NOTES:
According to the Netflix documentary – Homo Nadeli – looks like ‘Chris’ out of the Family Guy cartoon series.
Berger’s ‘fast-food’ science is the American way! If my order is not hot, complete or on time – I’m wrecking the cave!
Homo Naledi – a mixed morphology of Homo Habilis (head and brain size – although the teeth seem to be smaller versions of those found in modern Homo Sapians), Australopithecine (torso, arms, hands with opposable thumb, hips and upper legs) and Homo Sapiens (low leg and feet). Shocking! Palaeontology suggests a date of 1 million to 2 million BP – whilst biology suggests around 250,000 BP – reliable actual dating equals ‘235,000’ BP! Shocking!
Homo Naledi is the ultimate ‘out of place’ artefact! This assumption (and the method of carrying out science by ‘shooting from the hip’) – feeds into the idea that mainstream science has been lying to humanity from the start and implies all kinds of US anti-intellectual assumptions might be correct – for those who subscribe to such a theory!
Did Homo Naledi deliberately engrave a ‘#’ (hashtag) type symbol on the wall of the cave? Did the ‘Star Man’ invent the game of ‘Noughts and Crosses’?
Bodies supposedly ‘bound’ into the foetal position (to prevent elongated ‘stiffening’ due to rigor mortis) with the bodies positioned on their left side – but NO evidence of these bindings (either animal or vegetable) have survived or been found!
Random rocks or deliberately crafted weapons? Can a hominid with a small brain conceive of extending its physical effort through the use of externally-derived technology? Axe-head or knife-blade?
Homo Nadeli science, as practiced by Berger and Hawkes, is to ‘declare’ first and ‘research’ later! They think that it does not matter how irrational or outlandish the existential claims are now – time will prove all the assumptions correct! Afterall, without really trying – by calling the discovery ‘Star Man’ – those behind this find have effortlessly placated the UFO and pseudoscience community – where all the popular money lies! Furthermore, playing Devil’s Advocate, ‘Star Man’ sounds very similar to ‘Star Child’ – and in all the creative animation generated by Netflix, we have the hint of tool-wielding hominids whose heads appear ever so slightly ‘elongated’!
Indeed, when I first heard of Homo Nadeli in 2013, I thought it was mistaken research that would eventually be disproven by mainstream academia and we would all move on – learning valuable lessons about the limitations associated with blatant ‘Americanism’ – and the idea that financially-driven ‘force’ is not how good science is conducted. Good science should not ressemble the US government blanket-bombing a developing country into oblivion – simply because it’s people have chosen to pursue a self-determining path that contradicts the short term vision of the current occupants of the Whitehouse! Private US citizens should not be allowed to bully their way into mainstream academics using money and technology in support of unfounded ideas – as if those ideas are true! At the moment, the ‘ideas’ and the ‘material’ finds are running in parallel to one another without any necessary connection between the two manifestations!
EMAILS:
Subject: Homo Nadeli (235,000 BP)
Date: Thursday, 21 September 2023 11:50
Dear Nick
This is probably the most interesting evolutionary controversy to date. There is an idea that this human species, despite its small brain, was deliberately (ritualistically) burying their dead by carrying them through a complex cave labyrinth and then ‘dropping’ them down a steep and deep (natural) chute. The assumption is that they these people seemingly possessed ‘fire’, and practiced care of a dead body whilst ‘respectfully’ processing its burial. This all sounds very conveniently ‘modern’ and seems to ‘reflect’ contemporary American culture – but is any of this correct? As far as can be ascertained, the material find itself is ‘real’ and materially ‘evident’ (none of this assessment can be taken for granted) – but what does it all mean? The best science is often ‘boring’ because it is precise and practices the ethos of ‘steady as she goes’! There is NO playing to the gallery and a competent researcher does NOT conform to commercial or popularist (outside) concerns!
Film footage of the cave. My academic view is that we must be careful about projecting our modern behaviour and cultural norms (a US habit) upon the past. We are dealing here with limited material knowledge (bones and cave) and the assumptions we make in an attempt to make sense of it all. There are gaps in our knowledge. Of course, this could indicate deliberate burial – but as matters stand – none of it has been ‘proven’ beyond a reasonable doubt. There is a sentimentalist ‘will-power’ in effect that has a commercial and scientific force all of its own – which is currently operating ‘outside’ the exact control of mainstream academia. The Homo Naledi Project is a very well-funded ‘amateur’ expedition that can afford the best technology and employ very well qualified academics – all under the control of a commercial manager! Investors must recoup their investments and merchandise sales (driven by supply and demand) must generate the income that contributes towards all the costs. The problem is that the strictures of the commercial world are infiltrating and penetrating what is usually considered the ‘holy space’ of academia which should be driven by the requirement for non-commercial and apolitical research!
For some reason, the US freelance team dealing with this find are deliberately providing disinformation when rhetorically describing their finds (in an apparent attempt to boost financial gain through the encouragement of sentimentality). The mainstream academics featured in the above video – are correct in their criticism and approach. The ‘No Hypothesis’ must predominate if reliable ‘objective’ science is to be established, maintained and developed. The opposite is the ‘Yes Hypothesis’ found in religion and dogmatic philosophy and ideology. Merely believing that something ‘exists’ (or ‘operates’) in the physical world does not make it so. Simply ‘desiring’ or ‘wanting’ something to be a certain way in the interior of the mind – does NOT make it so in the (outer) material world (developed through cause and effect) in any way!
SANGHA KOMMUNE (SSR) 