As evolution became widely accepted in the 1870s, caricatures of Charlie Darwin with the body of a monkey or ape came to symbolize evolution [14]. This sketch was originally published in the satirical magazine The Hornet. The image, called "A Venerable Orang-outang," is available on University College London Digital Collections (1886).
The Zoroastrian schism (the Secret War for Europe's Soul)
(The Ark) Premiered Oct. 14, 2025: What if the spiritual struggle that still rages in the West today began 3,000 years ago, after a schism in the original Indo-European religion?
MUSIC:
Karl Casey @ White Bat Audio
80’s Synth Theme - Waves
• 80’s Synth Theme - Waves // Royalty Free C...
Scott Buckley - Echoes is under a Creative Commons BY 3.0 license.
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/...
/ musicbyscottb
Music powered by BreakingCopyright: • 🌊 Atmospheric & Strings (Royalty Free Musi...
Find more music here: breakingcopyright
Scientists studying a 4.4-million-year-old fossil named Ardi may have uncovered the evolutionary step ["missing link"] that turned ancient [nonhuman] climbers into early [human-hybrid] walkers
Here’s what there is to learn when reading this Popular Mechanics' story:
Ardi is the oldest known partial skeleton of a hominin and shows foot features that are transitioning from vertical climbing to bipedal walking.
While Ardi has the primitive grasping big toe of the more apelike human ancestors that came before her, other parts of her feet are more evolved.
It is Ardi’s talus, a bone in the ankle, that lies somewhere between the morphology of the same bone in apes and humans.
As humans, it’s important to remember that some of our oldest primate ancestors were apelike creatures.
Besides our much larger brains and visibly obvious differences, such as facial [structure and] features, one thing we evolved to be much more adept at than chimps and gorillas (which we, according to Darwinism, diverged from millions of years ago) is walking on two feet.
But just when did human predecessors first descend from the trees and walk upright?
A 4.4-million-year-old female skeleton named Ardi may answer that question. Predating even the iconic Lucy (Australopithecus) by a million years, she belongs to the species Ardipithecus ramidus and is revealing more about our human origins and how we became bipedal.
Unearthed in the Ethiopian desert back in 1994, Ardi is the oldest known partial hominin skeleton, though her species has been known since 1925 under the name Australopithecus ramidus.
Biological anthropologist Thomas Prang of Washington University in St. Louis and his research team discovered that Ardi was able to walk upright but still retained a grasping foot and other apelike features.
“Our observations of the human and ape fossil record are inconsistent with recently proposed models of human origins, which envision the last common ancestor of humans and chimpanzees as a generalized arboreal ape,” he said in a study recently published in Communications Biology.
“Instead, our results strongly imply that humans evolved from an African ape-like ancestor.”
Related video: 300,000-year-old fossils: The true origin of Homo sapiens (History with Kayleigh Official)
My name is Kaylee, and I guess it's safe to... (13:41)
Homo sapiens [not plural homos ("mankind") but Latin for "Thinking man"] belong[s] to the Homo-Pan clade, a group that evolved from a common ancestor and includes [violent, aggressive, militant] chimpanzees, [peaceful sex-centered hippie] bonobos, and both extant and extinct hominin species [Sasquatch, Bigfoot, Almasty, Yakkhas, Yeti, Orang Pendek, etc.]
This is part of a larger clade that gorillas also belong to. It has been argued that Ar. ramidus was more humanlike than apelike and had already evolved out of climbing trees vertically and dropping to all fours and walking on its knuckles in order to get around on land.
What Dr. Prang found was that Ardi is a mashup of primitive and modern features. She has a big toe designed for grasping branches, but other features of her feet, cranial base, and pelvis suggest that her species was adapting to bipedalism.
There is one bone that especially stands out: Ardi’s talus, a bone in the ankle which is also the second largest bone in the back of the foot. It transfers body weight between the lower leg and foot and helps African apes climb.
The talus enables dorsiflexion, or the backwards flexing of the foot, and inversion, the sideways turning of the foot. Both put the animal’s center of mass in a position closer to support, so apes are at much less risk of suffering lethal backward falls.
In ape species that primarily climb trees and primarily use dorsiflexion for vertical climbing, the forefoot is shorter than those of bipeds and quadrupeds, so Dr. Prang’s team turned its focus to the front of Ardi’s foot and also figured out her approximate body mass using the widths of the talar trochlea, or the upper joint surface of the talus.
There have been previous arguments that the morphology of the talar trochlea may not be the greatest indicator of how apes and early humans moved. Gorillas, chimps, bonobos, and gibbons have short forefeet for their body masses, while orangutans and larger monkeys have the longest forefeet.
The human forefoot is longer than those of chimps and gorillas and shorter than those monkeys, but there is still some overlap with bonobos. More
Extraterrestrials have intervened many times.
Michael Cremo, the Forbidden Archeologist, has something to say to the contrary: Human life is FAR older on this earth (bhumi) than science yet admits. And "modern humans" are a misnomer because we are far older, according to ooparts and other pieces of inconvenient (and suppressed) evidence in the fossil and archeological record: We are not evolving but devolving and have been for hundreds of millions of years (in yugas and kalpas as declared by the Dharmic religions).
Did your date give you 'the ick'? Here's the science behind the feeling
"Ugh, eww, and ick! I'm out! H to the NO!"
The food was top-notch, the atmosphere was cozy, and my date aimed to entertain. I love a good personal story, so I invited him to relate one that he'd referenced in his profile. Good fodder for a first date, I thought.
At one point in the story, as he recounted it, a goat butted its head into an outdoor toilet that he happened to be using, shoving the door open.
You could say I got "the ick" — that feeling of disgust when someone you're dating does this one thing that you just can't get past. The term was used on Ally McBeal in the 1990s and then popularized more recently on the reality show Love Island and on Nobody Wants This.
What gives me the ick and what gives you the ick can be worlds apart. From wearing acrylic nails to laughing too loud to using a Borat voice in the middle of a make-out session, a little internet searching will reveal a whole universe of "icks."
There's an idea in psychology that all emotions, from fear to disgust, were evolutionarily advantageous traits. But is the ick really serving us now?
One theory posits that disgust evolved to protect humans from pathogens that make us sick. And that kind of makes intuitive sense: If a piece of fruit or meat smells disgusting, you probably won't want to eat it.
But Professor of Psychology Josh Rottman, who studies disgust at Franklin & Marshall College, says disgust isn't just a biological function; it's a product of our socialization. And that means if you get the ick on a date, it might be time for some self-examination.
Prof. Rottman spoke with It's Been a Minute host Brittany Luse about the psychology of disgust and the case for pushing past the ick when it comes to choosing a partner. Here are four takeaways from their conversation:
1. Little kids don't feel disgust — and that tells us something
Maybe innocence means not having disgust yet.
"Unlike many emotions that emerge within the first year of life or so, it seems like disgust doesn't really robustly come online until around 5, 6 years of age," Prof. Rottman says. (Think about the toddler who has no qualms about eating a stale Cheerio off the floor.)
If disgust were all about keeping us healthy, he says, researchers would see it in younger children. Instead, kids start experiencing disgust around the same time they start thinking about "cooties" — and who's in the "in" group and "out" group on the playground.
2. Disgust is more gut reaction than conscious thought process
If you're at the movies and you see your date pick her nose before reaching for your hand, you don't think, "This behavior is indicative of poor hygiene and lack of consideration." You just flinch and pull your hand away. This revulsion response happens almost instantly; it comes without any thought, says Prof. Rottman. And he says once you feel disgusted by something, it can be really difficult to overcome that feeling.
As host Luse of It's Been a Minute puts it, it's just "this tiny bit of disgust that you just can't look past or get over."
3. Disgust is related to social norms — often ugly ones
"I think a lot of the specific icks that people have are reflections of social norms that we might want to challenge," says Prof. Rottman.
For instance, actress Millie Bobby Brown has said her "biggest ick" is when a man holds an umbrella, because "there's something about it that just feels really pathetic."
Prof. Rottman says Brown's ick might be an "aversion to the norm violation against masculinity."
And research shows that the consequences of disgust can get a lot worse than getting rejected on a date.
Prof. Rottman says that disgust may have served an evolutionary purpose in that it could help your reputation to distance yourself from people who your group considered undesirable. "I think disgust has evolved as a way to really embody a lot of xenophobia and bigotry," he says.
"There's a lot of good evidence that genocides and a lot of horrific things that have happened in society have been correlated in some way with disgust," Prof. Rottman says.
Tables turn on racist/implicitly biased Karen
Nazi princesses promoted by racist Disney
For example, Nazi propaganda used terms like "parasites" and "lice" to describe Jewish people. Disgust has been leveraged throughout history to create the feeling that certain people are "impure" or less than human.
"The ick is probably a much more minor version of that," Rottman says.
4. It's worth trying to get past the ick
Why can't I find my one and only perfect prince?
Prof. Rottman says that while it's difficult to completely shake a feeling of disgust about another person's particular behavior, getting the ick doesn't have to be a deal breaker.
And, he adds, there's good reason not to give it too much weight in dating: "I think…these feelings of ickiness are not going to be great signals of whether someone's going to be good for us and a good partner."
He shared that he even gets the ick from his partner from time to time — when she walks around barefoot in the garden, developing big calluses on her feet. "I think I can realize that…she's great in so many other ways, that that shouldn't be something to drive me away," Prof. Rottman says. (The professor said he got his wife's permission before sharing this story.)
As host Luse suggested to Prof. Rottman, perhaps "love is persevering against the ick."
So next time you get the ick, consider whether that says more about you than the other person.
And Luse says on It's Been a Minute, maybe "it's a you problem."
Corey Antonio Rose, B.A. Parker, Barton Girdwood, Liam McBain, and Jasmine Romero contributed to this story. Lead photo: munandme/Getty Images/iStockphoto
He delves deeply into the power of the mind and its profound influence on our genetic expression. (Epigenetics is that part above the genome that turns genes on and off, making it more important than our genes).
Discover how our thoughts, beliefs, and perceptions shape our reality and learn practical techniques to reprogram our mind for success and well-being.
From debunking aspects of Darwin’s theory to evolution (natural selection and origin of species) to empowering viewers with breakthrough scientific insights, this episode is packed with wisdom and actionable advice to help us become the conscious creators of our lives.
Whether we're seeking to break free from limiting beliefs, unleash our full potential, or simply curious about the intersection of science and spirituality, this podcast is the ultimate guide to understanding the incredible connection between mind (thought processes), body (genetics), and spirit (energetic patterns).
TIMESTAMPS
00:00- Intro
1:20- Science Has Now Recognized Spirituality | Quantum Physics
11:55- What Controls Genetic Expression? | Epigenetics and Consciousness
27:33- Cultural Programming, Control, and Planetary Destruction
32:26- The Power of Community | What Darwin Got Wrong
38:48- How We're Being Manipulated and Disempowered
46:00- Indigenous Wisdom and Creating A Better System
Aubrey Marcus |
► Fit For Service: https://fitforservice.com/
► Own The Day, Own Your Life: http://bit.ly/2vRz4so
► Aubrey Marcus Podcast: https://apple.co/2ns8zFP
► Ayahuasca Documentary: http://bit.ly/2OrNBTf
► Get 10% off all Onnit Products: https://bit.ly/3LMVArK
►Aubrey Marcus Poetry: http://bit.ly/2My1ezC
►Aubrey Marcus Binaural Beats: http://bit.ly/2vVc3EC
| Listen to the Aubrey Marcus Podcast |
►iTunes | https://apple.co/2lMZRCn
►Spotify | https://spoti.fi/2EaELZO
►Stitcher | http://bit.ly/2G8ccJt
►IHeartRadio | https://ihr.fm/3CiV4x3
►Google Podcasts | https://bit.ly/3nzCJEh
►Android | https://bit.ly/2OQeBQg
| Connect with Aubrey |
►Website | http://bit.ly/2GesYqi
►Instagram | http://bit.ly/2BlfCEO
►Facebook | http://bit.ly/2F4nBZk
►Twitter | http://bit.ly/2BlGBAdAd. Follow on social to keep up with the latest and meet many of the incredible guests we’ve been honored to have on the show.
ABOUT: The Podcast
founder of Onnit and modern philosopher Aubrey Marcus asks the important questions: How do we find our purpose, wake up to who we truly are, have a few more laughs, and human being a little better?
The Aubrey Marcus Podcast brings in world-class guests from the fields of athletics, health, business, fitness, science, relationships, and spirituality and asks them to open up about the failures and successes that define their wisdom and character.
(SciShow) June 29, 2017: Everyone knows the name Charles Darwin, but his lesser known frenemy, Alfred Russel Wallace, was developing a lot of the same ideas around the same time. Hosted by: Hank Green. For 10% off Squarespace: http://squarespace.com/scishow ---------- Support SciShow by becoming a patron on Patreon: scishow
Homo Floresiensis skull, hominin species analyzed in the study (The Duckworth Laboratory)
.
It's bizarre: humans are competitive like animals
(University of Cambridge via Newsweek) Human evolution might be more "bizarre" than we once thought, according to a new study.
In the past, scientists (anthropologists) believed that hominin evolution was largely driven by changes in climate. But now, research from the University of Cambridge has suggested that competition was, in fact, fundamental to hominin evolution.
Wallace, you were right. - I know, Darwin.
"We have been ignoring the way competition between species has shaped our own evolutionary tree," said lead author Dr. Laura van Holstein, a University of Cambridge biological anthropologist from Clare College.
"The effect of climate on hominin species is only part of the story."
Interspecies [not to be confused with intraspecies or between humans] competition is common among most other vertebrates: in any new environment there is an explosion of species evolution as each species adapts to fill a particular niche.
I shoulda killed that Wallace to evolve.
However, once all the niches are filled, competition kicks in and this explosive evolution flatlines.
"The pattern we see across many early hominins is similar to all other mammals," van Holstein said. "Speciation rates increase and then flatline, at which point extinction rates start to increase. This suggests that interspecies competition was a major evolutionary factor."
However, when van Holstein studied the evolution of our own genus, Homo, things started to get much more peculiar.
"The more species of Homo there were, the higher the rate of speciation," she said. "So when those niches got filled, something drove even more species to emerge. This is almost unparalleled in evolutionary science."
In other words, it appears as if competition between different Homo species actually drove the evolution of even more Homo species — a complete reversal of what we would expect to see based on the evolution of most other vertebrates.
Here's what would happen if ALL humans completely disappeared (Aperture)
(WQ) Given this breakthrough, we should start having competitive games not (intra) between humans and humans but (inter) between humans and animals. The all-female chicken league can go up against Missourians in worm finding. Bull teams can go up against matadors with horn helmets instead of swords. We can launch Iditarod II, a race where hungry dogs or wolves chase humans across the ice and snow to see who crosses the line first. There can be a surfer versus shark competition in the summers to see who can exclude the other from more waves. Fisherpersons can get out of boats and into the water to have it out with schools of sportfish.We can film a "Survivor Congo" mixed gender social strategy game between bonobos and humans. And we can have an international dolphin versus nerds test of intellect, where we will insist on a handicap for having smaller brains than the sea mammals.
Darwin's evolution or some intelligent design mechanism?
(Answers in Genesis Canada) June 30, 2023. Christian fanatic Calvin Smith takes a deep dive into the amazing kinesin protein. Unfortunately, Darwinian evolution proponents claim this protein is the result of chance, but if one takes the time to listen to the experts who have researched the topic, this video may change some minds.
More high-quality biblical content every week from
Answers in Genesis; Discover Science; Text by eds., Wisdom Quarterly
Our High Priests shall not be questioned!
Who dares to question the white-clad priests and patriarchs of our new state religion, Scientism? No one, except maybe the angry fundamentalist Christians those priests displaced with their anti-mystical and anti-faith rationalism. Sadly, science is often wrong but arrogant and not amenable to correction any time soon. Eventually one theory gives way to another, one ego defeats another, one view comes into fashion pushing out another, but it's a process too slow to save us. Religious abuses are legion. It's no wonder Abrahamic religions had to be shoved out and replaced with secularism. And we're all for it.
But now science, the scientific method (whatever that is deemed to be at any time by the gatekeepers in the ivory white towers of our monastery-like university with all those new and impressionable acolytes rolling through. So since religion, in this case Protestant Christians, dare to attack the unassailable bigots in white, let's let them. We assume "creationism" has to be wrong. There couldn't be any higher beings contributing to genetic manipulation, population control, culture, sacred texts, or anything else. That's all imaginary, science says. We assume "evolution" and Darwinism has to be write, no matter that most of us do not understand those life sciences like biology, physical anthropology, and archeology
Goodreads.com; co-authors Dr. Christopher Ryan, Ph.D. and Dr. Cacilda Jetha, MD, Idea City; Ana Kasparian (The Young Turks); Ashley Wells, Seth Auberon (eds.), Wisdom Quarterly
Co-author couple at Angkor Wat Buddhist temple complex, Cambodia (chrisryanphd.com)
Authors of Sex at Dawn Dr. Christopher Ryan, Ph.D. and Dr. Cacilda Jetha, M.D. reject the "standard narrative" of human monogamy through history. Instead, they look to our prehistoric ancestors and close primate relatives, like the bonobos, to propose a different idea of sexual relationships.
.
Since Darwin's day, we've been told that sexual monogamy comes naturally to our species.
Mainstream science -- as well as religious and cultural institutions -- has maintained that men and women evolved in families in which a man's possessions and protection were exchanged for a woman's fertility and fidelity. But that narrative is collapsing.
Fewer and fewer couples are getting married, and divorce rates keep climbing as adultery and flagging libido drag down even seemingly solid marriages.
How can reality be reconciled with the accepted narrative? It can't be, according to renegade thinkers Christopher Ryan [Shame Exorcist] and Cacilda Jethá [sexatdawn.com]. While debunking almost everything we "know" about sex, they offer a bold alternative explanation in this provocative and brilliant book.
They are a couple of 12+ years.
Dr. Ryan and Dr. Jethá's central contention is that human beings evolved in egalitarian groups that shared food, child care, and, often, sexual partners.
Weaving together convergent, frequently overlooked evidence from anthropology, archaeology, primatology, anatomy, and psychosexuality, the authors show how far from human nature monogamy really is.
Human beings everywhere and in every era have confronted the same familiar, intimate situations in surprisingly different ways. The authors expose the ancient roots of human sexuality while pointing toward a more optimistic future illuminated by our innate capacities for love, cooperation, and generosity.
With intelligence, humor, and wonder, Ryan and Jethá show how our promiscuous past haunts our struggles over monogamy, sexual orientation, and family dynamics. They explore:
why long-term fidelity can be so difficult for so many;
why sexual passion tends to fade even as love deepens;
why many middle-aged men risk everything for transient affairs with younger women;
why homosexuality persists in the face of standard evolutionary logic; and
what the human body reveals about the prehistoric origins of modern sexuality.
In the tradition of the best historical and scientific writing, Sex at Dawn unapologetically upends unwarranted assumptions and unfounded conclusions while offering a revolutionary understanding of why we live and love as we do.More
All materials on this site are submitted by editors and readers. All images, unless otherwise noted, were taken from the Internet and are assumed to be in the public domain.
In the event that there is still a problem, issue, or error with copyrighted material, the break of the copyright is unintentional and noncommercial, and the material will be removed immediately upon presented proof.
Contact us by submitting a comment marked "private."
Do not follow this journal if you are under vinaya or parental restrictions. Secure protection by Sucuri.
Wisdom Quarterly: American Buddhist Journal is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License. Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at creativecommons.org/about/licenses.
