often have interesting insights or facts
embedded somewhere in your noxious attitude.

Honey, I'm a mirror. I reflected back YOUR attitude. Yes, I have insights,
alright. My use of language? I find your attidute offensively noxious.
People that know me find me to be 100% easy going and very VERY friendly.
But I can't stand noxious ego - and you have a BIG one. You crashed into a
convo that I found HILARIOUS - and was giggling at it (the one about dicks
and orgasms) like MZ Vagina (Ms. V). Blah blah blah. You came onto E.
Kurtz like that and he told you off for it. Can E. Kurtz and I both be
wrong? And I see NO ONE replied to this latest "I'm so superior to those
who are not even the same species" post you made except me. Why is that?

Pretaloka - you don't know that word, I assume you mean? It's the sphere of
being (loka) of nothingness, empty people (preta) and no, I don't mean
religious people. Nothingness is defined, eg, by your expending good energy
concerning yourself with things you don't NEED to concern yourself with.
You need to pay the bills. You need to eat. Sleep. Have fun. These
things you need for LIFE that's worth something. You don't need to DISTRESS
yourself by showing off your exceedingly HIGH knowledge of biology to people
that don't want to hear it - or maybe can't grasp it. I know a nuclear
physicist (used to work with him) that can't fix his car. He just can't
seem to get it. I refer now to the old type American cars, the ones with
plugs and points and all that. You don't even have to know how they work -
to TUNE THE THING UP. But no, he couldn't get it. He couldn't gap plugs if
his life depended on it. He was too clumsy. Was he stupid? NO. I've seen
high minded assholes on here insult and intelligence of a freaking physics
teacher - and other so very wise things. Heh. And months later, he emails
me showing that I was RIGHT in something I said - they were wrong. And who
were they? Pretending to be whatever experts. They were nobody. And they
were FLAMING me - I was not flaming them - over something 100% SUBJECTIVE to
boot.

Your belief that you know so much about others is the most
remarkable thing about you, though. Must be grand being you.
I'll bet your family and friends enjoy your omniscience a great
deal.

Oh, I never claimed to be omnicient. But you do that in almost every post
you make about how you are another species that has this vast understanding
of human biology (and of course, you are stunningly beautiful too - show me,
I showed you me, show me you). But you don't seem to know *** about human
nature and you say you were raised by these people? HA!. You don't even
know what really makes them tick. Why is that? My friends are friends for
over 30 years duration. You also assume people are stupid. That in itself
is kinda naive on your part - and disgusting.

But I'm not going to pull teeth to figure out what the *** you're
posting about or why you call me Mrs. V.

I just told you. I never used Mrs. I said MS. LMAO.

It's entirely my own fault, whatever it is, and mainly due to the
fact I haven't had time to properly configure a newsreader...

No, it has nothing to do with the newsreader. Get outlook express. It's
GREAT. It's also free. Reading posts from google SUCKS.

You don't know what I'm posting about? Want a complimentary copy then?
I'll email it if you are dumb enough to post on usenet with a real email
(that gets you SPAM).

A.
- abandoning ship.


Okay, so I tried to wade through the whole thing. You have a lot
of time on your hands (I do too, today - I've got the flu). The
platitudinal
section I just can't read. I am getting outlook express, when I get
a chance to set it up. It's not a huge priority. The consulting I do
requires I read more broadly on usenet, anyway, and so I do.

Real email? LMAO. I have several email accounts (that's quite
possible you know). THIS one, spam away. I could not care less.
The very few people in my family who have this addy (my husband's
relatives) actually know how to title their emails so I can find them.
Imagine that.

But, you really do have a calling - to teach individuals how to use
email, avoid spam, etc., etc. Too bad almost no one listens to you.

A.

.