Page 1 of 1
Anyone read this?
Posted: Fri Jul 31, 2009 12:19 pm
by Trebuchet
Looks interesting.
http://www.booktopia.com.au/manthropolo ... 23912.html
Drawing from archaeology, anthropology and evolutionary psychology, the author confirms the awful truth: every man in history, back to the dawn of the species, did everything better, faster, stronger and smarter than any man today.
Highlights include a biomechanical analysis proving that a Neanderthal woman would have beaten Arnold Schwarzenegger in an arm-wrestle. Every modern claim to masculine fame is debunked, from terrorism (why wouldn't Osama bin Laden have made Captain in Genghis Khan's army?) to metrosexuality (why would David Beckham come last in a Fulani tribesmen's beauty pageant?).
Even the modern male's bragging rights about parenting are shown up as fraud: Congo Pygmy men carry their sons and daughters for 47 per cent of their waking day, and some Pygmy dads even develop lactating breasts to nurse them. Now that's commitment...
Re: Anyone read this?
Posted: Sat Aug 01, 2009 7:50 am
by vern
Ahhhh, the good old days...

Re: Anyone read this?
Posted: Mon Aug 03, 2009 8:48 pm
by Turdacious
Trebuchet wrote:Looks interesting.
http://www.booktopia.com.au/manthropolo ... 23912.html
Drawing from archaeology, anthropology and evolutionary psychology, the author confirms the awful truth: every man in history, back to the dawn of the species, did everything better, faster, stronger and smarter than any man today.
Highlights include a biomechanical analysis proving that a Neanderthal woman would have beaten Arnold Schwarzenegger in an arm-wrestle. Every modern claim to masculine fame is debunked, from terrorism (why wouldn't Osama bin Laden have made Captain in Genghis Khan's army?) to metrosexuality (why would David Beckham come last in a Fulani tribesmen's beauty pageant?).
Even the modern male's bragging rights about parenting are shown up as fraud: Congo Pygmy men carry their sons and daughters for 47 per cent of their waking day, and some Pygmy dads even develop lactating breasts to nurse them. Now that's commitment...
So did it teach you how to develop lactating breasts? How do you like them?
Re: Anyone read this?
Posted: Mon Aug 03, 2009 9:33 pm
by GoDogGo!
Looks like the same ol' "everything is degenerating" crap that we've been hearing since oh, 300 BC or so. It comes around every generation. We're still here, oddly enough.
Re: Anyone read this?
Posted: Mon Aug 03, 2009 10:53 pm
by JamesonBushmill
Are lactating man tits tactical, and will the spewage lube up the bar for a faster FRAN time?
If so, expect a "bitch tits" cert to surface soon.
Re: Anyone read this?
Posted: Tue Aug 04, 2009 2:52 am
by DrDonkeyLove
GoDogGo! wrote:Looks like the same ol' "everything is degenerating" crap that we've been hearing since oh, 300 BC or so. It comes around every generation. We're still here, oddly enough.
Yes, and most of us live longer and our most elite athletes are better, faster, stronger than at any time since results were recorded. And, it's not just because of pharmaceutical helpers.
Re: Anyone read this?
Posted: Tue Aug 04, 2009 2:57 am
by GoDogGo!
DrDonkeyLove wrote:GoDogGo! wrote:Looks like the same ol' "everything is degenerating" crap that we've been hearing since oh, 300 BC or so. It comes around every generation. We're still here, oddly enough.
Yes, and most of us live longer and our most elite athletes are better, faster, stronger than at any time since results were recorded. And, it's not just because of pharmaceutical helpers.
Bringing Neanderthals into it makes about as much sense as talking about us vs. hippopotami. They were a different species. And where are they now?
Re: Anyone read this?
Posted: Tue Aug 04, 2009 3:52 pm
by Abandoned by Wolves
Neanderthals were indeed a stronger species, more durable species, but they couldn't run for shit, and that's what cost them. (At least according to "Born To Run").
Re: Anyone read this?
Posted: Tue Aug 04, 2009 11:51 pm
by GoDogGo!
Abandoned by Wolves wrote:Neanderthals were indeed a stronger species, more durable species, but they couldn't run for shit, and that's what cost them. (At least according to "Born To Run").
Another argument that's made the rounds is that they couldn't use an atlatl very effectively, leaving them with thrusting spears only. Of course we don't have any around to test this out on, but...
http://news.duke.edu/2009/07/neandercide.html
Don't bring a handgun to a rifle fight.
Re: Anyone read this?
Posted: Wed Aug 05, 2009 6:24 pm
by seeahill
Abandoned by Wolves wrote:Neanderthals were indeed a stronger species, more durable species, but they couldn't run for shit, and that's what cost them. (At least according to "Born To Run").
Atl-atl Bob thinks their downfall was they couldn't throw for shit. They were tough and strong and used clubs, so they went toe to toe with lunch. You dig up the remains of these guys, they have heavy bones, must have been heavy muscles, too. But most of them are busted up in one way or another. Which is What happens when you take on a cave bear with a club or spear you don't throw.
Bob has looked at some of the skeletal remains and thinks Neanderthals' shoulders/arms weren't made for throwing. It's just a theory. He wants some sport medicine guys to study this deal.
We, says Bob, obviously can throw and learned early to kill from afar. We threw atl-atl darts, then figured out a way to throw an arrow from a bow. We are the best throwers on earth. Which, Bob opines, is why we are on top of the food chain. We aren't fast, we aren't that strong, we don't have claws or very menacing teeth, but by God, we can throw things.