molbol2000

The semiotics of modern medicine is curious. The serpent is an ancient Indo-European symbol of evil and lies, and the cup was earlier than something like a connection with heavenly gods through fire, fire was usually kindled in the cup (even Olympic), and probably this is where the  symbol of the holy grail comes from

In Russian, the word "doctor" etymologically comes from the root "lie" and in a literal grammatical interpretation would mean "liar":
"vrat"-"vrach"

So we can answer: Can Science Make us live shorter?

(and worse)

8 minutes ago, John Cuthber said:

What experiment?
The "4 humours" don't really exist.

Take blood, stand in a glass, waiting for separation into 4 fractions.
It doesn't matter what we call these factions,  humours or something else.
Then collect statistics in comparison with temperaments

13 minutes ago, John Cuthber said:

Melancholic does not really exist so

There are properties that considered as melancholic

I think that these concepts of the ancients about the genius of melancholic people have a physical basis. Melancholic is a highly excitable type, and a strong impulse is needed to activate the brain

"Black bile" may act as a neurotransmitter

1 minute ago, Bufofrog said:

 Some sort of anti-evolution thing maybe?

There is nothing anti-evolutionary, evolution is not an artist, it creates not beauty and aesthetics, but individuals capable of surviving in the current conditions

And besides, evolution does not have to go in one vector at all. For example, an ant degraded with the complication of society

By the way, the division of labor just along this vector directs human evolution at the present moment.

And in the direction opposite to sexual dimorphism, this is also a similar vector

The modern type of science defenetly not.
Ancient people lived about as long as we do, and a meager increase in life span is associated not with science, but with comfortable conditions
If science could do anything, we would have lived at least longer than a few thousand years ago, but even this is not. Scientific advances are truly zero

(or not for the common people)

4 hours ago, StringJunky said:

Somewhere on the evolutionary tree, we had a common ancestor(s) that carried those common traits and then the respective lineages diverged to what they are today..

Something like an ancient mouse?
Perhaps in some ways, humans are even closer than primates. For example, I've heard this about the biochemical composition of muscles and insulin.
Then it doesn't add up

Speaking of primates. The odd thing is that primates do not have negative rhesus

__________________

Is it possible here to allow horizontal gene transfer in cultures with pig crops?

Also primates usually do not accumulate fat as easily as humans and pigs. It seems in this aspect human and pig also the same and they leaders. True, not all people accumulate it easily.

1 hour ago, John Cuthber said:

No

What if run such an experiment? Did anyone that in modern times?
It is unlikely that the method was invented out of nothing when it practice in the ancient times

Also would be interesting to check proposition that only melancholyc can be genius, it also was considered so in that times

2 hours ago, dimreepr said:

Shouldn't that be mediated?

Of course, IQ-testing is far from ideal.But this at least shows the ability to generalize and self-study.

Just now, swansont said:

Yes they are. And you should be able to cite scientific findings to support any claims you make, rather than make blanket assertions of a possibly dubious nature.

it's just a hypothesis

2 minutes ago, swansont said:

I assumed you were referring to such, and did not mean architectural. Try again. Be specific, and scientific.

I don't know how I can try. In my opinion, biology and anthropology are quite scientific disciplines

9 minutes ago, swansont said:

And what are these “natural properties”?  Can you answer without treading away from a scientific analysis?

anthropological, biological features

Because "they" not need  for clever effective politics and manegers. They need keeping power, and stupid politicans  are good as comfortable puppets.
In addition, the modern mainstream of power and the image of the intellectual is an autistic type, where not intelligence, but memory plays a crucial role.

Тemperaments used to be determined by the predominance of fluids in the blood sediment. That is, literally by the composition of the blood.

Was this method actually working?

If not, why this classification was taken just from there? I think it is evidence that method works

btw the legend of big-* porn is John Holms, and in that time there was not much silicon

However, I do not consider this to be a real symbol of masculinity and btw  have nothing against black guys.

44 minutes ago, Area54 said:

Except:

• How does one ensure a comprehensive and objective analysis of the videos?
• How does one ensure one has selected a representative example of of accessible videos?
• How does one ensure that the accessible videoes are fully representative of all the videos?
• How does one ensure that the producers of the videos have not been selective of their shots?

In short, while videos would be a good potential source of data, to declare that "there is nothing more reliable than this" calls into question your ability to carry out a scientific analysis.

You can stick to your opinion, but I stick to mine.
I think that your "arguments" are just demagoguery. You can also demand proof that there are five fingers on the hand, with the same arguments. This is not really interesting to anyone.

42 minutes ago, koti said:

You could ask why theres so many afroamericans in NBA

I mentioned that professional sports are more dependent on politics and there is much that is achieved by artificial methods.
It is clear that African Americans have been actively promoting in American sports since about the 60s. For example, in the days of Foreman and Fraser, American boxing darkened dramatically. Before that, it was at least half white. Marchiano, Dempsey etc. and I dont't think the reason is rasism. There were many afroamericans in american boxing before it

42 minutes ago, koti said:

or why afroamericans have larger penises

I think this is medya myth

1 minute ago, studiot said:

Where is your proper evidence ?

it is obvious, they are in front of your eyes. Anyone can be convinced of this simply by opening any video hosting

video files are documentary evidence, there is nothing more reliable than this

5 minutes ago, studiot said:

I think you should refrain from posting this obnoxious nonsense.

I watch a lot of CrossFit videos, there really aren't many African Americans. This is a fact, what is nonsense? There must be an explanation for this?

For example

take any video and it will be about the same

1 minute ago, joigus said:

Yes, there were. The Beaker people were traders. They brought beer and artifacts. They travelled alone or in small groups across Europe and were buried with their artifacts. A famous example is the Amesbury Archer. Of course he had weapons, because many people had weapons in the Bronce Age. And travelling traders were not an exception, for very good reasons.

There is no culture without traders. Trade has been a part of human culture for millenia. Prehistoric trading routes of obsidian have been found in Africa.

A simple exchange of goods is not yet trade. Trading starts there, there is profit for trader.

if the Indo-Europeans were traders, this would be reflected in their ethic and myths

I think about it and had version that high Intensive training and explosive loads are not comfortable for afroamericans  due to their natural properties.
And although in big sports they cope with this normally, for example, they even lead in the sprint, boxing and so on, pharmacology and a specific professional approach to training and politics of sport cannot be disregarded there. And contrary  CrossFit shows the general picture in mass-society.
What do you think about it? And if it wrong opinion, what is real reason of this?

Modern soft "playing" boxing starting from Ali should be banned, because box is not female sport and not ballet

Are you talking about just aerobic work without intensivety? This on the contrary kill us due to oxidental processes.

I think no need to talk about what properties make human idental to pig, they well known. How it become possible from the view of point of evolution?

11 hours ago, joigus said:

The ones that really spread and seem to have been quite violent are the Yamnaya. They flooded Europe with their genes. They also brought the plague and big axes:

According the map, all of them from Yamnaya

11 hours ago, joigus said:

Some more peaceful, traders

There was no "peaceful traders" in the aryan cultures at all. All of them were extrimelly warior cultures with cult of Hero.
But the question is was it cultures agressive or it was just defence from paleoeuropeans

There are no "traders" in IE-mythology at all.

The base of indoeuropean myth is the hero that kills evil in the face of serpent

This is morally unacceptable to society. The politicans that allowed a person to commit suicide must resign or, better, kill themself

And why? It is generally accepted, that they was conqueriors, but that's not clear, why they come from steepe to the territory that was not good for horse breeding.
They did not need this territory for their usual economic structure.
What if we assume otherwise. They suffered from the expansion of European farmers, and therefore decided to establish control there.
After all, it is the expansion of agricultural cultures that is typical in history (for the purpose of colonization, and so on)
The ancient Indo-European attribute of snake fighting(Hero kills serpent) did not imply aggression, on the contrary, it meant victory over aggression and evil

21 minutes ago, CharonY said:

Then either you express yourself poorly or do not understand what you came across. Puberty is defined as the process in which sexual maturation occurs. "Associated with childbirth" is in so far relevant as prior to entering puberty reproduction is not possible. 

you haven't added anything new. This is exactly what I said (not quite exactly, but the meaning was clear, your amendments are purely formal).

Everything remains in effect

Further.
What exactly do you dispute from what is said below? Isn't there documentary evidence of childbirth from 7-8 years old, without pronounced secondary signs? Or do you dispute that childhood emotions include sexual aspect?

Or do you deny that teeth have nothing to do with childbirth?

Express yourself more clearly, please

At least establish a connection what the secondary hairline has to do with fertility. If it does not, then again we return to the question of what it is and where it came from