Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Environmentalist Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: koan who wrote (24541)	5/17/2009 11:39:12 AM
From: average joe	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 36917

How the human Ego triumphed over the selfish Neanderthals who were devoured A fossil discovery bears marks of butchering similar to those made when cutting up a deer Robin McKie, science editor The Observer, Sunday 17 May 2009 One of science's most puzzling mysteries - the disappearance of the Neanderthals - may have been solved. Modern humans ate them, says a leading fossil expert. The controversial suggestion follows publication of a study in the Journal of Anthropological Sciences about a Neanderthal jawbone apparently butchered by modern humans. Now the leader of the research team says he believes the flesh had been eaten by humans, while its teeth may have been used to make a necklace. Fernando Rozzi, of Paris's Centre National de la Récherche Scientifique, said the jawbone had probably been cut into to remove flesh, including the tongue. Crucially, the butchery was similar to that used by humans to cut up deer carcass in the early Stone Age. "Neanderthals met a violent end at our hands and in some cases we ate them," Rozzi said. The idea will provoke considerable opposition from scientists who believe Neanderthals disappeared for reasons that did not involve violence. Neanderthals were a sturdy species who evolved in Europe 300,000 years ago, made complex stone tools and survived several ice ages before they disappeared 30,000 years ago - just as modern human beings arrived in Europe from Africa. Some researchers believe Neanderthals may have failed to compete effectively with Homo sapiens for resources, or were more susceptible to the impact of climate change. But others believe our interactions were violent and terminal for the Neanderthals. According to Rozzi, the discovery at Les Rois in south-west France provides compelling support for that argument. Previous excavations revealed bones that were thought to be exclusively human. But Rozzi's team re-examined them and found one they concluded was Neanderthal. Importantly, it was covered in cut marks similar to those left behind when flesh is stripped from deer and other animals using stone tools. Rozzi believes the jawbone provides crucial evidence that humans attacked Neanderthals, and sometimes killed them, bringing back their bodies to caves to eat or to use their skulls or teeth as trophies. "For years, people have tried to hide away from the evidence of cannibalism, but I think we have to accept it took place," he added. But not every team member agrees. "One set of cut marks does not make a complete case for cannibalism," said Francesco d'Errico, of the Institute of Prehistory in Bordeaux. It was also possible that the jawbone had been found by humans and its teeth used to make a necklace, he said. "This is a very important investigation," said Professor Chris Stringer, of the Natural History Museum, London. "We do need more evidence, but this could indicate modern humans and Neanderthals were living in the same area of Europe at the same time, that they were interacting, and that some of these interactions may have been hostile. "This does not prove we systematically eradicated the Neanderthals or that we regularly ate their flesh. But it does add to the evidence that competition from modern humans probably contributed to Neanderthal extinction." guardian.co.uk

To: koan who wrote (24541)	5/17/2009 3:36:35 PM
From: Maurice Winn	2 Recommendations Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 36917

Koan, that's so funny. You don't "give" your money willingly. You don't have a choice. They take it. You might pretend you do it willingly, but that's a lie. When you get a chance to avoid tax, you do. Also, you don't "let" your representative democracy decide, they decide against your will - you do NOT agree with all they do but there is nothing you can do about it. You don't have a choice. All you can do is vote. < I pay very high federal taxes and am glad to do so. > What you really mean is you are glad others have to do so because you are a recipient of their money. You pay a negligible portion of the total - an infinitesimally trivial nothing, but collect a dirty great income from the public purse which is so huge you can afford to pay some of it back again to your paymasters, in the pretence that you also pay tax. Sending it around in a loop from your paymasters to you and back again isn't magnanimity on your part though you might fool yourself into thinking you are "doing your share". You won't give your money to me to do something useful with it because you are selfish, greedy, egocentric, ignorant, stupid, and have no concern for other people. <And I would never give my money to you because you seem like a selfish person to me.> It's all about you. I see that you and that wondrously deep humanitarian of perspicacious intelligence, Wharfie, both are soon pushing the insults around. I'm not a selfish person, though that's a great insult in your book. My list of insults was longer than yours and my father's a policeman. Mqurice

To: koan who wrote (24541)	5/18/2009 2:24:19 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 36917

I pay very high federal taxes and am glad to do so. I would also like to see a .50 tax on gasoline to fund a new energy grid and supplement a green revolution. So you're glad to take your money and give it to other people who are happy to use it to increase their regulatory power over your life and liberty? Somehow I think that comment would send a quiver of disgust amongst our founding fathers. I'm not happy to pay taxes, but recognize that it's required to sustain a common defense, physical and personal, and mitigate private market failure. But I'm not just happy to give it away to them. Because the government is nothing more than a group of people who think they know how to spend your money better than you do. Hawk