Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [evol-psych] News: Big brains, no fur, sinuses . are these clues to our ancestors' lives as 'aquatic apes'?

Expand Messages
  • JVKohl
    hibbsa, We have probably all read The Aquatic Ape, and The Scented Ape, which are book length representations of the biological facts I detailed in Human
    Message 1 of 19 , May 1, 2013
      hibbsa,

      We have probably all read "The Aquatic Ape," and "The Scented Ape," which are book length representations of the biological facts I detailed in Human pheromones and food odors: epigenetic influences on the socioaffective nature of evolved behaviors. Still, there remains a significant number of participants here who are completely unaware of past paradigm shifts (e.g., in The Scent of Eros: Mysteries of Odor in Human Sexuality). Among them we have you with your challenge for me to explain "how grasses came to harness fire"  -- ? in the context of "The Fire Ape" hypothesis? or some other context unknown to me. How do you explain how grasses came to harness fire as part of their evolutionary strategy? What, are you trying to tell us?

      -- 
      James V. Kohl
      Medical laboratory scientist
      ASCP AMT ASCLS
      Independent researcher
      Kohl, J.V. (2012) Human pheromones and food odors...
      Socioaffective Neuroscience & Psychology, 2: 17338.
      http://dx.doi.org/10.3402/snp.v2i0.17338



      On 5/1/2013 10:59 AM, hibbsa wrote:
       

      I would say the challenge for you would be explaining how grasses came to harness fire as part of their evolutionary strategy? Was it blind luck...in which case would that be an instance of natural selection?

      --- In evolutionary-psychology@yahoogroups.com, james kohl <jvkohl@...> wrote:
      >
      > From: Edgar Owen <edgarowen@...>
      >
      > Hibbsa,
      >
      >
      > Great post. One of the few here posted with original thinking...
      >
      > Edgar
      >
      > JK: Obviously, Edgar thinks what we need are more hypotheses that can't be
      > tested. That is the only way to avoid dealing with the biological facts, which
      > is the over-riding theme here. On the other hand, the Fire-Ape hypothesis might
      > be included as an after-thought in my model of Nutrient-dependent /
      > Pheromone-controlled thermodynamics and thermoregulation. Cooking food, for
      > example, would alter it's nutrient-dependent pheromone-controlled epigenetic
      > effects on adaptive evolution, and the effects could be linked to
      > primate-specific microRNA/messenger RNA balance- controlled brain development.
      >
      >
      > James V. Kohl
      > Medical laboratory scientist (ASCP)
      > Independent researcher
      > Kohl, J.V. (2012) Human pheromones and food odors: epigenetic influences on the
      > socioaffective nature of evolved behaviors. Socioaffective Neuroscience &
      > Psychology, 2: 17338.
      >
      >
      >
      <snip>



      
      
    • JVKohl
      Excerpted from below: Fire. It s a great source of the feedback mechanisms that would have been necessary to drive human evolution The feedback mechanisms that
      Message 2 of 19 , May 1, 2013
        Excerpted from below: Fire. It's a great source of the feedback
        mechanisms that would have been necessary to drive human evolution

        The feedback mechanisms that drive adaptive evolution of the human brain
        and behavior are nutrient-dependent and pheromone-controlled. Why is
        this not clear? Feedback loops link odor and pheromone signaling with
        reproduction <http://www.cell.com/abstract/S0092-8674%2805%2900981-5>.
        This isn't simply the case with vertebrates, it's the same with species
        from microbes to man. Feedback between Population and Evolutionary
        Dynamics Determines the Fate of Social Microbial Populations.
        <http://dx.doi.org/10.1371%2Fjournal.pbio.1001547> See also:
        Pheromone-Induced Morphogenesis Improves Osmoadaptation Capacity by
        Activating the HOG MAPK Pathway
        <http://stke.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/abstract/6/272/ra26>

        Does the level of ignorance here seem to anyone else to be increasing
        against the flow of information from virtually every scientific source
        and from every different discipline I have integrated into my model? How
        can anyone explain that phenomenon? Are random mutations causes the
        brains of evolutionary theorists to regress to a more primitive state as
        occurs with nutrient-dependent pheromone-controlled adaptive evolution
        and eye regression in cave fish?
        <http://dx.doi.org/10.1371%2Fjournal.pbio.1001547>

        --
        James V. Kohl
        Medical laboratory scientist
        ASCP AMT ASCLS
        Independent researcher
        Kohl, J.V. (2012) Human pheromones and food odors...
        Socioaffective Neuroscience & Psychology, 2: 17338.
        http://dx.doi.org/10.3402/snp.v2i0.17338

        =================================

        Steve,

        Why not just cite the part that states "...and by the aid of fire cooks food otherwise indigestible." In my model, that's the nutrient-dependent part of nutrient-dependent pheromone-controlled adaptive evolution. Is there a part that tells us how mutations are involved in adaptive evolution?

        Do you realize you just cited the chapter in which Darwin repeatedly mentions his 'conditons of existence' / conditions for life, which we now know are obviously nutrient-dependent and pheromone-controlled?

        • … changed conditions of life are of the highest importance in causing variability, both by acting directly on the organisation, and indirectly by affecting the reproductive system … (author‟s italics)” and “it is generally acknowledged that all organic beings have been formed on two great laws – „Unity of Type‟ and the „Conditions of Existence‟ … in fact the law of the ‘Conditions of Existence’ is the higher law, as it includes, through the inheritance of former variations and adaptations, that of Unity of Type” (Origin, Chapters 5 & 6, 6th edition). -- from Marsh (2011)

        Do you think that most evolutionary theorists are even minimally aware of what Darwin really said, or like me do you think they simply bought into the bastardized version of his work because they did not have the intelligence to grasp the complexity or consistency?

        -- James V. Kohl
        Medical laboratory scientist
        ASCP AMT ASCLS
        Independent researcher
        Kohl, J.V. (2012) Human pheromones and food odors...
        Socioaffective Neuroscience & Psychology, 2: 17338.
        http://dx.doi.org/10.3402/snp.v2i0.17338

        On 5/1/2013 12:23 PM, Steve Corsini wrote:
        >
        >
        > Is there a Fire-Ape hypothesis?
        >
        > See: Charles Darwin The Descent of Man [ 1871 ]
        >
        > Chapter V - On the Development of the Intellectual and Moral Faculties

        =========================================

        On 5/1/2013 1:48 PM, Stan Franklin wrote:
        >
        > There's a book that makes this point: Wrangham, R. (2009). Catching Fire: How Cooking Made Us Human Basic Books.
        >
        > Stan
        OK, let's be clear then. For some reason I have not made that point in my model of nutrient-dependent pheromone-controlled adaptive evolution.
        And I think that reason is ignorance of extant literature that most people away from this group have integrated into their opinions about adaptive evolution.

        -- James V. Kohl
        Medical laboratory scientist
        ASCP AMT ASCLS
        Independent researcher
        Kohl, J.V. (2012) Human pheromones and food odors...
        Socioaffective Neuroscience & Psychology, 2: 17338.
        http://dx.doi.org/10.3402/snp.v2i0.17338
      • hibbsa
        Hi Stan - the importance of fire and cooking are obviously well understood. It s one of the first images school kids are taught.cavemen conquering fire. The
        Message 3 of 19 , May 2, 2013
          Hi Stan - the importance of fire and cooking are obviously well
          understood. It's one of the first images school kids are taught.cavemen
          conquering fire.

          The distinctiveness I suppose was the intersection of grasses and
          humans, fire being a key thread given the importance of fire in the
          spread of grasses that saw their rise to dominance.

          I wasn't seriously suggesting any of that was original of course....I
          seriously recognize this sort of thing as low hanging fruit that will
          have been thoroughly explored.


          --- In evolutionary-psychology@yahoogroups.com, Stan Franklin wrote:
          >
          > There's a book that makes this point: Wrangham, R. (2009). Catching
          Fire:
          > How Cooking Made Us Human Basic Books.
          >
          > Stan
          >
          >
          > On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 4:56 AM, hibbsa hibbsa@... wrote:
          >
          > > **
          > >
          > >
          > > Is there a Fire-Ape hypothesis? There should be, because the
          > > evolutionary symbiosis of humans and grasses is one of the most
          > > consistent and powerful of them all (i.e. grasses - seeds - flowers
          -
          > > crops - biocomplexity - etc). And of course the rise of grasses to
          > > global dominance is a story of the genetic harnessing of the power
          of
          > > fire. The world was dominated by forests, but grasses evolved an
          > > ingenius mechanism involving, as I say, harnessing fire. Above
          ground
          > > grass evolved so as to maximize the chances of fire starting and
          then
          > > spreading. While below ground grass evolved so as to be able to
          survive
          > > any above ground fire, and simply regrow after the fire burns out.
          More
          > > so...the fire actually left the earths more fertile, for the grasses
          to
          > > regrow stronger than before.
          > >
          > > Not so the trees...the fires burned them away making space for the
          > > grasses. This would have been the reality facing the apes during the
          > > ages that saw their forest homes replaced by savannah grasslands.
          But
          > > the fact that fire was actually a component of an evolutionary
          strategy,
          > > meant that the occurence of fire was immensely
          predictable....correlated
          > > with conditions on the ground, conditions preceding the fire were
          always
          > > similar, conditions following the fire always similar. The
          relationship
          > > of fire to wind always there. Fire to rain.
          > >
          > > The process of understanding fire presents an unending challenge
          that
          > > would have relentlessly drawn the pre-human mind in the direct of
          > > objective curiousity in the elements and the relatedness of things.
          The
          > > first apes to master the behaviour of wild fires sufficiently to be
          able
          > > to walk right up to a fire from behind the wind and pick up the cool
          end
          > > of a burning stick, would have immediately distinguished themselves
          from
          > > their competitors, driving them terrified back into the forests,
          away
          > > from the Fire-Ape.
          > >
          > > Fire. It's a great source of the feedback mechanisms that would have
          > > been necessary to drive human evolution. Cooking immediately allowed
          our
          > > intestines to become much smaller and less energy greedy. Allowing
          that
          > > surplus of energy to be redirected in the direction of mental
          processing
          > > of the wonders and mysteries still outstaning about fire. Fire
          provides
          > > a massive evolutionary pressure, because of the huge and instant
          > > advantages to any new command of fire. True for individuals and
          groups
          > > alike.
          > >
          > >
          > > --- In evolutionary-psychology@yahoogroups.com, Stan Franklin wrote:
          > > >
          > > > The message below seem an especially poor account of the aquatic
          ape
          > > > hypothesis.
          > > >
          > > > Recent work brings mainstream anthropologists aboard to some
          extent.
          > > Please
          > > > see: Wrangham, R., Cheney, D., Seyfarth, R., & Sarmiento, E.
          (2009).
          > > > Shallow-Water Habitats as Sources of Fallback Foods for Hominins.
          > > AMERICAN
          > > > JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY, 140, 630–642.
          > > >
          > > > Stan
          > > >
          > > > --
          > > > Stan Franklin Professor Computer Science
          > > > W. Harry Feinstone Interdisciplinary Research Professor
          > > > Institute for Intelligent Systems
          > > > FedEx Institute of Technology
          > > > The University of Memphis
          > > > Memphis, TN 38152 USA
          > > > 901-678-1341
          > > >
          > > > lab
          > >
          > >
          > >
          >
          >
          >
          > --
          > Stan Franklin Professor Computer Science
          > W. Harry Feinstone Interdisciplinary Research Professor
          > Institute for Intelligent Systems
          > FedEx Institute of Technology
          > The University of Memphis
          > Memphis, TN 38152 USA
          > 901-678-1341
          >
          > lab
          >
        • hibbsa
          Jim - but how would you explain the genetic harnessing of fire by grasses, as part of a successful strategy of supplanting forests? Just give a straight and
          Message 4 of 19 , May 2, 2013
            Jim - but how would you explain the genetic harnessing of fire by
            grasses, as part of a successful strategy of supplanting forests?

            Just give a straight and direct answer to this specific problem old boy.




            --- In evolutionary-psychology@yahoogroups.com, JVKohl wrote:
            >
            > Excerpted from below: Fire. It's a great source of the feedback
            > mechanisms that would have been necessary to drive human evolution
            >
            > The feedback mechanisms that drive adaptive evolution of the human
            brain
            > and behavior are nutrient-dependent and pheromone-controlled. Why is
            > this not clear? Feedback loops link odor and pheromone signaling with
            > reproduction .
            > This isn't simply the case with vertebrates, it's the same with
            species
            > from microbes to man. Feedback between Population and Evolutionary
            > Dynamics Determines the Fate of Social Microbial Populations.
            > See also:
            > Pheromone-Induced Morphogenesis Improves Osmoadaptation Capacity by
            > Activating the HOG MAPK Pathway
            >
            >
            > Does the level of ignorance here seem to anyone else to be increasing
            > against the flow of information from virtually every scientific source
            > and from every different discipline I have integrated into my model?
            How
            > can anyone explain that phenomenon? Are random mutations causes the
            > brains of evolutionary theorists to regress to a more primitive state
            as
            > occurs with nutrient-dependent pheromone-controlled adaptive evolution
            > and eye regression in cave fish?
            >
            >
            > --
            > James V. Kohl
            > Medical laboratory scientist
            > ASCP AMT ASCLS
            > Independent researcher
            > Kohl, J.V. (2012) Human pheromones and food odors...
            > Socioaffective Neuroscience & Psychology, 2: 17338.
            > http://dx.doi.org/10.3402/snp.v2i0.17338
            >
            > =================================
            >
            > Steve,
            >
            > Why not just cite the part that states "...and by the aid of fire
            cooks food otherwise indigestible." In my model, that's the
            nutrient-dependent part of nutrient-dependent pheromone-controlled
            adaptive evolution. Is there a part that tells us how mutations are
            involved in adaptive evolution?
            >
            > Do you realize you just cited the chapter in which Darwin repeatedly
            mentions his 'conditons of existence' / conditions for life, which we
            now know are obviously nutrient-dependent and pheromone-controlled?
            >
            > • … changed conditions of life are of the highest importance
            in causing variability, both by acting directly on the organisation, and
            indirectly by affecting the reproductive system … (author‟s
            italics)" and "it is generally acknowledged that all organic
            beings have been formed on two great laws – „Unity of
            Type‟ and the „Conditions of Existence‟ … in fact
            the law of the `Conditions of Existence' is the higher law, as
            it includes, through the inheritance of former variations and
            adaptations, that of Unity of Type" (Origin, Chapters 5 & 6, 6th
            edition). -- from Marsh (2011)
            >
            > Do you think that most evolutionary theorists are even minimally aware
            of what Darwin really said, or like me do you think they simply bought
            into the bastardized version of his work because they did not have the
            intelligence to grasp the complexity or consistency?
            >
            > -- James V. Kohl
            > Medical laboratory scientist
            > ASCP AMT ASCLS
            > Independent researcher
            > Kohl, J.V. (2012) Human pheromones and food odors...
            > Socioaffective Neuroscience & Psychology, 2: 17338.
            > http://dx.doi.org/10.3402/snp.v2i0.17338
            >
            > On 5/1/2013 12:23 PM, Steve Corsini wrote:
            > >
            > >
            > > Is there a Fire-Ape hypothesis?
            > >
            > > See: Charles Darwin The Descent of Man [ 1871 ]
            > >
            > > Chapter V - On the Development of the Intellectual and Moral
            Faculties
            >
            > =========================================
            >
            > On 5/1/2013 1:48 PM, Stan Franklin wrote:
            > >
            > > There's a book that makes this point: Wrangham, R. (2009). Catching
            Fire: How Cooking Made Us Human Basic Books.
            > >
            > > Stan
            > OK, let's be clear then. For some reason I have not made that point in
            my model of nutrient-dependent pheromone-controlled adaptive evolution.
            > And I think that reason is ignorance of extant literature that most
            people away from this group have integrated into their opinions about
            adaptive evolution.
            >
            > -- James V. Kohl
            > Medical laboratory scientist
            > ASCP AMT ASCLS
            > Independent researcher
            > Kohl, J.V. (2012) Human pheromones and food odors...
            > Socioaffective Neuroscience & Psychology, 2: 17338.
            > http://dx.doi.org/10.3402/snp.v2i0.17338
            >
          • james kohl
            From: hibbsa Jim - but how would you explain the genetic harnessing of fire by grasses, as part of a successful strategy of supplanting
            Message 5 of 19 , May 2, 2013
              From: hibbsa
              Jim - but how would you explain the genetic harnessing of fire by

              grasses, as part of a successful strategy of supplanting forests?

              Just give a straight and direct answer to this specific problem old boy.

              JK: The straight and direct answer is that I would never attempt to answer such a foolish question involving the ability of grasses to genetically harness fire. However, I might attempt to address a model in which mutations somehow enabled grasses to genetically harness fire. Is there a model for that?

              > -- James V. Kohl
              > Medical laboratory scientist
              > ASCP AMT ASCLS
              > Independent researcher
              > Kohl, J.V. (2012) Human pheromones and food odors...
              > Socioaffective Neuroscience & Psychology, 2: 17338.
              > http://dx.doi.org/10.3402/snp.v2i0.17338



              --- In evolutionary-psychology@yahoogroups.com, JVKohl wrote:
              >
              > Excerpted from below: Fire. It's a great source of the feedback
              > mechanisms that would have been necessary to drive human evolution
              >
              > The feedback mechanisms that drive adaptive evolution of the human
              brain
              > and behavior are nutrient-dependent and pheromone-controlled. Why is
              > this not clear? Feedback loops link odor and pheromone signaling with
              > reproduction .
              > This isn't simply the case with vertebrates, it's the same with
              species
              > from microbes to man. Feedback between Population and Evolutionary
              > Dynamics Determines the Fate of Social Microbial Populations.
              > See also:
              > Pheromone-Induced Morphogenesis Improves Osmoadaptation Capacity by
              > Activating the HOG MAPK Pathway
              >
              >
              > Does the level of ignorance here seem to anyone else to be increasing
              > against the flow of information from virtually every scientific source
              > and from every different discipline I have integrated into my model?
              How
              > can anyone explain that phenomenon? Are random mutations causes the
              > brains of evolutionary theorists to regress to a more primitive state
              as
              > occurs with nutrient-dependent pheromone-controlled adaptive evolution
              > and eye regression in cave fish?
              >
              >
              > --
              > James V. Kohl
              > Medical laboratory scientist
              > ASCP AMT ASCLS
              > Independent researcher
              > Kohl, J.V. (2012) Human pheromones and food odors...
              > Socioaffective Neuroscience & Psychology, 2: 17338.
              > http://dx.doi.org/10.3402/snp.v2i0.17338
              >
              > =================================
              >
              > Steve,
              >
              > Why not just cite the part that states "...and by the aid of fire
              cooks food otherwise indigestible." In my model, that's the
              nutrient-dependent part of nutrient-dependent pheromone-controlled
              adaptive evolution. Is there a part that tells us how mutations are
              involved in adaptive evolution?
              >
              > Do you realize you just cited the chapter in which Darwin repeatedly
              mentions his 'conditons of existence' / conditions for life, which we
              now know are obviously nutrient-dependent and pheromone-controlled?
              >
              > • … changed conditions of life are of the highest importance
              in causing variability, both by acting directly on the organisation, and
              indirectly by affecting the reproductive system … (author‟s
              italics)" and "it is generally acknowledged that all organic
              beings have been formed on two great laws – „Unity of
              Type‟ and the „Conditions of Existence‟ … in fact
              the law of the `Conditions of Existence' is the higher law, as
              it includes, through the inheritance of former variations and
              adaptations, that of Unity of Type" (Origin, Chapters 5 & 6, 6th
              edition). -- from Marsh (2011)
              >
              > Do you think that most evolutionary theorists are even minimally aware
              of what Darwin really said, or like me do you think they simply bought
              into the bastardized version of his work because they did not have the
              intelligence to grasp the complexity or consistency?
              >
              > -- James V. Kohl
              > Medical laboratory scientist
              > ASCP AMT ASCLS
              > Independent researcher
              > Kohl, J.V. (2012) Human pheromones and food odors...
              > Socioaffective Neuroscience & Psychology, 2: 17338.
              > http://dx.doi.org/10.3402/snp.v2i0.17338
              >
              > On 5/1/2013 12:23 PM, Steve Corsini wrote:
              > >
              > >
              > > Is there a Fire-Ape hypothesis?
              > >
              > > See: Charles Darwin The Descent of Man [ 1871 ]
              > >
              > > Chapter V - On the Development of the Intellectual and Moral
              Faculties
              >
              > =========================================
              >
              > On 5/1/2013 1:48 PM, Stan Franklin wrote:
              > >
              > > There's a book that makes this point: Wrangham, R. (2009). Catching
              Fire: How Cooking Made Us Human Basic Books.
              > >
              > > Stan
              > OK, let's be clear then. For some reason I have not made that point in
              my model of nutrient-dependent pheromone-controlled adaptive evolution.
              > And I think that reason is ignorance of extant literature that most
              people away from this group have integrated into their opinions about
              adaptive evolution.
              >

              >

            • james kohl
              From: hibbsa Hi Stan - the importance of fire and cooking are obviously well understood. It s one of the first images school kids are
              Message 6 of 19 , May 2, 2013
                From: hibbsa
                Hi Stan - the importance of fire and cooking are obviously well

                understood. It's one of the first images school kids are taught.cavemen
                conquering fire.

                The distinctiveness I suppose was the intersection of grasses and
                humans, fire being a key thread given the importance of fire in the
                spread of grasses that saw their rise to dominance.

                I wasn't seriously suggesting any of that was original of course....I
                seriously recognize this sort of thing as low hanging fruit that will
                have been thoroughly explored.

                JK: That being the obvious case, do you think that the Aquatic Ape and the Scented Ape have been as thoroughly explored as the "Fire Ape?" I ask because if you combine the two ape stories, they support a model of nutrient-dependent pheromone-controlled adaptive evolution that can be combined with the "Fire Ape" story. The trouble is, I don't like to tell stories, I like to detail biological facts that clearly eliminate some of the more ridiculous stories being told -- like those that involve mutations theory in the adaptive evolution of the Aquatic Ape, Fire Ape, and Scented Ape.

                James V. Kohl

                Medical laboratory scientist







                --- In evolutionary-psychology@yahoogroups.com, Stan Franklin wrote:
                >
                > There's a book that makes this point: Wrangham, R. (2009). Catching
                Fire:
                > How Cooking Made Us Human Basic Books.
                >
                > Stan
                >
                >
                > On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 4:56 AM, hibbsa hibbsa@... wrote:
                >
                > > **
                > >
                > >
                > > Is there a Fire-Ape hypothesis? There should be, because the
                > > evolutionary symbiosis of humans and grasses is one of the most
                > > consistent and powerful of them all (i.e. grasses - seeds - flowers
                -
                > > crops - biocomplexity - etc). And of course the rise of grasses to
                > > global dominance is a story of the genetic harnessing of the power
                of
                > > fire. The world was dominated by forests, but grasses evolved an
                > > ingenius mechanism involving, as I say, harnessing fire. Above
                ground
                > > grass evolved so as to maximize the chances of fire starting and
                then
                > > spreading. While below ground grass evolved so as to be able to
                survive
                > > any above ground fire, and simply regrow after the fire burns out.
                More
                > > so...the fire actually left the earths more fertile, for the grasses
                to
                > > regrow stronger than before.
                > >
                > > Not so the trees...the fires burned them away making space for the
                > > grasses. This would have been the reality facing the apes during the
                > > ages that saw their forest homes replaced by savannah grasslands.
                But
                > > the fact that fire was actually a component of an evolutionary
                strategy,
                > > meant that the occurence of fire was immensely
                predictable....correlated
                > > with conditions on the ground, conditions preceding the fire were
                always
                > > similar, conditions following the fire always similar. The
                relationship
                > > of fire to wind always there. Fire to rain.
                > >
                > > The process of understanding fire presents an unending challenge
                that
                > > would have relentlessly drawn the pre-human mind in the direct of
                > > objective curiousity in the elements and the relatedness of things.
                The
                > > first apes to master the behaviour of wild fires sufficiently to be
                able
                > > to walk right up to a fire from behind the wind and pick up the cool
                end
                > > of a burning stick, would have immediately distinguished themselves
                from
                > > their competitors, driving them terrified back into the forests,
                away
                > > from the Fire-Ape.
                > >
                > > Fire. It's a great source of the feedback mechanisms that would have
                > > been necessary to drive human evolution. Cooking immediately allowed
                our
                > > intestines to become much smaller and less energy greedy. Allowing
                that
                > > surplus of energy to be redirected in the direction of mental
                processing
                > > of the wonders and mysteries still outstaning about fire. Fire
                provides
                > > a massive evolutionary pressure, because of the huge and instant
                > > advantages to any new command of fire. True for individuals and
                groups
                > > alike.
                > >
                > >
                > > --- In evolutionary-psychology@yahoogroups.com, Stan Franklin wrote:
                > > >
                > > > The message below seem an especially poor account of the aquatic
                ape
                > > > hypothesis.
                > > >
                > > > Recent work brings mainstream anthropologists aboard to some
                extent.
                > > Please
                > > > see: Wrangham, R., Cheney, D., Seyfarth, R., & Sarmiento, E.
                (2009).
                > > > Shallow-Water Habitats as Sources of Fallback Foods for Hominins.
                > > AMERICAN
                > > > JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY, 140, 630–642.
                > > >
                > > > Stan
                > > >
                > > > --
                > > > Stan Franklin Professor Computer Science
                > > > W. Harry Feinstone Interdisciplinary Research Professor
                > > > Institute for Intelligent Systems
                > > > FedEx Institute of Technology
                > > > The University of Memphis
                > > > Memphis, TN 38152 USA
                > > > 901-678-1341
                > > >
                > > > lab
                > >
                > >
                > >
                >
                >
                >
                > --
                > Stan Franklin Professor Computer Science
                > W. Harry Feinstone Interdisciplinary Research Professor
                > Institute for Intelligent Systems
                > FedEx Institute of Technology
                > The University of Memphis
                > Memphis, TN 38152 USA
                > 901-678-1341
                >
                > lab
                >

              • hibbsa
                ... answer such ... harness fire. ... enabled ... So then do you (a) deny that fire was the essential component for why grasses rose to dominance? or (b)
                Message 7 of 19 , May 2, 2013
                  > JK: The straight and direct answer is that I would never attempt to
                  answer such
                  > a foolish question involving the ability of grasses to genetically
                  harness fire.
                  > However, I might attempt to address a model in which mutations somehow
                  enabled
                  > grasses to genetically harness fire. Is there a model for that?


                  So then do you (a) deny that fire was the essential component for why
                  grasses rose to dominance? or (b) accept this is the case but call it a
                  lucky intersection of random phenomena?

                  If (b) then can you explain the distinction between that, and an
                  instance of natural selection involving genetic manifestations such as
                  the ability of grasses to survive fires and simply regrow in their wake,
                  given fires actually occured and given grasses rose to dominance as a
                  result, as a randomly assigned selective benefit for those traits?

                  Or did the traits come about as the result of a non-random process
                  involving nutrient gradients or any other mechanism?

                  Or do you have another non-random description for what actually occured?




                  --- In evolutionary-psychology@yahoogroups.com, james kohl wrote:
                  >
                  > From: hibbsa hibbsa@...
                  >
                  > Jim - but how would you explain the genetic harnessing of fire by
                  >
                  > grasses, as part of a successful strategy of supplanting forests?
                  >
                  > Just give a straight and direct answer to this specific problem old
                  boy.
                  > JK: The straight and direct answer is that I would never attempt to
                  answer such
                  > a foolish question involving the ability of grasses to genetically
                  harness fire.
                  > However, I might attempt to address a model in which mutations somehow
                  enabled
                  > grasses to genetically harness fire. Is there a model for that?
                  >
                  > > -- James V. Kohl
                  > > Medical laboratory scientist
                  > > ASCP AMT ASCLS
                  > > Independent researcher
                  > > Kohl, J.V. (2012) Human pheromones and food odors...
                  > > Socioaffective Neuroscience & Psychology, 2: 17338.
                  > > http://dx.doi.org/10.3402/snp.v2i0.17338
                  >
                  >
                  > --- In evolutionary-psychology@yahoogroups.com, JVKohl wrote:
                  > >
                  > > Excerpted from below: Fire. It's a great source of the feedback
                  > > mechanisms that would have been necessary to drive human evolution
                  > >
                  > > The feedback mechanisms that drive adaptive evolution of the human
                  > brain
                  > > and behavior are nutrient-dependent and pheromone-controlled. Why is
                  > > this not clear? Feedback loops link odor and pheromone signaling
                  with
                  > > reproduction .
                  > > This isn't simply the case with vertebrates, it's the same with
                  > species
                  > > from microbes to man. Feedback between Population and Evolutionary
                  > > Dynamics Determines the Fate of Social Microbial Populations.
                  > > See also:
                  > > Pheromone-Induced Morphogenesis Improves Osmoadaptation Capacity by
                  > > Activating the HOG MAPK Pathway
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > Does the level of ignorance here seem to anyone else to be
                  increasing
                  > > against the flow of information from virtually every scientific
                  source
                  > > and from every different discipline I have integrated into my model?
                  > How
                  > > can anyone explain that phenomenon? Are random mutations causes the
                  > > brains of evolutionary theorists to regress to a more primitive
                  state
                  > as
                  > > occurs with nutrient-dependent pheromone-controlled adaptive
                  evolution
                  > > and eye regression in cave fish?
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > --
                  > > James V. Kohl
                  > > Medical laboratory scientist
                  > > ASCP AMT ASCLS
                  > > Independent researcher
                  > > Kohl, J.V. (2012) Human pheromones and food odors...
                  > > Socioaffective Neuroscience & Psychology, 2: 17338.
                  > > http://dx.doi.org/10.3402/snp.v2i0.17338
                  > >
                  > > =================================
                  > >
                  > > Steve,
                  > >
                  > > Why not just cite the part that states "...and by the aid of fire
                  > cooks food otherwise indigestible." In my model, that's the
                  > nutrient-dependent part of nutrient-dependent pheromone-controlled
                  > adaptive evolution. Is there a part that tells us how mutations are
                  > involved in adaptive evolution?
                  > >
                  > > Do you realize you just cited the chapter in which Darwin repeatedly
                  > mentions his 'conditons of existence' / conditions for life, which we
                  > now know are obviously nutrient-dependent and pheromone-controlled?
                  > >
                  > > • … changed conditions of life are of the highest
                  importance
                  > in causing variability, both by acting directly on the organisation,
                  and
                  > indirectly by affecting the reproductive system …
                  (author‟s
                  > italics)" and "it is generally acknowledged that all organic
                  > beings have been formed on two great laws â€" „Unity of
                  > Type‟ and the „Conditions of Existence‟
                  … in fact
                  > the law of the `Conditions of Existence' is the higher law, as
                  > it includes, through the inheritance of former variations and
                  > adaptations, that of Unity of Type" (Origin, Chapters 5 & 6, 6th
                  > edition). -- from Marsh (2011)
                  > >
                  > > Do you think that most evolutionary theorists are even minimally
                  aware
                  > of what Darwin really said, or like me do you think they simply bought
                  > into the bastardized version of his work because they did not have the
                  > intelligence to grasp the complexity or consistency?
                  > >
                  > > -- James V. Kohl
                  > > Medical laboratory scientist
                  > > ASCP AMT ASCLS
                  > > Independent researcher
                  > > Kohl, J.V. (2012) Human pheromones and food odors...
                  > > Socioaffective Neuroscience & Psychology, 2: 17338.
                  > > http://dx.doi.org/10.3402/snp.v2i0.17338
                  > >
                  > > On 5/1/2013 12:23 PM, Steve Corsini wrote:
                  > > >
                  > > >
                  > > > Is there a Fire-Ape hypothesis?
                  > > >
                  > > > See: Charles Darwin The Descent of Man [ 1871 ]
                  > > >
                  > > > Chapter V - On the Development of the Intellectual and Moral
                  > Faculties
                  > >
                  > > =========================================
                  > >
                  > > On 5/1/2013 1:48 PM, Stan Franklin wrote:
                  > > >
                  > > > There's a book that makes this point: Wrangham, R. (2009).
                  Catching
                  > Fire: How Cooking Made Us Human Basic Books.
                  > > >
                  > > > Stan
                  > > OK, let's be clear then. For some reason I have not made that point
                  in
                  > my model of nutrient-dependent pheromone-controlled adaptive
                  evolution.
                  > > And I think that reason is ignorance of extant literature that most
                  > people away from this group have integrated into their opinions about
                  > adaptive evolution.
                  > >
                  >
                  > >
                  >
                • james kohl
                  From: hibbsa ... answer such ... harness fire. ... enabled ... So then do you (a) deny that fire was the essential component for why grasses
                  Message 8 of 19 , May 2, 2013
                    From: hibbsa
                    JK: The straight and direct answer is that I would never attempt to

                    answer such

                    > a foolish question involving the ability of grasses to genetically
                    harness fire.
                    > However, I might attempt to address a model in which mutations somehow
                    enabled
                    > grasses to genetically harness fire. Is there a model for that?

                    So then do you (a) deny that fire was the essential component for why
                    grasses rose to dominance? or (b) accept this is the case but call it a
                    lucky intersection of random phenomena?

                    JK: I deny that there is any point whatsoever to such questions in the context of evolutionary psychology. Please place the rise of grasses to dominance is whatever context you wish to discuss it. Do you want to place it in the context of random mutations theory, for example?

                    If (b) then can you explain the distinction between that, and an
                    instance of natural selection involving genetic manifestations such as
                    the ability of grasses to survive fires and simply regrow in their wake,
                    given fires actually occured and given grasses rose to dominance as a
                    result, as a randomly assigned selective benefit for those traits?

                    JK: The problem for me is that I have never considered thinking about this, must less explaining such distinctions.

                    Or did the traits come about as the result of a non-random process involving nutrient gradients or any other mechanism?

                    Or do you have another non-random description for what actually occured?

                    JK: I have a description for what you are trying to involve me in: it's� nonsensical "foolishness." Offer me a theory of how mutations randomly caused something to occur if that's what you think might have happened.

                    James V. Kohl
                    Medical laboratory scientist (ASCP)
                    Independent researcher
                    Kohl, J.V. (2012) Human pheromones and food odors: epigenetic influences on the socioaffective nature of evolved behaviors. Socioaffective Neuroscience & Psychology, 2: 17338.

                    --- In evolutionary-psychology@yahoogroups.com, james kohl wrote:
                    >
                    > From: hibbsa hibbsa@...
                    >
                    > Jim - but how would you explain the genetic harnessing of fire by
                    >
                    > grasses, as part of a successful strategy of supplanting forests?
                    >
                    > Just give a straight and direct answer to this specific problem old
                    boy.
                    > JK: The straight and direct answer is that I would never attempt to
                    answer such
                    > a foolish question involving the ability of grasses to genetically
                    harness fire.
                    > However, I might attempt to address a model in which mutations somehow
                    enabled
                    > grasses to genetically harness fire. Is there a model for that?
                    >
                    > > -- James V. Kohl
                    > > Medical laboratory scientist
                    > > ASCP AMT ASCLS
                    > > Independent researcher
                    > > Kohl, J.V. (2012) Human pheromones and food odors...
                    > > Socioaffective Neuroscience & Psychology, 2: 17338.
                    > > http://dx.doi.org/10.3402/snp.v2i0.17338
                    >
                    >
                    > --- In evolutionary-psychology@yahoogroups.com, JVKohl wrote:
                    > >
                    > > Excerpted from below: Fire. It's a great source of the feedback
                    > > mechanisms that would have been necessary to drive human evolution
                    > >
                    > > The feedback mechanisms that drive adaptive evolution of the human
                    > brain
                    > > and behavior are nutrient-dependent and pheromone-controlled. Why is
                    > > this not clear? Feedback loops link odor and pheromone signaling
                    with
                    > > reproduction .
                    > > This isn't simply the case with vertebrates, it's the same with
                    > species
                    > > from microbes to man. Feedback between Population and Evolutionary
                    > > Dynamics Determines the Fate of Social Microbial Populations.
                    > > See also:
                    > > Pheromone-Induced Morphogenesis Improves Osmoadaptation Capacity by
                    > > Activating the HOG MAPK Pathway
                    > >
                    > >
                    > > Does the level of ignorance here seem to anyone else to be
                    increasing
                    > > against the flow of information from virtually every scientific
                    source
                    > > and from every different discipline I have integrated into my model?
                    > How
                    > > can anyone explain that phenomenon? Are random mutations causes the
                    > > brains of evolutionary theorists to regress to a more primitive
                    state
                    > as
                    > > occurs with nutrient-dependent pheromone-controlled adaptive
                    evolution
                    > > and eye regression in cave fish?
                    > >
                    > >
                    > > --
                    > > James V. Kohl
                    > > Medical laboratory scientist
                    > > ASCP AMT ASCLS
                    > > Independent researcher
                    > > Kohl, J.V. (2012) Human pheromones and food odors...
                    > > Socioaffective Neuroscience & Psychology, 2: 17338.
                    > > http://dx.doi.org/10.3402/snp.v2i0.17338
                    > >
                    > > =================================
                    > >
                    > > Steve,
                    > >
                    > > Why not just cite the part that states "...and by the aid of fire
                    > cooks food otherwise indigestible." In my model, that's the
                    > nutrient-dependent part of nutrient-dependent pheromone-controlled
                    > adaptive evolution. Is there a part that tells us how mutations are
                    > involved in adaptive evolution?
                    > >
                    > > Do you realize you just cited the chapter in which Darwin repeatedly
                    > mentions his 'conditons of existence' / conditions for life, which we
                    > now know are obviously nutrient-dependent and pheromone-controlled?
                    > >
                    > > • … changed conditions of life are of the highest
                    importance
                    > in causing variability, both by acting directly on the organisation,
                    and
                    > indirectly by affecting the reproductive system …
                    (author‟s
                    > italics)" and "it is generally acknowledged that all organic
                    > beings have been formed on two great laws â€" „Unity of
                    > Type‟ and the „Conditions of Existence‟
                    … in fact
                    > the law of the `Conditions of Existence' is the higher law, as
                    > it includes, through the inheritance of former variations and
                    > adaptations, that of Unity of Type" (Origin, Chapters 5 & 6, 6th
                    > edition). -- from Marsh (2011)
                    > >
                    > > Do you think that most evolutionary theorists are even minimally
                    aware
                    > of what Darwin really said, or like me do you think they simply bought
                    > into the bastardized version of his work because they did not have the
                    > intelligence to grasp the complexity or consistency?
                    > >
                    > > -- James V. Kohl
                    > > Medical laboratory scientist
                    > > ASCP AMT ASCLS
                    > > Independent researcher
                    > > Kohl, J.V. (2012) Human pheromones and food odors...
                    > > Socioaffective Neuroscience & Psychology, 2: 17338.
                    > > http://dx.doi.org/10.3402/snp.v2i0.17338
                    > >
                    > > On 5/1/2013 12:23 PM, Steve Corsini wrote:
                    > > >
                    > > >
                    > > > Is there a Fire-Ape hypothesis?
                    > > >
                    > > > See: Charles Darwin The Descent of Man [ 1871 ]
                    > > >
                    > > > Chapter V - On the Development of the Intellectual and Moral
                    > Faculties
                    > >
                    > > =========================================
                    > >
                    > > On 5/1/2013 1:48 PM, Stan Franklin wrote:
                    > > >
                    > > > There's a book that makes this point: Wrangham, R. (2009).
                    Catching
                    > Fire: How Cooking Made Us Human Basic Books.
                    > > >
                    > > > Stan
                    > > OK, let's be clear then. For some reason I have not made that point
                    in
                    > my model of nutrient-dependent pheromone-controlled adaptive
                    evolution.
                    > > And I think that reason is ignorance of extant literature that most
                    > people away from this group have integrated into their opinions about
                    > adaptive evolution.
                    > >
                    >
                    > >
                    >

                  • hibbsa
                    Really Jim? You think it s crazy and stupid to think a biological system could evolve to harness the occurence of fire? What about the even crazier idea that a
                    Message 9 of 19 , May 5, 2013
                      Really Jim? You think it's crazy and stupid to think a biological system
                      could evolve to harness the occurence of fire? What about the even
                      crazier idea that a biological system could evolve to harness photons
                      from outer space? What would be the nutrient dependent pheromone
                      controlled adaptive evolution leading to the harnessing of photons from
                      outer space?


                      --- In evolutionary-psychology@yahoogroups.com, james kohl wrote:
                      >
                      > From: hibbsa hibbsa@...
                      >
                      > > JK: The straight and direct answer is that I would never attempt to
                      >
                      > answer such
                      > > a foolish question involving the ability of grasses to genetically
                      > harness fire.
                      > > However, I might attempt to address a model in which mutations
                      somehow
                      > enabled
                      > > grasses to genetically harness fire. Is there a model for that?
                      >
                      > So then do you (a) deny that fire was the essential component for why
                      > grasses rose to dominance? or (b) accept this is the case but call it
                      a
                      > lucky intersection of random phenomena?
                      > JK: I deny that there is any point whatsoever to such questions in the
                      context
                      > of evolutionary psychology. Please place the rise of grasses to
                      dominance is
                      > whatever context you wish to discuss it. Do you want to place it in
                      the context
                      > of random mutations theory, for example?
                      >
                      >
                      > If (b) then can you explain the distinction between that, and an
                      > instance of natural selection involving genetic manifestations such as
                      > the ability of grasses to survive fires and simply regrow in their
                      wake,
                      > given fires actually occured and given grasses rose to dominance as a
                      > result, as a randomly assigned selective benefit for those traits?
                      > JK: The problem for me is that I have never considered thinking about
                      this, must
                      > less explaining such distinctions.
                      >
                      > Or did the traits come about as the result of a non-random process
                      involving
                      > nutrient gradients or any other mechanism?
                      >
                      > Or do you have another non-random description for what actually
                      occured?
                      > JK: I have a description for what you are trying to involve me in:
                      it's
                      > nonsensical "foolishness." Offer me a theory of how mutations randomly
                      caused
                      > something to occur if that's what you think might have happened.
                      >
                      >
                      > James V. Kohl
                      > Medical laboratory scientist (ASCP)
                      > Independent researcher
                      > Kohl, J.V. (2012) Human pheromones and food odors: epigenetic
                      influences on the
                      > socioaffective nature of evolved behaviors. Socioaffective
                      Neuroscience &
                      > Psychology, 2: 17338.
                      >
                      <Snip>
                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.