RE: The death of the RTB model

From: <>
Date: Sat Feb 11 2006 - 21:26:20 EST

>The part I have a problem with is Templeton’s conclusion that they “made love not war.”  I’m sure
>Homo erectus tribes welcomed with open arms hoards of Homo sapiens warriors eager to spread
>their genes among the lady folk.  Methinks Templeton’s science outflanks his knowledge of human >behavior.

At the risk of being indelicate, I would point out that all peoples seem to want to spread their genes, be it ladies or men.  And that brings me to the point of, well indelicacy. If there be any truth to the rumors that certain groups of men liked sheep and certain women engaged in the activities similar what Catherine the Great supposedly did, then there would be little rational reason to believe that there would be too many scruples against an archaic/modern mating of either directionality.  Thus, I would say that your knowledge of human behavior may need some improvement.


>A more likely scenario is that once the homeland security guards were dispatched the young girls
>and maybe children too were incorporated into the attacker’s group of camp followers.  You can
>ask Paul Harvey for “the rest of the story.”

Dick, your fanciful scenario, imaginative though it is, ignores many biological facts. Facts like Dogs can interbreed with wolves even though there has been 400,000 years of genetic isolation. Bovines lineages isolated for 1 million years are capable of successful interbreeding.  These kind of time frames allow lots of room for archaic/modern interbreeding. 

>BTW, welcome back to the list for the 37th time, Glenn :>).

On that last note, I didn't want to get into another shout-fest with anyone so I excused myself and engaged in mere drive-by-posting.


Received on Sat Feb 11 21:30:07 2006

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Sat Feb 11 2006 - 21:30:07 EST