Education Part 1 - The Problem Of Psychiatric Drugs

To understand why psychiatric drugs have become a problem in the educational system of the United States first it is important to understand what it is these drugs are meant to control and why.

Understanding why drugs are so popular (from PBS)...

It is tempting to view this pattern as suggesting that the ADHD diagnosis provides teachers with a new technique for regaining control of the classroom in a world where many of the traditional methods of control have been eliminated. Drugs have replaced the reprimand.


But it seems to me that the real problem may be that the concept of compulsory, cookie-cutter education needs rethinking. In spite of the rhetoric in schools of education about the importance of taking into account the individual needs of the children in a classroom, the current system of public education is designed to make that nearly impossible. State curriculum guidelines and requirements, coupled with further requirements from the local community, prevent teachers from making any serious effort to tailor materials and assignments to the differing abilities and dispositions of individual children. Nor is there any mechanism, of the sort one would find in a school-choice-based system of education, for parents to seek out schools tailored to the temperaments and capabilities of their children. Instead, it becomes necessary to find ways of making children able to perform in the environment as they find it. And, in late twentieth-century America, when it is difficult or inconvenient to change the environment, we don't think twice about changing the brain of the person who has to live in it. The rise in consumption of Ritalin is only one manifestation of this cultural practice. Consider Prozac or, in previous decades, Valium.


None of this should be taken to suggest that there are no cases of genuine brain damage or dysfunction that require medical intervention. There have always been diseases of the brain, as of any other organ, and they should be treated as such. But difference does not automatically equal disease. Is changing the child's brain chemistry, by prescribing Ritalin-like drugs, really the most appropriate response to the child who doesn't perform well in the modern school environment? Perhaps it's time we asked ourselves whether the fact that so many children can't learn well in our schools is a reflection on the schools, not the children.Read more

Cevin Soling says public schools have been transformed into prisons because of an overdependence on security. (05:39)...

The Colbert Report
Get More: Colbert Report Full Episodes,Political Humor & Satire Blog,Video Archive

Notes:

1. Author of 'The War on Kids'

2. Schools started as a model to train people for military

3. Then, with the industrial revolution, the school model was based on the factory model (repetitious and boring job)

4. Latest model he compares to prison because of the harshness of the rules. For example; one school fired a bunch of kindergarderners for using thier fingers as guns in a cop and robbers game. And it is common to handcuff kids for spitballs (something that is an integral part of Archie comics and even cartoons) - Soling says that this shows a zero tolerance attitude to any kind of misbehavious and this is similar to the prison model.


Trailer to the movie to provide an overview...




The extremeness of some of the school policies...



Notes:

1. Many of the shooters are on Ritalin. Why is there such a high correlation between Ritalin and mental problems?

2. Drug companies market drugs for kids.

3. Messing with our childrens brain in the name of psychiatric help...


The modern problem of 'psychiatric labels' to which aspects of modern education psychology seems to be tied to (from Psychology Today)...

I have been thinking a good deal about normality lately. It's a concern in the medical world. The complaint is that doctors are abusing the privilege implied in Jack's query, to define the normal. Ordinary sadness, critics say, has been engulfed by depression. Boyishness stands in the shadow of attention deficits. Social phobia has engineered a hostile takeover of shyness.


A spate of popular books—The Loss of Sadness: How Psychiatry Transformed Normal Sorrow into Depressive Disorder by Allan V. Horwitz and Jerome C. Wakefield, The Last Normal Child by Lawrence H. Diller, and Shyness: How Normal Behavior Became a Sickness by Christopher Lane—challenge what they believe is psychiatry's narrowing of the normal. The National Institute of Mental Health reports that in any given year, over a quarter of Americans—and over a lifetime, half of us—suffer a mental disorder.


The fate of normality is very much in the balance. The American Psychiatric Association is now revising its diagnostic and statistical manual—the next version, DSM-V, should preview in 2011 and become official the following year. It may, indeed, be that as labels proliferate, mental disorders will annex ever more territory. But claims of a psychiatric power grab are overstated. The real force behind a proliferation of labels is the increasing ability of technology to see us as we've never been seen before. Still, the notion of a shift in the normal invites unease: To constrain normality is to induce conformity. To expand diagnosis is to induce anxiety. Is anyone really well?


It's a short hop from critiquing narrowed normalcy to claiming that we are an overmedicated nation. As Lane writes, "We've narrowed healthy behavior so dramatically that our quirks and eccentricities—the normal emotional range of adolescence and adulthood—have become problems we fear and expect drugs to fix." Psychiatry's critics also complain that doctors medicate patients who meet no diagnosis, who practice what I have dubbed "cosmetic psychopharmacology," to move a person from one normal, but disfavored personality state, like humility and diffidence, to another normal, but rewarded state, like self-assertion.


Labels matter even when medication has no role in treatment. A wife complains that her husband lacks empathy. Does he have Asperger's syndrome, a lesser variant of autism, or is he simply one of those guys who "don't get it," who simply don't see social interactions as ordinarily perceptive women do?


Diagnosis, however loose, can bring relief, along with a plan for addressing the problem at hand. Parents who might have once thought of a child as slow or eccentric now see him as having dyslexia or Asperger's syndrome—and then notice similar tendencies in themselves. But there's no evidence that the proliferation of diagnoses has done harm to our identity. Is dyslexia worse than what it replaced: the accusation, say, that a child is stupid and lazy? (Read More)

More about modern psychiatric/psychological labels...

The Daily Show with Jon Stewart
Get More: Daily Show Full Episodes,Political Humor & Satire Blog,The Daily Show on Facebook

Notes:

1. Redefining mental health can be very profitable

2. The world expects the west's science to be good

3. Problems with dugs for depression


Given how much relabeling/reframing/repacking is going on for the definitions of mental disease, theories like the following are bound to increase...

The Colbert Report
Get More: Colbert Report Full Episodes,Political Humor & Satire Blog,Video Archive

Psychiatrist Nassir Ghaemi believes that mental illness can foster great leadership, but the Republican presidential candidates are too "normal."

New York Times did a review: What Befits a Leader in Hard Times? An Intimate Knowledge of Insanity

The premise of Dr. Nassir Ghaemi’s book about leadership and mental illness is simple. It need not be reiterated as frequently as Dr. Ghaemi repeats it. But he begins “A First-Rate Madness” by writing, “This book argues that in at least one vitally important circumstance insanity produces good results and sanity is a problem.” To put it only a shade differently: “When our world is in tumult, mentally ill leaders function best.” Or: “In the storm of crisis, complete sanity can steer us astray, while some insanity brings us to port.”

The quick survey of the field of education and psychiatrists/psychology makes it clear that no one is qualified to be prescribing powerful drugs on a long-term basis to anyone much less children whose brains are still forming. As an adult if you want to experiment with drugs that is one thing, but to give them to kids is just plain wrong. If you are not yet convinced, here is a small collection of evidence:

One study that looks at just one of the angles of ADD/ADHD misdiagnosis...


Nearly 1 million children in the United States are potentially misdiagnosed with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder simply because they are the youngest -- and most immature -- in their kindergarten class, according to new research by a Michigan State University economist.


From Salon.com: "Anatomy of an Epidemic": The hidden damage of psychiatric drugs...

What about stimulants used to treat ADHD. How effective are they?
These stimulants alter behavior in a way that teachers can appreciate. They subdue finger-tapping and disruptive symptoms. But in the 1990s, the National Institute of Mental Health started looking to see if things like Ritalin were benefiting kids with ADHD, and to this day they have no evidence that this drug treatment improves long-term functioning in any domain -- the ADHD symptoms, lower delinquency rates, better performance at school, et cetera. Then the NIMH studied whether these drugs provide a long-term benefit, and they found that after three years, being on medication is actually a marker of deterioration. Some patients’ growth has been stunted, their ADHD symptoms have worsened. William Pelham, from the State University of New York at Buffalo and one of the principal investigators in that study, said, "We need to confess to parents that we’ve found no benefit." None. And we think that with drugs, the benefits should outweigh the risks.


What's so risky about Ritalin?
For one, a significant percentage -- between 10 and 25 percent -- of kids prescribed medication for ADHD will have a manic episode or psychotic episode and deteriorate in such a way that they’re diagnosed with bipolar disorder. A similar study in 2000 on pediatric bipolar disorder reported that 84 percent of the children treated for bipolar illness -- at the Luci Bini Mood Disorders Clinic in New York -- had been previously exposed to psychiatric medications. The author, Gianni Faeda, wrote, "Strikingly, in fewer than 10 percent of the cases was diagnosis of bipolar disorder considered initially." The reality is that until children were medicated with stimulants and antidepressants, you didn't see juvenile bipolar mania.


But if these studies are so groundbreaking, why have they gone unreported in the media?
Because the NIMH didn’t announce it. Just as they didn’t announce the 2007 outcome study for schizophrenia patients. In that study, the recovery rate was 40 percent for those off meds, but only 5 percent for those on meds. I checked all the NIMH press releases for 2007, and found no release on this study. I found no announcement of it in any American Psychiatric Association publication or textbook. Not a single newspaper published an account of the study. And that’s because the psychiatric establishment -- the NIMH, the APA, even the National Alliance on Mental Illness, an advocacy organization -- did not put out any press release about it or try to alert the media in any way.


Are you suggesting that psychiatrists are beholden to pharmaceutical companies?
Not exactly, although most of the leading academic psychiatrists act as consultants, advisors and speakers for them. The problem is that psychiatry, starting in 1980 with the publication of the DSM-III, decided to tell the public that psychiatric disorders were biological ailments, and that its drugs were safe and effective treatments for those ailments. If it suddenly announces to the public that a long-term NIMH-funded study found that the 15-year recovery rate for schizophrenia patients was 40 percent for those off meds and 5 percent for those on meds, then that story begins to fall apart. By not reporting the results, psychiatry maintains the image of its drugs in the public mind, and the value of psychiatrists in today’s therapy marketplace.


So do you think psychiatric drugs should be used at all?
I think they should be used in a selective, cautious manner. It should be understood that they’re not fixing any chemical imbalances. And honestly, they should be used on a short-term basis. But beyond this, I think we should look at programs that are getting very good results. This is what I love about Keropudas Hospital’s program in Finland. They have 20 years of great results treating newly psychotic patients. They see if patients can get better without the use of meds, and if they can’t, then they try them. It’s a best-use model, not a no-use or anti-med model. It fits with our studies done in the 1970s that found if you use this model, you get better outcomes, and a good number of people get better and go on with their lives.

Miscellaneous Information on the Side Effects of Ritalin...

U.S. DEPT. OF JUSTICE: “Of particular concern is that ADHD literature prepared for public consumption does not address the potential or actual abuse of methylphenidate. Instead, methylphenidate is routinely portrayed as a benign, mild substance that is not associated with abuse or serious side effects. In reality, however, the scientific literature indicates that methylphenidate [Ritalin] shares the same abuse potential as other Schedule II stimulants. Further, case reports document that methylphenidate abuse can lead to tolerance and severe psychological dependence.”


Ritalin (methylphenidate) is an amphetamine-like prescription stimulant commonly used to treat Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) in children and adults.


Many think Ritalin (methylphenidate) is safe, or mild, because so many children use it. However, the government classifies the psychoactive drug with cocaine and morphine because it is highly addictive.


Long-Term Effects of Ritalin: Changes in Brain Development


Ongoing research shows early-life use of Ritalin (methylphenidate) has complex effects that endure later into life. A study published in Biological Psychiatry suggests that exposure of Ritalin in youth may later disrupt development of brain cells in the hippocampus, region of the brain critical to memory, spatial navigation, and behaviorial inhibition. Damage can lead to memory problems, disorientation and depression in adulthood.


Ritalin is a Schedule II Substance, which means Ritalin has a "high potential for abuse" that "may lead to severe psychological or physical dependence," and the federal government sets limits on the amount of these amphetamine drugs that may be manufactured each year.


A review of 20-years of scientific literature on using stimulant medications, including Ritalin, to treat children with ADD and ADHD found a consensus: there is no documented long-term benefit (academic achievement or pro-social behavior) in using psychoactive drugs.


Abrupt cessation of stimulant drugs such as Ritalin can cause extreme fatigue and severe, even suicidal, depression in adult patients.


The question of whether methylphenidate (Ritalin) impairs creativity in children;


Ritalin may have subtle impacts on cognitive and intellectual processes. Both parents and researchers have noticed that children taking Ritalin sometimes answer questions in ways that seem overly compliant or narrow, suggesting the drug might restrict creative thinking. One study found hyperactive children taking Ritalin offered less varied answers to open-ended questions.


How much do the “neuro-enhancing” drugs really help? And there's the question of what we mean by “smarter.”


The psycho-stimulants help students bear down on their work, but with odd effects. One college student says he spends “too much time researching a paper rather than actually writing it.” Another student looked back at papers he'd written while on Adderall and found them verbose: “I'd produce two pages on something that could be said in a couple of sentences.”


Could enhancing one kind of thinking exact a toll on others?


All these questions need proper scientific answers, but for now much of the discussion is taking place furtively, among an increasing number of Americans who are performing daily experiments on their own brains (or their children's brains)

A few links that seal the case for, abolishing psychiatric drugs being administered to children...

How drug companies' PR tactics skew the presentation of medical research

How flimsy research gets inferior drugs to market

Dr. Jeffrey Schaler Professor of Psychology describes psychiatry as a pseudo Science.

Xanax Addiction from ABC News

Anti-Psychiatry.Org

Psychiatrists On Psychiatry

Bad Effects of taking Psychiatric Drugs

Psychiatric treatments impair the function of the brain and mind.

PSYCHIATRIC DRUGS: Cure or Quackery?

Why Psychiatry Should Be Abolished as a Medical Specialty

Why I Never Recommend Psychiatric Medications

School Support for ADHD Children May Be Missing the Mark: Inattention, Not Hyperactivity, Is Associated With Educational Failure

Depression is not a one-size-fits-all condition.


A simple alternative to giving kids drugs (unfortunately for drug company shareholders, it's extremely cheap)...




Moment of Zen... Dogs get their first antidepressant drug approved...

The Daily Show with Jon Stewart
Get More: Daily Show Full Episodes,Political Humor & Satire Blog,The Daily Show on Facebook

The Fragmentation of Knowledge Part 1 [Or, The case against over-specialization in theory based academics]

Historically, knowledge has always been approached from a holistic perspective. The Ancient Greeks studied every field of knowledge and put together theories after careful thought on all the evidence and theories they had on the world around them (this applies to Democritus, Socrates, Plato and Aristotle amongst others). In fact, it has been shown that the word they used which is often translated as 'virtue' (i.e. the word Arete) actually has meanings along the lines of 'Excellence' with the idea that a person should seek excellence in all aspects of life(shown in the Ancient Greeks approach to knowledge and ideas on living life)

Yet, in todays 'modern' academic world, from which all our theories on the structure of the worlds cultures and economy come from, is heavily fragmented into specialized fields of knowledge. This leads to problems in comming to agreement about simple facts and theories making progress on the more intricate theories and studies almost impossible (except by a tiny group of degree holders which tend to be called 'alternative' and relegated to the edges of mainstream science and media).

During the renaissance the scholars studied every field of knowledge. In fact, major break-throughs in science tended to come from individuals not directly linked to science for most of the history of science. It was only when the math became so complicated that specialized mathematical skills were required that 'lay men's' theories about the specific implication of mathematical formula became useless. For contradicting religious doctrine many Renaissance age scholars learned the hard way to avoid to contradict the church and over time an agreement was reach between the church and the new form of specialized knowledge that came to be known as 'scientists'. The agreement was simple, scientists will focus on observable phenomenon and avoid studying matters of faith and religious belief. So the modern enlightenment, or reemergence of ancient knowledge, began crippled. It's why I think A. N. Whitehead, (Process and Reality, 1929), is right when he says that all of modern western philosophical thought is a footnote to the works of Plato."The safest general characterization of the European philosophical tradition is that it consists of a series of footnotes to Plato". It had to be. Plato could consider fields of knowledge that became socially and culturally unacceptable from about the 1700's to today's extremely fragmented state of academia, creating a type of scholar which gives scholarship a bad name.

A better type of scholar for understanding the complexity of science and the connection between the various fields of knowledge is Leonardo Da Vinci. A genuine liberal arts education with accurate textbooks could help generate more such scholars in the long-term (needs to be combined with better media influence as well).

The video below is of an interview of a modern 'ethical' philosopher. It is obvious that he believes that only he can ask and ponder the questions he has even when Stephen Colbert (a non-philosophy or economics degree holder) makes a brilliant case for the inaccuracy in one of his theories. (Note: This overspecialization of knowledge, particularly the division of  'ethicality' from other aspects of knowledge is something that Robert Pirsirg ranted about in his book "Zen and The Art of Motor Cycle Maintenance" attributing this problem to Plato and Aristotle, which could very well be correct).

The Colbert Report

Get More: Colbert Report Full Episodes,Political Humor & Satire Blog,Video Archive

Note that Michael's question about why baseball players get paid more than teachers is something you could explain to a 10 year old. It is easier to teach little kids than it is to throw 100 mile per hour fast balls or hit these fast balls out of the playing field. If all teachers could compete with modern baseball athletes on their level ONLY then could such a question be valid. The simple reality is that the skill that is rare gets paid more for. This is simple demand and supply economics (as Colbert points out) - Also note that I have a degree (bachelors) in economics which gives my simple explanation more weight but I prefer to use links to authoritative information as I think every writer in any field of knowledge should. Also note that he simply ignores Colbert's accurate counter response hiding behind the degree by saying roughly. ' this is a question for ethical philosophy' implying Colbert can't understand this particular field of philosophy (after all, the argument is, 'I have a degree in this, you don't'). Its not Michael's fault he doesn't know economics. It's not a requirement for knowledge (specialization begins right at the beginning at college level education and school textbooks are grossly out of date), he is illustrating a symptom of a much larger cultural problem (fragmentation of knowledge) which must be addressed and is the main point of all my blogs (the idea being to combine news media and education to create larger perspectives on modern challenges).

One of the most fragmented fields of knowledge is the one of archeology. The skills of excavation (or more accurately, patience?) have reached a new high but putting together the finds in a proper theoretical framework based on all available evidence, that has been confirmed as reliable, has broken apart to such a degree that cults seem to have formed around different theories. This seems to have made the support of various archeological theories (and evidence associated with it) a political and religious issue.


Introduction  to the modern archeology problem

The type of problems in archeology revolve around one group disbelieving in historical writings if they are from a book of scripture vs. literal interpreters of the Bible vs. the archeological evidence that is actually found. The following extract of a report on a recent discovery in Israel exemplifies this problem in analysis of archeological evidence.

In a region where history, belief and ideology play such an important role, the discovery is controversial. Other archaeologists dispute the significance of the find.

Professor Israel Finkelstein, of Tel Aviv University, pointed out that the remains are not evidence of a powerful biblical state.

He said: "We are not talking about some great empire ruled from a wonderful capital, the way we look at Assyria in the 9th century B.C., or even the northern Kingdom of Israel in the 9th century B.C. We are here in a formative phase of the rise of Judah."

Finkelstein added: "Khirbet Qeiyafa does not make Judah a great empire with great armies."

Garfinkel argued that even if it was not the great empire of the bible, its existence is significant.

"What people try to do is say that the Kingdom of Judah didn't exist," he said. "What I am saying is that it existed. It's a small one, not so glorified as the Bible presented. But it doesn't mean there was nothing."

Here are a few extracts from websites of mainstream archeological theories about the age of civilization (not in line with Darwin's theory of evolution... please note that my visual explanation below of the variations of skull shapes and sizes nullifies much of the evidence cited by Darwinians. This does not mean that the theory is wrong, just that, like any scientific theory, it is a theory 'in the works' and does explain many natural phenomenon but not all archeological and observational evidence).

Website example 1: CIVILIZATION BEGINS: THE COPPER-STONE AGE, 3600-2800 B.C.

Website example 2: By 6500 B.C.E., humans secured for themselves a dependable food supply by planting crops and domesticating animals. As a result, the human population increased, food surpluses allowed for economic specialization and exchange, and the emergence of civilization was made possible.[The problem with the second theory statement is the large structures that have been found with no obvious settlement, i.e. large structures require a large population to make them. The idea of these structures being religious don't fit the evidence found thus far so shouldn't be put into that category - click here to read my theory]


The following is the more religious version of the theory of evolution (Christian source):

First, even though some people believe that evolution is correct, and that men evolved from animals, that does not make it right. People believe all kinds of things that are wrong. Humans did not "evolve," but were created specially by God (Genesis 1:26-27).


Second, the fact that a person lives in a cave has nothing to do with whether or not he or she is human. Saying that a man who lives in a cave is "half human" would be like saying a dog that lives in the house is "half human." The place where you live does not determine your "humanity."


Third, the Bible explains that people of the past lived in caves for various lengths of time, and for various reasons.

There are some attempts to bring together the religious idea of creationism with it's opposite, the theory of evolution. The basic theory tends to be along the lines of 'God create man with the capacity to evolve and change for various reasons and that is why we find so many variations of human beings in fossils'.

[Click here to read an excellent example of bringing together a faith based idea in-line with a modern scientific perspective]

Amongst some Christian religious scholars there is even an attachment to a literal interpretation of the meaning of the word "day" in the first two books of Genesis. Amongst the more reasonable and open minded this can be countered with a New Testament quote, "But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day." 2 Peter 3:8


First set of evidence supporting the case that a PhD in the field of theoretical archeology is useless:

Here are some extremely strong pieces of evidence (some might say indisputable evidence) that the age of civilization being older than some would like to believe...

The following are extracts from a previous blog posts to show the various evidence there is that proves that civilization goes back further than school/college textbook...

"The so-called Harappa stage of the great cities of Mohenjo-daro, Chanhu-daro, and Harappa (c. 2500-1200/1000 B.C), which bursts abruptly into view, without preparation, already fully formed and showing many completely obvious signs of inspiration from the earlier high centers of the West (i.e. fertile crescent), yet undeniable signs, also, of a native Indian tradition – this too already well developed. As professor W. Norman Brown has suggested, a native Indian center (i.e., a mythogenetic zone) somewhere either in the south or in the Ganges-Jumna area would seem to be indicated, where the characteristically Indian traits, unknown at this time farther west, must have come into form. [Joseph Campbell -Primitive Mythology - Page 435]

Other interesting facts about the cities of Mohenjodaro and Harappa is that the bricks used in making them are uniform, i.e. they had a system to measure and weigh stuff accurately. They had their own sewage system, public baths and the structure of the architecture suggest an egalitarian society, but there are no signs of architectural development. That means these cities arrived fully developed and then went into decline. There are no in-between cities or towns where the Mohenjodaro/Happan style of architecture is first used.

With the discovery of ancient cities off the coast of India, the sudden appearance of Mohenjodara and Harrapa makes more sense. Cities that existed before a rise in the oceans(that began at the end of the last ice age) would explain the sudden appearance of cities like Mohenjodaro and Harrapa;

"The carbon dating of 7500 BC obtained for the wooden piece recovered from the site changes the earlier held view that the first cities appeared in the Sumer Valley [in Mesopotamia] around 3000 BC," said B Sasisekaran of India's National Science Academy.


The images gathered over the past six months led to a surprising discovery - a series of well-defined geometric formations were clearly seen, spread irregularly across a nine-kilometre (five-mile) stretch, a little beneath the sea bed.


Some of them closely resemble an acropolis - or great bath - known to be characteristic of the Harappan civilisation.


The Gulf of Cambay is one of the largest tidal areas in the world - with a current of very high velocity - and so it is conceivable that the area may well have submerged an entire ancient settlement, Mr Ravindran said to the BBC.

But that isn't the only evidence of a lost civilization. The following is an abstract of a study done by Japanese scientists about an underwater structure off the coast of Japan followed by hsome pictures that show that these structures are man made (the extract below indicates that these structures date back to at least 10,000 years ago, i.e. 8,000 BC).

Abstract;Submarine research surveys using SCUBA and sonic surveys reveal detailed topography similar to submarine, pyramidal features looking like a stepped pyramid off Yonaguni in Okinawa, Japan. The site is called Iseki Point(ruins site) as a leisure diving spot. Yonaguni Submarine Pyramid(YSP) is the major structure that stands under approximately 25 meters of ocean. Essentially, it has a cliff face like the side of a stepped pyramid, and dimensions of about 290m(length) by 120m(width) by 26m(height). Flat terraces, straight walls and its surface structure of walls with scars of tool marks driven in by a wedge on the structure are identified to be artificially fabricated. Appearance and size of YSP are similar to the biggest, ancient castles such as Shuri and Nakagusuku Castles in Okinawa Island, where they are called 'gusuku'. Roads associated with drainage canals were recognized, surrounding YSP, and that a retaining wall was found along a road. The southern point of the wall is composed of huge rock fragments. Stone tools and other artifacts were discovered from the sea bottom. Those evidence strongly shows that the YSP has not been manufactured by nature. It is identifie to be man-made. The formation age is estimated to be about 10,000 years ago based on 14C and 10Be age determinations. (author abst.)

Second set of evidence supporting the case that a PhD in the field of theoretical archeology is useless:

All ancient human classifications are based on a few fossils and the variations in skull shape and size seem to be within modern day variation of our species to some extant [there is also mention of a bone here or there which is supposed to be further evidence of an evolutionary change but the main arguments are based around the skull sizes and the size of the brain that these cranial cavities could hold]

"Archaic forms of Homo sapiens first appear about 500,000 years ago. The term covers a divers...e group of skulls which have features of both Homo erectus and modern humans. The brain size is larger than erectus and smaller than most modern humans, averaging about 1200 cc, and the skull is more rounded than in erectus. The skeleton and teeth are usually less robust than erectus, but more robust than modern humans. Many still have large brow ridges and receding foreheads and chins. There is no clear dividing line between late erectus and archaic sapiens, and many fossils between 500,000 and 200,000 years ago are difficult to classify as one or the other. "

Here is a graphic example of this theory (the one on the right is supposed to be Neanderthal)...

Is there a scientific theory to explain the huge variation in skull shapes and sizes in ancient humans and modern humans (of the various races)?

Yes, for Neanderthals in particular but it applies to all theories connecting humans to apes and other species through skull sizes, for example: pygmies will have smaller heads than a gorilla but its doesn't mean a gorilla is smarter, ...

ScienceDaily (Aug. 16, 2007) — Chance, not natural selection, best explains why the modern human skull looks so different from that of its Neanderthal relative, according to a new study led by Tim Weaver, assistant professor of anthropology at UC

"For 150 years, scientists have tried to decipher why Neanderthal skulls are different from those of modern humans," Weaver said. "Most accounts have emphasized natural selection and the possible adaptive value of either Neanderthal or modern human traits. We show that instead, random changes over the past 500,000 years or so – since Neanderthals and modern humans became isolated from each other – are the best explanation for these differences."

Weaver and his colleagues compared cranial measurements of 2,524 modern human skulls and 20 Neanderthal specimens, then contrasted those results with genetic information from a separate sample of 1,056 modern humans.

The scientists concluded that Neanderthals did not develop their protruding mid-faces as an adaptation to icy Pleistocene weather or the demands of using teeth as tools, and the retracted faces of modern humans are not an adaptation for language, as some anthropologists have proposed.

Instead, random "genetic drift" is the likeliest reason for these skull differences.

Problem with this skull size and shape theory is that these variations occur even today, yet according to archeologists we are supposed to be one species of humans of different races while the humans of the past are supposed to look like apes.

Take a look at examples of individuals with different skull sizes, both in one race and accross different races. You can carry out these observations across many segments of modern populations and you will find these variations in skull size and shape are very common.

In the following video compare the skull size of the basketball player with his countrymen...



The following images show the same and different races side by side with the same basketball player showing clearly the variation in skull shape and size varies, that, according to some archeologist theories, should make these individuals of a 'different species of pre-historic, ape-like humans'.

Image source

Image source

Image source

Image source

Image source

It should be obvious from the above images that skull shape and size is highly variable even in our time of 'homo sapian sapians' making that argument for a different human species untenable.

Third set of evidence supporting the case that a PhD in the field of theoretical archeology is useless:

There is clear evidence of ritual in Neanderthal burial sites but even more fascinating is the ancient wooden spears that have been found. We all know that apes don't use spears or go on hunts, therefore the skulls etc. found from 400,000 years ago must belong to humans.


Video Evidence for Neanderthal Burials

About Neanderthal burial site: "the idea of the earth as mother and of burial as a re-entry into the womb for rebirth appears to have recommended itself to at least some of the communities of mankind at an extremely early date. The earliest unmistakable evidences of ritual and therewith of mythological thought yet found have been the grave burials of Homo neanderthalensis, a remote predecessor of our species, whose period is perhaps to be dated as early as 200,000 – 75000 B.C. Neanderthal skeletons have been found interred with supplies (suggesting the idea of another life), accompanied by animal sacrifice (wild ox, bison, and wild goat), with attention to an east-west axis (the path of the sun, which is reborn from the same earth in which the dead are placed), in flexed position (as though within the womb), or in a sleeping posture – in one case with pillow of chips of flint. Sleep and death, awakening and resurrection, the grave as a return to the mother for rebirth; but whether Homo neanderthalensis thought the next awakening would be here again or in some world to come (or even both together) we do not know." Joseph Campbell's Primitive Mythology page 66

Evidence for ritual and hunting in ancient humans

More evidence for ritual in ancient humans

How artists perception influence their drawings of ancient humans (Neanderthal example)
[Note: If archeologists will stop calling ancient humans 'ape look alikes' then the artist drawings of ancient humans with ape-like feature will stop.]

More evidence for hunting with wooden spears in ancient times

Fourth set of evidence supporting the case that a PhD in the field of theoretical archeology is useless:

In my last post on archeologists, I suggested that petroglyphs of Mammoths could have been of actual observations (as even Native American tribes have reported sighting them). The following is more evidence of how animals can survive in small pockets into times when they are supposed to be extinct. The point here is that given that petroglyphs and eye-witness evidence archeologists shouldn't believe that mammoths definitely went extinct around 10,000 years ago as there is enough evidence to leave the extinction date for mammoths open ended as mammoths could easily have survived in the northern cold land mass of Canada into more modern times. The following are links to examples of animals thought to be extinct that were later found to be very much alive.


1. A "surprisingly healthy" population of rare snow leopards has been discovered in the remote northeastern stretches of Afghanistan, one of the few areas largely unaffected by the near decade-long war in the country.

2. Toad rediscovered

3. New Indian frogs and new species of amphibians

4. 14 species of rediscovered animals rediscovered that were thought to be extinct
[including a dwarf elephant!] 


This is the end of this post on the fragmentation of knowledge, Or, The case against over-specialization in theory  based academics.


Part 2 is here: 

• Psychology: Fragmentation Of Knowledge 2 - [Or, The case against over-specialization in theory based academics]

Prelude to a new article series on education

The modern form of scientific thought and analysis emerged from the philosophy of the Ancient Greeks and their writings. Which were passed down through the Dark Ages by the Universities of the Middle East from their Golden Age (every region has a Golden Age and it appears to be continuously moving west, its next stop is China and India, again).

The mechanism at work is the importing of technological and creative ideas. This same process was at work when there was an idea flow from Europe to the New World. In this example, from France to the newly developed, and still developing (industrially), United States;

The Colbert Report
Get More: Colbert Report Full Episodes,Political Humor & Satire Blog,Video Archive

Wednesday July 13, 2011 - Colbert Report: David McCullough
David McCullough discusses his book "The Greater Journey" about young Americans moving to Paris in the 19th century.

It is common economic knowledge that that a country needs a strong industrial base to grow. It also needs a strong democratic base (especially in the flow of information) which can be ensured using some simple measurement tools.

I have wanted to do a thorough study on education for several years and now I think I have enough background information to begin. I'll start with the emergence of science, education and rhetoric from the Ancient Greeks.

Archeologists can explain away anything! [Mysterious Evidence of Mommoths/Mastadons in America]

Recently National Geographic published an article on Gobekli Tepe and this got me wondering if I could prove that Archeologists are either so blinded by bias that they are incapable of considering evidence that goes against their beliefs (Such as the Judges in America who are sharply divided by ideology - As Jon Stewart points out, ‎"It's clear now, your politics shapes reality") OR simply don't read anything beyond their academic curriculum and their 'leaders' accepted sources of information. (You can consider this post as a part 1 in this analysis).

My first test was one of free speech. Which they passed with flying colors...

The following were my comments posted on National Geographic's facebook page:

Comment 1:

Hi, I have been studying ancient structures for many years. To assume that this is a religious site... well, lets just say, it's a really big leap. There is no evidence to support that theory except the bias of the observer. If archeologist...s take all ancient structural evidence into account many other possible theories to the origin of these structures can be discussed. http://www.culturesocietyblog.com/2011/02/ancient-mysteries-worlds-earliest.html . Given the level of the ocean the structures in the link I've posted date to over 10,000 years ago. If you take this evidence into account it is possible that these structures are a monument to the dead of the previous civilization or a clear indication to future generations that a culture, sophisticated in the formation of stone monuments, did exist.


Comment 2:

Note: the following is not bewildering if it is considered that the formation of these structures were by a people of a previous civilization who were, more or less, destroyed. In such a situation technological adeptness would decrease. (f...or example:If our civilization were destroyed how many of us could biuld a car or plane from scratch? Our technology and skills would wither til eventually we would forget all the knowledge we had previously aquired.) [Note: This has happened many times in recorded history as well, exmaple, the knowledge of the Greeks or the inheritance from the Muslims through the dark ages etc.] - "Bewilderingly, the people at Göbekli Tepe got steadily worse at temple building. The earliest rings are the biggest and most sophisticated, technically and artistically. As time went by, the pillars became smaller, simpler, and were mounted with less and less care. Finally the effort seems to have petered out altogether by 8200 B.C. Göbekli Tepe was all fall and no rise."

Comment 3:

Ooops! The above comments were meant to go with this article: http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2011/06/gobekli-tepe/mann-text .

[These comments were a day ago and are still up there.]

In college a religion professor once mentioned in class (Professor Richman?) that in her day archeologists needed something called 'evidence' before coming up with theories. (She was referring to the female figures found that are assumed to be Goddesses). I also think it may have been her who gave me/us the example of future archeologists digging down to our time and discovering a bunch of Barbie dolls and concluding, based on these finds, that this was the Goddess of the early twentieth century.

Anyways, all of this was just to begin my analysis of how perception and lack of reading can affect the analysis (and therefore legitimacy) of the most highly qualified PhD holder in Archeology.

As Louis L'Amour explains at the end of his fictional book, Jubal Sackett (from his Sackett series) :

"Mammoth, Mastadon etc: According to scholars mammoths died out around 6000 B.C. Nonetheless, American Indians record hunting and killing them. One such report occurs in the Bureau of ethnology report The Ponca Tribe. Returning from their "long hunt" west to the Rockies, the Poncas saw a mammoth, as well as what was probably a giant ground sloth, near what is now Niobrara, Nebraska.


David Thompson, the distinguished Hudson's Bay Co. explorer, on January 7, 1811, came upon some tracks near the Athabasca River in the northern Rockies which the Indians told him were those of the mammoth. the Indians has assured him the animal was to found there. Many Indian tribes had accounts of seeing or hunting mammoth.


Near Moab, at Hys Bottom close to the Colorado River, there is a petroglyph of a mastadon. And in the Four Corners area Flora Vista a small boy found two slabs on which were carved many glyphs, including pictures of two elephants. They have been called fakes, which is the most convenient way of getting rid of something that does not fit current beliefs."

[Note: The best analysis of the Moab petroglyph (IMO) is here... and I can't find any information on the Flora Vista elephants/mammoths on any authoritative website.]

The following is the evidence that is currently available on this topic:

The scholars have changed the date to the extinction of the mammoths to 10,000 years ago (At the time of the writing of Jubal Sackett it was at 6000 years).

Here is a carving found on a mammoth bone (from the Smithsonian):

It was heavily mineralized, which prevented standard dating, Stanford explained. But mammoths and mastodons had died out in the Americas by 13,000 years ago, so it has to be older than that. "It could be quite early," he added.

Here is some more analysis of the Moab petroglyph:

Furthermore, according to Barnes and Pendleton, in their book Canyon Country Prehistoric Indians: Their Cultures, Ruins, Artifacts and Rock Art, there are two such "mammoths" in the Moab vicinity. One is a short distance down river from Moab Valley in the Colorado River Gorge (pictured). The other is in Indian Creek Canyon within sight of US 163 to the Needles district of Canyonlands National Park. There are interesting arguments on both sides of this historic-or-prehistoric controversy that centers on these two petroglyphs.

On the prehistoric side neither petroglyph appears to be recent. Both have desert varnish built up within the chipped out parts of the glyphs. Further it is widely accepted by anthropologists and paleontologists that early American Indians hunted such large animals as giant bison, mammoths and giant sloths, and may even have brought about their extinction.

On the historic side the two mammoth petroglyphs do not appear to be much older, if any, than the many other glyphs nearby, glyphs that are clearly associated with the most recent stages of prehistoric creatures that did not even exist 2000 years ago. Paleontologists estimate that mammoths became extinct on this continent about 10,000 years ago. Further the oldest rock are so far discovered that is age-dated by inference as 8700 years old is simply a fist-sized rock with scratches on it. To date, no rock are known to be older than about 1000 years old resembles the sophistication of design and techniques that was used in making these mammoths.

This find is my favorite...

This petroglyph is so old and weathered that one can walk right by without noticing it, this is , unless the sun is shining just right. We are told that it stands out sharp in early morning or late afternoon sunlight. Evidently the lower angled rays of the sun produce better highlights and shadows on opposite walls of the peckings and enhance legibility. Unfortunately, our visit occurred about noon and even the photographs we took are hard to read. They proved to be unsuitable for reproduction but a rubbing taken on stiffener cloth with a black crayon was obviously an instant success. The original rubbing renders a petroglyph that is 18-inches wide. 

How the memory of this animal came to the Track Rocks, we do not know. Either the engraving is so old that the artist was recording a mastodon or, more reasonably, it dates to a later period associated with ancient colonist from the Mediterranean who were famililar with the elephant.

Going along with the last assumption, it is interesting to note that the 1975 radio carbon dating of core samples from the Grave Creek Mound (less than 25 miles from the Track Rocks) gave a date of 200 BC for its construction. This corresponds well with the time period for the use of the Iberian-Punic script found on the tablet removed from the mound. The script also identifies people who were familiar with elephants and Carthaginians. 

This Track Rocks petroglyph is not the first rendering of an elephant in America. There were many of reports of tablets, steles, petroglyphs, and sculptures depicting elephants. Wisconsin even records an enormous elephant effigy earthwork. Many of these were reported in the early 1800's, long before it was fashionable to deny the presence of ancient mariners on this continent prior to the coming of Christopher Columbus. [Note: 'fashion' may be just as much a part of modern science as it was in the past?]

Adding the above extract to the descriptions given by Native Americans that Louis L'Amour describes above and this concludes part 1 of my investigation into the legitimacy of University degrees in Modern Archeology (at least as far as theory goes, we do need some people to do those incredibly slow digs). Also, keep in mind that Canada has the largest cold land mass that is cut off from the 'old world', there is plenty of land and mountain valleys for herbivores to survive a long time in this up and down ice age of the last million years or so.  [Note: There are no links to the verbal accounts that Louis L'Amour describes because it would be much harder for me to find and is probably not even online - Also, to kill off the Indians, to take their land, they had to be discredited. The perception of Indians (Native Americans) as uneducated 'savages' (and therefore lacking observation skills) is still a view amongst many, especially in academic circles who pride themselves on their university taught archeological observation skills er... I mean blinders.]

-----------------------------------------

Note to Archeologists: Ignore one piece of evidence, fine. Ignore two pieces of evidence, fine. Ignore three pieces of evidence, getting iffy. But this is getting ridiculous.

-----------------------------------------
On a side note: Some info from Ponca City (been there!) where the Ponca Tribe was sent to from Nabraska when that area was taken over and it's also where mammoth bones were found and I'm sure more bones exist (and maybe even petroglyphs?)...

Before modern settlers and Indians came to Oklahoma, the land was occupied by hunter-agriculture peoples. Near Anadarko, archeologists discovered the bones of a mammoth and several spear points. They estimate the mammoth was killed more than 11,000 years ago. The spear point was identified as belonging to an ancient group of hunters called the Clovis culture.

From 500 to 1300 AD, the Spiro Mound Builders lived in an area just west of the Arkansas/Oklahoma border. Items left in burial mounds show the Mound Builders to be skilled artists.

In the 1830s, the federal government forced the Five Civilized Tribes to leave their homelands. These tribes were living in the southeastern part of the U.S. They had to walk to Oklahoma over a trail that became known as the "Trail of Tears." Many men, women and children died during this long and treacherous trip. Once these people settled here, Oklahoma became Indian Territory.

On April 22, 1889, a cannon blast started the first Land Run. Settlers ran, rode on horseback or traveled in wagons to stake their land claims. By the end of the day, nearly 10,000 people had settled in Oklahoma City.
[Note: A great great great grandfather of mine was in on this land run - married a Cherokee, I think.]

Unedited version of 'Forgot About Dre.'

Connects to the songs from the post called, "What's the difference between me and you?"

Could American psychology have a major Native American influence?

In the early part of the last century there was a boy named William James Sidis who became known as a child prodigy. He entered Harvard at age 11 (as they wouldn't let him in when he was ready - at age 9) and everyone expected him to do big things. And he did. In the world of ideas. He was the first to predict the existence of black holes and wrote many books on many different topics.

How could Native American perspectives influence the early American pioneers?

The pioneers, or the people who moved west, always contained individuals who kept to themselves and made friends with the natives. They traded and made friends with many different tribes. Besides goods such as furs that these individuals would get from the natives, they also learnt their ways. These types of people are represented in the western novels written by Louis La'more.

The immigrants who came to settle and farm the land hated the natives. For territorial as well as cultural reasons. However, they respected the mountain men. Since all the immigrants were new to this strange and untamed land they had to develop new ways of living to deal with this. Ways that were different from their original land. They copied the very self assured and well established mountain men and traders.

Do you see the chain? Since these mountain men learnt from the natives and the new immigrants learnt from the mountain men, the ideas being absorbed by the new people to this land (and the founding fathers) were from the people that most considered to be ‘savages’.

In fact, the cowboy gunslinger is the western version of a native american warrior. Both are calm upto the very moment of battle. When they stike it’s sudden and decisive. Both have a code of honor. The perfect example for this kind of man, which is honored in American society (and rightly so) can be seen in the Louis La'more books.

Here are some quotes by Native Americans that exemplify their steadfast perspective on individuality, freedom and equality - concepts as much a part of America and it's founding fathers, as it once was a part of the Natives who lived there. Notice the continuity in perspectives from Native Americans to modern Americans (the other side of the American mind set is inherited from the Old World and is beyond the scope of this post).

All birds, even those of the same species, are not alike, and it is the same with animals and with human beings. The reason Wakan Tanka does not make two birds, or animals, or human beings exactly alike is because each is placed here by WakanTanka to be an independent individuality and to rely upon itself. - Shooter Teton Sioux

If the white man wants to live in peace with the Indian, he can live in peace.....Treat all men alike. Give them all the same law. Give them all an even chance to live and grow. All men were made by the same Great Spirit Chief. They are all brothers. The Earth is the mother of all people, and all people should have equal rights upon it.......Let me be a free man, free to travel, free to stop, free to work, free to trade....where I choose my own teachers, free to follow the religion of my fathers, free to think and talk and act for myself, and I will obey every law, or submit to the penalty. - Chief Joseph, Nez Perce

I do not think the measure of a civilization is how tall its buildings of concrete are,
But rather how well its people have learned to relate to their environment and fellow man. - Sun Bear of the Chippewa Tribe

All birds, even those of the same species, are not alike, and it is the same with animals and with human beings. The reason Wakan Tanka does not make two birds, or animals, or human beings exactly alike is because each is placed here by WakanTanka to be an independent individuality and to rely upon itself. - Shooter Teton Sioux

When a child my mother taught me the legends of our people; taught me of the sun and sky, the moon and stars, the clouds and storms. She also taught me to kneel and pray to Usen for strength, health, wisdom, and protection. We never prayed against any person, but if we had aught against any individual we ourselves took vengeance. We were taught that Usen does not care for the petty quarrels of men. - Geronimo [Goyathlay], Chiracahua Apache

Out of the Indian approach to life there came a great freedom, an intense and absorbing respect for life, enriching faith in a Supreme Power, and principles of truth, honesty, generosity, equity, and brotherhood as a guide to mundane relations. - Luther Standing Bear, Oglala Sioux Chief

If you see no reason for giving thanks, the fault lies in yourself. - Minquass

Sharing and giving are the ways of God. – Sauk

Man's law changes with his understanding of man. Only the laws of the spirit remain always the same. - Crow

Man has responsibility, not power. - Tuscarora

Do not judge your neighbor until you walk two moons in his moccasins. - Cheyenne

Force, no matter how concealed, begets resistance. - Lakota

What's the difference between me and you?

Added to my collection which consists of this post, this one and this one.

Interlude: Reflection of Cultural Perspectives Through Gardening

The Colbert Report
Tags: Colbert Report Full Episodes,Political Humor & Satire Blog,Video Archive

The few Native Americans who traveled to England in the early days of colonization were horrified by the English sense of gardening. They came from a lifetime of living in nature...

Then they saw something along the lines of this...

You can understand how it could be mind boggling to a person from a primitive culture to see garden art in a culture so far away from their own cultural perception. Such differences often lead to demonization in environments that are highly emotionally charged.

Images: Neanderthals - Proof that the artist's perception influences his or her art

I mentioned in the earliest evidence of ritual and myth part 1 how Neanderthals seem to be seen differently by each artist based on their preconceptions. This post gathers together more evidence to support that theory.

Here is an updated collection of images from the minds of various people;

Example 1:

Example 2:

Example 3:

Example 4:

Example 5:

This one isn't a piece of art, it's evidence from a DNA test which is mind blowing:

Some Neandertals may have had red hair and pale skin, just as some modern humans do, according to a new genetic study.

The traits were likely more common in European Neandertals (often spelled Neanderthals), just as they are often seen in modern humans of European descent.

[Edit - 19 April '11: The woman in this video (Jenna Lee) fits the above description for neanderthals, so I thought I would add her as a possible example of a neanderthal woman - keeping in mind that the genetics from those times have been diluted quite a bit. ]

The Real Slim Shady By Eminem UNCENSORED

The earliest evidence of ritual and myth part 2

OK. I posted the video about Neanderthal Burial Caves here, which was 17 days ago. So if any historians/archeologists have read it then they have had enough time to either put the pieces together or to block out the thought from their heads... in a desperate (though probably unconscious) attempt to save their non-existent careers.

I guess the most obvious (and also the stupidest) defense an archeologist could come up with has to do with the shape of the skulls (I say 'archeologist' but they tend to roam in packs, like boy/girl groups).

For some reason many scientists/academics are so locked up in their heads that they can’t see what is right in front of them. So, apparently, I have been sent here to show you what they are unable to see for themselves. [Note: There are some archeologists who are not educated fools... they tend to be shunned by the mainstream academics... can anyone say ‘hall of shame’?]

Before I begin with the earliest evidence of ritual and myth part 2 I thought I should first take care of the obvious.

The following is a comparison between ‘human’ (i.e. ‘Homo sapian sapiens) and Neanderthal (Homo neanderthalis) skulls

This is a picture of Dwayne Johnson, also known as The Rock

This is a picture of Jackie Chan

Compare the skull size of Dwayen Johnson and Jackie Chan... and ask yourself...are they different sizes? The answer should be fairly obvious (I hope).

If we are to believe the nonsense that is coming out of the mouths of modern academics about Neanderthals (and with it early human history) then we would have to name Dwayne Johnson’s species Homo Rockathalis and Jackie Chan’s species Homo Chanathalis. Since the one with the bigger skull is the supposed to be the dumb one that means that Rockathalis is a dumb species (Note to The Rock: This is what the academics are saying not me). While Chanathalis is the smart one that has learned how to speak and cook.

Decide for yourselves if you want to believe all the papers and papers of theories based on tiny differences in the shape of the rare skulls we find in our archeological record.

Moving on. Here is the video again:



Images in the video in order:

Skeleton in a position of rest (i.e. burial with stuff to take to the afterlife)

A Boomerang!

"We do not know what the hunting methods of these Neanderthalis can have been. There was a great disparity between the size of their weapons and the animals that were their prey. The bow and arrow had not yet been invented, but the boomerang, or throwing stick, apparently had." Primitive Mythology by Joseph Campbell page 371

A carved figurine!

Bone based jewelry

Here is a picture of shell based jewelry:

Hand axe ‘blade’

From Primitive Mythology Page 66

"the idea of the earth as mother and of burial as a re-entry into the womb for rebirth appears to have recommended itself to at least some of the communities of mankind at an extremely early date. The earliest unmistakable evidences of ritual and therewith of mythological thought yet found have been the grave burials of Homo neanderthalensis, a remote predecessor of our species, whose period is perhaps to be dated as early as 200,000 – 75000 B.C. Neanderthal skeletons have been found interred with supplies (suggesting the idea of another life), accompanied by animal sacrifice (wild ox, bison, and wild goat), with attention to an east-west axis (the path of the sun, which is reborn from the same earth in which the dead are placed), in flexed position (as though within the womb), or in a sleeping posture – in one case with pillow of chips of flint. Sleep and death, awakening and resurrection, the grave as a return to the mother for rebirth; but whether Homo neanderthalensis thought the next awakening would be here again or in some world to come (or even both together) we do not know."

Note on cannibalism:

"Neanderthal Man may have practiced some form of ritual cannibalism in connection with an early version of the headhunt; and if so, ... this grim cult might reasonably be proposed as the earliest religious rite of the human species." Primitive Mythology by Joseph Campbell page 394

From National Geographic:

"Struggling for survival, Neanderthals turned to cannibalism—even brain-eating—some 43,000 years ago, says a new study of mutilated bones discovered in a Spanish cave. ... The new research supports previous studies that have suggested that Neanderthals turned to cannibalism to stave off starvation when times got tough."

I think the idea that Neanderthals may have engaged in cannibalism out of desperation rather than as a regular part of their culture makes sense. In cannibalism was normal then we would find thousands of skulls not occasional ones.

Also there is this little piece of evidence that suggests they were eating grains (i.e. they could cook and so had access to a greater variety of food than just what they could get with their wooden clubs):


Hunter, gatherer, vegetarian masterchef?

Neanderthals cooked and ate plants and vegetables, a new study of Neanderthal remains reveals.

Researchers in the US have found grains of cooked plant material in the teeth of the remains.

The study is the first to confirm that the Neanderthal diet was not confined to meat and was more sophisticated than previously thought.

The research has been published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

Images: Could Ancient Swastikas Have Actually Been Boomerangs?

The diffusion of swastikas across the planet is an old story...

This one is from Oklahoma...

Engraved design on conch drinking cup from Craig Mound, Spiro with four Piasa figures (part snake, cat, and bird) arranged in swastika around a central circle and cross.

This one is from India...

This one is from Hitler..

This is what Aborigine boomerangs look like...

[Note: Also notice the boomerang next to the child in the Neanderthal Burial Cave video]

Finally, check out these modern sports boomerangs...

Example 1

Example 2

Questions to ask yourself:

Could the boomerang have been an old weapon that came in many forms including that of a swastika? Could bows and arrows have made this an obsolete weapon?