Monday, 28 September 2015

(59) The Killer Hominid

Basic Dimension 

The killer Hominid

With killer Hominids especially we focus on Homininae (7 million years ago (mya); 400 cc).

Killer Hominids are made by evolution in harsh environments. And since we all are partly killer Hominids this discussion is about gradation. The first pathological killer is the chimpanzee (Pan paniscus), which evolved in an environment with insufficient food supply. He must be compared with the friendly and socialized bonobo (Pan troglodytes):

Second psychopathic killers were inhabitants of Paradise culture, humanlike creatures which evolved under harsh conditions of the steppes and deserts of Africa and whose descendants are now living in the arid regions of the Arabian Peninsula. From them comes the acclaimed paradise story.

Both, chimpanzees and Paradise culture underwent severe genetic selections. In the evolution chimp males have been killed systematically if they did not fit into the hierarchy. Consequently, certain traits have been culled in the course of million years of evolution.

The same occurred with Paradise culture where members not fitting in the inbreeding and incest culture have been murdered systematically for about 7 million years. 
Muslims are the lineal descendants of Paradise culture:

This blog is dedicated to three brave young women who paid with their lives for genetic freedom:

Islamic culture is the prototype of a tribal endogamy, which still can be observed in Europe in the honor killings of Sadia Sheikh and Gülsüm Selim, who refused forced marriages with their cousins. The characters of Gülsüm, Mirjam and Sadia will no longer reproduce, they are extinct. They wanted to marry non-Muslims what even for Mirjam in religious endogamy was completely impossible. In seven million years, character deformation in this group of Homininae acquired gigantic proportions and is probably irreversible:

This brings us to the conclusion that killer Hominids are the result of harsh environment and selective breeding. They lost social empathic behavior and the system reinforced sadism in males and masochism in females.

Without selective breeding killer Hominids would return to more normal behavior if ended up in moderate circumstances. Hence it is not the harsh environment which causes killer Hominids but especially inbreeding and incest and otherwise, what selects certain psychological traits in the evolution. 

In harsh environments it is male power which is in charge. Tribes are always patriarchal, meaning that (polygamous) male heterosexuality is leading and 'other sexual roles' must follow. Hence primacy is always for monotheism (a single sexual role) in SM-dyad:

On the other hand, in more temperate and fertile regions and without inbreeding and incest, sexual roles become more or less equivalent since male power is not needed in the fight for food and wealth. Bonobos are an outstanding example of Vanilla-dyad where all sexual roles are allowed. This is called polytheism:

Although Christianity in its last stage can be compared with semi-polytheism in Vanilla-dyad, Western culture in temperate and fertile regions also has been very aggressive in the past. We conclude for humans it is far more complicated than for bonobos. 

But it is true in the evolution the bonobo population and Christianity have maintained normal psychological structure without any selection on character traits.

It is very doubtful if Muslims and Christians will ever assimilate because of fundamental differences in personality structure:


Seven million years of evolution created somewhat different species for Panini:

Chimpanzees are called Panini and human like creatures are called Hominini. Chimpanzees and Hominini diverged as Homininae from the common ancestor Hominidae, about 14 - 7 million years ago (mya). About 6-5 mya, Panini and Hominini split apart. Fewer than one million years ago the bonobo (Pan paniscus) and common chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes) species effectively separated as DNA evidence suggests.

Two African apes are the closest living relatives of humans: the chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes) and the bonobo (Pan paniscus). Although they are similar in many respects, bonobos and chimpanzees differ strikingly in key social and sexual behaviours1234, and for some of these traits they show more similarity with humans than with each other.

Here we report the sequencing and assembly of the bonobo genome to study its evolutionary relationship with the chimpanzee and human genomes. We find that more than three per cent of the human genome is more closely related to either the bonobo or the chimpanzee genome than these are to each other. These regions allow various aspects of the ancestry of the two ape species to be reconstructed. In addition, many of the regions that overlap genes may eventually help us understand the genetic basis of phenotypes that humans share with one of the two apes to the exclusion of the other.

From 7- 5 million years ago chimpanzees (Panini) and humans (Hominini) shared the same religious development. (But remember Panini did not definitely leave the forests). Note, both types had 400 cc brains and interbred, as they were the same species.

'Today, bonobos are found in only the Democratic Republic of Congo and there is no evidence that they have interbred with chimpanzees in equatorial Africa since they diverged, perhaps because the Congo River acted as a barrier to prevent the groups from mixing'.

'Why, then, have chimps not evolved this social structure? The answer may lie in the history of the habitats they occupy. Both species of primates live in tropical forests along the Zaire River -- chimps north of the river, bonobos to the south. Their environments seem to be quite similar today. But about 2.5 million years ago, there seems to have been a lengthy drought in southern Zaire that wiped out the preferred food plants of gorillas and sent the primates packing. After the drought ended, the forests returned, but the gorillas did not.[bonobos nowadays are without gorillas.]' 

'Chimpanzees [nowadays bonobos] in this environment south of the river had the forest to themselves, and could exploit the fiber foods that had previously been eaten by gorillas -- foods that are still eaten by gorillas to the north [chimps nowadays with gorillas]this additional food to tide them [bonobos] over between fruit trees, they could travel in larger, more stable parties, and form strong social bonds. They became bonobos.'

'On the north side of the river, the chimps had to share their niche with gorillaswhich eat the fiber foods. The chimps have to compete for fruit, and occasionally meat, food resources that tend to be widely scattered. Female chimps disperse into the forest with their infants to find enough to eat, and cannot spend time together to forge strong bonds. The changes in social behavior that occurred in response to this environmental factor may be what led chimps down a different evolutionary path, toward a society more prone to violence.' 

Here is stated that a harsh environment made less social and more aggressive chimpanzees than bonobos. It must be said chimpanzees also have some good points. So females are free to live in the forest on the edges of the tribe. And just like bonobos, young adolescent females may leave the group in search for other groups to settle. This is a strong argument against inbreeding but selective breeding of males remains. Now, random inbreeding is not the biggest problem, but selective breeding on psychological traits does.

Now we see the enormous difference with Islam where young females are treated like slaves which are not allowed to choose for genetic diversity. This gives the following rank order in 'equal sexual roles'. It is the Homininae rank order of civilization:

Note 1: Chimp females are free to live in the forest on the edges of the tribe finding their own food, simply because chimp males are not sexually interested 24/7 as human males.

Note 2:  Very young females may leave the group in search for other groups to settle. Chimp males other than a lot of Muslim males are not interested in sexually immature juveniles.

Psychological tests of Panini

'Overall this broad spectrum comparison of bonobo and chimpanzee cognition demonstrates that species differences in cognition are directly reflected in the most pronounced differences observed in their naturally occurring behavior. Each species outperformed the other on one cognitive scale and in the direction predicted by previous socio-ecological observations, even when controlling for effects of age (i.e. statistically and matching ages). 
Mirroring individual differences observed in theory of mind development in human children [5]the more cautious and socially tolerant bonobo outperformed chimpanzees on the theory of mind scale
Meanwhile, the prolific tool-using chimpanzee, whose survival is more dependent on extractive foraging, outperformed bonobos in the tool-use and causality scale. This pattern can potentially be interpreted as suggesting that bonobos are more skilled at solving problems requiring an understanding of social causality, while chimpanzees are more skilled at solving problems relating to physical causality.'
' In other words, while the two species are highly similar and only diverged 1–2 million years ago, the observed socio-ecological differences may have shaped each species psychology in predictable ways.'


Nowadays bonobos travel all the year from fruit place to fruit place. Meanwhile they eat fiber foods. They are intellectually very flexible and developed great capability for empathy, as Christians. But chimpanzees are prisoners of little areas and are unable to roam through the forests north of Congo River. Females did not communicate well what leads to spiritual poverty, to a lack of empathy and to sexual monocultures of chimp males in the last million years. 

Because the Congo River is a barrier between chimps and bonobos, they did not merge for a million years, and meanwhile they have got another faith (sexual roles) or got other genes, causing very different sexual habits. 

Without the Congo River and without the disappearance of Gorillas from the bonobo area, both subspecies probably would not have differed genetically. 

But nowadays chimps and bonobos probably
will not assimilate because of genetically very different psychological traits in their populations.

It might be possible bonobos would be massacred by chimps as they could cross the Congo River. 

Similarities between Muslims and chimpanzees are large, just as between bonobos and Christians. Distinguishing features include monotheism (SM-dyad) versus polytheism (Vanilla-dyad). But also the harsh climate of the desert versus fertile areas in temperate zones, and finally the most important: selective breeding.

Fortunately chimpanzees cannot cross the Congo River, and they have no idea bonobos have a much better life. They certainly would have butchered the bonobos.  But this obstacle does not apply to Muslims who long tried to conquer the temperate zones of Europe with it's fertile land. 

Annex I

Assumption 234: Selective breeding with Homininae.

Human family (Hominini) has about the same genome as chimpanzees (Panini). Both evolved as Homininae, from 7 to 4 million years ago. Because Homininae set the first steps towards human religion, chimpanzees are our natural control group.

And then it turns into the evolution, humans and chimpanzees developed the same remarkable split in religion. For the family of chimpanzees (Panini), this became clear with the split into common chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) and bonobos (Pan paniscus). About a similar division split Humans into Muslims and Christians. The behavior of Muslims is somewhat similar to that of common chimpanzees, while bonobos are more like Christians.

The split in Hominini is caused by the harsh environment of the desert (Paradise culture) versus the opulence of heavenly temperate regions (Christianity). And the split in Panini is caused by a shortage of food (common chimpanzee), against an abundant food supply for bonobos south of the Congo River.

Common chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) and Muslims (Islam) developed behavior definitely characterized by unequal sexual roles. Bonobos (Pan paniscus) and Christians, however, developed behavior with equivalent sexual relations:
Assumption 203: Sexual deprivation (poverty) strengthens the endogamous group. Promiscuity (wealth) strengthens the exogamous group.
Assumption 240: Polygamy leads to inbreeding in patriarchies (Islam) and to outbreeding in matriarchies (bonobos and elephants).

Moreover, in the evolution chimpanzees practiced selected breeding on their population by killing males, who sought for genetic diversity in other tribes. Only sadistic males survived defending genetic monoculture, though adolescent females were free to wander between tribes looking for genetic diversity.

In the evolution a worse development of selective breeding in Paradise culture (former Islam) culled all human characters not suited for inbreeding and incest, males and females. There, a population evolved with an excess of sadistic males and masochistic females.

Hence it is questionable if common chimpanzees and bonobos ever will assimilate. The same question arises with Muslims and Christians.
Assumption 204: Forcing a sexually deprived (poor) endogamous group to assimilate within a promiscuous (wealthy) exogamous group means civil war.


This work is licenced under a Creative Commons Attibution-Non Commercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International Licence.

Sunday, 27 September 2015

(58) Homo naledi: Antedating Human Religion

Basic Dimension 

Number Archive

(190) Australopithecus interbred with Homo sapiens? 

[Anyway, they definitely are half Australopithecus, which dates from 2.5 - 7 million years ago. This means half their genes are old and half are young. So, they still might have been evolved in the developmental stage of Rebirth. They likely survived for millions of years. Just learned Hominin subspecies do not change much in evolution after they are established.]

An exhaustive search by a professional caving team and researchers has failed to find any other plausible access points into the Dinaledi Chamber, and there is no evidence to suggest that an older, now sealed, entrance to the chamber ever existed. Furthermore, detailed surface mapping of the landscape overlying the Rising Star cave system (Figure 2A) illustrates that no large flowstone-filled fractures occur in the region above the Dinaledi Chamber.

See also:

(77) Homo naledi from rebirth to reincarnation

Altering the religious evolution of humankind

Regarding the evolution of human religion we distinguished three abstractions of eternal life of increasing difficulty which we linked to brain size:

(mya: million years ago)

1: Genetic immortality by inbreeding and incest (Homininae, 7-2 mya, 400 cc)
2: Reincarnation into the (earthly) universe (Homo erectus, 2 mya, 900 cc)
3: Reincarnation into the parallel universe (Homo sapiens, 0.2 mya, 1450 cc)

But Professor Lee Berger of the University of the Witwatersrand, South Africa, made a series of amazing discoveries which force us to involve Australopithecus more into the religious development of humankind. 

A transitional form might have existed between the apelike Australopithecus (Homininae) and the humanlike Homo erectus. That would be amazing and Lee Berger really reversed the tree of human development.

Berger, or better his 15 year old son first discovered Australopithecus Sediba (1.78-1.95 mya; adult size 422 cc). And later Berger discovered Homo naledi (2 mya; 500 cc). Homo naledi is our biggest interest because this species already might have taken the barrier from genetic immortality to reincarnation into the (earthly) universe. 

Of course we already placed the discovery of reincarnation at 2 mya but for brain size 900cc. But now we are in the astonishing situation 500 cc already might be sufficient for the intellectual breakthrough to reincarnation. But then one may ask the question if 400 cc eventually would be sufficient too. Might chimpanzees and bonobos also believe in reincarnation? That's the big question in sexual religion.

So we change our model from:

1: Genetic immortality by inbreeding and incest (Homininae, 7-2 mya, 400 cc)
2: Reincarnation into the (earthly) universe (Homo erectus, 2 mya, 900 cc)
3: Reincarnation into the parallel universe (Homo sapiens, 0.2 mya, 1450 cc)


1: Genetic immortality by inbreeding and incest (Homininae, 7- 4 mya, 400 cc)
2: Reincarnation into the (earthly) universe (Australopithecus (Homininae) x Homo erectus, 2 mya, 500 cc)
3: Reincarnation into the (earthly) universe (Homo erectus, 2 mya, 900 cc)
4: Reincarnation into the parallel universe (Homo sapiens, 0.2 mya, 1450 cc)

Furthermore it behooves us modesty and we lead you straight to the important information:

The revolution in paleontology 2008

Malapa Cave: Australopithecus sediba's place of discovery ...,_Cradle_of_Humankind

Malapa is a fossil-bearing cave located about 15 kilometres (9.3 mi) Northeast of the well known South African hominid-bearing sites of Sterkfontein and Swartkrans and about 45 kilometres (28 mi) North-Northwest of the City of Johannesburg, South Africa. It is situated within the Cradle of Humankind World Heritage Site.

In March 2008, Lee Berger of the University of the Witwatersrand, South Africa, undertook an exploration project in the Cradle of Humankind World Heritage site outside of Johannesburg, in order to map the known caves identified by him and his colleagues over the past several decades, and to place known fossil sites onto Google Earth so that information could be shared with colleagues.[1]

By July 2008, the pattern of cave distribution seen on Google Earth by Berger as well as the recognition of what these deposits looked like from satellites and significant amounts of searching on the ground had led Berger to discover almost 500 caves that scientists had not plotted or identified previously.[1]

In late July, Prof. Berger noted in Google Earth a series of caves running along a fault that pointed to a blank area in the region, an area that appeared to have clusters of trees that typically marked cave deposits.[1

On 15 August, Prof. Berger returned to the site with his post-doctoral student, Dr. Job Kibii and his 9 year old son Matthew. Within minutes, Matthew had discovered the first remains of early human ancestors - a clavicle, or collar bone. On the opposite side of the block Prof. Berger quickly discovered a jawbone with a canine tooth of a hominid. The find would soon be prepared and identified as part of a partial skeleton of a juvenile hominid, around 9 – 13 years of age.[3]

The two skeletons were called Austalopithecus Sediba.

Australopithecus Sediba:
1.78-1.95 mya.
Boy 1.27 cm; 12 years old; (420cc; adult size 422 cc).
Adult female.

Sediba is a hybrid between Australopithecus africanus (Lucy; 3.2 mya), 
Homo habilis (2.2 mya; Leakey 1959)(Ethiopia March 2015, Oldest Hominin 2.8 mya) and Homo erectus (1.6 mya, Leakey, Turkana boy).

Rising Star Cave

Homo naledi (560 cc m; 465 cc fm; 2 mya)

Berger, L. R. et al. 2015. Homo naledi, a new species of the genus Homo from the Dinaledi Chamber, South Africa. eLife: 2015;4:e09560, DOI 

H. naledi presents yet a different combination of traits. This species combines a humanlike body size and stature with an australopith-sized brain; features of the shoulder and hand apparently well-suited for climbing with humanlike hand and wrist adaptations for manipulation; australopith-like hip mechanics with humanlike terrestrial adaptations of the foot and lower limb; small dentition with primitive dental proportions.

Geological and taphonomic context for the new hominin species Homo naledi from the Dinaledi Chamber, South Africa    => PDF

Human evolution:
The many mysteries of Homo naledi
 and PDF.

'The same schizoid pattern was popping up at the other tables. A fully modern hand sported wackily curved fingers, fit for a creature climbing trees. The shoulders were apish too, and the widely flaring blades of the pelvis were as primitive as Lucy’s—but the bottom of the same pelvis looked like a modern human’s. The leg bones started out shaped like an australopithecine’s but gathered modernity as they descended toward the ground. The feet were virtually indistinguishable from our own.'

'But then there was the head. Four partial skulls had been found—two were likely male, two female. In their general morphology they clearly looked advanced enough to be called Homo. But the braincases were tiny—a mere 560 cubic centimeters for the males and 465 for the females, far less than H. erectus’s average of 900 cubic centimeters, and well under half the size of our own. A large brain is the sine qua non of humanness, the hallmark of a species that has evolved to live by its wits. These were not human beings. These were pinheads, with some humanlike body parts.'

'In some ways the new hominin from Rising Star was even closer to modern humans than Homo erectus is. To Berger and his team, it clearly belonged in the Homo genus, but it was unlike any other member. They had no choice but to name a new species. They called it Homo naledi (pronounced na-LED-ee), tipping a hat to the cave where the bones had been found: In the local Sotho language, naledi means “star.”'

'Having exhausted all other explanations, Berger and his team were stuck with the improbable conclusion that bodies of H. naledi were deliberately put there, by other H. naledi. Until now only Homo sapiens, and possibly some archaic humans such as the Neanderthals, are known to have treated their dead in such a ritualized manner. The researchers don’t argue that these much more primitive hominins navigated Superman’s Crawl and the harrowing shark-mouth chute while dragging corpses behind them—that would go beyond improbable to incredible. Maybe back then Superman’s Crawl was wide enough to be walkable, and maybe the hominins simply dropped their burden into the chute without climbing down themselves. Over time the growing pile of bones might have slowly tumbled into the neighboring chamber.'



Homo naledi from rebirth to reincarnation:

1: It is completely dark in the Rising Star Cave and Homo naledi had no light. Dinaledi chamber is about 100 meters away from the entrance and everything was completely dark and invisible.
2: Homo naledi probably thought the deep chute to Dinaledi chamber was the gate to the underworld but he probably never went all the way down.
3: Earlier, he figured out that all new life sprang from the soil of the underworld.
4: He threw all dead bodies into the chute of the underworld to renew their bodies for rebirth in the upperworld. It was the same as burials in the ground but better without worms and insects.
5: In Dinaledi chamber he took renewal for granted, since he was not able to check the degree of decomposition of the bodies. Remember the body of Jesus was gone also after rebirth.
6: Apparently, he expected the deceased to be reborn as offspring within their own renewed bodies and without reincarnation into other bodies.
7: Hence, he needed no auxiliary hypothesis of body and soul.
8: Because there was not the slightest check on reality, Dinaledi chamber was as Heaven of the parallel universe. Jesus and Heaven make the Rising Star Cave a perfect example of human religion.
9: Two million years was Homo naledi the Christians ahead.
10: This all means the Rising Star Cave gives us an extremely rare example of religion in human prehistory and offers a glimpse of the state of the art of the religion of Australopithecus.
11: This means, there might not be found another Dinaledi chamber.

The age of Homo naledi and associated sediments in the Rising Star Cave, South Africa


New ages for flowstone, sediments and fossil bones from the Dinaledi Chamber are presented. We combined optically stimulated luminescence dating of sediments with U-Th and palaeomagnetic analyses of flowstones to establish that all sediments containing Homo naledi fossils can be allocated to a single stratigraphic entity (sub-unit 3b), interpreted to be deposited between 236 ka and 414 ka. This result has been confirmed independently by dating three H. naledi teeth with combined U-series and electron spin resonance (US-ESR) dating. Two dating scenarios for the fossils were tested by varying the assumed levels of 222Rn loss in the encasing sediments: a maximum age scenario provides an average age for the two least altered fossil teeth of 253 +82/–70 ka, whilst a minimum age scenario yields an average age of 200 +70/–61 ka. We consider the maximum age scenario to more closely reflect conditions in the cave, and therefore, the true age of the fossils. By combining the US-ESR maximum age estimate obtained from the teeth, with the U-Th age for the oldest flowstone overlying Homo naledi fossils, we have constrained the depositional age of Homo naledi to a period between 236 ka and 335 ka. These age results demonstrate that a morphologically primitive hominin, Homo naledi, survived into the later parts of the Pleistocene in Africa, and indicate a much younger age for the Homo naledi fossils than have previously been hypothesized based on their morphology.

How do you figure out a fossil’s age? (By John Hawks)

We applied six different methods. The most valuable of these were electron spin resonance (ESR) dating, and uranium-thorium (U-Th) dating. ESR relies on the fact that teeth contain tiny crystals, and the electron energy in these crystals is affected by natural radiation in the ground over long periods of time after fossils are buried. U-Th relies on the fact that water drips into caves and forms layers of calcite, which contain traces of uranium. The radioactive fraction of uranium decays into thorium slowly over time. So the proportion of thorium compared to uranium gives an estimate of the time since the calcite layers formed. One of these calcite deposits, called a flowstone, formed above the H. naledi fossils in the Dinaledi Chamber. That flowstone helps to establish the minimum age: the fossils must be older than the flowstone above them.



This work is licenced under a Creative Commons Attibution-Non Commercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International Licence.