The House of David

"dawnbreak in the west"

Wednesday, March 20, 2019

RT says: don't watch Dragged Across Concrete

As of now, the movie Dragged Across Concrete scheduled for tomorrow night has 80% on Rotten Tomatoes. Despite that it's a Mel Gibson Joint, with some other Right-ish and Right-curious Hollywood types involved.

That's Problematic, to some. The critics have mentioned this even whilst they've been giving favourable reviews to it.

Now that the opening date is arriving, here's what I'm seeing on RottenTomatoes.com:

For context, Cruel Intentions came out in 1999ish. I admit, I liked it . . . when I was twenty years younger. That nostalgia-trip is less likely to be playing in your local cinema than is a first-run actioner starring Gibson.

Please #woke millennials, watch Us. Please please please perimenopausal white single ladies, watch Gloria Bell. Oooh and did you know that Ryan Philippe and Sarah Michelle are back?? Pay no attention to this deplorable movie also screening here and there.


posted by Zimri on 19:50 | link | 1 comments

Tuesday, March 19, 2019

Japan before Japanese; Asia before Asians

h/t Razib, Takashi Gakuhari leads a crew of mostly-Japanese to the Ainu "Jomon" settlement of Japan. Its first settlement, before Japanese itself.

Gakuhari has sequenced a body from 500 BC labeled "IK002". Since IK002 predates the Japanese invasion he has the full DNA which even the Ainu in Hokkaido cannot boast anymore. From it, comes a story of how the Ainu and - through them - a good portion of Japanese ancestry got to the island-chain.

IK002 is mainly basal to all other Asians and Native-Americans. The main split between Asians and that Asian component of Amerinds is currently dated 24000 BC (Amerinds and modern Siberians share an additional west-Siberian component but I'm assuming that the paper has corrected for that already); so IK002's ancestry stems from even earlier.

The Jomon culture is dated to 14kBC and not many remains survive in Japan from before that. But there do survive stone tools from before that, back to 36kBC. IK002 proves that Jomon and - therefore - the Ainu were sequestered from other Asians a long, long time. Occam's Razor leads to the Ainu in Japan in 36kBC and not being replaced until the Japanese came.

Side question: now that the world has the DNA and the researchers have proven it is Ainu, should not the remains from which they come be reinterred according to the Ainu rite?


posted by Zimri on 18:03 | link | 0 comments

Bell Beakers in Iberia

The Bell Beaker study is in, and as such studies do they confirm some prejudices - like the genocide and mass rapine of (and/or abject cuckish surrender to) Bronze Age conquests - and dethrone others.

The archaeologists perceive three main population clusters in the European Bronze Age: the Yamnaya / Kurgans, the Corded Ware / Battleaxe, and the Bell Beakers. Yamnaya is considered proto-Aryan. Battleaxe is considered proto-German and other nonAryan IndoEuropean groups; Albanian being a possible other survivor. The Bell Beakers are... well, problematic. Davidski is hosting a discussion at Eurogenes on the problems.

The Bell Beakers hail from the Rhineland long before any German was spoken there. As a result there's long been a tentative consensus that they were Celto-Italic. If Indo-Europeans conquered Spain and pwned all thr d00dz then you'd think it would be all Celtic throughout its record.

Spain is no such thing and never has been. To this day it is part Latin, part Euskara. Some argue the Euskara showed up later from their homeland Aquitaine. But the Aquitanians in the Bronze Age were just as Bell-Beaker as the rest.

The pre-Roman Celtic recorded in Spain, and you can throw in basal-Italoceltic Lusitanian, looks like it split in the Late Bronze Age, not in the Middle Bronze of the first Bell Beaker invasion. The timeline suggests that the Celts are a later introgression and a less-violent one. Maybe a series of small-scale invasions starting with the Lusitanians. At which point they are already vying with Berbers and with whoever the Tartessians were.

It all implies that the Bell Beakers might not be IndoEuropean at all. They might be a reaction from the Rhineland farmers, which actually worked. For a while anyway.

A middle-ground might be that it was - at first - led by nonIndoEuropeans, like Mongols leading Turks. After the conquest the Euskara got the Basque country, the Lusitanians got Iberia, and the true Celts got the rest of Gaul. Those Celts over the early Iron Age then migrated into Spain too.


posted by Zimri on 17:02 | link | 0 comments

Asteroid Day

When I go onto Science Daily's astronomy / space news filter, sometimes I notice a theme. A month or two back, the theme was dying stars. Today it's asteroids: Ryugu and Bennu.

Both featured in The Planet Factory pp. 78f. Both were - at time of print - considered C type asteroids with lots of carbon: each a primordial rock, or rubble-pile, perhaps from the icy part of the belt. There's long been a theory that icy asteroids can deliver water to the Solar System's not-so-icy interior. Earlier there'd been a theory that the water came from comets, but the Rosetta / Philae mission scotched that.

Anyway, now the results are in. Ryugu has no ice at all. In its present state it is "only" 100 million years old when it calved off a "parent body" - which was (is?) probably just as dry.

Bennu by contrast is a pile of clayballs. It is so icy that, in its current near orbit, it's losing mass like a comet. And spinning. Which means it is shrinking and going faster, so will fly apart someday. Good thing we caught it now.

For studying how water got to Earth, rockjumbles like Bennu seem the best source of material. As far as research goes both Bennu and Ryugu have value, for constraining how the solar system formed as a whole.


posted by Zimri on 16:34 | link | 0 comments

Monday, March 18, 2019

Whig History Month

Every now and again some pressure-group strongarms the government and corporations to force everyone to pay attention to meeee. It was "Black History Month" last month. White women got jealous of the attention and, now, we must endure the same this month.

Because the pressure-groups don't have many good historians on hand, their "history" tends to the anecdotal. First X to do whatever. Famous and smart Y who invented this other thing. And most noxious of all, when Z won the right to the electoral franchise - thus diluting the franchise of more competent and responsible people.

What isn't much mentioned is that, for female suffrage, they won the vote through violence. We don't hear of the Pankhurst family. But when women burn and bomb stuff I guess it's more okay than when, say, Gökmen Tanis does it.

Also not much mentioned is that the policies which invited Gökmen Tanis and which didn't insist much on him changing his viewpoints were, also, supported more by women than by men. Angela Merkel, you'd think, would deserve a mention in a true History Month.

If you're going to do history, you need to do history, and most of history is frankly violent and ugly, and it's not intrinsically clear that this history has led to the good guys (or girls) winning.


posted by Zimri on 17:22 | link | 0 comments

Sunday, March 17, 2019

Tim Berners-Lee against the free web

Since we're talking Internet History, I would be remiss if I didn't move on to the Web - HTTP, not NNTP - upon which we are now interacting. Time to do a hyperlink.

Tim Berners-Lee, who has a Royal Knighthood, shared with Jimmy Savile, has Concerns about the open web. Sure it's open but it's also open to criminality. There were illegal things being done twenty years ago too but now (Lee thinks) it's worse. Among the badness is a voice to those who spread hatred. Lee gets to define what "hatred" is, and Lee means to silence those who disseminate it.

An open web without aggressive or polarised discussions, is Lee's dream. An open web where everyone agrees to agree with Lee.

Open, my foot. Lee is just another petty tyrant spewing self-justifying humbug. He has the right to say it and, thanks to his own invention, a platform to get us to hear it. But he doesn't get the right to force us to take him seriously.

I'd sooner listen to the Cult Of The Dead Cow. Or to Yarvin - now off the Urbit project, and on to the next one.


posted by Zimri on 11:11 | link | 0 comments

Beating the dead cow

Since it's Saint Patrick's day, let's discuss Robert Francis Ó Ruairc. Anglo-Irishman to Norse-Irishman.

RF O'Rourke, before he ran into some money and rebranded himself as a Tejano, was a teenage "hacker". He hung out with the Cult Of The Dead Cow peeps.

The cDc crossed my attention for the first time in the late 1990s when they released "Back Orifice", a suite of exploitation tools for (rather, against) early Microsoft Windows enterprise-software. There was stuff like this published against AOL as well, albeit not by cDc. Computer security was a joke back then. The Dead Cow were among those consortia who delivered its punchlines. In the late 1990s.

RF O'Rourke wasn't active in the late 1990s though. As I understand it, the Beat-Off was pounding away in the early 1990s. Tim Berners-Lee hadn't invented the World Wide Web yet. In the early 1990s, what you got was late-teenaged goofoffs uploading stupid nonsense on bulletin-boards. People like Curtis Yarvin (wonder what happened to him?).

As for why we are all talking about this now, rather than El Paso's electorate talking about this years ago when the cDc mattered, you'll have to ask Reuters. That seems a scandal: that Reuters is among those SPLC-type outfits who spring news against the Right but suppress news as might hurt some Left darling.

As for Beto once upon a time being an edgy hacker-wannabee and chillin' with Moldbug... feh.


posted by Zimri on 10:55 | link | 0 comments

Friday, March 15, 2019

The flag is true, so fly it

That *chan troll did a lot of murder last night (Friday afternoon, in New Zealand time) and, as I was reading it, the flaggots squealed the squeal they always squeal when someone inconvenient does murder. FALSE FLAG!

And yes the 24 Hour Rule should always apply during the fog of war. It's good to take a slight blog-n-comment hiatus until all the facts roll in. I'm not talking about that.

I'm talking about, when you know who did it and when you've got what passes for their manifesto, then don't raise up conspiracy theories about how the murderer was eeekhshuallie an agent for the Jews or whatever. (In this case what the Kiwis got was a bunch of trolls from 8chan and 4chan boasting about their dank memes and about their FPS kill count. And ecofascism whatever the hell that is.)

It is never a "false flag". But if you say it is, then the bloody rags become your flag. You're their accessory, covering for their crime and adding to the chaos.


posted by Zimri on 16:45 | link | 0 comments

And then they all got AIDS and died

(Thank Matt Groening for that one.)

Another effete anthropologist by name of Roberto Risch (not "Reich") has gone out of his way to claim that the total R1b Y chromosomal takeover of IndoEuropean Spain isn't what it looks like. Greg Cochran has asked, when's there ever been a plague passed so completely among men. To that, TGGP makes a good answer in the comments: HIV. So let's allow that Risch be right.

Gimbutas' "Old Europe", the gylanic / gynocentric Europe under the Great Mother, was a polygynous Europe. Paedophilic, too. The men left over, as men do without women, especially in a paedophilic environment, were certainly nailing each other. Gimbutas, "Merlin Stone", and Eisler were all in agreement on that. (With approval.)

So let's not rule out there was a "Y: The Last Man" / "World's End Harem" situation in early Bronze Age Spain. It wouldn't be total, to be sure. And maybe some Old Spaniards did put up a fight for their way of life but, probably not very many - and not very hard.

Deep down, they all knew that their society was a sick one. If Risch is right.

RELATED 7:05 PM MST: Another patient-zero.


posted by Zimri on 16:25 | link | 0 comments

Thursday, March 14, 2019

More on Weitz

On Twitter, other Byzantinists weigh in. Potentially blowing my last post into nothing.

@byzantinepower: [ed. filled in abbrevs]

Good article but exaggerates Byzantine content. Marriage was a civic contract, but the Church was heavily involved in guiding its 'mystery' (Ephesians 5:32). That 10th-Century AD stuff to which Lev Weitz refers is Leo VI's Novel 89. But since Gregory of Nazianzus families tended to ask the priest to do the 'crowning'. N89 just made it compulsory.

Aside: here's Juan S Codoñer on the Novels ascribed to Leo VI, called The Wise, a decade back. Leo is likely responsible for the Novels ... over N1-68. N89 belongs to a later edition and I cannot rule out a later emperor. Kind of like... the Psalter!

@History_Twerp:

The article is pretty much nonsense.

Leo's novels date to the late 880s, so not the 10th century.

He [ed.Weitz] lacks a basic understanding of how Byzantine Canon law worked.

And there's no proof of Church ideas on marriage spreading to Byzantium from the *schismatic* Nestorian Church.

It's basically a spin in order to create some buzz around his book, and apparently he's not afraid to cut corners in order to make that happen.

I must point out here that the 10th century v. 880s is a rhetorical trick. It looks like a mistake of over a century. Until you realise that (in AD) the 880s end at 889... a whole eleven years before the start of the tenth century. Assuming authenticity that would be ... yes, a mistake; but, if I may be so bold, not a large one. Pounce, pounce, seize. And when you bring into evidence the question of when, exactly, "Leo's" novellae from N69 on were set down this is looking like a History Derp.

I will however admit that point about Weitz not (yet) offering evidence about how the Nestorians' power-grab ended up in Latin Europe. I've suggested one route: via Jacob of Edessa. I hope that Weitz has investigated the possible routes and offered them in his book.


posted by Zimri on 18:04 | link | 0 comments

Did the Nestorians invent a Catholic sacrament?

By way of Razib, Lev Weitz at the Ancient Jew Review proposes a Persian Gulf origin for the Church's takeover of marriage. This is the 676 Synod of Diren. The Nestorian synod.

Usually scholars of Islam mine this synod for a witness "as others saw it" to the evolution of Islam. Razib shows that this is also an interest of secularising exMuslims. Scholars of Late Antiquity might neglect that the Synod was, foremost, a Christian event and that it made law for Christians - the antiEphesian Syrians, specifically.

I've been saying here for some time that the Church of the East happened upon Catholicism before the Catholics did. In 410 AD the Christians in the Sasanian-ruled Aniran - with the shah's full support - adopted the Council of Nicaea. This instituted the (Spanish!) emperor Theodosius I's separation of Father and Son, and thereby of state and church. But then, say the Orientals, the Council of Ephesus made a sham of Nicaea. Subsequent Western synods like Chalcedon and Toledo, and theologians like Maximus, corrected Ephesus to the point of repeal; and sparked a schism against Ephesian diehards like the Copts. But the Church of the East never suffered this particular controversy. Oriental Christians have always been Nicene.

The Oriental Church had her own, different problems. Many of these came from outside: congregation-poaching by also-Syriac-speaking Ephesians, whether to accept the western antiEphesian "heretic" Nestorius as one of them, Heraclius' Monotheletic neoEphesianism, and of course the Arab conquests. Some controversies were internal, like Henana's revival of Origen and, later, the great 650s AD schism against catholicos (=pope) Isho'yahb III. When Islamic scholars read Isho'yahb, as ever, they look for those comments about Arab rule; they find instead comments about the schism.

Christianity's home base was west of the Euphrates. Here, the problem was to assert first the Church's survival within a pagan empire and then the Church's independence from an antiNicene one. Until the Sasanian attack in the 600s AD there was always an empire in some form. The empire, like all ancient states, handled the codification of human life from birth to death. This included a definition of marriage as the best stabiliser of new life, from pregnancy to infancy.

Late Antiquity in the West was the incipit of the Third Dark Age. Kingdoms had broken away from the Roman Empire - most dramatically, perhaps, the Vandal (anti-Nicene!) kingdom in North Africa. But the greatest of these kingdoms still had Romans to advise them. The true Dark Age had not yet begun. It was, then, still possible to get a Roman marriage without involving the Church or, in Africa's case, by way of the wrong church. When a saint like Albinus preached against consanguinous marriage he could not, yet, do anything about it; except advise the king not to licence one. Same goes for monogamy which is, I suggest, the oldest enforcement of Love Socialism.

The phenomenon of a Christian population ruled over by a wholly nonImperial elite was rare in the West, although its day was coming (Gaelic Ireland, Frankish Austrasia...). The Orient had always been that way. And by 676 AD, the Orient didn't even have a shah no more.

I think it was the re-assertion of a proper state apparatus under Mu'awiya in his last decade that forced the Church Of The East to reconsider, from Nicene principles, which parts of human life belonged to the Father and which to the Son. Meanwhile the failure of state literacy everywhere outside the Islamic and Byzantine core devolved record-keeping to churches.

I doubt that the Latin Church had direct knowledge of Diren 676. But perhaps the other Syriac churches picked up on Diren's arrogation of the marriage-licence. I vaguely recall Jacob of Edessa in the 700s preaching about who could get married and who couldn't. The Copts could pick that up from Jacob, and the Greeks would hear about it from both. Thence to the Latins.


posted by Zimri on 17:00 | link | 0 comments

That college-admissions scandal

If you have been online at all this week you'll have heard what everyone with a brain knew already, which is that college admissions are gamed. Ace declares the FBI's move rinkydink. This brings us to the metaquestion - on focus, also known as "what we should be talking about".

I get it; I've recently complained about "focus" myself, with reference to Ilhan Omar's Judenfrage. But I felt guilty about mentioning it. It's the same media “but this is a distraaaxion” generally mooted by distracters. Or, if you like, it's a species of Pounce And Seize, talking about this one obvious issue when more-important issues are left alone. (Can't we talk about sports-based admissions and "scholarships"? About Affirmative-Action and Diversity? How about what Unz has talked about?)

But as Frum in The Atlantic points out, at the end of the day, or of the election-cycle anyway, it’s voters who decide what matters and what’s a distraxion. Well, voters and thems as whats informs voters.

If I were in a position to legislate, which I’m not, I’d Pounce on this as a way in to question college admissions generally. I’m in that sort of district which has a dog in this hunt, with plenty of young and social-climbing people with children. Who are already discriminated against, even without having to shell out bribes.


posted by Zimri on 16:53 | link | 0 comments

Wednesday, March 13, 2019

The first Carrington Event

If "radiochronologist" is a word: some of these scientists have been looking into old tree-stumps and ice-cores, for spikes in certain isotopes in certain years. Over the past decade they've unearthed some, the largest at 774/5 and another large one 993/4 AD. The research points to these being solar in origin: flares. Given that flares tend to spark aurorae in our exosphere, historians have gone through the mediaeval histories and chronicles, looking for record of such.

So now they're talking up another such event. This one is 660 BC. That would be "Biblical" times - the long reign of Manasseh king of Judah.

The Greeks weren't yet writing histories and the best Anatolian history of this era, "Lydiaca" by Xanthos, does not survive. But there are annals in Assyria. The king Ashurbanipal was obsessive about recording events over his long reign which started around 670 BC; at this point his brother Shamash-shum-ukin was ruling Babylon semi-autonomously. His first go at writing his own State Of The Empire is commonly dated around 663 BC, called "Prism E" or "Cylinder E". So I gather from Mordechai Cogan's introduction to Prism A (pdf) also called "Rassam". All the prismata can be had in Luckenbill (University of Chicago, 1927: pdf). Anyway, still too early.

Closest to events are Prisms B and D; that's Luckenbill, 323-40 and 345-6. But as Cogan points out, the politics of the times - and simple lack of access to certain regions - often meant that earlier prisms couldn't record all the facts which later prisms did. So the later Prism A tells us of Gyges' perfidy, which Prism B didn't. Looking at these, these are military accounts; although they do mention celestial signs, these are lunar eclipses and not aurora. Prism B does, at least, give the name of another king at the time: the usurper Teumman in Elam. Ashurbanipal would launch his seventh campaign against him.

The best hunting-ground will be the tupsharrû literature: Babylonian astrology (also tupshar enûma anu enlil). King Esarheddon had retained the services of Nabû-ahhe-erîba although that one might have died by 660 BC. Ashurbanipal was perhaps less interested in that form of soothsaying than was his father; he left fewer astrological reports over a longer timespan (pdf). Ashurbanipal's biographical prisms show he cared more about dream-divination.

Nineveh is just Mosul at latitude 36.35. Would an aurora be seen there?


posted by Zimri on 16:30 | link | 0 comments

Tuesday, March 12, 2019

Facts have no home at Amazon

For some years, as I may have noted here and there, I have self-published some books. These, I posted via CreateSpace. Amazon bought that outfit last year. Since then, when looking for "Ross House of War" on Amazon, I'd seen my book listed maybe four or five books down. This, despite that these words are all in the title and author lastname, which should supercede content; this, despite that Amazon are, now, my de-facto publisher.

I consider that a Shadow Ban. I wasn't wholly surprised; given how swift Amazon acted, under the last Presidency, to stop the sale and purchase of Confederate memorabilia. Also when they left alone a fake review that lied about House of War's content. (I just checked again and it's even worse now; I have to type "DAVID ross house of war" to see this book anywhere on the first page of results.)

I also got weirded out that Two Centuries of Silence got delisted, at least in the form at which I bought and reviewed it. You can get that by another link but... wuuuut. Last Christmas I saw a book about Iranian nationalism which cited Zarinkoob as some sort of nationalist Islamophobe. Whatever, dood; read my review.

Today I learn that Kevin MacDonald's Culture of Critique has been banned outright, as have a number of other books like Jared Taylor's (very mild) White Identity. If you expect here a ritual denunciation of MacDonald, of his work, and/or of his friends: this post shall disappoint you. (If you must know where I stand, I refer interested parties to this post. As with Wendy Doniger, I haven't composed a full review as yet. Cofnas, who appreciated MacDonald even less than I did, has to his great credit stepped forward.)

Barnes and Noble aren't much better. Good luck finding Robert Spencer's history of jihad in a Colorado or Northern Virginia store.

Here, I simply point out, that MacDonald's work is available for free in many places. This move by Amazon is stopping no signal.

I also add that a lot of people are learning to distrust Jews and to support racial identity on their own, due in large part to censorship elsewhere. Since I am myself a legally-racial Jew, and one who has cited this genome on MANY occasions here and elsewhere, I observe this with no satisfaction, rather with an amount of personal fear.

You stop hate by confronting the hatred and demonstrating the falsehood behind it. You don't stop hate by acting with malice in response.


posted by Zimri on 17:53 | link | 0 comments

Sunday, March 10, 2019

Liberalitas

Helena Rosenblatt has published a history of Liberalism. This proposes to rectify some names.

-Isms are political ideologies and, for most of human history, it hadn't occurred to any philosopher to define "Liberalism" as such. The very name is a monstrosity cobbled from a Latin root with a Greek suffix.

Until Hobbes, Western men spoke about liberal-ity. This was the virtue of a free citizen, to contribute to the public good as a free man. There may have been words for men such as the Gracchi who worked the state apparatus to do this instead. The Senators' words weren't nice words.

Hence, the Liberal Education: this was to teach men to understand civic virtue, which included liberality. Christians like Saint Ambrose adopted this, particularly from Cicero, and set a Christian imprimatur upon it.

After the Reformation in England, Thomas Hobbes (in parallel with Han Fei in China) built his philosophy around the denial that liberality was possible. The Jansenists (Rosenblatt has just taught me) like Pascal figured that liberals just fake it. Interesting that both Hobbes and Pascal were mathematicians at heart, although Hobbes was a famously wrong one. John Locke set up his system in reaction to Hobbes and the Jansenists, arguing for personal liberality although even this late he would not utter "Liberal Ism".

So far I am speaking of men. Rosenblatt notes that Liberality was a male virtue. The first pro-Liberal thinkers deemed that women educated far enough to understand Liberality would fall into other vices: sexual predation being one (this is simple misogyny) and being ruined for middle-educated decent men being another (this at least has modern empirical evidence). Anyway, not the concern of my essay here.

Rosenblatt sees the Liberal Ism as something from the French Revolution's aftermath, which includes Germany up to 1848.

I've been talking about Hobbes and Locke since, what, 1994 so I shan't bore you with more of that here. I am more interested these days in how the West preserved Liberalitas as an ideal, and the Byzantine and Syriac Greek East basically didn't. They assuredly had similar virtues in Athens long before Cicero. Another concept "Magnanimity" was a concern of Aristotle although it too is Latin and I don't know the Greek for it offhand.

As to how a Liberal people looks on a graph, compared to non Liberals, here's Branko Milanovic, Income Level and Income Inequality in the Euro‐Mediterranean Region, C. 14–700 (2017). 1800ish Britain looks like Rome: the wealth disparity is in an upper-middle-class. This is not egalitarian by any means, but the oligarchs were at least relatively-numerous enough to keep the other oligarchs honest(ish). Constantine's City just had the upper class.

Liberality couldn't get a Locke on Constantinople (yeah I know) because any noble rich enough to be liberal would earn the jealousy of the Emperor. In the West, first the Republic and then the Church accepted inequality and "wage gaps"; but they exhorted the rich men to spend of what God had provided them. The Quran to be fair does this too (Q 17, 18) but there, too many suras (Q 4, 8, 47) twist this (literally) noble sentiment toward the jihad.

Modern Liberal-Ism is that the state shall define and direct what monetary redistribution is Liberal and what is not. It's just more Byzantinism to my eyes. As ctindale notes in Milanovic's comments, would be great to over lay todays distribution.


posted by Zimri on 12:42 | link | 0 comments

Friday, March 08, 2019

The move to smaller game

Larry Gonick's first Cartoon History volume mentioned Early Man's move from large game to small "game", including fish and oysters. Bruce Bower (not to be confused with Bawer) dates that to 34000 BC. His timelines are a bit confused so I'll try again here.

34kBC would be the Cro-Magnon / Aurignacian era. That's before the domesticated dog. So the 'Magnons could lay out traps for rabbits and fish; but not chase down a hare or a wounded deer. You need a good dog for that.

Bower notes, also, evidence that some Neanders 400000 years prior had, also, caught rabbits.

As for why the shift: I propose that the tribe which settled to trap small game was also the tribe less physically fit than the bison-hunters. The Bison Tribe kept beating the Bunny Tribe and, with the populations as small as they were, at least in Europe: so it went for myriennia.

Over that fourth myriennium, populations steadily grew throughout Europe and, I have to assume, North Africa and Asia. Suddenly somewhere a Bunny Tribe had the numbers and the wit to lay out traps not for rabbits, but for men.


posted by Zimri on 17:00 | link | 0 comments

Gosnell's Scouts

Today is the day, Google tells me, when women across the world unite... against men, but who cares about us.

A few years ago some Girl Scout showed up at my door with cookies; I looked behind her and saw some fake-smiling woman behind her, presumably related. I got that hinky feeling I'd got with the Boys And Girls Club. I politely said "thanks, but no" and they went on their way. More recently the downtown fooderies (mostly owned by the same guy, whom we've met) put out an email about what a good cause the Girl Scouts are.

The Girl Scouts have been hit for supporting abortion. If you go to their website they will deny this.

And then they do stuff like awarding Meghna Gopalan.

Yeah, the Scouts are a Planned Parenthood front. Also, I take it that nobody's commented on sex-selective abortion in Gopalan's home subcontinent. So the Scouts aren't even good for women either.


posted by Zimri on 17:00 | link | 0 comments

On this site




Sophia



Politics



Random crap

Powered By Blogger TM

Property of author; All Rights Reserved