26 Feb 10
In Crete fossils from dwarf elefants has been found. They didn't build boats to get to the island. So why should human(oid)s use boats to get there?
Isn't it more probable that they (both) walked to Crete during times when the sea level was low. From time to time the Mediterrany was dried out completely and the bottom was exposed and savanna-like.
26 Feb 10
2 edits
Originally posted by FabianFnasI think (i.e. I did a quick google search) the Meditteranian hasn't been dry for more than 5 million years.
In Crete fossils from dwarf elefants has been found. They didn't build boats to get to the island. So why should human(oid)s use boats to get there?
Isn't it more probable that they (both) walked to Crete during times when the sea level was low. From time to time the Mediterrany was dried out completely and the bottom was exposed and savanna-like.
26 Feb 10
Originally posted by PalynkaOh, so long time ago? Okay... My theory went up in smoke.
I think (i.e. I did a quick google search) the Meditteranian hasn't been dry for more than 5 million years.
So the elephants there was there as early as 5 million years ago...? Hmm...
- Joined
- 30 Dec 07
- Moves
- 9905
26 Mar 10
Originally posted by Proper KnobIt's not the brain sizes, but the expected ratios of brain sizes to body mass and size.
Are you 100% sure of that?
I'm currently reading Stephen Oppenheimers - Out of Eden - The Peopling of the World, in which there is a section on human skull sizes. And i quote -
Significantly, both Neanderthals and those modern humans living before the last ice age 20,000-30,000 years ago had rather bigger brains than do people living today.
26 Mar 10
Originally posted by UzumakiAiWhy should the ratio be more relevant than size? Do we really believe a fly with a brain as big as the rest of its body would be more intelligent? Of course not.
It's not the brain sizes, but the expected ratios of brain sizes to body mass and size.
Sure, a larger number of muscles might require a larger brain to operate, but there's no reason to believe that the relationship between intelligence and such a ratio is linear. No reason, whatsoever.
26 Mar 10
1 edit
Originally posted by PalynkaTake a look here:
Why should the ratio be more relevant than size? Do we really believe a fly with a brain as big as the rest of its body would be more intelligent? Of course not.
Sure, a larger number of muscles might require a larger brain to operate, but there's no reason to believe that the relationship between intelligence and such a ratio is linear. No reason, whatsoever.
The idea behind EQ is that the larger an organism is, the more brain weight is required for basic survival tasks, such as breathing, thermoregulation, senses, motor skill, etc. The larger the brain is relative to the body, the more brain weight might be available for more complex cognitive tasks. This method, as opposed to the method of simply measuring brain weight alone, puts humans closer to the top of the list.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brain-to-body_mass_ratio
If you want original research I can try to find it for you.
26 Mar 10
1 edit
Originally posted by AThousandYoungEQ=w(brain)/Ew(brain) where Ew(brain) = 0.12w(body)^(2/3)
Take a look here:
The idea behind EQ is that the larger an organism is, the more brain weight is required for basic survival tasks, such as breathing, thermoregulation, senses, motor skill, etc. The larger the brain is relative to the body, the more brain weight might be available for more complex cognitive tasks. This method, as opposed to the ...[text shortened]... wiki/Brain-to-body_mass_ratio
If you want original research I can try to find it for you.
This is hilarious. A standard straightforward ratio (the linear relationship I mention) would put birds on top of the scale. So let's find the parameters for an "expected weight" that puts us on top of the scale. Right.
BTW: Thin people are smarter than fat people. Proof!
26 Mar 10
Originally posted by PalynkaIt takes a lot of brain to manage fat! That's why fat people sweat so much from the head when exercising. They gotta cool off those overworked neurons.
EQ=w(brain)/Ew(brain) where Ew(brain) = 0.12w(body)^(2/3)
This is hilarious. A standard straightforward ratio (the linear relationship I mention) would put birds on top of the scale. So let's find the parameters for an "expected weight" that puts us on top of the scale. Right.
BTW: Thin people are smarter than fat people. Proof!