> On Jan 15, 5:16 am, Archimedes Plutonium > <plutonium.archime...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Jan 15, 4:01 am, Archimedes Plutonium > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > For it seems to me that unless we have equi-dated > genomes, that much > > > of what Paabo and Green and Hawks discussed in > Decoding Neanderthal > > > NOVA is just opinion.
Anything they do is better than anything you. When they take a dump, that floating turd is better than you, better than anything that comes from you, better than anything you will ever do.
Go kill yourself, you waste of a f*&^ing life. > > > > > Now do we know what genes indicate hair growth > and what genes indicate > > > the color of skin such as black African or white > European? > > > > > So can the Neanderthal genome indicate what color > of skin and how much > > > hair? > > > Can we make a comparison to a Sapiens of 33,000 > years ago as to what > > > color of skin and how much hair? > > > > > It may turn out, that what Hawks found for the > Tuscany Italy genetic > > > indicators was the mutations of the Sapiens > conferring immunology > > > because they were turning to a whiter skin to > absorb more sunlight and > > > vitamin D. It maybe that Sapiens was even > healthier in Europe than the > > > existing Neanderthals. It may turn out that > Neanderthals were prone to > > > more sickness from the cold than the invading > Sapiens from Africa. > > > > > It is puzzling as to what benefits accrued to > Sapiens to go from a lot > > > of hair, a hairy body to a body that is less > hair. Does Rock throwing > > > have more advantage with less hair than more > hair? > > > > > The one place on the body that has no hair is the > front of the hands > > > and hair there would be a nuisance to a rock > thrower. > > > > > Hair would be important for cold climate and an > advantage. So was > > > Neanderthal hairy or the same hair as Sapiens > invading Europe? > > > > > Hair is of a disadvantage for parasites. > > > > > So we need some answers to the above from the > genomes of Neanderthal > > > of 33,000 years ago and from Sapiens that were > contemporaries of > > > Neanderthal. > > > > > Now there has been a theory going around as to > the Swimming Sapiens as > > > the way Sapiens lost most of their body hair and > become the hairless > > > ape. I do not buy that, except for one > application. > > > > > How close is Tuscany to the Mediterranean Sea of > 33,000 years ago? > > > > > It is possible that the African sapiens that > invaded Europe and > > > extincted Neanderthal were clustered in Tuscany > and lived close to the > > > Med. Sea. It is possible that they spent so much > time near the Sea, > > > that over 10,000 years they would mutate the > genes for less hair as an > > > advantage in swimming. How warm is the Med. Sea > in winter in Tuscany? > > > > > Also, I would like to remind the reader that this > theory of > > > Rockthrowing starts in Italy near Sardina some 8 > to 10 million years > > > ago with a ape creature throwing rocks to a habit > of throwing rocks > > > that conferred many advantages and increasing his > mating and > > > offspring. This throwing ape creature would > eventually migrate into > > > Africa, and become Orrorin. So was there a full > land bridge between > > > Tuscany, Sardinia and Africa? > > > > > I know Gilbraltor harbors monkeys from Africa? Do > monkeys somehow find > > > a means of crossing the Med. Sea, on perhaps logs > adrift? Could > > > monkeys and apes some 10 million years ago have > made a crossing of > > > Sicily into Northern Africa? > > > So it would be ironic that the birthplace of > humanity starts in > > > Sardinia Italy some 8 to 10 million years ago and > migrates into Africa > > > and then some 60,000 years ago the African > Sapiens migrated back north > > > into Europe. So they came full circle. > > > > Thinking about the above, it dawned on me that the > loss of hair, as > > one author in the 20th century titled his book "The > Naked Ape", but > > the loss of hair was not due to swimming and living > near water, but > > rather this logical means-- how can you have white > skin and take in > > sunlight for Vitamin D if your body is covered in > hair? > > > > Has any anatomist researched whether other animals > take in sunlight to > > produce Vitamin D, or is Homo sapiens unique to > taking in sunlight for > > Vitamin D? > > > > So if you had a hairy ape such as a chimpanzee or > orangutan > > or gorilla, could you take in sunlight and convert > to Vitamin D for > > health advantage? > > > > So the logic is, that once you have the genetics > that converts > > sunlight to Vitamin D, then that advantage would > spur the genetics for > > less hair to gain more Vitamin D. Now in the > Tropics of Africa, loss > > of hair would mean sunburn for there is too much > sunlight, so for that > > to balance out, the skin genetics favored dark > skin. > > > > So here I think I found the genetic mechanism for > loss of hair for > > Homo sapiens to allow for Vitamin D uptake. > > > > Now I wonder when this took place in Homo sapiens > history? Was it > > 60,000 years ago or earlier? Did Neanderthal have > less hair and > > Vitamin D uptake? > > > > Now I took a look at Wikipedia's entry of Vitamin D, > and I do not know > what the author had in mind when he/she snuck in the > word "unique" for > it makes the complex sentence obfuscating to me: > > --- quoting Wikipedia on Vitamin D --- > In humans, vitamin D is unique because it can be > ingested as > cholecalciferol (vitamin D3) or ergocalciferol > (vitamin D2) and > because the body can also synthesize it (from > cholesterol) when sun > exposure is adequate (hence its nickname, the > "sunshine vitamin"). > --- end quote --- > > I had a search of other primates and their need of > Vitamin D so the > use of the word "unique" is very vague in the above. > > But I am happy over this escapade of linking the > evolution of hair > loss for Homo Sapiens with that of skin color and > Vitamin D uptake. > > Before, I was of no opinion as to how Homo Sapiens > became a "Naked > Ape". And as far as rockthrowing theory is concerned, > loss of hair was > an advantage so long as the hair lost was an > impediment to throwing. > Say the hair around the eyes, for if there was a lot > of hair around > the eyes could be fatal in a battle with predators or > another tribe of > early humans. > > And I suppose the Aquatic Ape theory, that our early > ancestors lived > mostly in a aquatic environment was a silly-theory to > answer the hair > loss of Homo sapiens. > > But now, it appears I stumbled on the correct path to > explaining how > or why early Homo sapiens became the "Naked Ape". > > I think there is a term in evolutionary biology of > co-evolution which > means several traits evolve together, where trait A > is a function of > trait B. Here the traits are 1) hair reduction 2) > skin color 3) > Vitamin D uptake > 4) warmth. So we have at least four factors > influencing one another > and likely others not mentioned. > > So we have Homo sapiens moving North into Europe some > 60,000 years ago > and by 30,000 years ago all the Neanderthals gone > extinct. > > Now was these Sapiens moving north already having > reduction of hair or > did they have mutations in Europe some 10,000 years > upon arriving > there? Well the climate is colder in Europe than in > Africa, so the > Sapiens would have covered up their bodies with skin > hides to keep > warm. That covering would mean less sunlight and less > vitamin D. And > were these Sapien invaders already having a dark skin > or did they have > a lighter skin before they moved North? Let us assume > they had dark > skin and after living near Tuscany Italy for 10,000 > years and wearing > clothing that the advantage of reduction in hair and > a whiter skin > would help in vitamin D uptake. > > So let us assume that the African sapien invaders of > Europe some > 60,000 years ago were of dark skin and a lot more > hair than modern day > sapiens. That living in Europe for many thousands of > years, especially > around Tuscany that the genetic advantage accrued to > those with > mutations that would be a whiter skin with reduction > in hair in order > to take in more vitamin D. > > Now in the NOVA show, they hacked on and on about > Neanderthal > interbreeding with Sapiens to confer extra health > immunity to European > diseases. One has to wonder, though, whether > Neanderthal was more > white skinned than the invading sapiens? And one has > to wonder whether > the Sapiens just evolved towards a whiter skin, > reduction in hair > without ever any Neanderthal interbreeding. > > -- > Google's archives are top-heavy in hate-spew from > search-engine- > bombing. Only Drexel's Math Forum has done a > excellent, simple and > fair archiving of AP posts for the past 15 years as > seen here: > > http://mathforum.org/kb/profile.jspa?userID=499986 > > Archimedes Plutonium > http://www.iw.net/~a_plutonium > whole entire Universe is just one big atom > where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies >