Life’s pattern of organization is the tensegrity, it has been in use on earth for over three and one half billion years. The tensegrity is the basis of organizing all living systems including our own bodies. Up until now we humans have not understood the mechanism and therefore could not use this pattern to organize our marriages, our businesses, our organizations and institutions, our communities, or even the entire human species. Humans who organize themselves using the pattern of tensegrity will find themselves orders of magnitude more efficient, more productive, more creative, more intelligent. More importantly they will be much more successful in pursuing their goals and desires. (02/24/02)
more…

There are many challenging aspects to explaining human evolution including the origin of anomalous features such as the large brain, diving reflex, bipedalism, relative hairlessness, subcutaneous fat (especially in neonates) and development of speech. The shore-based hypothesis views at least two of these features (neonatal subcutaneous fat, large brain) as being dependent on nutrition. Animals including primates do not develop these features on terrestrial diets but do on shore-based or aquatic diets. A fully aquatic habitat would not be necessary to derive the benefits of the shore-based food supply. However, positioned as it is between the two extremes of fully terrestrial or fully aquatic evolution, a shore-based existence would permit humans to evolve in near constant contact with water or quite remote from it. It would support the development of bipedalism (through enhanced buoyancy, especially in infants) and could plausibly promote hairlessness and development of speech. The shore-based hypothesis only attempts to explain human brain evolution and, in parallel, neonatal fat stores. In so doing, it accounts for the known and ongoing vulnerability of the human brain and neonatal fat stores to undernutrition. Competing hypotheses need to explicitly address these important physiological and metabolic limitations or explain clearly why they are not relevant; otherwise, they are untenable. (02/24/02)
more…

I am in the process of writing a new book based on the synergic analysis of human evolution and history. My book begins approximately 200 million years ago. Most of my research for this book was completed a few years ago, but I always keep by eye open for new or additionally sources. Yesterday after lunch, my daughter wanted to stop by the bookstore. As always, I wandered over to the science section where I noticed a small book by Elaine Morgan entitled The Descent of Woman. It was subtitled “The Classic Study of Evolution”. I had never heard of Elaine Morgan so I purchased the book. It turns out she is the leading proponent for Sir Alister Hardy’s hypothesis that we humans were remolded by a ten million year holiday at the seashore. First proposed in 1960, the Aquatic Hypothesis of Human Evolution has been controversial since its inception. Hardy was told not to talk about it or it would ruin his career. He did stop talking about it and it is not even mentioned on the website celebrating his long and distinguished career as a marine biologist. In 1972, Elaine Morgan became excited by the idea and remains its strongest proponent to this day. (02/24/02)
more…

Jay Hanson (the Paul Revere of the fossil fuel depletion-over population crisis) as well as many first rate energy scientists see no solutions. Hanson fears a die off in which billions of humans could die with only a small nucleus, perhaps as few as 10-40 million humans,  surviving as new hunter-gatherers. Horace Valentine argues that humans are more adaptive than it might seem. We might not like running our of cheap energy, but we will adapt.  (02/24/02)
more…