The occiput is not Neanderthal. It is hominoid.
|June 6, 2013||Posted by Koanic under Uncategorized|
Thus we shift to an anthropology founded upon the Edenic Multiple Intervention Theory, rather than solely upon Tex’s Edenic mythos. A fusion of Lloyd Pye and Tex Arcane, with a dash of Koanic anthropometry thrown in.
We must also alter our rating system, to reflect a generalized facial anthropometry.
Most features will be given a major and minor rating, on two axes:
Prosocial vs. Antisocial
Small group vs. Large group
Rarely, a feature will be given a third rating on this axis:
Functional vs. Dysfunctional
At the extreme pro-social end, expect crippling life problems stemming from the toxic modern social environment. At the extreme anti-social end, expect shocking low criminality.
At the extreme small group end, expect introversion and social awkwardness. At the extreme large group end, expect ADD, extroversion and social grace.
At the extreme dysfunctional end, expect functional retardation. There is no extreme functional end. This axis is for developmental dysfunctions such as biological Asperger’s and autism.
An incomplete list of the features, with major and minor ratings.
Wide eye spacing – major: prosocial, minor: large group
Large eye size – major: prosocial, minor: small group
Deep eye sockets – major: small group, minor: pro-social
Cro magnon bone flanges – major: anti-social, minor: large group, minor: dysfunction
Eye asymmetry – minor: anti-social, minor: large group, minor: dysfunction
Mid and lower face
Thal lower face – major: pro-social, minor: small group
Forward jutting chin – major: large group, minor: anti-social
Vertical facial compression – major: anti-social, minor: large group
Unusual/extreme midface spacing elongation – dysfunction & small group, strength unknown
Aspie/autistic characteristic faces – varying dysfunction & small group.
Top, back and sides of skull
Occipital – major: small group, major: pro-social
Melon back – large group, strength depends on angle. Further back, weaker; higher up, stronger.
Starchild sides – major: medium group
Note: For the characteristics of the opposite feature, e.g. narrow eye spacing, simply reverse “prosocial” to “antisocial” and “large group” to “small group”. Major and minor stay unchanged.
I didn’t attempt to rate Melon and Starchild as either pro- or anti-social. In the melon case, there is a will to good and order, and also a will to ambition. In the Starchild case, collaborative value/memory/personality weaving is coupled with a less aggressive ambition. These attributes can be either pro or anti social, depending on the context.
I can no longer ignore the areas of overlap. Both Melon and Neanderthal had large, wide-spaced eyes. Both Neanderthal and the other hominoids (and modern black Africans) had bulky Earth-adapted frames and large occipitals.
Thus we can say that there are melonhead black Africans and occipital Africans, and yet neither have Neanderthal DNA. Interesting implication – we can see similar basic spiritual motivations in Africans and white TT’s. The difference is in the brain volume and frontal facial characteristics. But the concrete simplicity and the small-tribe lostness of the TT and the African has the same root.
Onwards to the Edenic Multiple Intervention Theory:
1.1 Evolution of bipedal hominoids well adapted to Earth gravity and climate. Large bones, thick waists, powerful ape muscles. Note that 1.1 probably did not occur without intervention, especially in light of the compatibility implied by 1.2.
1.2 The first ensoulment. Alien Y-DNA spliced into hominoid mother egg. Sentience results. It is unclear at what point in the hominoid chain 1.2 occurred. But every human alive today and maybe Bigfoot has this.
2.1 Melonheads born – the gods descend. Humans with heavily alien characteristics, including massively oversize skulls, appear. The Nephilim? From a lower-gravity planet, and thus weaker muscles? Adapted to waterside life?
2.2 A weakened slave race is born in Africa, to serve the above Melonheads. This may have occurred in multiple locations and times, but Africa was the first template for the slave race. Fast breeding, vegetable eating spear chuckers designed to follow orders and worship Melon religious hierarchy. Monkey social genes, small bones and weak muscles.
3.1 Destruction of Melon civilization by catastrophe(s) and/or angry gods/aliens. Unclear whether 3.1 or 3.2 happened first.
3.2 Slaughter of the hominoids by Melon / slave alliance. Deliberate Melon design? Or runaway slave riot? Cain killing Abel?
Whoever or whatever has been gardening this planet, seems to return at key intervals, once certain developmental stages have been reached. One wonders whether we are approaching such a nexus, or whether we are perhaps expected to toodle along under our own steam for a millenia longer. Either way, the approaching solar minimum will not give this civilizational iteration nearly so much time.
But it is very interesting that certain seemingly very bad events were permitted to occur, and these seem to have been necessary sacrifices to achieve the population density and cosmopolitan ferment necessary for technological and civilizational progress. See Charles Murray’s Human Accomplishment.
“These things must come, but woe to those by whom they come.”
For the more literal minded: The title could be rewritten to “The occiput is not SOLELY Neanderthal”. The white Neanderthal can still be considered the pinnacle of Earthly evolution, and that is what you are. No identity crisis intended.
To put it even more explicitly: Neanderthals are a subset of hominoids. Lloyd Pie draws a sharp distinction between robust hominoids and weakly Homo Sapiens Sapiens, who appears to be partially from a lower gravity planet with more abundant water and a milder climate. In other words, Eden.
It is of course difficult to ignore our low-gravity neighbor in the same habitable band, that once enjoyed flowing water and an atmosphere, until some catastrophe rendered it a wasteland. Visions of tall aliens with conical heads…
As for where the Starchildren came from, the likely answer is: not this solar system. As the DNA sequencing so far indicates.
Also, forehead verticality/slant wasn’t mentioned above because it doesn’t really fit into the above axes. Pro ethical universals != pro social. Nor does it map neatly to large group / small group, at least in the extrovert / introvert sense. Best dealt with elsewhere. Ditto for noses.