Leaderboard

People should start adding a new section to their resume/CV, 'Prior reincarnations.'

Here's the paper with the find that Denisovan ancestry reveals two distinct pulses of Denisovan genes: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29551270/ And here's a paper based on applying Bayesian methods with a bundle of plausible models as contrasting hypotheses, and finding that there seems to be support for a "third" --meaning distinct, but genetically equidistant between Neanderthals and Denisovans-- group of humans: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-018-08089-7 I learnt about these papers in this wonderful podcast by Stefan Milosavljevich: I always think twice before recommending a YT channel. This one is prime quality. Número uno...

I have figured it out. 1) Misspelling: 'in revenge' is 'v mesti' in the OP language while 'v meste' means 'in place'. One letter was wrong before translation. 2) 'Earth' and 'land' are the same word in the OP language. So, the expression, "earth in one revenge", should've been, "land in one place." And the question, meant to be, "Are there planets where all land is in one place?"

The publication does not show that 'science supports' your idea, the publication shows that 3 guys have written multiple articles together and separately saying seafood was vital for brain development. The overwhelming bulk of scientific literature on diet and the evolution of the human brain does not support your claim.

Well, you can't swim away...

Actually, until I retired from teaching a few years ago, writing in class was exactly what seemed to work best for teaching (at least for me). I was teaching Math. Instead of lecturing all during class and then having the math done as homework, I gave reading assignments for homework, then a quick review and had the students work their math assignments in class (on paper). This seemed to generate many discussions on best methods of solving problems, as well as ensuring the students had well-focused practice in solving problems. It also encouraged students to compare answers and self-correct, which is itself a good learning experience.

Perhaps if you actually employed the scientific method… It’s not enough to show that some features could have arisen from an aquatic existence. You need to show that they must have, and it has to cover all features. The math says that bipedalism arose before that. “the discovery of “Lucy” (Johanson et al. 1982), a 3.2-million-year-old (Ma) Australopithecus afarensis skeleton that was very ape-like above the neck but possessed a suite of characters related to bipedalism throughout the rest of the skeleton. Then came the 3.7-Ma Laetoli footprint trail—an exquisitely preserved moment in time when two or more hominins walked bipedally across an ash-covered landscape” https://evolution-outreach.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1007/s12052-010-0257-6

I haven't kept up with this thread, so apologies if i'm repeating earlier comments. A guy called Jim Moore set up a website on what's wrong with the AAH many years ago, and it's well worth visiting for refutation of pretty much all of the wrong claims made for aquatic apes. It's called "aquatic ape, sink or swim? " and here's the link : https://www.aquaticape.org/ I have no idea if he's still active on the subject, but his analysis of all of the guff still 'holds water' in my opinion. On the slight reduction in brain size of modern homo sapiens, it's a tiny change, and it could be for any of many possibilities. The trend has been for humans to get more gracile physically, more lightly built, more mobile and less stocky. That might mean that people slimmer of hip would favour a smaller head during childbirth. The Neanderthals did have a slightly bigger brain, on average, but it was longer front to back, and the extra volume was not in the frontal lobes. So Neanderthal women probably had an edge during childbirth, with wider hips and narrower babies heads. But the difference would be fairly insignificant. This is over-claiming on a huge scale. There's no evidence whatsoever that Neanderthals and Homo Sapiens prior to 40,000 years ago were chiefly aquatic. It's pure invention without any evidence.

I think I know. The cups will never get over the turning points on the very top and on the very bottom of the upper and the lower wheels. This is because regardless of how the cups are attached to the belt, it takes h longer way for the upper weight to reach the top of the upper wheel than it takes for the lower weight to reach the bottom of the lower wheel. See, for example, this: Thus, to get to the turning point the device needs at least Mgh extra energy. But, as @Lorentz Jr has derived above, this is equal to or more than the energy that all other cups can supply. So, the device will stop before reaching that configuration. QED

The Chinese and Japanese could not conquer the world - they spend too much time on paperwork:

Funny how screenplay writer Elaine Morgan to this day is poo-poo'ed for being an amateur speaking up in proper company, but you just looove to listen to car mechanic Jim Moore, an amateur in equal measure. I know. You're still the master race. The peak of evolution causing your own extinction. Of course you're much smarter than the inferior Neanderthals. We all know the Earth is the center of the universe. Except for FUCKING SURFER'S EAR IN THE DAMN SKULLS!!! GO TAKE A FUCKING LOOK YOURSELF!!! THIS IS FULL ON DENYING IRREFUTABLE EVIDENCE!!! YOU'RE DOING NOTHING DIFFERENT FROM CREATIONISTS!!! 'Cause baboons are smart enough to recognize the same thing, sure. Hippos aren't bipedal in water, because they don't descend from brachiating simians +25mya. Except when you pick aquatic foods for five million years.

Surfer's ear does not evolve in cold winds and rain. I'm gonna repeat that: Surfer's ear does not evolve in cold winds and rain. You have to be in water for hours a week for years. Hence the name. All I know is that today, Homo sapiens match the freediving capacity of sea otters and hippos.

The matter lies, among other things, in the secrets of the workshop, which I would not like to go into here, suffice it to say that these data are certain

You're missing 100cc of brain because of it, sapiens. And today we're draining the world oceans of the brain food. Endemic cretinism will only increase, if we even survive the next century, what with climate change, fission war and whatnot. This is all based on the already known fossil archive along with comparative analysis straight out of Darwinian tradition and sound biochemical observation. Uhuh. Do you even know what this idea is actually suggesting? Do you even give a fuck? That's nice. https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b07w4y98 No one ever succeeded in proving it false. As little as the cardinals proved Galileo wrong. So why add it to your kitchen salt? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iodine_deficiency A quarter of the world's sapienses don't get enough iodine. Are you gonna believe the WHO? There is only one general food source plentiful in iodine, as well as the other brain selective micronutrients. And that is seafood. You're denying irrefutable evidence for no other reason than that of Elaine Morgan being an irritating armchair scientist that is not supposed to have a point. You're all acting out of sociological bullshit, not scientic enquiry. And it needs to stop, 'cause her studies have over time revealed why we have been losing our brain for 40 millenia, and why it will only continue for any foreseeable future. Without Morgan, we would simply not know this. Stop pissing on your own giant already!!!

Piss on William of Ockham...