Are you or your representative(s) for or against basic Human Rights equality?

Peter Klevius global morality can only be challenged by violating the most basic of Human Rights.

Everything Peter Klevius writes (or has written) is guided by the anti-sexist. anti-racist, and anti-fascist Universal* Human Rights declaration of 1948. In other words, what is declared immoral and evil is so done as measured against the most basic of Human Rights (the so called "negative" rights - i.e. the rights of the individual not to be unnecessarily targeted with restrictions and impositions). Unlike the 1948 Universal Human Rights (UHR) declaration, islam denies Human Rights equality to women and non-muslims. And violation of such basic Human Rights can't be tolerated just by referring to "freedom of religion".

* This means accepting everyone - without exception due to e.g. sex, religion, lack of religion, "security" etc. - as equal in Human Rights. The individual is protected by negative Human Rights, but of course not against substantiated legal accusations - as long as these are not produced as a means that violates the basic Human Rights (compare "not necessary in a free, democratic country"). The legislator may not produce laws that seek to undermine some individuals rights. This also includes e.g. "freedom of religion", i.e. that this freedom doesn't give the right to unfree others, or cause others to be in an inferior rights position. If by islam you mean something that fully adheres to basic Human Rights equality, then you aren't targeted by Peter Klevius islam criticism. However, if you mean islam accepts violations of the most basic of Human Rights, then you may also call Peter Klevius an "islamophobe" - and he will be proud of it. And when it comes to "security" it can't mean "offending" opponents to basic Human Rights.

This is why any effort to twist or accuse the writings of Peter Klevius as "islamophobia" etc. can only be made from a standpoint against these basic Human Rights. As a consequence, no body of authority can therefore accuse, hinder etc. Peter Klevius without simultaneously revealing its own disrespect for these Human Rights. Conversely, Peter Klevius can not accuse anyone who agrees on these rights - i.e. this leaves e.g. "islamophobia" etc. accusations against Peter Klevius without merit.

Every effort against these basic Human Rights is treason against a country calling itself free and democratic.


Some basic facts to consider about Klevius* (except that he is both "extremely normal" and extremely intelligent - which fact, of course, would not put you off if you're really interested in these questions):

* Mentored by G. H. von Wright, Wittgenstein's successor at Cambridge.

1 Klevius' analysis of consciousness is the only one that fits what we know - after having eliminated our "pride" bias of being humans (which non-human would we impress, anyway?). Its starting point is described and exemplified in a commentary to Jurgen Habermas in Klevius book Demand for Resources (1992:30-33, ISBN 9173288411, based on an article by Klevius from 1981), and is further explained in a commentary to Francis Crick's book The Astonishing Hypothesis under the title The Even More Astonishing Hypothesis (EMAH), which can be found in Stalk's archive and which has been on line since 2003 for anyone to access/assess.

2 Klevius out of island/mainland fluctuating Southeast Asia Denisovans up to big skulled Siberians as the birth of much more intelligent modern humans who then spread all over the world, is the only analysis that fits both genetic reality as well as tool and art sophistication seen in e.g. the Denisova cave (no dude, Blombos etc. don’t come even close).

3 Klevius criticism of Human Rights violating sharia islamofascism (e.g. OIC) which is called "islamophobia" by islamofascists and their supporters who don't care about the most basic of Human Rights (e.g. re. women). Klevius' "islamophobia" has two roots: 1) UN's 1948 Universal Human Rights declaration, which, contrary to any form of muslim sharia, doesn't, for example, allow sex to be an excuse for robbing females of their full Human Rights equality, and 2) the history of the origin of islam ( e.g. Hugh Kennedy, Robert G. Hoyland, K. S. Lal etc.) which reveals a murderous, pillaging, robbing, enslaving and raping racist/sexist supremacist ideology that exactly follows precisely those basic islamic tenets which are now called "unislamic" but still survive today (as sharia approved sex slavery, sharia approved "liberation” jihad, academic jihad etc.) behind the sharia cover which is made even more impenetrable via the spread of islamic finance, mainly steered from the islamofascist Saudi dictator family.


4 Klevius analysis of sex segregation/apartheid (now deceptively called “gender segregation”) and heterosexual attraction - see e.g. Demand for Resources (1981/1992), Daughters of the Social State (1993), Angels of Antichrist (1996), Pathological Symbiosis (2003), or Klevius PhD research on heterosexual attraction/sex segregation and opposition to female footballers (published in book form soon).

Britisharia Human Rightsphobia

Britisharia Human Rightsphobia

Saudi induced muslim attack on UK Parliament. How many elsewhere? And what about Saudi/OIC's sharia

Saudi induced muslim attack on UK Parliament. How many elsewhere? And what about Saudi/OIC's sharia

Racist UK Government and BBC

Racist UK Government and BBC

UK's sharia ties to Saudi islamofascism threaten EU (and UK) security

UK's sharia ties to Saudi islamofascism threaten EU (and UK) security

Peter Klevius "islamophobia"/Human Rightsphobia test for you and your politicians

Warning for a muslim robot!

There's no true islam without Human Rights violating sharia

There's no true islam without Human Rights violating sharia

UK PM candidate Rees-Mogg: Germans needed Human Rights - we don't. Klevius: I really think you do.

The Viking phenomenon started with bilingual Finns raiding/trading sex slave to Abbasid (ca 750)

Klevius 1979: Human Rights rather than religion

Klevius 1979: Human Rights rather than religion

BBC (imp)lies that 84% of the world is "monotheist" although most people are A(mono)theists

BBC (imp)lies that 84% of the world is "monotheist" although most people are A(mono)theists

Peter Klevius' 1986 experimental zero budget refugee video

Klevius can no longer distinguish between the techniques of BBC and Nazi propaganda - can you!

By squeezing in Atheist ideologies/philosophies as well as polytheisms under the super set BBC calls "religion", and by narrowing 'Atheism' to what it's not (Atheism is what it says on the tin - no god) they produced the extremely faked proposition that 84% of the world's population is "religious". Moreover, BBC also proudly claimed that the 84% figure is rising even more. Well, that's only by relying on those poor women in Pakistan, Bangladesh, English muslim ghettos (where most so called "British" women don't even speak English) etc., who still produce many more children than the average in the world. But Klevius doesn't think this abuse of girls/women is anything to cheer.

The main threat to your Human Rights

The main threat to your Human Rights

BBC, the world's biggest fake/selective news site - with an evil agenda

BBC, the world's biggest fake/selective news site - with an evil agenda

BBC's compulsory fee funded propaganda for Saudi sharia islam

Sunday, October 12, 2014

No, dear Chris Stringer*, Sulawesi cave hand prints can't possibly be compared with even older and much more sophisticated north Eurasian art!



* Chris Stringer belongs to the rapidly disappearing species Homo out-of-Africa



The Sulawesi hand prints are equal to similar hand prints made by Neanderthals in Europe who also created other "art" around 40,000 bp. However, according to Klevius, there was no big difference in intelligence between Neanderthals and archaic Homo sapiens sapiens (HSS) who were already around when the truly modern humans with superior intelligence spread out of Siberia after having got the new brain set up via Denisovans coming from SE Asia and mixing with Neanderthals and HSS (and probably Homo erectus) in Northern Eurasia/Siberia.


Neanderthal "art" from Spain (40,000 bp).


Real art by truly modern humans




Lion wo/man of the Hohlenstein Stadel in Germany (>40,000 bp) is an ivory sculpture that is both the oldest known zoomorphic sculpture in the world, and the oldest known uncontested example of figurative art yet discovered.





The Denisova bracelet, the most sophisticated of the oldest art works ever found in the world, was discovered at the Denisova cave in Altai/Siberia in the lowermost portion of stratigraphic layer 11.1. Layer 11.2 is >50,000 bp which means the bracelet might be much older than the cautious 40,000 bp estimate.




















Moreover, the northern Eurasian art track is later followed by an equally unique series of astonishing portraits which have no competitors so far anywhere in the world.

29,000 bp (Central Europe)



 

Do note the lack of chin on this 26,000 bp Venus of Brassempouy, France (irises and lips added by Klevius) from the same location and time period as Cro-Magnon with its extremely protruding chin.





 Malta/Siberia around 26,000 bp




From nocturnal jungle-tree climbers to intelligent ice age steppe wanderers



Many species in the primate evolution have developed nocturnal capabilities. Were Homo floresiensis big eyes part of this?





Here's what Klevius wrote some time ago about one of the most prominent out of Africa babblers, i.e. someone whose bias hinders and obscures true scientific discoveries. This new finding is truly a hard slap in Springer's face. But that won't stop BBC and others too listen to his gallimatias.

And yes, Africa is extremely interesting, not the least the Congo river delta that we know almost nothing about so far. It will certainly reveal astonishing evolutionary findings in the future. However, today there's absolutely nothing else than PC bias that points to Africa as the birthplace of modern humans! The African ape needed the cold North to evolve to what we are today.







Thursday, March 14, 2013


Oxford "scientists" opinion about non-existing brain areas


Ants are some of the most social creatures on the planet. And they do have big eyes. Is Oxford evolving towards a huge ant-heap (steered by the ultimate racist/sexist totalitarian social tool Sharia)?!


There's a childish proposal, eagerly consumed by stupid media, that Neanderthals died out because they used too much of their brains for vision. And Klevius is eagerly waiting for John Hawks' comment on it.

Moreover, to understand why the whole concept of "vision areas in the brain" is complete nonsense please do read EMAH (The Even More Astonishing Hypothesis). The "vision area" could be used to whatever. Moreover, vision isn't "vision" in any particular sense but just part of information which together with all saved information results in an awareness tied to the immediate now that we tend to call "vision".




One eye of the Tarsier above is the size of its entire brain. So what about the one to the right?


Professor Chris Stringer: 'Our study provides a more direct approach by estimating how much of their brain was allocated to cognitive functions, including the regulation of social group size; a smaller size for the latter would have had implications for their level of social complexity and their ability to create, conserve and build on innovations.'

Professor Robin Dunbar: ‘Having less brain available to manage the social world has profound implications for the Neanderthals’ ability to maintain extended trading networks, and are likely also to have resulted in less well developed material culture – which, between them, may have left them more exposed than modern humans when facing the ecological challenges of the Ice Ages.’


Klevius tired and yawning comment: Floresiensis!



Btw, if "friendship" had been a factor in the hunting gathering groups based on kinship before civilization then they would have instead gathered armies. And that's precisely what we have seen, namely a striking lack of organized hunter-gather armies. Who would have been a "friend" in the sparsely populated community where everyone was already related? Rapes and other attacks on lonely individuals or small groups certainly occured but organized warfare is a very late invention. Actually much later than the peak of human intelligence.

Alternatively, we need to re-conceptualize 'hunter-gather' or 'friendship'.





Higher ape/hominid evolution in continental Africa vs. island SE Asia

Already before the discovery of Homo floresiensis Klevius thought a good "pygmy" brain slowly traveled to the protein rich but cold north while increasing in size and capabilities. After the discovery (2004) of the apelike and extremely small brained but smart Homo floresiensis in southern Indonesia nothing except M130 connected anything to Africa anymore. And when the Denisovan was discovered in Siberia at the same place as the hitherto most sophisticated early artifact ever found (Denisova bracelet - see below) the picture seemed quite clear. There are only two possible places for equatorial evolution of hominids, either Africa or SE Asia. And because SE Asian archipelago offers the by far best combination of jungle isolation and changing barriers it seems that floresiensis (and similar populations) should have been equally expected as the dwarfed elephants they hunted.



So when a floresiensis like population managed to escape to mainland Asia they started mixing with local Homo erectus all the way up ontil they met with the northern Neanderthals and there created what became the truly modern humans.


M130

Sima de los Huesos, Floresiensis and Denisovan

may have all originated in SE Asia





The Sima sample exhibits a number of features that are shared with Neanderthals but not African fossil humans, and are rare in recent humans.


Also note that we don't know the shape of Floresiensis' nose. 


Later Neanderthals do not have the same diversity as earlier Neanderthals in western Europe, while central Asian Neanderthals have more diversity than those from Europe. This may indicate that Neanderthals were more numerous in western or central Asia.

The Denisovan nuclear DNA is also closer to Neanderthals than the Denisovan mtDNA.

Sima de los Huesos is closely related to the lineage leading to mitochondrial genomes of Denisovans.

The Denisovan-heidelbergensis clade split about 800kya-900 kya (around the time of the oldest stone tools on the island of Flores where floresiensis was found) is older than the modern human-Neanderthal split. Non-African Homo has an Erectus connection, a Denisovan-heidelbergensis connection, as well as a Neanderthal connection.






See here what Klevius wrote about political bias on the subject:

Saturday, April 21, 2012


How political correctness blurs science


Michigan University feeds their students with this misleading map which is at odds with everything we now know about the traces of truly modern intelligent humans.Nothing on the map shows the cultural explosion from Altai to Western Europe that constituted the birth of humans as we now understand it. Homo floresiensis was capable of using fire and making stone tools etc with a chimp-sized+ brain. As did Homo erectus and others with much bigger brains. And despite some local varieties all Homos until M173 were incapable of making any significant breakthrough in the archeological records. Only when a more sophisticated (better packed) brain was poured into the biggest ever human skull (the northern Neanderthal) did truly intelligent humans emerge.Relative to its time the most impressive ever cultural explosion took place between Altai and the Pyrenees during 40,000-18,000 years along the M173 path until genetic "dilution" lowered intelligence to what we have today. 























Klevius comment: In fact, the map would fit quite well, not to describe human evolution but rather (except for Australia and the north eastern line) islamic slavery atrocities during 1400 years. What it shows is Koranic slave trade routes. Political correctness hence involuntary reveals its own source namely that islam is so bad so it has to be defended from open scrutiny for whatever price.

Compare that to the stunning agreement of genes (Denisova/Neanderthal) and culture (art) in the northern part of this map



We have no clue whatsoever how M168 and M130 looked like. And even if we did we still would need cultural artifacts etc. to assess their level of intelligence. Nor do we know if the new tighter CPU came from Africa or Southeast Asia (Floresiensis type? - remember that the main objection was that its brain was "too small" for achieving what it did). And M89 and M9 may be just traces of back and forth gene flow as described by Klevius. M130 may well have been a bipedal but dumb "ape-man" who hybridized with clever apes in Southeast Asia.

Or is M130, in fact, nothing more than the rest product of those who never met with northern Neanderthals on their way out of Southeast Asia?



We have no clue whatsoever how M168 and M130 looked like. Nor do we know if the new brain came from Africa or Southeast Asia, i.e. was the Floresiensis type really able to walk the M130 line? And if the ape brain came from Africa, why didn't it affect the culture of relatively big skulled (compare Hofmeyr) African Homos? And M89 and M9 may be just traces of back and forth gene flow as described by Klevius. M130 may well have been a bipedal but dumb "ape-man" who hybridized with clever apes in Southeast Asia.

Or is M130, in fact, nothing more than the rest product of those who never met with northern Neanderthals on their way out of Southeast Asia?

The above also explains the distribution of mongoloid traits. Cold adapted Denisova/Red Deer Cave type laid the basis for mongoloid features and after meeting northern Neanderthals and due creation of modern humans the back migration/hybridization left (mainly) Caucasoids (what Klevius call the grey "bastard belt" on the map below) to the West and Mongoloids to the East.

















No comments:

Post a Comment