Why was the spoked wheel invented in Siberia, and why was PIE born out of Uralic? Peter Klevius: Because of intelligent mongolic women.

 

Only Peter Klevius interdisciplinary* science analysis of highly intelligent mongolic females having children with kurgan males, explains why the spoked wheel invention spread from Siberia to the rest of the world, and why Tocharian is related to Uralic Samojedic.

* Peter Klevius masters interdisciplinary science studies better than most because of high IQ, protected from "peer review" bias, and only focusing on what he is best at, i.e. low hunging scientific fruits. Peter Klevius intelligence was perhaps best described by the Finnish neuroscientist, J. Juurmaa, who in the 1990s wrote: "Teidän ajatuksen kulku on ilmavan lennokas ja samalla iskevän ytimekäs" which translated to English would mean something like: "Your train of thought is airy and lively and at the same time punchy to the point." This he wrote in a long letter answering Peter Klevius question about the effects on the visual cortex on individuals who have been blind from birth. This inquiry was part of Peter Klevius check up of his already published EMAH theory (1994), so to get a qualified confirmation that the "visual cortex" in born blinds is fully employed with other things than vision. Juurmaa's description of Peter Klevius is in line with philosopher Georg Henrik von Wright's 1980 assessment, and more importantly with Peter Klevius own experience, and perhaps most importantly when assessing consciousness and AI.

For most people trying to do interdisciplinary science studies are doomed to fail, or worse (as can be seen by much nosense published in Nature etc).

In anthropology and linguistics Peter Klevius benefited from learning archaic Swedish and Finnish as a child. The family he was kidnapped to at age two, spoke a very old type of Swedish. Moreover, many old neighbors and family friends/contacts were refugees from Karelia and therefore talked old Finnish, although their children talked modern Finnish. As a result Peter Klevius has no problem with whatever strange Swedish or Finnish dialects. Later he started seeing the obvious advantage of such bilingualism ("Finland-Swedish"), and connected it with the spread of the Goths, Vikings etc. 

As interdisciplinary science combines multiple academic disciplines to address complex problems, this approach not only allows for a more comprehensive understanding and innovative solutions, but also puts demands on the scientist that few can handle without slipping into personal bias. Except for a better than usual brain, and the self-evident need not to be affected by forces outside the scientific focus, the scientist must also possess the opposite, i.e. unbiased personal understanding of the topic. Ironically, the rigidity in a scientific field often shields it from wider perspectives while also may contribute to highly biased overall attitudes thoroughly wrapped in scientific jargon - compare e.g. the completely unfounded "out of Africa" mantra.

And...

Women from the NE brought intelligence and taught their daughters.

According to Peter Klevius, in the (forest) contact zone mongolic women were taken by kurgan men (compare Kalevala) and produced more intelligent offspring, because, according to Peter Klevius, the sparsely populated north had preserved much of the original HSS intelligence that then spread/mixed over the world in diluted form. And when Peter Klevius wrote Origin of the Vikings 2005/2006 he based it on islamic slave price lists (Abbasid starting around 750 AD - i.e. contemporary with the Staraja Ladoga site) which clearly pointed out fair-skinned slave girls from the north as the most valuable (excl. eunuchs). Due to much of European Russia back then speaking Finno-Ugric languages, this explains the success of the bilingual "Finland-Swedish" Vikings.

Mongolic mothers influenced bilingualism by talking their own Finno-Ugric mother tongue to their children, who later also learned Indo-European languages from the surrounding society, yet also affecting the development of Indo-European branches. Moreover, the non-mongolic forest dwelling kurgan people became the Finns who mixed with Saami women, hence creating two very different Finno-Ugric speaking phenotypes.

Proto-Indo-European (PIE) was spoken from approximately 4500 BCE to 2500 BCE.

 

A number of possible parallels of mostly Uralic, in particular Samoyedic, and Yeniseian to the typological traits of Tocharian sets it apart from PIE. This is in line with Peter Klevius view that PIE was the result of North Eurasian language(s) southern movement and mixing with existing southern languages (e.g. Kartvelian). Tocharians reached the Tarim Basin from the Afanasievo culture in Altai 3300-2500 BC.

No one knows what a word is in spoken language, which fact constitutes an enormous blur in linguistics.

According to Peter Klevius, languages started as the combination of meaning bearing single sounds. This polysynthetic transition became highly inflected and lacking words, which are the product of later writing systems. 

The next step produced a variety of agglutinative languages of which later on many became affected by writing systems and due introduction of words.  

Most languages except later Indo-European ones, are still to some extent agglutinative, depending on how words are defined. However, Tocharian is the only, but most important, exception in the Indo-European family. And, according to Peter Klevius (2006), while PIE "words" are only artificially linguistically reconstructed, modern Finnish still today contains real proto-Uralic "words", i.e. meaning bearing sounds and sound combinations (see e.g. Origin of the Vikings). Modern Finnish constitutes of only some 200-300 true Finnish words, while the rest are mostly loanwords. When the Finland-Swede Mikael Agricola in the 16th century translated Finnish sounds to orthography, this had a huge effect on what is now modern Finnish. On the pro-side came the fact that exact Finnish pronaunciation can be understood by anyone: 1) who always puts intonation on the first syllable, and: 2) who uses the alphabetic sounds correctly - i.e. not as the English mess. But do remember that u in Finnish is pronounced as o, while o is pronounced as å, and 3) that double vowels always mean long. Following this simple rules you can read out Finnish text as a native Finn. However, Mikael Agricolas linguistic intervention radically changed how Finns speak compared to Saami and many other related Finno-Ugric languages.

Iceage refuges were rooted in Eurasiatic - IE came much later.

Eurasiatic and Nostratic in the cross hair of rigid linguistic orthdoxy spiced with Western boosting of Indo-European (essentially the Old Nordic creole we call English).

According to Peter Klevius it's self-evident that PIE arose in an already existing agglutinative Eurasian context (Uralic, Jenisejan, Ket etc.). Listen to Edward Vajda.

Peter Klevius: Why was the most important evolutionary fossil, 106 cm Homo floresiensis woman from SE Asia, ridiculed and pathologized, while random ape bones of the same size female ape from NE Africa was titled "the marvellous Lucy"?!

According to Peter Klevius, the cradle of humans (like of most s.c. "African animals") was the volatile tropical SE Asian archipelago. Small Homos spread during low sea level via mainland tropics, while others got bigger in the cooler but fat and protein rich north. This formula explains the "puzzling mess" of hybrids and phenotypes.

Today we (HSS) are all one remaining species because the big skulled "mongoloid" (cold adapted) flat faces spread and mixed all over. 

The world's tallest healthy man Väinö Myllyrinne moving around with ease.

Peter Klevius and Svante Pääbo agree: There was a significant boost in modern human (HSS) intelligence.

 According to Peter Klevius, this was due to the latest brain shrinking during high sea level that forced some humans back into the jungle, where the evolutionary pressure again favoured better packed neuronal circuits. When this latest brain update during low sea level entered mainland Asia, it became more pronounced in the big skulled northern "mongoloids", which then took over the world resulting in the (vanishing*) phenotype pattern we still see today. Following the Mekong river HSS was in northern Laos at least 86,000 BP.

* The small get bigger and the big get smaller on average. However, although Peter Klevius is  average global height (but sons well over average)  - thanks to a back mutation in his 1/3 Sami mother - his crania is much larger than average, even in Europe.

Papuan and Australian HSS negritos got extinct because of waves of bigger HSS.

The fossil of the 106 cm Homo floresiensis woman (left) found on Flores in SE Asia, consists of an almost intact skeleton belonging to a single individual. Ribs from other H. floresiensis were found in the same cave but not used to "improve" the original. However, the similar sized ape* fossil called Lucy (right) from NE Africa consists of random bones collected in different locations over a year (incl, some Baboon ribs).

* Bipedal apes have been around for at least 12 millions years without getting a more human like brain before around two million years.

Homo floresiensis compared to Roonka skull from Australia. Homo floresiensis had unique dental morphology, with teeth that were similar in size to those of short modern humans.

If some of the Roonka burials are close to 7,000 years in age this suggests that the post-Pleistocene reduction in body size and robusticity in south-eastern Australia (Brown 1989, 1992) occurred between 10,000 and 7,000 years BP.

The oldest and most sophisticated HSS art and tools are found in SE Asia (Sulavesi) and Siberia.

The "pan-African" model with multiple speciations and "raftings" is just hilarious! What stopped access to the Afro-Eurasian continent for the most advanced Homos - and why would they fail where H. erectus made it to China more than 2 MA?! And why would s.c. "African animals" (giraffes, antelopes etc.) evolve in the opposite direction to humans?

And geneticists must understand that archaic mutations in moderns lack "GPS". According to Peter Klevius, we (HSS) clearly originated in SE Asian volatile archipelago to the beat of accelerating climate oscillations in Pleistocene, and are now alone after the latest brain update made us fill the Earth and genetically consume the rest - so e.g., together we've ~50% of the Neanderthal genome - and a chin resulting from less protrusion. 

The out of Africa PC pseudoscience has no valid ground. According to Peter Klevius, the Afro-Eurasian continent lacked enough isolation of its potential "Mitochondrial Eves" for successful Homo speciation - only hybridization. And oldest DNA mutations in modern African HSS ("mongoloid", i.e. genetic cold adaptation traits in Khoisan) disprove an African origin. 

The recent s.c. Bantu expansion hybridized the intruding Eurasians to look "African", and archaic Pygmies to become modern HSS - however, their Ebola resistance wasn't always transfered. 

Moreover, the most important "missing link", the Homo floresiensis woman (with an advanced Homo head and advanced Australopithecine body) didn't "raft" to Flores but evolved in SE Asia and got stuck on the "wrong" side of the Wallace line. 

The burial of evolutionary science.

 

Out of Africa is now really about US boosted racism - spiced with "monotheistic" anti-Atheism - , i.e. against East Asians. It emerged after the long lasting Piltdown hoax eventually punctured British Eurocentrism. And in the 1990s - at a time of increased anti-East Asian racism due to Japanese tech challenging US and EU - phylogenetics etc. were eagerly altered to fit "out of Africa" models and later usually disproved in silence. Only Homo still clings on without any reason to do so. And Cambridge still warns prospective students that focus ought to be on Africa.

In this headwind it took some 20 years for Chris Beard to get Eosimias from China and Myanmar to be accepted as earliest Anthropoid fossils. The PC racist out of Africa and anti-Asia community's subversive campaign is widely known but sadly little talked about. 

Africa is a genetic and fossil dump that puzzles everyone who thinks it's not. 

The "puzzling" variety in space and time of hard to fit overlapping fossil species and hybrids, incl. later bipedal apes which were in Eurasia at least 12 MA, i.e. long before Sahelanthropus in northern African Mediterranean river environment, but after climate cooling only survived in more tropical environment. And of course there are Australopithecine fossils all over South Asia yet to be found.

Modern H. sapiens (HSS - i.e. definitely not Jebel Irhoud) have globular skulls. The oldest are from outside Africa, e.g. Apidima 1 in Greece which dates to more than 210,000 BP. However, this globularity may be traced back at least a million years because H. floresiensis also possessed it with additional modern feaures together with Australopithecine like post-cranial ones. 

As Peter Klevius has written since 2012, Homo could only have evolved on the SE Asian tropical archipelago with fluctuating landbridges due to increased sea level oscillations. The back and forth from savannah to jungle honed a better CPU without increasing the size. And every time a new species landed on mainland Asia, the small skulled dark skinned tropical ones continued along tropics while others went to the fat and protein rich north and got bigger unrestricted brains and "mongolized" (cold adapted) faces. This latter observation Peter Klevius wrote about 1992 in his book Resursbegär (Demand for Resources) when comparing the big skulled Jinniushan fossil from northern China with similarly "mongolized" (cold adapted) faces of Khoisan people in southern Africa - and asked why he (now classified as the largest female fossil ever found) didn't go to the Moon with a 1400cc brain and 200,000 years time to do so before HSS.

Our ancestor wasn't a clumsy chimp immigrant in Africa but an extinct gibbon like ape in SE Asia.

 

 

 

We have nothing in common with clumsy knuckle-walking chimps, but a lot with monogamous gibbons who are superior brachiators (arm swinging). Their ball-and-socket wrist joints allow them unmatched speed and accuracy when swinging through trees. They are the fastest of all tree-dwelling, nonflying mammals. On the ground, gibbons can walk bipedally because their Achilles tendon morphology is more similar to that of humans than that of any other ape.  

How climate change made human evolution possible.

 

 

 .

How Peter Klevius evolution formula (1981) explains why existencecentrism (P. Klevius 1992) is essential to understand the human mind*.

*  'Mind' is here to be understood as the latest state of the individual's (or humankind's) adaptation to sensory input imprinted via the thalamus in a way that makes any new input pattern obliged to hit (roughly/dynamically) the same original association pattern. For this process to work no "qualia" is possible other than as obscure concepts in language. In fact, to understand the mind one has to separate it from language. Or more precisely, one has to understand language as sensory input in general - compare Peter Klevius stone example (1992) - but realize its capability of irrational illusions. There's no table in the brain to support a toddler learning to walk - s/he is just adapted to it as part of her/his surroundings. Same with a sunset etc. The neuronal circuit is just a chaotic "film" emulsion where different association patterns have become familiar to the individual. And scanning the brain shows just that, i.e. a chaotic pattern unlike anyone else's, except for more general structures due to similar biology.

The main point of Peter Klevius concept 'existencecentrism' (1992) is that the only reality is the one inside the mind, and that it's impossible to even talk/think about something "outside" the mind because any such speculation is 100% determined/understood by what is inside the mind.

A pile of house building material has the potential for a variety of different houses. However, the more the house is built the less possibility for variation. Same applies to the mind, according to Peter Klevius (1981, 1992, 1994, 2004). This means that the more the brain (mind) adapts to its limited (existencecentrism) surrounding, the less room for other views. First threshold for the growing young human (fetus, baby etc.) is the limit of the senses. The second is the ackumulation of synaptic adaptations which makes the individual naturally (walking etc.) and socially (talking etc.) fluent, but further also limits access to alternative understanding because of the mind “going native”*.

* "Going native" is a concept in social anthropology when a researcher “becomes” one with the culture under study.

Peter Klevius evolution formula from 1981 applied to the mind.

 This article appeared as a s.c. "under-liner" (under strecket) on the editorial page and was back then paid Fmk 500 to the author. 

The understanding of what the senses bring is limited to what they have brought before (P. Klevius 1992). This is in line with Peter Klevius evolution formula (published 1981) where the basic element of existence is motion, and the causality of events constitutes a complex of evolution and devolution (synaptic pruning). Evolution can be said to be the consequence of the variables of causality in where the complexity of older structures is reinforced (compare s.c. counterfactual relation). This development stays in an apparent opposition to thermodynamics which theoretically leads to what is called "maximum entropy", i.e. the state where no additional pruning is needed (compare e.g. walking and talking in general). Thus, one could fatalistically say that evolution in fact only constitutes components of causality on its way to uniformity, where the end point of evolution is determined by its external frame of reference, and can be summed up in the words of the philosopher Hegel: 'Pure being and nothingness are identical' (P. Kotilainen* 1981). 

* Kotilainen (mother's maiden name) was the last of three names labelled on Peter while still a child - the others being Lundberg (married to the mother) and Lindroos (who kept the kidnapped child in secret for many years). Ironically, the proper name Kinnmark (the bio father who admitted fathering the child and promised to marry the mother but never did) was never applied.