Darwin evolution tells us organisms evolve because of natural selection as to better adapt the living environment. That explains why giraffe has long neck, lion has sharp teeth, and white peppered moth turned black under soot pollution in the industrial England. However, the evolution of our intelligence does not really comply with the Darwin evolution theory. Contrary to the evolution principle, the evolution of humans (since the early hominid species) has always been driven to dissociate ourselves from the nature. The emergence and development of our intelligence allows us to walk out of the forest and create an artificial environment that would fit our own nature. Looking backwards into the development of human civilization, the use of tools for hunting, the invention of animal husbandry, agriculture, the emergence of the urbanized settlement, the structure of polity, industrial revolution, electronics etc, are the indisputable footsteps we left along this human evolution path. Following this logic, I dare to hypothesize that the ultimate objective of human civilization would be one abstract sentence: to dissociate ourselves from the given nature.
Thinking a step further, this seems also to be observed in the modern social mentality as well. I have always said that leftism, an appendix of modern surplus productivity, stem from the very idea that humans ought to be and act god-alike. Thou shalt love others just as much as yourself. Despite the myth about the origin of leftism (with several disputing theories), it is unanimously agreed that leftism tends to associate more with the intelligentsia with extremely high intelligence. While leftism itself has lots of incurable defects and I am sure there are noticed by the smart leftists, its core supporters (really smart people) appear to be rather stubborn in believing there are no other alternatives that would keep up with the advancement of our civilization.
What accounts for the advancement of the civilization anyway? Science and technology? As if the answer is that simple as all science and technology are neutral to our social beings… In my opinion, egalitarianism, that’s what the left intellectuals are really aiming for. Leftists think our achievement in science and technology has reached a milestone where the pursuit of a pure egalitarian artificial world starts possible. You see there are lots of facts that need numerous tests to confirm their existence in our realm. But it wouldn’t make any sense to look for even a slight degree of egalitarianism in this sensory world. In fact the pursuit of egalitarianism, a specious claptrap, has been destined to fail since the very beginning when this idea was nurtured 200 years ago, for it just simply goes against literally every empirical axioms we witness in the nature. Ignore the natural diversity, bell curves, and individual variations to guide our actions, and the only result is failure, for we don’t have the science and technology yet to make all individuals, all races, all species the same. This is THE perfect example of mankind’s desire to dissociate ourselves from the given universe.
Burrowing into deeper analysis and specific illustrations, egalitarian perspectives regarding the environment and the nature is best interpreted as gaiaism. For instance, terms such as preservation, conservation, and mitigation etc. have deluged the mass media in recent years. The hegemonic tone has never ebbed since the day they were created in the show business. But why do we want to preserve the nature? Why do we want to mitigate the climate change? Why do we want to protect the endangered species? Of course, there are so many conspicuous explanations that emphasize on the importance of “co-existence” , “ sustainability”, “rights to live” etc. Modern gaiaism has long jumped out of the spectrum of mere environmental problem control. In most western countries people’s livelihood are no longer susceptible under the compromising environmental conditions. Modern gaiaism is all about “value” and “lifestyle”. Beyond all those eloquent apologies, the true interpretation of this recent environmental fad is rather embedded in our own brains: the desire to dissociate from the nature. “We are transcended creatures with our artificial realms and thus we shall do everything we could to leave the old place the way it was, undisturbed and absolutely harmonious.” Therefore some advocates to stop slaughtering animals, some advocates stop pumping the fossil fuels, and some advocates even stop the modern technology for it disrupts the rhythm of the earth…
Western elites came up with the ideas and ensure that most people are well drilled to feel the same way. This luxurious emotion would be magnified manifold before a kid even learns to see the real cruelty of the world. That you think you care about African starving babies is nothing more than a sheer result of repetitious drills from the hypnosis organ. Nevertheless, this all may have worked perfectly fine, if our science and technology drive didn’t stagnate for the past half century. I have no problem with leaving in a real Brave New World where people just fool ourselves to death. At least that’d be a system that works. But once again our reality could not be offset by our intelligence yet, and worst of all, we are still insolently blind to the dire consequences that are about to ravage our incoherent civilization.
As far as I concern our human evolution has entered a dead end. The only way out would be a regrouping after the collapse of what has been built up for the past 50 or even 100 years and consciously refrain us from turning the divine thirst of mankind into a dead cult of leftism. For all I know, that window of opportunity is accumulating its momentum as we speak.
The myth of genetic admixture between Homo Sapiens and Neanderthals have long been speculated by scientists for years. Since the “Out of Africa theory” basically labels every other alternative human evolution theory as “scientific racism”, it is always a very tricky issue for such scientific discussion, thanks to those daydreaming liberals. But science is science, it has no “prejudice” towards things we imply artificially such as “racism”. However, the latest study did confirm that all non-African-black people have certain degrees of blood from the mysterious Neanderthals that left Africa between 400,000 and 800,000 years ago and disappeared completely around 30,000 years ago. Modern homo sapiens (of course, except for the blacks who never really managed to get out of Africa by themselves) left Africa to pass through Neanderthal’s hood between 50,000 and 80,000 years ago, so there’s at least 20,000 years for all those good-old-fashion orgy-progy between the two hominid species. And it theoretically does make sense. While liberal/leftist tend to argue that there was no mixing and homo sapiens evolved independently by themselves to adapt to different climate and living conditions within this 50,000 years outside Africa, this scientific ruthlessly pinches their little wishful denial bubble and solidly proves that Neanderthals are part of our ancestors and that makes us different from the black people.
So what does this difference mean to all non-black people?
It means at least Eurasians do not have black skins anymore and of course the acceleration of evolution! Here is why I said so: Eurasians benefit greatly from the admixture from Neanderthals, as apparently we inherited the capability to live in the diverse harsh environment in Eurasia quickly, thanks to the orgy-progy with Neanderthals, who evolved gradually to adapt to the non-African environment in a much long span of hundreds of thousand years already. Likewise, it is highly possible that Eurasians got much fairer skins after mixing with Neanderthals. A scientific study back in 2007 has already confirmed the highly de-pigmented nature of Neanderthals from their hundreds of thousands of years of evolution from living in the Northern hemisphere. It is no surprise that non-black humans (the fair skin of Caucasoid and Mongoloid) largely inherited this particular genetic trait from the Neanderthals rather than self-evolution in just a 40,000 year-or-so time, provided that now there’s proof that large scale sex intercourse did happen between homo sapiens and Neanderthals. Variability is indeed very crucial for the evolution of a species, as it always does. Enriched by the Neanderthals gene, of course naturally the divergence between original African blacks and other hybrids started to emerge and widen gradually.
What I could also speculate is that the degree of admixture varies from places to places. For example, hypothetically that when Negrito islanders and Australian aborigines emigrated out of Africa eastwards, they must have passed over Neanderthals habitats and it’s highly possible that inter-breeding happened as well. This is actually supported as well in this recent study. But why are they still black-skinned and have little resemblance to Eurasians? Well, my theory is, Negrito and Australian aborigines were too imperative in their migratory phase. They probably can not wait to get off the mainland to live happily ever after in some jungle islands for eternality so as not to get sexually harassed by the darned horny Neanderthals. Probably that purpose would serve them well. They did come to absolute isolation as early as 40,000 thousand years ago (at least for Australian aborigines and even earlier for those Andaman Islanders). At the same time, they probably have way less mixing with the Neanderthals and therefore retain predominantly their pre-migratory African genetic traits, including the dense melanin in their skin. So… Wait a second! There were homo floresiensis living on their ways to Australia and Papua! Those little people could also have mixing and probably even more mixing with the Papuans than the Neanderthals. Then… Alas, all those suspicious evidences just couldn’t keep one from wondering what on earth happened back then… Nonetheless, notwithstanding whatever happened tens of thousand years ago, Europeans discovered them 40,000 years later while they are still in stone age.
Looks like science is racist after all.