The Neanderthal Legacy by Paul Mellars

[Laura]

If Belibaste still has the file and is able to get it to me some how i can upload it to my server where people can get at it to download.

Actually, I'm the one who has it. I'll see if I can upload it somewhere for downloading. It's much better than the one online because it has been cleaned up, has better images... high rez.

 

[Nathan]

Actually, I'm the one who has it. I'll see if I can upload it somewhere for downloading. It's much better than the one online because it has been cleaned up, has better images... high rez.

There are ways to significantly reduce the sizes of PDFs. It's a common problem for newly created PDFs to be ridiculously sized even for small documents. I've run into this a few times and - not wanting to email someone a 10MB PDF of just 2 pages - have asked friends who are more knowledgeable to slim it down for me. I wish I'd paid more attention now, but I think it has something to do with printing as PDF from Microsoft Word and using some compression options, but this can probably be done from Adobe Acrobat with an existing PDF. I'm not precisely sure of how to do this, perhaps a PDF expert could chime in, or download the large version and give it the electronic equivalent of an Ultrabroth.

Nonetheless, the excerpts posted and your commentary was very helpful. It allowed me to get my head around some otherwise very heavy text. I'm sure the author of this paper might be a little offended that you're breaking down their lingo so a layperson like me can understand it!

 

[FireShadow]

Actually, I'm the one who has it. I'll see if I can upload it somewhere for downloading. It's much better than the one online because it has been cleaned up, has better images... high rez.

There are ways to significantly reduce the sizes of PDFs. It's a common problem for newly created PDFs to be ridiculously sized even for small documents. I've run into this a few times and - not wanting to email someone a 10MB PDF of just 2 pages - have asked friends who are more knowledgeable to slim it down for me. I wish I'd paid more attention now, but I think it has something to do with printing as PDF from Microsoft Word and using some compression options, but this can probably be done from Adobe Acrobat with an existing PDF. I'm not precisely sure of how to do this, perhaps a PDF expert could chime in, or download the large version and give it the electronic equivalent of an Ultrabroth.

Nonetheless, the excerpts posted and your commentary was very helpful. It allowed me to get my head around some otherwise very heavy text. I'm sure the author of this paper might be a little offended that you're breaking down their lingo so a layperson like me can understand it!

How about zipping it - my favorite is 7zip (free), but winzip also works, I think.

 

[Akopirnas]

Oh, this is very interesting. Thank you, Laura!
Thank you for recommendations, reviews and explanations.

Certainly, "The Neanderthal Legacy" is very specific book. Indeed, "anglo-saxon compromise" as an author said :)


Here's my five cents of another interesting quotations:

"It is from Boule’s characterization of the Chapelle-aux-Saints specimen that the popular conception of Neanderthals as shambling brutes arose, one which modern studies have shown to be entirely inaccurate. The ‘Neanderthal stoop’, for instance, arose because Boule misinterpreted the arthritic condition of the Old Man of Chapelle-aux-Saints as a general characteristic of the species. But Boule’s view that Homo neanderthalensis was a quite separate species from H. sapiens has been vindicated, although for entirely different reasons than those of intellectual and physical inferiority.
Today we know that Homo sapiens shared a common ancestor with the Neanderthals about 500,000 years ago, this date having been estimated from the extent of difference between Neanderthal and modern human DNA (Ward and Stringer 1997). The common ancestor may have been Homo Heidelbergensis or another—as yet—unidentified hominid species. Fossils are classified as H.neanderthalensis if they have a particular shape to their skull, arrangements to their teeth, and other recurrent physical traits (Stringer and Gamble 1993). Such fossils are only found in Europe and western Asia.
...
The archaeological dating methods are simply insufficient to determine whether Chatelperronian tools were made just before or just after modern humans arrived. Archaeologists rely on the method of radiocarbon dating, which can only ever provide approximate dates. At around 30,000 years ago the most accurate date will still lie within a window of several hundreds, if not thousands, of years in scope.
...
This ‘domain-specific’ mentality explains why the Neanderthals appear so intelligent in some ways and so limited in others. The Neanderthals had, for instance, the same amount of technical skill for making stone artifacts as modern humans. Similarly, they knew just as much about animal behaviour—all hunter-gatherers have to be good zoologists. But unlike modern humans, they could not combine their knowledge about tool-making and animals together to design specialized hunting weapons. I used the same argument to explain why Neanderthals were unable to make beads, create art, or believe in supernatural beings. All of these required what I termed ‘cognitive fluidity’—the mixing of knowledge and ways of thinking that had once been isolated in separate mental domains."


Steven Mithen "Creations of Pre-Modern Human Minds: Stone Tool Manufacture and Use by Homo habilis, heidelbergensis, and neanderthalensis"
(Creations of the Mind
Theories of Artifacts and Their Representation
"Creations of the Mind presents sixteen original essays by theorists from a wide variety of disciplines..."
Published in the United States by Oxford University Press Inc., New York by the several contributors 2007)



Just got Rebecca Stefoff "Modern Humans", so I'll go to look through pages...



Once again thank you!

 

[Akopirnas]

How about zipping it - my favorite is 7zip (free), but winzip also works, I think.

Eric John Dingwall "Artificial Cranial Deformation" (1931) zipped(*.zip) optimized *.pdf 34 MB (Please, scroll to see list of links) here: http://mir.cr/0RDEVQOY

 

[Gaby]

Just stumbled upon this today, it is from a health and diet (non gluten/lectin) blog:

http://drbganimalpharm.blogspot.com/2010/07/middle-to-late-paleolithic-neanderthals.html

Tuesday, July 20, 2010

Middle to Late Paleolithic: Neanderthals Consumed Grains and Legumes

[... background ...]

Evidence Middle Paleolithic Neanderthals Foraged Small Grained Grasses

Grasses are basically weeds and non-flowering. The seeds are dispersed off the grain-head by wind and animal/bird ingestion. As such, natural plant defenses support dispersal by keeping the seed intact and evolution of 'chemical warfare' involving phytic acid, lectins and gluten to ensure intact dispersal after animal/bird digestion. As early as 105,000 years ago, sorghum grains were found immediately near hearths in S. Africa highly suggestive of ancient man foraging and use stone mill tools (Science 2009). Could ancient Neanderthals have adopted similar tools and techniques, especially if cooling climatic changes, reduced animal resources to hunt and possible competition with modern humans for resources were all occurring?

Apparently this is the case. ~Approximately 50,000 yrs ago, definitely before the end of the middle paleolithic era, evidence for Neanderthals collecting phytic acid rich legumes and small-grain grasses exists.

Weiss et al published in a review of the use of cereals out pacing small-grained labor intensive grasses in utilization by early man (PNAS 2004). See above diagram. I extrapolated to where estimated Neanderthal extinction may have occurred and the potential for use of small-grained grasses by co-mingling modern humans. He discusses the evidence of grain/cereal foraging by Middle Paleolithic Neanderthals at 2 sites in the Middle East ('fertile cresent'):

* 48-60,000 yrs ago: Kebara Cave, Lev et al
* 55-70,000 yrs ago: Amud Cave, Madella et al

Middle Paleolithic: Prelude to the Broad Spectrum
In Middle Paleolithic Kebara Cave (~60,000–48,000 thermoluminescence years ago), Mount Carmel, Israel, Lev and associates (41, 44) found 3,956 charred seeds representing 52 taxa. On the basis of ethnographic observations and the fact that this plant assemblage was retrieved mainly from the immediate environment of the hearths, we assume that these seeds represent the Mousterian cave dwellers’ diet. Most of the seeds (3,300) were legumes but there were also acorns (Quercus sp.) and pistachio (Pistacia atlantica) nuts, as well as the seeds of giant golden-drop (Onosma gigantean), podonosma (Podonosma orientalis), Judean bugloss (Echium angustifolium judaeum), safflower (Carthamus sp.), and wild grape (Vitis vinifera). Only ten grass grains, including two of wild barley (Hordeum spontaneum), were recovered. In light of the generally good preservation of plant remains in the cave, Lev and colleagues concluded that cereal grains were an insignificant food source. It is notable, however, that they had made their way into human hands by this time, albeit in modest amounts.

Less compelling evidence of the Middle Paleolithic diet comes from Amud Cave (~70,000–55,000 thermoluminescence years ago) in the Upper Galilee, Israel. On the basis of phytolith assemblages, Madella et al. (42) concluded that the cave’s Neanderthals exploited herbaceous plants, ligneous parts of trees and shrubs, and mature grass panicles, and proposed that broad-spectrum exploitation of plants had started at least by the end of the Middle Paleolithic.

Legume and Grain-Consuming Neanderthals and Modern Humans

Did Neanderthals' diet affect the trajectory of their long existence to a final conclusion earlier than expected for such a strong, vital, muscular, close-proximity large-game hunting, cold-adapted, smart, larger-brained (20%), advanced hominid race who had already survived several large and small ice ages???

Why did their race slowly but abruptly fall short?
Lectins? Phytates? Vitamin D deficiency? Celiac disease?
How are both modern humans and extinct Neanderthal similar to Old and New World Primates in regards to pathophysiology of celiac and bone diseases?
See diagram below -- fossil sites of Neanderthal and modern man and the fertile cresent of grains/cereals/gluten. The vegetation is for 18,000 yrs ago, not 28,000 yrs ago when it was several magnitudes cooler reaching the lowest temperatures of the last Ice Age, more grass-lands and arid areas in the Mediterrean and northern European areas... The intense cooling from the Ice Ages did not initiate at polar caps but central continental bodies of water -- literally sucking out 200 to 300 ft of water as it cooled to freezing. Vegetation vastly altered... Grains...d*mn dirty grains...


Next post:
Evidence of Phytate-related Rachitic Damage in Late Neanderthals

 

[Approaching Infinity]

also I found this very amusing
_http://www.xent.com/FoRK-archive/august97/0277.html

The Jews are Neanderthals. Advanced in this decade by heretic
anthropologist Stan Gooch, who has also argued that the original,
full-blooded Neanderthals were telepathic. The thesis was taken up last
year by Canadian Michael Bradley in his incoherent book Chosen People
Iceman Inheritance, which identifies the origins of white racial evil in
prehistoric psychosexual tensions of some sort. Chosen People is an
extension of his ideas: Biblical evidence that Jews are Neanderthals
includes the Esau incident (Esau is hairy, remember?). The reason Jews
have an injunction against portraying God is that Neanderthals cannot
draw. However, Bradley adduces evidence that they were quite good with
numbers and were overly sentimental about their mothers. Interestingly,
Bradley also believes that modern European Jews are Khazars, which means
he must argue not only that biblical Hebrews were Neanderthals, but that
so were Khazars. He actually does so. News that Neanderthals have
little in common with modern humankind should be welcome to admirers of
Bradley's work. Among his blurbists, by the way, is Dr. Leonard
Jeffries, of New York's City College.

Yeah. I've read both of them and while they raise interesting questions, their simplistic reasoning and lack of effort digging for the facts, made their conclusions ridiculous.

However, if one thinks about it, it very well might be that "Semitic" actually means half of one race and half of another. And in this sense, the only other race we know of that existed alongside modern humans that could have fit this bill would have been Neanderthal since they were clearly a different species.

This was posted as a reply on Laura's facebook page:

_http://www.michaelbradley.info/books/iceman_chosen.html

In Chosen People From the Caucasus, Bradley extends his "Iceman" theory to a provocative and controversial discussion of the Hebrews. "Given their relatively small numbers, Jews have had an inordinately great influence on Western Civilization," says Bradley. "And, given the fact that Western Civilization has come to dominate the world over the past five hundred years, Jews have accordingly played a wildly disproportional role in the unfolding drama of all humanity."

Chosen People From the Caucasus focuses on the two separate groups of people who came from the Caucasus Mountains of the Middle East: the Biblical Hebrews who emerged from the southern Caucasus between 3000-2000 BC to invade Palestine, and the northern Caucasus "Khazars" who were converted to Judaism about 740 A.D. The Khazars were pushed into Central and Eastern Europe by Mongol invasions, and their descendants comprise the vast majority of modern Jewry. Both peoples, ironically, are considered to be "Jews"-- although they have no direct historical or genetic connections with each other -- except as they shared a Neanderthal origin in the Caucasus Mountains in the far distant and ancient pre-Judaic past.

Bradley contends that people and cultures emerging from the Caucasus Mountains (a known refuge of late-lingering Neanderthal populations) in proto-historical and historical times would have remained highly intelligent, highly aggressive and psychosexually maladapted (promoting a high level of in-group cohesion). These traits, Bradley contends, explain the survival of Biblical Hebrews against all odds and also the inordinate social influence of modern Western Jews.

Bradley contends that there is no mystique of "the chosen people." "Monotheism" -- a purely male and abstract Godhead -- is merely a result of Neanderthal glacial physical and mental adaptations or "maladaptations". Proven Neanderthal in-group cohesion and extreme aggression together resulted in a fiercely parochial "chosen people" perspective. The cultural fusion of the two separate streams of "Jews" has, since the 16th century, played an important role in the evolution of Western Civilization and thus in the molding of the entire world's present cultural profile.

Bradley contends that a uniquely high level of lingering Neanderthal aggression, perpetuated by ethnic prohibitions against outside marriage, has been responsible for the major role played by those calling themselves Jews in the discovery and conquest of the Americas, the transatlantic trade in Black Africans as slaves and cultural colonization of non-Whites by the West. It has been a role too often distorted and disguised by loud lamentations of "anti- Semitism."

Non-fiction. Sequel and extension of "The Cronos Complex" and "The Iceman Inheritance", a presentation of evidence that Neanderthal characteristics in remnant montane populations have influenced the history, culture and monotheistic religions of the Middle East and Europe. Only U.S. book publishing rights have been licensed (English language). UK and all other territorial and language rights are available, including Film, Television and Video.

 

[dant]

Wow, thanks for that thread AI!
Very interesting!

 

[Laura]

Bradley may very well be onto something.

 

[Akopirnas]

Citations from some articles which refers to Cs timeline and statements:


http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn18869-neanderthal-genome-reveals-interbreeding-with-humans.html

"Any human whose ancestral group developed outside Africa has a little Neanderthal in them – between 1 and 4 per cent of their genome, Pääbo's team estimates. In other words, humans and Neanderthals had sex and had hybrid offspring. A small amount of that genetic mingling survives in "non-Africans" today: Neanderthals didn't live in Africa, which is why sub-Saharan African populations have no trace of Neanderthal DNA.

It's impossible to know how often humans invited Neanderthals back to their cave (and vice versa), but the genome data offers some intriguing details.

"It must have been at least 45,000 years ago," says David Reich, a geneticist at Harvard Medical School who was involved in the project. That's because all non-Africans – be they from France, China or Papua New Guinea – share the same amount of Neanderthal DNA, suggesting that interbreeding occurred before those populations split. The timing makes the Middle East the likeliest place where humans leaving Africa and resident Neanderthals did the deed.

...

-Can we trace any human traits back to Neanderthals?

- Probably not. Some researchers had hypothesised that some human genes, including one involved in brain development, originated from interbreeding with Neanderthals, but Pääbo's team found no evidence for this. In fact, no Neanderthal DNA sequences are consistently found in humans. "Each person has a different bit of Neanderthal in them," says Reich.

However, Sarah Tishkoff, a geneticist at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia not involved in the project, says it is possible that interbreeding introduced traits into a few human populations. "It will be interesting to look at other ethnic groups and other Neanderthals," she says."



http://www.livescience.com/history/090721-neanderthal-murder.html

"Newly analyzed remains suggest that a modern human killed a Neanderthal man in what is now Iraq between 50,000 and 75,000 years ago."

 

[shijing]

- Probably not. Some researchers had hypothesised that some human genes, including one involved in brain development, originated from interbreeding with Neanderthals, but Pääbo's team found no evidence for this. In fact, no Neanderthal DNA sequences are consistently found in humans. "Each person has a different bit of Neanderthal in them," says Reich.

However, Sarah Tishkoff, a geneticist at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia not involved in the project, says it is possible that interbreeding introduced traits into a few human populations. "It will be interesting to look at other ethnic groups and other Neanderthals," she says."

What I take away from the above is that this matter is a lot more complex than it has been made out to be in recent publications. There has been a tendency so far to imply that the same Neanderthal gene sequences exist in all non-African populations, but the above indicates that there may be more to the story, if I'm reading it right. If we consider that the Out-of-Africa model is inaccurate, then there has to be an alternative explanation for the existence of the Neanderthal material in the disparate non-African populations -- possibly multiregional infusions, as opposed to a single infusion, which could be linked to various strains of psychopathy. That means that evidence for a specific infusion of genes in the Middle East related to essential psychopathy could still be awaiting discovery, once more work is done in this area. I think it's still premature, and we probably just need to keep our eyes peeled for upcoming breakthroughs in this area.

 

[Approaching Infinity]

What I take away from the above is that this matter is a lot more complex than it has been made out to be in recent publications. There has been a tendency so far to imply that the same Neanderthal gene sequences exist in all non-African populations, but the above indicates that there may be more to the story, if I'm reading it right. If we consider that the Out-of-Africa model is inaccurate, then there has to be an alternative explanation for the existence of the Neanderthal material in the disparate non-African populations -- possibly multiregional infusions, as opposed to a single infusion, which could be linked to various strains of psychopathy. That means that evidence for a specific infusion of genes in the Middle East related to essential psychopathy could still be awaiting discovery, once more work is done in this area. I think it's still premature, and we probably just need to keep our eyes peeled for upcoming breakthroughs in this area.

Found this, which is also relevant to the "1-4% figure", on Bradley's site.

_http://www.michaelbradley.info/

Science, May 6, 2010 vindicates The Iceman Inheritance and Chosen People from the Caucasus, but beware of that "one to four percent" statistical spin!


The May 6, 2010 issue of Science, Journal of the American Academy of Sciences, has finally confirmed that modern human populations have significant Neanderthal genetic admixture. This study by the Max Planck Institute of Leipzig under the overall leadership of Dr. Svante Paabo also included some researchers from the Harvard University School of Medicine.

Behind the scenes, it seems that this DNA study's dramatic reversal of the Paabo-Stoneking Cell article of July 15, 1997 insisting that there was no Neanderthal DNA in modern humans was due to the fact that Harvard researchers came up with data that contradicted the 1997 study by Svante Paabo (then at the University of Munich) and Mike Stoneking (then at the University of Pennsylvania).

Personally, I have always suspected that this 1997 study was purposefully concocted or even commissioned to please North American Jews and to further Israeli interests. In the 1997 study, Svante Paabo and Mike Stoneking claimed to have re-created part of the Neanderthal DNA sequence to an "acceptable" extent (2%) and then to have compared it to human DNA (but the complete human genome wasn't mapped until 2005). In short, Paabo and Stoneking were comparing nothing much to nothing at all. Dr. Alan Templeton, a geneticist at the American University in St. Louis, characterized their 1997 study as "a statistical house of cards."

At that time the acknowledged world expert on Neanderthals was Dr. Erik Trinkaus, formerly of the Anthropology Department at the University of New Mexico. His massive book The Neandertals was published in 1992 (Random House, and in two revised Vintage "University Format" paperback editions 1994-1996). Trinkaus chose to adopt the new German spelling system which hasn't caught on among Germans. The Neandertals contained this observation in the concluding pages (March, 1994 Vintage paperback): "Only humans from the Near East and parts of Europe can claim Neandertals per se in their direct ancestry" (page 416, my emphasis). The 1997 Paabo-Stoneking study published in the July issue of Cell was highly promoted in North American media, contradicted Trinkaus, prevented Random House from issuing a cheaper mass-market paperback edition of The Neandertals in the Fall of 1997 and immediately enthroned Svante Paabo instead of Erik Trinkaus as the world's leading expert on Neanderthals in the public mind. Naturally, the 1997 Paabo-Stoneking Cell article also discredited my own books The Iceman Inheritance (1978) and Chosen People from the Caucasus (1992) because I had concluded exactly what Trinkaus had concluded, only I said it first. This new May 2010 study concedes that from "1 to 4" percent of modern human DNA is Neanderthal. However, I see and smell a little loophole just large enough for a statistical rat.

The conclusions of this new 2010 study, certainly vetted and possibly written by Paabo, are clearly intended to convey the impression that this "1 to 4 percent" of lingering Neanderthal DNA is more or less evenly distributed throughout the world except for Africa where there is supposedly no Neanderthal DNA -- and I find this hard to believe.

The May 2010 study even found Neanderthal DNA in New Guinea, which is highly unlikely and I wonder who the carefully chosen modern donor was to get this supposed Neanderthal DNA. I like to joke that it was probably the fictional (I hope) Dr. Jacob Epstein, formerly a New York doctor who now practices in Port Moresby. That's the worldwide "Paabo spin" on Neanderthal DNA in modern humans and, looked at this way, "1 to 4 percent" doesn't amount to much. Figures don't lie but liars figure.

On June 5, 2010 the world's population was estimated to be 6.8-billion-plus people (United States Census Bureau, Wikipedia). One percent of that is roughly 68-million and change. Four percent works out to about 278-million people. Odd, isn't it, that this is about the population of the Middle East, according to my Bloomsbury Pocket Atlas? And this is the geographic homeland of the Semitic peoples, the present Judeo-Islamic Arabs and the Jews. Work it out for yourself on any good atlas.

Using maps and atlases there is a way of looking at this "1 to 4 percent" of Neanderthal DNA in modern humans that makes a great deal of historical sense. What if this Neanderthal DNA is concentrated in the Caucasus Middle East, where this 2010 study admits that Neanderthals and Cro-Magnons (or "Early Modern Humans") met and interbred? Surely it is reasonable to suppose that the main concentration of the world's surviving Neanderthal DNA must be in this area, discounting very modern migrations of some people by railway, steamship and aircraft transportation, and that Neanderthal DNA decreases rapidly as distance from the Caucasus centre of interbreeding increases?

There would be virtually no Neanderthal DNA in Atlantic Western Europe, but there would be more in Central Europe and much more in Eastern Europe, and especially in mountainous areas. There would be virtually none northward toward the Baltic Sea and virtually none east of Kazakhstan to Pacific Far East Asia. And we were already told that there is supposedly no Neanderthal DNA in Africa. But actually there should be at least some Neanderthal DNA in North Africa because the Arab-Muslims conquered it. Now, this sort of Neanderthal DNA distribution might average out to that insignificant "1 to 4 percent of Neanderthal DNA in the whole world's population." See? As Mark Twain put it: first come lies, then damn lies and then statistics.

Now, assuming this sort of concentration of Neanderthal DNA in the Caucasus Middle East, that "1 to 4" percent of world population suddenly becomes very significant indeed. It means that the Semitic peoples of the Middle East -- Jews, Arabs and others (like Armenians) -- must, therefore, be substantially Neanderthal.

And this sort of concentration of Neanderthal DNA seems to be the case.

On May 10, 2010 a Svante Paabo co-reseacher on the new study, Johannes Krause, said on the Mid-German TV Network that the people of the Middle East, the Semites, were at least from "10 to 20" percent Neanderthal. The Internet link to this interview on the Mid-German TV Network was deactivated on May 18, 2010.

This is precisely what I argued in The Iceman Inheritance (1978), Chosen People from the Caucasus (1992) and what Erik Trinkaus at least inferred in his The Neandertals of 1992. However, my own calculations indicate that some Middle East Semitic populations approach 50 percent Neanderthal and in some very specific small areas, 70 percent Neanderthal. Given the usually modest Semitic populations in mountain valleys and arid landscapes of the Caucasus Middle East, this sort of Neanderthal DNA concentration among some groups would not affect that "1 to 4 percent" of the total world population very much.

In my view, there are two major subspecies of technical "humanity" presently contending for the domination of our world.

One subspecies and the most influential one in terms of its sheer numbers and geographic extent can simply be called "ordinary humanity". Before 15th century European maritime expansion and commerce they inhabited Atlantic Western Europe, most of Africa, perhaps "Atlantis" in the past, North and South America and across the Pacific to the Far East, Japan and China. There are several geographic varieties of this subspecies differentiated mostly by skin colour and some other physical traits, but this subspecies as a whole exhibits a clear tendency toward polytheism, a tolerance of females in society and in divine affairs and a relatively low level of aggression. All varieties share a reasonable level of intelligence, very definite visual artistic ability, relatively non-protruding noses and only moderate male hairiness. Because of the differences in physical characteristics of this subspecies, it may be possible that it really consists of several subspecies that evolved separately in slightly different ways within their various geographic areas and different environments of origin. Or, it may have originally been just one Eastern or Southern African subspecies that migrated into various geographic areas and then evolved unique characteristics. This latter is the modern view, but it may not be correct.

However, the roughly common mentality of this subspecies, much more important than its superficial physical differences, indicates a relatively low degree of sexual dimorphism in its primal anthropological ancestry - except in areas where it has since been greatly affected biologically and culturally by the expansion of the other contending subspecies, as in Central and Western Europe after the Jewish Diaspora of AD 70, the Hun invasion AD 451-453 and Khazar migrations from the Russian-Ukrainian steppes into Central Europe of circa AD 1000 to 1300.

This other contending subspecies originated in what I call the "Toxic Lozenge", a narrow elongated area extending from the Rift Valley lakes of Tanzania, Kenya and southern Ethiopia to the northern Caucasus Mountains. This Toxic Lozenge therefore encompasses the geographic epicentres of both Homo habilis and later Neanderthal development. This Toxic Lozenge is also the original homeland of the Hamitic languages and the later seemingly related Semitic ones.

Note that Ancient Egypt was well to the west of where this Toxic Lozenge crosses the Red Sea between Jiddah and Medina in Arabia - an area now called Hijaz and/or Yemen but known as Saba (biblical "Sheba") in ancient times - the very place where the first evidence of the Hebrew language has been discovered and where Islam was also later conceived (see Queen of Sheba and Biblical Scholarship by Dr. Bernard Leeman much further down on this website).

Physically, this subspecies is characterized by very great nasal development, extreme hairiness in males, long torsos and short legs, extremely high numerical and spatial intelligence, very little visual artistic ability, a low level of emotional stability, fanatical monotheism, anti-feminism and a predisposition to control, enslave or exterminate "ordinary humanity". There is some anthropological evidence that this subspecies may derive from Homo habilis, through the Neanderthals and on to modern representatives. However, not all anthropologists agree that Homo habilis should be considered fully "human" as that term is rather loosely defined, but was possibly an aberrant offshoot of either Homo or Australopithecus (see Esau's Empire I on this website). That is, people deriving from this Toxic Lozenge in ancient times may not be exactly human and certainly seem to be incompatible with the values and attitudes of "ordinary humanity". However, recent historical migrants into the Toxic Lozenge represent mostly ordinary African humanity.

Much more important than physical traits, the aggression of this subspecies is responsible for its expansion from its original Toxic Lozenge both east and west to inhabit most of the "Middle East" (especially mountainous regions) and even parts of Europe, western India and northern and eastern Africa, imposing its religious and social values. In short, the people of this Toxic Lozenge have gradually driven a wedge of perhaps "not-quite-human" genes and culture between the ordinary humanity of the West and the ordinary humanity of the Far East. And this wedge has been inexorably expanded by well-known historical events from 5600 BC to the present. Despite the incessant propaganda and disinformation promulgated by this subspecies, adherence to Judaism, Judeo-Christianity and Judeo-Islam are the symptomatic indications of its biological expansion and/or cultural influence.

This Toxic Lozenge subspecies is the most influential one in terms of its extremely high aggression (see "Hard Times Among the Neanderthals", Natural History, Journal of the American Museum of Natural History, New York, December 1978 by Dr. Erik Trinkaus and Dr. T. Dale Stewart of the Smithsonian Institute).

How aggressive are they? Trinkaus and Stewart subjected every Neanderthal bone then known to a forensic-style analysis and found over twice the number of violence-inflicted injuries as among any similar number of bones from other fossil humans. Nonetheless, though extremely violent, Neanderthals took care of their injured and elderly people (Trinkaus and Stewart; see also Ralph Solecki's later work at Shanidar cave). Ironically, this Trinkaus and Stewart article was published one month after the publication of The Iceman Inheritance in November, 1978. I could certainly have used this data if it had been available a few months earlier.

This December 1978 Trinkaus-Stewart study and article adequately explains why the Middle East has been a region of chronic conflict for about 3,500 years of more or less reliably recorded human history. Very little more needs to be said or written about extreme Middle Eastern aggression itself.

However, much more can be said and written about how the Western World got drawn into Middle East confrontations.

President Barack Obama, General Stanley A. McChrystal (relieved of command by Obama on June 23, 2010 because of McChrystal's comments in Rolling Stone magazine) and Maj. Hal Skaarup (Canadian Forces Intelligence) are at least aware of Esau's Empire I and may even have read it carefully. Gen. David H. Petraeus is also now aware of Esau's Empire I. All I can say is that the final five concluding pages of Esau's Empire I resulting from 30 previous pages of anthropological evidence and conjecture seem to predict Obama's very recent determination to commit a total of almost 100,000 American troops in Afghanistan.

These troops will apparently be concentrated around Kandahar in the southern relative "lowlands" flanking the Helmand River and may be reflecting the strategy I suggested in Esau's Empire I. The West can possibly hold the lowlands of Iraq, Afghanistan and, much more important, the Indus Valley of nuclear-capable Pakistan against the Taliban. This is because there is a substratum of Cro-Magnon genes in these lowlands of major rivers. In Iraq and along the Indus River of Pakistan, this Cro-Magnon substratum represents a large minority of the population, and even an actual majority in some places. However, along the Helmand River of strategic Afghanistan this Cro-Magnon substratum represents a distinct minority because the Helmand River drains into an upland salt lake and has no outlet to any sea. A strategy based on Kandahar, Afghanistan as a "Central Position" is therefore iffy at the very best given the subspecific demographics of the Helmand River "lowlands" and Helmand Province.

The true geographic Central Position of this region's present war zone (from Iraq to Pakistan) would be near the large northern Omani town of Sohar. The current Sultan Qaboos(?) would probably agree to U.S. and Allied troops there; his southern border with Yemen and his interior Northwestern border with the United Arab Emirates would then become more secure because of the presence of these foreign Western troops in Oman. And the also the nearby oil Straits of Hormuz into and out of the Persian Gulf would be under U.S. and Allied guns, ships and aircraft.

Although Oman is officially Islamic, it has a 5,000-year-old tradition at the very least of Monsoon seafaring to East Africa and across the Arabian Sea to India, Indonesia and even as far as China; first in reed ships called "Ma-gurs" and later in sewn-plank vessels of various types usually called "dhows" by Wsterners (see Thor Heyerdahl's The Tigris Expedition and Tim Severin's The Sindbad Voyage). The discovery of a large coastal city with dry docks for reed ships that was partially excavated several years ago in India's Kathiawar Peninsula and dated to 7,500 BC indicates that Monsoon trade across the Arabian Sea may actually be more like 10,000 years old. The coastal population of Oman therefore has a very great admixture of Cro-Magnon genes, much more so than the Helmand River Valley of Afghanistan, and Western troops would probably be safer there in a war of attrition. Allied troops could be supplied more easily by sea, while Sohar is also a much more immediate threat to Iran.

However, from Kandahar in Afghanistan we certainly cannot win on the ground in the Caucasus, Elburz, Hindu Kush or Pamir Mountains without being willing to commit concerted, dedicated and effective genocide by air of the mountain people who are of Semitic-Neanderthal genetic stock. A central position at Kandahar, if it can be established and held, could cover the lowlands of Afghanistan, Iraq and crucial Pakistan, while also being within striking distance of Iran if that is considered necessary. However, a central position at Sohar, if a large enough military base could be leased from Oman, would do the same job much better so long as the Allies were willing to give up fighting the Taliban on the ground and be content with bombing Taliban strongholds.

Maybe someone in Washington finally realizes that we are really into a genetic war in the Middle East, while no one in Washington apparently understands what the contending sides are. And no one appreciates the fact that we cannot win this war, unless we begin to fight closer to home, simply because we have already almost lost this war due to Middle Eastern infiltration long ago and much closer to home. For example, Americans do not even know for sure who first conceived of 9/11 and who may have secretly financed the project, but Americans most certainly know who benefitted from it: Israel and "Wall Street", including the two Jewish owners of the World Trade Center - and yet the U.S. is in Afghanistan?

Disregarding the complex geographic and demographic considerations of purely military strategy, I suspect that most ordinary Americans really know where Obama's proposed 100,000 troops could be deployed with better results than in Afghanistan. The same 100,000 troops in Tel Aviv, Haifa, Jerusalem and Jaffa would instantly reduce most of the world's tensions, perhaps begin negotiated settlements of most present Middle East conflicts and also guarantee Israel's immediate security until decisions about its continued independent existence and its control of atomic weapons could be made. But such is the power of the Toxic Lozenge infiltrators in the U.S. that no one can even whisper these locations. Even President Barack Obama, whom the French public called "the last chance for America", cannot defeat the all-pervasive Toxic Lozenge mentality and influence which has compromised U.S. ideals and has distorted its policies.

According to SAMS, the U.S. Army's own "School for Advanced Military Studies" at Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, Israel had manipulated and secretly funded Islamic militants to carry out Israeli terrorism many times before 9/11. SAMS ironically announced this finding on September 10, 2001, the day before 9/11, on the front page of The Washington Times, adding that SAMS expected a very devastating example of this Israeli strategy "soon". Later, SAMS announced its conclusion on several front page stories in The Washington Star that the World Trade Center had been destroyed due to purposeful demolition by many carefully set and timed thermite bombs, an operation requiring two or three months. And this seemed obvious from the televised collapses of the buildings. According to SAMS, the twin towers of the WTC were not destroyed by the two televised aircraft impacts. If SAMS is correct, then the two airliner impacts must have been carefully timed and executed highly dramatic "coincidences" intended to confuse and propagandize the public, motivating Americans to fight a profitable war (for Wall Street) against Islam on behalf of Israel. And that's what happened.

However, these conclusions by the Army's School for Advanced Military Studies received little or no coverage on major electronic mass media in the United States. You never saw it on CNN, ABC, NBC or CBS televised news. It was covered on BBC, France's TV-5 and Deutchewelt.

Obviously, too, Islamic militants could use Israeli fanatics in the same way for their own ends. Judeo-Christians have never been above the same sort of conspiracy and deceit as the spurious "Donation of Constantine" proves. And there was also the supposed forgery of "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion" released at the first Zionist conference in 1896. There is ample evidence that the CIA once manipulated Israeli "Irgun" terrorists and Iraqi Shi'ites to commit religiously disguised violence in order to justify U.S. policy in the Middle East.

In short, when dealing with the mentality of the Toxic Lozenge, ordinary people can have only the vaguest ideas about who is promoting which conflict in the Middle East and what the several agendas may be.

As another example, who promoted and financed the several days of violent demonstrations after last summer's 2009 Iranian elections? Even Western pre-election political polls predicted Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's re-election by a very wide margin. Did the U.S. CIA provoke the demonstrations to try and justify American intervention in Iran in order to halt Iran's nuclear program? Did Israel do it to bolster its claim that Iran poses a threat to Israeli security - and also to draw attention away from Netanyahu's intransigence about further Israeli settlements in Palestinian territory? Did the Taliban, perhaps financed by Pakistan, Iran, Israel or "rogue" elements in the U.S. CIA, do it in order to open another theatre of war in the region and compromise the U.S. strategic buildup in Afghanistan? And there are yet other possibilities.

That's why my 13 Rennsalaer novels are all set in France and Western Atlantic Europe. In France, the legality of wearing symbols of Middle Eastern religious affiliation in public has been a matter of intense political debate since 2003 with actual legislation in 2007. At least the French know the identity of the historically ancient common human enemy and are not likely to support pathetically muddled American ideas in 2009 any more than they did in 2003.

Ironically, I suppose, we have been propagandized into thinking that these three Middle Eastern monotheistic religions are mutually antagonistic - and they are among themselves. Yet, they all come from the same source and are all targeted against the beliefs and mental orientation of the majority of humankind. Whether Islam, Roman Catholicism or Protestant Baptists win converts is irrelevant. The very same fundamental Judaic Old Testament monotheism, myths and mindset are preserved in both the Koran and the Christian Bible. As Sigmund Freud observed, "religious [and racial] intolerance came into the world with monotheism" (Moses and Monotheism, 1938). These historical myths, monotheism, social values and mindset come from the Toxic Lozenge reflecting ancient anthropology from the Horn of Africa. What does "spirituality" have to do with it? See Esau's Empire I.

 

[Stevie Argyl]

The May 2010 study even found Neanderthal DNA in New Guinea, which is highly unlikely and I wonder who the carefully chosen modern donor was to get this supposed Neanderthal DNA. I like to joke that it was probably the fictional (I hope) Dr. Jacob Epstein, formerly a New York doctor who now practices in Port Moresby. That's the worldwide "Paabo spin" on Neanderthal DNA in modern humans and, looked at this way, "1 to 4 percent" doesn't amount to much. Figures don't lie but liars figure.

On June 5, 2010 the world's population was estimated to be 6.8-billion-plus people (United States Census Bureau, Wikipedia). One percent of that is roughly 68-million and change. Four percent works out to about 278-million people. Odd, isn't it, that this is about the population of the Middle East, according to my Bloomsbury Pocket Atlas? And this is the geographic homeland of the Semitic peoples, the present Judeo-Islamic Arabs and the Jews. Work it out for yourself on any good atlas.

According to the Guardian on the 6th May http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2010/may/06/neanderthals-dna-humans-genome the report said that

Most people living outside Africa can trace up to 4% of their DNA to a Neanderthal origin, a consequence of interbreeding between the two groups after the great migration from the contintent.

Most people having between 1 and 4% Neanderthal DNA is a different statistic from between 1 and 4% of the population have Neanderthal DNA leading to michaelbradly.com conclusion of One percent of that is roughly 68-million and change. Four percent works out to about 278-million people. Is he confused and doesn't understanf basic maths or is the Guardians reporting of the stats wrong?

 

[Approaching Infinity]

Most people having between 1 and 4% Neanderthal DNA is a different statistic from between 1 and 4% of the population have Neanderthal DNA leading to michaelbradly.com conclusion of One percent of that is roughly 68-million and change. Four percent works out to about 278-million people. Is he confused and doesn't understanf basic maths or is the Guardians reporting of the stats wrong?

I think he's questioning the nature of the statistics. Above the part you quoted, he wrote:

At that time the acknowledged world expert on Neanderthals was Dr. Erik Trinkaus, formerly of the Anthropology Department at the University of New Mexico. His massive book The Neandertals was published in 1992 (Random House, and in two revised Vintage "University Format" paperback editions 1994-1996). Trinkaus chose to adopt the new German spelling system which hasn't caught on among Germans. The Neandertals contained this observation in the concluding pages (March, 1994 Vintage paperback): "Only humans from the Near East and parts of Europe can claim Neandertals per se in their direct ancestry" (page 416, my emphasis). The 1997 Paabo-Stoneking study published in the July issue of Cell was highly promoted in North American media, contradicted Trinkaus, prevented Random House from issuing a cheaper mass-market paperback edition of The Neandertals in the Fall of 1997 and immediately enthroned Svante Paabo instead of Erik Trinkaus as the world's leading expert on Neanderthals in the public mind. Naturally, the 1997 Paabo-Stoneking Cell article also discredited my own books The Iceman Inheritance (1978) and Chosen People from the Caucasus (1992) because I had concluded exactly what Trinkaus had concluded, only I said it first. This new May 2010 study concedes that from "1 to 4" percent of modern human DNA is Neanderthal. However, I see and smell a little loophole just large enough for a statistical rat.

The conclusions of this new 2010 study, certainly vetted and possibly written by Paabo, are clearly intended to convey the impression that this "1 to 4 percent" of lingering Neanderthal DNA is more or less evenly distributed throughout the world except for Africa where there is supposedly no Neanderthal DNA -- and I find this hard to believe.

He then goes on to quote some people who think that Middle Easterners might have up to 70% Neanderthal DNA. So I think he's saying that he thinks the statistic, applied to all of humanity, is bogus, and that some humans have more, and some less Neanderthal DNA.

Now, this sort of Neanderthal DNA distribution might average out to that insignificant "1 to 4 percent of Neanderthal DNA in the whole world's population." See? As Mark Twain put it: first come lies, then damn lies and then statistics.

In other words, he's saying that it looks like this "1 to 4%" figure is a result of averaging out the results for all the humans tested, when it makes more sense that some humans have almost 0%, while others would have a significantly higher percentage.

 

[Stevie Argyl]

Thanks for the clarification. Have you seen or do you have a link to the original write up that these two articles are based on? I am wondering how large the sample size that the researchers are basing their conclusions on is.