Re: Homo Erectus Traits in Hss

On Aug 18, 8:30 pm, "J.LyonLayden" <JosephLay...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Aug 18, 8:21 pm, Tom McDonald <kilt...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:



On Aug 18, 3:23 pm, "J.LyonLayden" <JosephLay...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

1. You've said this is common knowledge. It's not to me. Can you
provide a useful reference, ideally one that explains the issue on the
basis of real cranial differences between your noggin and those of
Aussie Aboriginals?

Nope. It's only common knowledge to people who frequent aussie bars in
the outback where there's chickenwire between the aboriginal section
and the common section.

It would be politically incorrect for any scientist to do a study on
the differences between the rubustness of two modern Hss skulls I
think.

So you have no scientific evidence.

How would I go about getting the scientific evidence? Smack an
aboriginal upside the head with a fifth of Wild Turkey in a controlled
environment??

No. You would start with a review of the available physical
anthropology wrt Aboriginal cranial anatomy. For the hearsay story you
report to have a scientific basis, you would have to show that Aussie
Aboriginals' occipital and/or parietal bones (depending on what
exactly is meant by 'the back of the head') is significantly more
robust than those of the human group to which you belong.

Here's the problem you have. If you look at the world only as what you
can verify by science, you will only be seeing a shadow of the world.

This is debatable. The pre-scientific world was filled with shadows,
and lots of 'common knowledge' that led to needless conflict and
oppression. Science shone much light on the world, and dispelled much
of the worst depredations of 'common knowledge' that turned out to be
uncommonly wrong.

But what is not debatable is that this is a group in the sci.
hierarchy, and the relevant science here is physical anthropology. If
you want to make potentially racist assertions here, you need to back
it up with something other than second-hand stories.

When aussies who don't know each other tell me these things
repeatedly, totally independently from one another, I tend to think it
might have some truth to it.

And if there is some truth to it, that truth will be discovered in
comparative cranial anatomy.

It is also possible that the Aussies who told you those things are
racists, or people who are willing to accept stories that separate
Abos from themselves.

Especially when I then see erectus traits in an aboriginal who only
died 200 years ago.

There are many skeletal anomalies among the billions of Hss who have
lived on this earth. You have to show that the anomaly you posit is
endemic to Aboriginals, and in such a degree that what would kill you
would not kill them.


.