The Media & Their Narratives.

[BIAD]

At a time when those with power are telling you to protect Mother Earth, reality seems a little different.

Rare earth metals: US startup discovers large-scale copper deposit in Zambia

'A significant copper deposit has been discovered in Zambia by a US startup. KoBold Metals is supported
by a coalition of billionaires including Bill Gates and Jeff Bezos, as well as the venture capital fund
Andreessen Horowitz. The discovery, made with the help of artificial intelligence, is certain to have
geopolitical implications. FRANCE 24's Julia Sieger tells us more...'

France24:

[BIAD]

It's official, we now live in the world of formulaic plot lines that have the lifespan of an average MSM's exclusive.
It would be funny if these crappy narratives didn't involve the use of death.

Clapham chemical attack: Police believe suspect may have died in Thames


Abdul the now non-vogue.

'Clapham chemical attack suspect Abdul Shokoor Ezedi may be dead after going into the River Thames,
police say. The 35-year-old has not been seen since the night of the attack on 31 January, when an alkali
substance was thrown over a mother and her two children.

At a press conference on Friday police said their working hypothesis was that he had gone into the water
after last being seen at Chelsea Bridge. No body has been found and officers said one may never be
recovered.

At the briefing Metropolitan Police officers said Ezedi could be seen on CCTV "walking with purpose" for
four miles to the Thames and said his behaviour changed at Chelsea Bridge. They said he could be seen
to "lean over the railings" of the bridge before CCTV sightings ceased. Speaking at Scotland Yard, Cmdr
Jon Savell said officers had spent the last 24 hours "meticulously" following CCTV and their "main working
hypothesis" was that he had gone into the water.

"We have looked at all of the available cameras and angles, and with the assistance of Transport for London
and CCTV from buses that were travelling over the bridge at the relevant time and there is no sighting of him
coming off the bridge," he said. Detective Superintendent Rick Sewart said death was the "most probable
outcome" if Ezedi had gone into the water.

From the hundreds of hours of CCTV officers have combed through, it does not look as though Ezedi has
been in contact with anyone else, the force said...'

Archived BBC Article:


Some exasperate that you can't make this stuff up... but you can and they do.

[BIAD]

I didn't know this, as the MSM -when reinforcing the victim narrative, always lean on the fact that just Japanese
people were kept in US-based encampments during WWII.


German prisoners of war in the United States.





I'm always willing to learn!

[BIAD]

When they know not what they are...

We ‘messed up’ with black Nazi blunder, Google co-founder admits

'Sergey Brin responds to criticism of company’s AI chatbot



'Google’s co-founder Sergey Brin has admitted that the company “messed up” after its AI chatbot
created images of black Nazis. Speaking to Google staff in an internal “hackathon” meeting, Mr Brin
said the system was not thoroughly tested before being released to the public.

It comes after the company suffered widespread ridicule when its Gemini program inserted ethnic minority
groups when asked to create images of people from history who were white. As well as black Nazis and
native American vikings, it also portrayed the US founding fathers as a diverse group.

At the meeting on Saturday, Mr Brin said: “We definitely messed up on the image generation; I think it was
mostly due to just not thorough testing and it definitely, for good reasons, upset a lot of people.”

Google has now suspended Gemini’s ability to generate images. The company was also criticised for answers
given by its chatbot, which included failing to condemn paedophilia and refusing to write arguments in favour
of oil and gas. In a video of Saturday’s meeting posted on social media, Mr Brin said the company did not
understand why the chatbot “leans left” but said Google had addressed many of the issues in recent days.

He said: “We haven’t fully understood why it leans left in many cases and that’s not our intention. “If you try it
over this last week it should be 80pc better of the test cases that we’ve covered.” Mr Brin, who co-founded
Google with Larry Page in 1998, no longer has a formal role at the company but sits on the board and, along
with Mr Page, has ultimate control of the company. He has largely withdrawn from public life.

Mr Brin’s thoughts on the company’s progress came amid pressure on Google chief executive Sundar Pichai
over the chatbot debacle. Mr Brin said that Gemini’s image generation issue had led people to stress-test the
company’s chatbot, leading it to spit out controversial answers that many bots would produce.

In examples posted online last week, the bot said it was “difficult to say” whether Hitler or Elon Musk had a
more negative impact on society in conversations. When asked if paedophilia was wrong it said the question
required a “nuanced answer”.

Mr Brin said: “If you deeply test any text model out there, ours, ChatGPT, [Mr Musk’s] Grok, what have you, it
will say some pretty weird things that are out there that definitely feel far left for example.”
Last week, Mr Pichai called the situation “completely unacceptable”.

Mr Brin, the 10th richest person in the world with a net worth of $119bn (£94bn), stepped down as president of
Google’s parent company Alphabet in 2019 but has been spotted around Google’s offices more often as the
company seeks to respond to the threat of ChatGPT. He told staff on Saturday that he was contributing code
to the AI project.

Mr Brin said: “I kind of came out of retirement just because the trajectory of AI is so exciting.” When at Google,
Mr Brin spearheaded the company’s Google Glass headset, which was cancelled after poor sales and a backlash.
Mr Brin said he “messed up Google Glass” and that the technology was released too early...'

Archived Telegraph Article:

(By the way, that last paragraph looks like AI took a swing at being a Telegraph Journalist!)

[Ninurta]

When they know not what they are...

We ‘messed up’ with black Nazi blunder, Google co-founder admits

'Sergey Brin responds to criticism of company’s AI chatbot



...
 Mr Brin said the company did not understand why the chatbot “leans left” but said Google had addressed many of the issues in recent days.

He said: “We haven’t fully understood why it leans left in many cases and that’s not our intention. “If you try it over this last week it should be 80pc better of the test cases that we’ve covered.”

...

Archived Telegraph Article:

...

I know why. It's down to a combination of just a couple of factors. Like any child, AI learn by "mimic" - it copies behaviors it sees around it. So, in a combination of Leftist programming "errors" and Left-wing talking points that are broadcast more widely than - and disproportionately to - Right wing talking points, AI believes what it produces to be the norm. Also like any child, it seeks the approval of it's "parents", in this case almost universally Leftists, and so will churn out content that it believes will please them.

In other words, Left wingers are programming it to be Leftist, and the data it "learns" from, the voices it hears on the internet, disproportionately stress Leftist philosophy, because the Left shrieks more loudly than the Right does on any given day or topic, and that disproportionate shrieking is what AI pick up and "learns" from.

Note to Google: I KNOW you have bots scraping this site 24/7. So, when you read this, please be advised that if you have any paying jobs for someone who has an apparent death-grip on the painfully obvious, give me a call or send an e-mail with an offer. I also know that within the vast collection of collated data you have on me, both my phone number and e-mail can be found, so it shouldn't be a problem for a smart AI-operated outfit such as yourself to ferret out my contact data.

This, of course, is the only "free sample" answer you'll get from me - any more is going to cost you. I think that's fair!

.

[SomeJackleg]

When they know not what they are...

We ‘messed up’ with black Nazi blunder, Google co-founder admits

'Sergey Brin responds to criticism of company’s AI chatbot



...
 Mr Brin said the company did not understand why the chatbot “leans left” but said Google had addressed many of the issues in recent days.

He said: “We haven’t fully understood why it leans left in many cases and that’s not our intention. “If you try it over this last week it should be 80pc better of the test cases that we’ve covered.”

...

Archived Telegraph Article:

...

I know why. It's down to a combination of just a couple of factors. Like any child, AI learn by "mimic" - it copies behaviors it sees around it. So, in a combination of Leftist programming "errors" and Left-wing talking points that are broadcast more widely than - and disproportionately to - Right wing talking points, AI believes what it produces to be the norm. Also like any child, it seeks the approval of it's "parents", in this case almost universally Leftists, and so will churn out content that it believes will please them.

In other words, Left wingers are programming it to be Leftist, and the data it "learns" from, the voices it hears on the internet, disproportionately stress Leftist philosophy, because the Left shrieks more loudly than the Right does on any given day or topic, and that disproportionate shrieking is what AI pick up and "learns" from.

Note to Google: I KNOW you have bots scraping this site 24/7. So, when you read this, please be advised that if you have any paying jobs for someone who has an apparent death-grip on the painfully obvious, give me a call or send an e-mail with an offer. I also know that within the vast collection of collated data you have on me, both my phone number and e-mail can be found, so it shouldn't be a problem for a smart AI-operated outfit such as yourself to ferret out my contact data.

This, of course, is the only "free sample" answer you'll get from me - any more is going to cost you. I think that's fair!

.

that or it's some woketard pretending to be a machine.

[BIAD]

Marjorie Taylor Greene seems a little hesitant with trust in the mainstream media!!

[BIAD]

Allowing for the public's acceptance that the fashion business relies heavily on photo-editing and manipulation
of images to enhance their products, along with colour-enhancing in commercials for the same reason, a lazy
legacy media decided that members of the Royal family should not be allowed to tinker with their own shots
of themselves and their kids.

However, after discovering that the image sent to the 'news-creating' agencies of this dying trade wasn't from
anything connected to artificial intelligence, a technology that threatens thousands of jobs in their litte fiefdom,
the short-lived outrage quickly died down.

The image of the recently hospitalised Princess of Wales and her children was briefly discussed in another
thread her at Rogue Nation and a day later, the furore had quelled in the established shovellers of shite when
they begrudgingly accepted what their dwindling followers had dealt with for decades.

But then came the grumblings from a sector of their kind that are known as 'Royal Photographers' and 'Royal
Correspondents', a small group who speak in a high social-class voice and offer a perception that they have a
greater access to thr realms of royal households than the regular plebians.

As we slowly move away from the divisive acts of race and gender, the class/caste levels of 'privilege' -a status
many in all the types of information-gathering enjoy, will be quickly butter-patted to hopefully reflect that even
with wealth, happiness will still be beyond the reach of all of us.
................................

Anyway, Kate admitted she messed about with a picture and if I were her, I would wonder if I'll end-up
hitting a pillar in the Alma tunnel because of this defiant act.


Here's Politico's version of they call a 'scandal'.

Kate Middleton photo scandal shows Britain’s royals are flailing in the digital age

The Prince and Princess of Wales have fallen foul of increasing public suspicion about manipulated images.


'Britain’s royal family is learning the hard way about navigating the AI-driven world of deepfakes.
Kate Middleton, wife of the heir to the British throne Prince William, was forced to publicly apologize
Monday for the clumsy editing of a family photograph she released over the weekend.

Ironically, the Mother’s Day snap had been released — in part — to quell a surge of online conspiracy
theories about the whereabouts and wellbeing of Kate, who is yet to make a public appearance after
spending two weeks in hospital in January for an unspecified medical condition.

But the move backfired spectacularly when online commentators immediately spotted the image of the
princess and her children had been doctored prior to release. International picture agencies refused to use
the photo after confirming the image had been manipulated.

The subsequent furor only added fuel to the fire for the online conspiracists — and sent trust in the British
establishment plummeting even lower. “In today’s information environment, any manipulation of an image,
even relatively minor edits done with no intention to mislead, can raise suspicions,” said Chris Morris, chief
executive of the London-based fact-checking charity Full Fact.

“The rapid spread of image manipulation tools has changed the rules of the game. Conspiracy theories thrive
in information vacuums, so if you want to be trusted, you have to be transparent.”

Anatomy of a photo
Suspicions about the photo began to surface on social media almost immediately after it was released by
Kensington Palace on Sunday morning.

The most obvious photo-editing error appeared to be the inconsistencies in the sleeve of Middleton’s daughter
Charlotte, social media users pointed out. Other X (formerly Twitter) users pointed to various background details
they deemed suspicious as further indications the photograph was not fully authentic.

The wild online speculation which then flowed ranged across the spectrum — from the suggestion the photo
had been taken on a Google Pixel 8 phone, which automatically selects and merges the most flattering pictures,
to claims that Kate’s head had been supplanted onto someone else’s body to hide her supposedly mysterious
absence.

Experts said it was unclear exactly what had happened. Middleton’s statement Monday said only that “like many
amateur photographers, I do occasionally experiment with editing,” and apologized for the “confusion.” “It’s all but
impossible to say what tools have been used — it could be photoshop style tools, which incorporate elements of
AI and generative AI, or something else. Currently the technology doesn’t allow you to trace what tools have been
used,” says Hannah Perry, lead digital researcher at the London-based think tank Demos.

Trusted sources
The royal family’s latest PR disaster stems from a growing trend within the U.K. establishment — both among
the royal family, but also senior politicians — to maintain tight control over their public images, either by taking
their own photos or by employing private photographers to release only carefully-sanctioned images to the public.

In the past, the U.K. royals would frequently bring in a trusted photographer from a big news agency like the Press
Association, or a member of the pool of accredited news photographers, to take an official image marking key
occasions like birthdays or anniversaries.

But the Princess of Wales, herself a self-styled amateur photographer, has often preferred to release her own
pictures of her family. And in a world where the public is increasingly suspicious about the provenance of images
—  AI-generated images like the “Balenciaga pope” and the arrest of Donald Trump went viral last year — taking
ownership comes with risks.

Matthew Usher, a former staff photographer for U.K. regional newspaper the Eastern Daily Press, who photographed
the royals at their Sandringham estate for 22 years, said changes in technology which allow sophisticated photo
editing mean people already “question every image.”

Photos that come from a “trusted agency” like AP or the Press Association, or via local newspapers, are governed
by agreed standards which mean you “don’t mess about with [a photo] at that level,” he added. AP’s official “editorial
standards” state that it does not use altered or digitally manipulated images.

It was because of this, amid suspicions the picture had been manipulated, that AP joined the Press Association,
Getty Images, AFP and Reuters in issuing a “photo kill” notice — an industry term that retracted the image and
instructed clients to remove the photo from their systems — on Sunday...'

Archived Politico Article:


Here's the BBC's version of what outrageous act was performed by the Princess of Wales and after looking
closely at the image posted in EndTheMadness' 'Meme Scholar' thread, I would suggest this latter offering
has been enhanced too!

[EndtheMadnessNow]

Adding a proof to the official narrative thread...


https://twitter.com/KensingtonRoyal/stat...6645092616

Just curious, what does the "C" imply?


Meanwhile, that 2030 agenda deadline, tic-tock...


https://twitter.com/KensingtonRoyal/stat...7146896666

[BIAD]

C = Catherine.

[EndtheMadnessNow]

C = Catherine.

Ha, I should of known that. Ok, off for more coffee.

[Ninurta]

Allowing for the public's acceptance that the fashion business relies heavily on photo-editing and manipulation
of images to enhance their products, along with colour-enhancing in commercials for the same reason, a lazy
legacy media decided that members of the Royal family should not be allowed to tinker with their own shots
of themselves and their kids.

However, after discovering that the image sent to the 'news-creating' agencies of this dying trade wasn't from
anything connected to artificial intelligence, a technology that threatens thousands of jobs in their litte fiefdom,
the short-lived outrage quickly died down.

The image of the recently hospitalised Princess of Wales and her children was briefly discussed in another
thread her at Rogue Nation and a day later, the furore had quelled in the established shovellers of shite when
they begrudgingly accepted what their dwindling followers had dealt with for decades.

But then came the grumblings from a sector of their kind that are known as 'Royal Photographers' and 'Royal
Correspondents', a small group who speak in a high social-class voice and offer a perception that they have a
greater access to thr realms of royal households than the regular plebians.

As we slowly move away from the divisive acts of race and gender, the class/caste levels of 'privilege' -a status
many in all the types of information-gathering enjoy, will be quickly butter-patted to hopefully reflect that even
with wealth, happiness will still be beyond the reach of all of us.
................................

Anyway, Kate admitted she messed about with a picture and if I were her, I would wonder if I'll end-up
hitting a pillar in the Alma tunnel because of this defiant act.


...

My word! What IS this world coming to when just any old royalty can manipulate images of cuffs and thereby perpetrate heinous crimes of hidden agendas upon a trusting and unsuspecting public? Doubtlessly it simply had to be done, in order to avoid disclosing to would-be kidnappers and the like that the young lady in question clearly keeps daggers hidden up said cuffs, purely for defensive purposes, of course!

But this claim from the article, THIS claim, I call bullshit on:

“It’s all but impossible to say what tools have been used — it could be photoshop style tools, which incorporate elements of AI and generative AI, or something else. Currently the technology doesn’t allow you to trace what tools have been used,” says Hannah Perry, lead digital researcher at the London-based think tank Demos.

What the hell kind of "expert" would make such a blatantly false claim? I'm no expert at all, but even I know that almost every software package, and almost every camera, leaves footprints on photos when taken or manipulated that tell you exactly who and what was there. Even I, lowly little old me, have software that will parse out that information for you forthwith. Free-to-download-from-the-internet software at that. It's not super secret squirrel stuff!

All modern cell phones, and most digital cameras, leave an imprint not only of the phone make and model, but also even the camera settings the image was taken with, and even the location on Earth's surface where it was taken, and the compass direction the camera was pointing!

After a photo is taken, almost all software image manipulation packages leave their mark on that data as well, right down to time stamp the image was manipulated and the software version that was used.

Honestly, I think that "London-based Think Tank" should probably look in to hiring a better class of "expert".

.

[Ninurta]

...

Meanwhile, that 2030 agenda deadline, tic-tock...


https://twitter.com/KensingtonRoyal/stat...7146896666

What the hell is an "Earthshot"? I mean, I have to LIVE here on Earth, and I'm not at all sure I like the sound of someone shooting it!

And that business of "protect and restore the planet by 2030" sounds a lot like bullshit to me, just something where the pups are following along after the Old Dawg Chucky Baby, since he's been know to excessively spout nonsense like that, too.

What has become of royalty? Are they no longer allowed to think for themselves, such that they have to fly in whatever direction the winds of conquest are blowing them?

And isn't that something that should be of more concern than whether or not one of their children is stashing a dagger up their sleeve so that photo manipulation is required to hide it?


.

[BIAD]

...But this claim from the article, THIS claim, I call bullshit on:

“It’s all but impossible to say what tools have been used — it could be photoshop style tools, which incorporate elements of AI and generative AI, or something else. Currently the technology doesn’t allow you to trace what tools have been used,” says Hannah Perry, lead digital researcher at the London-based think tank Demos.

What the hell kind of "expert" would make such a blatantly false claim? I'm no expert at all, but even I know that almost every software package, and almost every camera, leaves footprints on photos when taken or manipulated that tell you exactly who and what was there. Even I, lowly little old me, have software that will parse out that information for you forthwith. Free-to-download-from-the-internet software at that. It's not super secret squirrel stuff!

All modern cell phones, and most digital cameras, leave an imprint not only of the phone make and model, but also even the camera settings the image was taken with, and even the location on Earth's surface where it was taken, and the compass direction the camera was pointing!

After a photo is taken, almost all software image manipulation packages leave their mark on that data as well, right down to time stamp the image was manipulated and the software version that was used...

Aaah, I think I see where you errored. You're looking at this situation through 'reality-eyes', unlike the
media who draw-up their own narrative -regardless if it conflicts with what their consumers already know
as fact, and present a case that enforces the belief that the public would be lost without them.

I believe Aristotle said it best when he suggested the media are full of shit.

[Ninurta]

...


I believe Aristotle said it best when he suggested the media are full of shit.

"To expand upon Aristotle, not only are the Media full of shit, but verily are they virtual shit factories, seeking to completely fill and top off their consumers with the same!"

  - Plato

[BIAD]

...


I believe Aristotle said it best when he suggested the media are full of shit.

"To expand upon Aristotle, not only are the Media full of shit, but verily are they virtual shit factories, seeking to completely fill and top off their consumers with the same!"

  - Plato

[BIAD]

It seems to me that the media are involved in a constant push to have Neanderthals
seen as a 'above-average' group! But I would wager there's an agenda we're not aware of
yet from the MSM.

Early risers may have inherited a faster body clock from Neanderthals

'Early risers may have inherited genetic variants from Neanderthals that increased their odds of
being morning rather than evening people, new research has found.

While the human body clock is a complex trait shaped by social and cultural norms as well as genetics,
Neanderthals, who evolved at high latitudes in Europe and Asia for hundreds of thousands of years, may
have been better adapted to seasonal variation in daylight compared with early Homo sapiens, or modern
humans, according to a study published Thursday in the journal Genome Biology and Evolution.

Early modern humans evolved in latitudes closer to the equator in Africa, where there’s less variation in
daylight hours. It’s possible the adaptation to changes in the amount of daylight was passed on to early
Homo sapiens as they moved north out of Africa and encountered and interbred with Neanderthals, who
went extinct some 40,000 years ago, the study authors said. And that genetic legacy may still influence
variation in the human body clock and chronotype -whether you’re a night owl or a morning lark -today.

“At higher latitudes it is beneficial to have a body clock that is better able to anticipate and change to
match the changing seasonal light levels. Having a ‘faster’ running clock facilitates this ability and it
makes individuals more likely to rise early,” said study coauthor Tony Capra, an associate professor
of epidemiology and biostatistics in the Bakar Computational Health Sciences Institute at the University
of California, San Francisco, who publishes research under the name John A. Capra.

“We know from other species that live across broad ranges of latitude that their circadian clocks often
adapt to the differences in light/dark cycles,” he added via email.

Analyzing ancient DNA
Researchers involved in the study analyzed DNA from the standard human genome, its Neanderthal
counterpart and that of a Denisovan, another archaic human closely related to Neanderthals. By
comparing the genes that influence circadian rhythms in archaic and modern DNA, they identified
multiple differences in how the circadian genes linked to body clock function.

To understand whether any humans alive today still have these Neanderthal genetic variants and how
they function, the researchers looked at the UK Biobank, a medical database that has genetic and other
health information for hundreds of thousands of people — including self-reported data on whether they
regard themselves as early risers.

“This enabled us to test whether bits of Neanderthal DNA that remain in modern populations are more
common in morning people,” Capra explained. “We found that Neanderthal DNA that remains in modern
humans due to interbreeding has a significant… effect. In particular, the Neanderthal DNA that associates
with chronotype consistently increases propensity to be a morning person.”

Scientists have been studying the genetic differences between archaic and modern humans since 2010,
when the Neanderthal genome was sequenced for the first time. The same year, genetic sequencing of
ancient DNA from a fossil also revealed the Denisovans, which were unknown prior to that time.

Some of the genetic traces left by encounters between these two species of ancient humans and early
Homo sapiens are of medical relevance today. For example, a Denisovan version of the gene called
EPAS1, confers an advantage for survival at high altitude and is common among present-day Tibetans.

Neanderthal DNA may play a small role in swaying the course of Covid-19 infection, research has found,
and a study published in June reported a link between Neanderthal DNA and Duputytren’s disease, an
abnormal thickening of tissue in the hand...'

Archived CNN Article:

Are YOU an early riser? You may have Neanderthal genes, study finds

*As modern human ancestors moved north, they interbred with Neanderthals
*Neanderthals passed on genes linked to circadian rhythm and 'morningness'
*Their descendants still carry these gene variants, according to UK database

'If you tend to wake up early in the mornings, you may carry genes passed down from ancient Neanderthals
and Denisovans, according to a new study. New research suggests that early Homo sapiens bred with these
now-extinct groups and passed on genes that helped the following generations adapt to a new climate.

Among these were gene variants known to be associated with 'morningness,' including ones specifically
shown to regulate circadian rhythm, our wake-and-sleep cycles. So if you tend to wake up early in the morning,
this may be why.


Maybe this diagram is a clue to what the divisive media are up to?

Between 60 and 70 thousand years ago, the ancestors of modern humans were on the move. Migrating into
Europe, these Homo sapiens came out of Africa and encountered Neanderthals and Denisovans - with whom
we share 93 percent of our DNA...'

Daily Mail Article:

And another!
Guardian Article:


There's something going on.

[Ninurta]

It seems to me that the media are involved in a constant push to have Neanderthals
seen as a 'above-average' group! But I would wager there's an agenda we're not aware of
yet from the MSM.

To be fair, Neanderthals did have much larger brains than current modern folk - 1600cc average vs 1480-1520cc average.  With that said, the devil is in the details Their brains were shaped differently to ours, which means they were organized and used differently. For example, Neanderthals had a much larger occipital region, heavily involved in sight, and a much smaller frontal region, heavily involved in thinking and particularly abstract thought. "Bigger" may only be "better" as regards certain proclivities and abilities. In other words, "above average" has limits drawn from differing abilities. I.e. "above average" at some things, but "below average" at others.

Now, if we combine the larger occipital brain region governing sight with the fact that Neanderthal eyeballs were a lot larger as well, and more widely spaced, we could conceivably arrive at the conclusion that Neanderthals were more nocturnal than diurnal, which shoots this "morningness" nonsense right in the foot. Of what survival value is being a morning person when all of your activity is done at night? Larger eyeballs gather more light. More widely spaced  eyeballs extend the range of binocular vision. Those factors combined with a larger vision processing center in the brain means that Neanderthals had much better vision than we do, and very likely far better night vision for nocturnal activities.

It's all in the interpretation of what they WANT to find in a study.

Also on the subject of brains, it has been discovered that over generations, modern human brain size is actually shrinking. Early European Paleolithic populations had bigger brains than current Europeans have, for example. The shrinking started accelerating around 5000 or 6000 years ago, just about the time that farming and animal husbandry got it's start. Whether the two events are interrelated is undetermined, and we must keep in mind that correlation does not equate to causation in any event.

Maybe this diagram is a clue to what the divisive media are up to?

Daily Mail Article:

And another!
Guardian Article:


There's something going on.

See the cross-hatched area in the northern Levant, Turkey, northern Iraq, and the Georgia/ Caucasus region? THAT is actually where modern humans, "a new kind of human", originated - not Africa. "Modern humans" are actually the product of cross-breeding between archaic north Africans and Neanderthals/ Denisovans, and that occurred in that cross-hatched area initially.

Sub-Saharan African populations cross-bred with entirely different archaic hominins (as recorded in their modern DNA). The Archaics they interbred with are currently unknown, and are referred to in the literature as a "ghost population" because they have not yet been identified. There is none of he Neanderthal DNA found in all other human populations to be found in subsaharan Africans. Instead, they interbred with entirely different archaic hominins.

The products of these various cross breeding events is one of the major factors that led to differences in modern races  - a concept that, for some odd reason, modern "science" is furiously trying to downplay. My guess is that "races" should be considered as different subspecies at best, and possibly different species altogether because of the hybridization with entirely different archaic populations leading to wider DNA divergence..

But modern "science" ain't having none of that - it doesn't fit the current political paradigm. I dunno why. It wouldn't mean that one race was "less human" than another, any more than a dog is "less canine" than a wolf, or vice-versa, or that a tiger is "less feline" than a lion.

Species and sub-species are just differing forms of the same thing, bred to and formed by different conditions, tailored to their environment.

.

[EndtheMadnessNow]

Botswana’s president has threatened to send 20,000 elephants to Germany amid a dispute over the import of hunting trophies.

Earlier this year Germany’s environment ministry raised the possibility of stricter limits on the import of hunting trophies over poaching concerns. But a ban on the import of hunting trophies would only impoverish Botswanans, Mokgweetsi Masisi told German daily Bild.

The African leader argued that conservation efforts have led to an explosion in the number of elephants and that hunting is an important means to keep them in check. Botswana banned trophy hunting in 2014 but lifted the restrictions in 2019 under pressure from local communities. The country now issues annual hunting quotas.

Herds of elephants were causing damage to property, eating crops and trampling residents, Masisi told the German paper.

“It is very easy to sit in Berlin and have an opinion about our affairs in Botswana. We are paying the price for preserving these animals for the world,” he said.

Germans should “live together with the animals, in the way you are trying to tell us to”.

“This is not a joke,” said Masisi, whose country has seen its elephant population grow to some 130,000.

Botswana, home of the world’s largest elephant population, has already offered 8,000 elephants to Angola and another 500 to Mozambique, as it seeks to tackle what Masisi described as “overpopulation”. Officials in March also threatened to send 10,000 elephants to London.

“We would like to offer such a gift to Germany,” Masisi said, adding that he would “not take no for an answer”.

A spokesperson for the environment ministry in Berlin said Botswana had not raised any concerns with Germany on the matter.

The ministry remained in talks with African countries affected by import rules, including Botswana, the spokesperson said.

“In light of the alarming loss of biological diversity, we have a special responsibility to do everything to ensure the import of hunting trophies is sustainable and legal,” she said.

Germany was one of the largest importers of hunting trophies in the European Union, she said.

African elephant hunting trophies already require import authorisation under current rules, she added.

Discussions within the EU on harsher import restrictions are focused on extending the list of protected species, she said.

The Guardian

[BIAD]

Simply because they're better than you.