Live Like Dirt

Monday Miocene Primate: Pliopithecus antiquus

2016-03-21T07:00:00.000-04:00

Pliopithecus antiquus was among the first fossil primates ever unearthed. Discovered by Édouard Lartet in 1837 in Sansan, France, the original specimen was named by Henri-Marie Blainville in 1839, but was not officially nominated as a taxon until 1849 by Paul Gervais.

Among pliopithecoids, P. antiquus is one of the most complete specimens. The type specimen consists of a nearly complete mandible with missing rami. All of the lower teeth are present, with only the crowns missing from the right canine and left second incisor. P. antiquus remains one of the smallest pliopithecoids discovered, its small dental size being among its most identifying features.

P. antiquus was a widespread species known from multiple sites in France as well as sites in Germany, Poland, and Switzerland. Based on biostratigraphy, P. antiquus is known primarily from fossil strata assigned to MN6 (15 million years ago), but t has been suggested that P. antiquus may have persisted to MN9 (11 million years ago).

Miocene Monday Primate: Victoriapithecus macinnesi

2016-03-07T10:10:00.001-05:00

With an assigned fossil range from 12.5 to 19 million years ago Victoriapithecus macinnesi is one of the oldest known fossil monkeys (only recently supplanted by Nsungwepithecus gunnelli at 25 MA). Victoriapithecus predates the emergence of old world monkeys, and as a part of the larger Victoriapithecidae family, it represents a sister taxon to Cercopithecidae (old world monkeys).

Unlike most modern Cercopithecids, who are largely arboreal, Victoriapithecus was terrestrial primate that lived off a diet of hard fruits and seeds. Given the phylogenetic position of this taxon at the base of the Cercopithecidae lineage, some authors have suggested that the common ancestor of all old world monkeys may have passed through a terrestrial stage before returning to the trees.

From Gonzales et al. (2015).

More recently researchers at Duke University have suggested that although Victoriapithecus had a relatively small brain, it was surprisingly wrinkled. A highly wrinkled brain, as opposed to a smooth brain, increases the surface area over which neurons can fire, suggesting increased cognitive capacity. So even though Victoriapithecus was a small monkey (3-5 kg), it was probably pretty crafty. If your species is going to stick around and remain largely unchanged for close to 7 million years, being able to outsmart your competitors is a necessary survival skill. Maybe staying on the ground and away from the arboreal habitat of the Miocene apes was one of best ideas Victoriapithecus ever had.

Sunken taxa: Telanthropus capensis

2016-03-02T12:13:00.000-05:00

In 1949 Robert Broom and John T. Robinson described "A New Type of Fossil Man" from Swartkrans cave, South Africa. The fossil used to designate this newly described species, Telanthropus capensis, was a nearly complete mandible (below).

Broom and Robinson had previously described another hominin species from Swartkrans, Paranthropus crassidens (later synonmized with Paranthropus robustus), but the Telanthropus jaw was significantly different. It more closely resembled modern humans, as opposed to the large, robust mandible and megadont teeth of Paranthropus. In their initial diagnosis Broom and Robinson suggested it was morphologically similar to what they referred to as "Heidelberg Man" (aka the Mauer Jaw).

Left: Telanthropus capensis, Right: JT Robinson and Robert Broom

Following their intial publication, Robinson and Broom found a few more specimens which they included in the Telanthropus capensis hypodigm. The following year Broom (1950) came to the conclusion all of the South African hominin fossils could be placed into three distinct sub-families of South African "proto-men". These subfamilies consisted of Australopithecinae (Australopithecus africanus, Plesianthropus transvaalensis), Paranthropinae (Paranthropus robusts, Paranthropus crassidens) and Archanthropinae (Australopithecus prometheus, Telanthropus capensis). For those of you familiar with the hominin fossil record and hominin phylogentics you'll note that only two (maybe three) of these species are considered valid taxa today.

In 1955 long-time friend and colleague of Broom, Raymond Dart, suggested that Broom had developed a habit of naming new hominin species every time he discovered a new fossil. Dart (1955) noted that Telanthropus capensis was remarkably similar to Pithecanthropus and Sinanthropus and that all three could be placed into the Archanthropinae sub-family. Following this, Simonetta (1957) moved Telanthropus capensis into the Pithecanthropus genus, renaming it Pithecanthropus capensis. Although Broom did not like this revision, Robinson agreed with the change. Following the taxonomic revisions of Homo erectus by Ernest Mayr (discussed previously in the first episode of Sunken Taxa), Robinson (1961) referred to the Telanthropus jaw as a South African representative of Homo erectus.

Today, there exists a difference of opinion among paleoanthropologists as to whether the African representatives of Homo erectus represent a distinct species from the Homo erectus specimens of Eurasia. Those who inclined to see the African population as distinct species include the Telanthropus jaw in the Homo ergaster hypodigm, making it the first Homo ergaster fossil ever discovered.

Miocene Monday Primate: Pliopithecus vindobonensis

2016-02-29T08:28:00.001-05:00

From Zapfe (1958)

The majority of fossils attributed to the primate family Pliopithecoidea consist of isolated teeth and fragmentary maxillae and mandibles. Thankfully, for at least one species, Pliopithecus vindobonesis, there exists cranial and post-cranial fossils. These fossils give us a lot information, not just about one particular species, but about the pliopithecoid family as a whole.

The crania of P. vindobonesis shows us pliopithecoids had a relatively large and globular braincase and a projecting snout. The snout projects less than the propliopithecoids of North Africa (Aegyptopithecus), suggesting some prognathic reduction from the inferred common ancestor of these two primate families. The orbits are widely spaced and the mandible is long and robust, with a relatively broad ramus. Most importantly, however, the crania of P. vindobonensis, shows us that pliopithecoids had an incompletely ossified ectotympanic tube. This anatomical feature represents an intermediate stage between what is found in Platyrrhines (New World Monkeys), which do not have an ossified ectotympanic tube, and Catarrhines (Apes and Old World Monkeys), which have a completely ossified ectoympanic tube.

Edited from Begun (2002)

The skeleton of P. vindobonesis shows us that post-cranially pliopithecoids had an interesting mix of platyrrhine and catarrhine traits. The brachial index of P. vindobonesis (length of radius divided by the length of the humerus) is similar to that of a howler monkey, but the crural index (length of the tibia divided by the length of the femur) is similar to that of a gibbon. Proportionally, however, the forelimbs of vindobonesis were shorter than their hindlimbs, making them comparable to a baboon. The hands and feet of P. vindobonesis were long and curved suggesting that Pliopithecoids were adept and agile climbers. The post-crania of P. vindobonesis also shows that Pliopithecoids had an entepicondylar foramen, which is a primitive trait not found in any other catarrhine primates (extant or extinct). Finally, the fossils of P. vindobonesis show us, that unlike apes, Pliopithecoids retained their tails.

The fossils which represent Pliopithecus vindobonesis are perhaps the most important pliopithecoid specimens ever found. What little other Pliopitheocoid cranial and post-cranial fossils have been discovered suggest that this family was fairly morphologically uniform. I have an urge to resist the battle cry of paleoanthropology (i.e. "We need more fossils!"), but the fact remains, without additional postcranial pliopithecoid fossils we won't know if the body of P. vindobonesis was representative of most pliopithecoids, or whether it may be distinct in possessing this unique mix of primitive and derived catarrhine traits.

Sunken taxa: Ramapithecus, Bramapithecus, and Sugrivapithecus

2016-02-24T13:45:00.000-05:00

I was originally planning to write about the rise and fall of the taxon Ramapithecus, but I realized I've already written a lengthy blog post about that back in 2011. Judging from the looks of what I wrote (shudder), I think the post originated from some sort of undergrad assignment.

The short version of the Ramapithecus story goes like this: Dr. Guy Pilgrim found some ape fossils in the Siwalik Hills (Pakistan, India, and Nepal) in the early 1900s. In 1910 he published a paper describing these specimens and erecting a number of new species. Some of these species were placed within the pre-existing Dryopithecus genus, but Pilgrim placed others into his newly created Sivapithecus genus. Then, in the 1930s a paleoanthropologist named G.E. Lewis came along and took another look at the Siwalik fossils. He decided they were too different from the Dryopithecus fossils of Europe to be placed within the same genus, but also felt they all wouldn't fit into the Sivapithecus genus either.

In 1934 Lewis published an article in which he erected a number of new genera to accommodate the Siwalik fossils. The most important of these newly revised taxa was Ramapithecus. On the basis having a anteroposteriorly shortened canines and a parabolic dental arcade, Lewis suggested Ramapithecus was ancestral to modern humans. This claim was largely ignored until it was picked up by David Pilbeam and Elwyn Simons in the 1960s. For more precise details of what happened next you can read my 2011 blog post. Suffice to say, subsequent field work in the Siwalik Hills resulted in the discovery of additional fossils, and eventually it was shown that Ramapithecus was not a distinct species, but a female Sivapithecus. As the Sivapithecus was named first, the Ramapithecus fossils were synonymized with Sivapithecus, and the taxonomic label Ramapithecus was sunk. Later studies eventually demonstrated that Sivapithecus was actually part of the Ponginae clade, making it more closely related to orangutans than it is to Hominae (gorillas, chimpanzees, and humans).

Bramapithecus punjabicus

Essentially, Ramapithecus represents a textbook case of a sunken taxon, but still there's another part of this story that often goes ignored. Lewis (1934) also named two other genera in his publication: Bramapithecus and Sugrivapithecus.

Bramapithecus was the first of these two taxa to be sunk. It occurred when Simons (1964) began to review the Siwalik fossils and G.E. Lewis's descriptions. He realized all the Ramapithecus specimens consisted of upper teeth and all the Bramapithecus specimens were lower teeth. Simons put the teeth together and realized they fit perfectly. Thus, sunk Bramapithecus.

Similarly, Sugrivapithecus was also sunken by Simons and Pilbeam (1965). Well kinda.... See, Sugrivapithecus was only ever represented by a single fossil, which Lewis referred to as Sugrivapithecus salmontanus. Simons and Pilbeam argued that this fossil was really quite similar to Sivapithecus sivalensis and it could be lumped in there. At the time, however, Simons and Pilbeam had a habit of lumping most Miocene apes into Dryopithecus, so they originally referred to this species as Dryopithecus sivalensis. It was actually Prasad et al. (1969) who began referring to this specimen as Sivapithecus sivalensis.

By the mid-1980s Ramapithecus, Bramapithecus, and Sugrivapithecus had fallen out of usage. Today, nearly all paleoanthropologists recognize these three genera as really being part of the Sivapithecus genus.

Justin Bieber: professional primatologist

2016-02-23T09:00:00.000-05:00

I know very little about the music of Justin Bieber. As I am a thirty-five year old man it's probably safe to say I'm not exactly his target market. Other than that time he appeared on Saturday Night Live and I changed the channel I haven't really been to exposed to his music. Still, I know enough to know that I don't like it. The little I've gleaned about his personality leads me to the belief that he's little more than a classic example of what happens when you give a spoiled child everything he wants. He takes it, expects more, and becomes confused and angry when he doesn't get his way.

Cool guy Bieber with his captive
victim, a white-headed capuchin
monkey (Cebus capucinus).

A few years ago Bieber was forced to leave his pet monkey in Germany. This is because Germany has laws which prevent assholes from using their airports to illegally transport exotic animals. This made out Bieber kinda sad, but he quickly got over it and left his monkey stranded in Germany while he continued to gallivant around the world singing love songs to prepubescent girls.

Once the world started to grow tired of Bieber's music and personality he hired a professional image consultant and tricked everyone into loving his over-privileged personality once again. And it's been working... at least that's what I read in Vanity Fair. Apparently, he sang a song on the Grammys and now we're suppose to love him again (The Grammys is that weird show where TV executives turn music into a competitive sport and rich people show up to give each other golden statues of antiquated stereo equipment).

That's all fine. Typically, I couldn't care less about the singing and dancing routine of commercial child star. Like I said, I'm not the target demographic, and I'm not one to put down the musical tastes of children. But I am one to put down idiots that endanger the lives of primates.

Justin Bieber is now planning to adopt another monkey. A number of animal rights groups are asking him to reconsider. Perhaps you think that's what I'm about to do, but I'm not. I'd like Justin to adopt a primate, but this time don't make it something cute like a capuchin monkey. This time I'd like to see him adopt an adult male chimpanzee. I'd also like to suggest that this chimp be allowed to live alongside Justin in his house. I think it's also a good idea if Justin teased the chimp and learned how to properly show signs of aggression and dominance. Then I'd like to see what is left of Justin after this chimp breaks his jaw, chews off his hands, and rips off his genitals. I think this could serve as a great learning opportunity to show the public that adopting primates as pets is juvenile and it could leave you disemboweled, disfigured, or dead.

Miocene Monday Primate: Egarapithecus narcisoi

2016-02-22T08:51:00.000-05:00

Egarapithecus narcisoi (Moyà-Solà et al., 2001)

Egarapithecus narcisoi was a pliopithecoid that inhabited Spain approximately 9 million years ago, making it the last known European pliopithecoid. Although little is known about its body proportions, it has been estimated to be about 10 kg, roughly the same size as a howler monkey. As with most pliopithecoids, Egarapithecus known solely by teeth and some small cranial fragments (partial maxilla and mandible). Still, the teeth have been very useful in showing that this species was highly derived compared to the other pliopithecoids. Egarapithecus has a unique combination of molar and premolar characters not found in other Pliopithecoids. These include unique traits like the tuberculum sextum of the lower third molar (an extreme accessory cusp found on the distal portion of the tooth).

Although the precise phylogenetic position of most pliopithecoids are not yet resolved, species are typically placed into one of three subfamilies: Dionysopithecinae, Pliopithecinae, and Crouzeliinae. In a cladistic analysis conducted by Moyà-Solà et al. (2001)), it was shown that Egararpithecus fits within the Crouzeliinae subfamily and forms a sister taxa relationship with Anapithecus hernyaki. Although this wasn't the most robust analysis, given the scarcity of comparative materials available, the other most parsimonious cladograms produced by Moyà-Solà and colleagues also suggested a strong relationship between Egarapithecus and Anapithecus. This prompted Alba & Moyà-Solà (2012) to suggest that the Crouzeliinae subfamily is composed of two tribes: Crouzeliini and Anapithecini. Crouzeliini includes one genus, Pleisopliopithecus (with four distinct species), whereas Anapithecini contains four genera: Anapithecus, Laccopithecus, Barberapithecus, and Egarapithecus (each genus being composed of a single species).

Given that Egarapithecus is the last remaining European pliopithecoid, and it has such highly derived dentition, it raises the question as to whether it may have been too specialized. By too specialized I am suggesting that it may have had a very strict diet, and it is possible that it was not able to adapt to the cooling climate and changing vegetation of the late European Miocene. Of course, this is just speculation on my behalf. Still, we begin to see some changes in the faunal makeup of Europe around 8 million years ago, so it's not that crazy to suggest that the extinction of Egarapithecus may be in part linked to climate change.

Neil Young & the Bluenotes - Bluenote Café (2015)

2016-02-19T12:42:00.001-05:00

Release date: November 13, 2015
Producer: Neil Young
Track listing: Welcome to the Big Room, Don't Take Your Love Away From Me, This Note's For You, Ten Men Workin', Life in the City, Hello Lonely Woman, Soul of a Woman, Married Man, Bad News Comes to Down, Ain't It the Truth, One Thing, Twilight, I'm Goin', Ordinary People, Crime in the City, Crime of the Heart, Welcome Rap, Doghouse, Fool For You Love, Encore Rap, On the Way Home, Sunny Inside, Tonight's the Night
Musicians: Neil Young (vocals, guitar), Chad Chromwell (drums), Rick Rosas (bass), Poncho Sampedro (keyboards), Steve Lawrence (lead tenor saxophone), Ben Keith (alto saxophone), Larry Cragg (baritone saxophone), Claude Cailliet (trombone), John Fumo (trumpet), Tom Bray (trumpet)

This is my final Neil Young review. I've had ample time to listen to this record, as its been seven week since my last review. There are plenty of excuses why this final review took so much time. The first and most reliable excuse is that I've been extremely busy with schoolwork. The second excuse is a subconscious excuse. Perhaps I didn't want this project to end, so I unintentionally extended it. Wherever the truth may lie, the time has come to do my final Neil Young album review (until he puts out a new record of course).

Bluenote Cafe features live recordings from the 1987-1988 tour by Neil Young & the Bluenotes. It contains a lot of material from This Note's For You, but also some unreleased songs and some reworked songs we've heard on other recordings. All and all, it's a really good record in which Neil gets to show off his song writing and song arranging skills while simultaneously demonstrating that he can play just about any style of music on guitar.

The album begins with a previously unreleased song "Welcome to the Big Room" which really sets up the feeling of the album. It's filled with horns, twangy guitar solos, and Neil's love it or leave it vocals. We also hear some lesser known Bluenote songs like "Don't Take Your Love Away From Me" and "Ordinary People" which really come to life on this record.

My favorite moments are, however, the reworked Neil Young songs. In particular I feel as though the version of "On The Way Home" is the best version ever recorded of this song. It changes from an acoustic ballad to an upbeat funk song with driving Motownesque drums. "Soul of a Woman" also features an interesting arrangement (although I do prefer this bootleg piano version the best). The version of "Crime in the City" sounds a lot closer to the version found on Freedom, than say the Crazy Horse version on Weld, but it still manages to sound unique on this recording.

The album culminates with 19 minute long version of "Tonight's the Night". I could sit here and describe how great this version is, but I'll leave it you. If you think a 19 minute version of that song sounds great, you'll love it. Otherwise, it's probably better to leave it alone. In fact the same thing could probably be said about this entire record. One reviewer for Exclaim magazine, Daniel Sylvester, wrote "even die-hard fans will find this as nothing more than a masochistic curiosity."

He's probably right, but then the same thing could be said about my entire Neil Young project. It's a bit of masochistic curiosity. I just spent the entire year of 2015 and the early part of 2016 listening to all of Neil's albums in chronological order. I still love his music, even though I may disagree with his modern anti-scientific ideology (as discussed in my review of the Monsanto Years). There were some great albums in there, some downright awful albums, and a fist full of mediocre albums. I'm not sure what it all means quite yet. It's still going to take me some time to digest Neil's catalog before I reflect back upon it with any profound statement.

I think there's one last Neil Young post left in me. I plan to summarize his career by choosing my favorite song from each album and then composing a 54 song playlist. Watch for this in coming weeks. Or if you're sick of me writing about Neil Young and just wanna read about fossil primates, don't worry, there's only one Neil post left to come.

Hybridization and Speciation: Neanderthals, Denisovians, and Modern Humans

2016-02-18T14:12:00.003-05:00

It looks like modern humans and Neanderthals were interbreeding earlier than previously believed. The date is being pushed back from about 50,000 years ago to 100,000 years ago. Except, it's a little more complicated than that...

Modern humans (Homo sapiens) and Neanderthals (Homo neanderthalensis) shared a common ancestor about 800,000 years ago. There's quite a large disagreement as to which fossil hominin most likely represents that common ancestor (Homo heidelbergensis, Homo rhodesiensis, Homo erectus), and I'm not going to get into that argument today. Suffice to say, the common ancestor ancestor dispersed across African and into Europe. In Europe this species evolved into Homo neanderthalensis and subsequently dispersed across Western Asia and the Middle East. The African lineage evolved into Homo sapiens, which remained in Africa until about 100,000 years ago.

As you probably remember, a few years ago researchers from the Max Planck institute figured out that early modern humans and Neanderthals interbred somewhere between 47,000 and 65,000 years ago (Green et al., 2010). This is thought to have occurred after humans been to migrate out of Africa (as the Neanderthals never made it to Africa), somewhere in the Middle East. That's the reason why non-African humans carry about 1 to 4% Neanderthal DNA in their genome today.

The same year the Max Planck researchers published the draft sequence of the Neanderthal genome, fossils of a previously unknown species of hominin was discovered in the Altai Mountains (Siberia). Dated to an age of 41,000 years these fossils were originally given the name Homo altaiensis, but that was later retracted and now this species is typically just referred to the Denisovians.

Actually, I should have said fossil, instead of fossils. The Denisovian hypodigm initially consisted of a single fragmentary finger bone. Still, that's all that was needed to extract DNA. Analysis of that DNA is what actually determined the Denisovians to be a distinct species. It turns out the Denisovians form a sister clade with the Neanderthals and these two species shared a common ancestor about 600,000 years ago.

By John D. Croft at English Wikipedia

Since that initial publication researchers have found two teeth and a toe bone which can be attributed to the Denisovians. This has allowed for even more ancient DNA research comparing the genomes of Denisovians, Neanderthals, and modern humans.

So, now on to the recent study. An article published yesterday in Nature (Kuhlwilm et al., 2016) compared the genomes of a Neanderthal and a Denisovian who were both from the Altai Mountains in Siberia with the genomes of Neanderthals from Spain and Croatia. Here's what they found:

"We find that a population that diverged early from other modern humans in Africa contributed genetically to the ancestors of Neanderthals from the Altai Mountains roughly 100,000 years ago. By contrast, we do not detect such a genetic contribution in the Denisovan or the two European Neanderthals. We conclude that in addition to later interbreeding events, the ancestors of Neanderthals from the Altai Mountains and early modern humans met and interbred, possibly in the Near East, many thousands of years earlier than previously thought."

Pretty cool, eh? It seems the more we learn about the Homo genus, the messier this whole speciation-hybridization-migration-dispersal thing gets. It kinda makes me glad I'm primarily study fossil species that are way too old to extract DNA from. I like the neat little taxonomic categories that morphology and fossil gaps create.

Let's call a Creationist, a Creationist

2016-02-18T09:55:00.003-05:00

“Fear is the main source of superstition, and one of the main sources of cruelty.
To conquer fear is the beginning of wisdom.”

- Bertrand Russell

The Discovery Institute is an anti-scientific religious organization that works tirelessly to stop American students from receiving a 21st century based education in biology. In other words, they are creationists.

Interestingly, however, the Discovery Institute has a long history of attempting to masquerade as a non-religious scientific organization (see this bullshit article). They even hire "researchers" and publish books and articles about how "Darwinian evolutionary theory" is falling apart (they seem to be largely unaware of the modern evolutionary synthesis which took place in the early 20th century). The Discovery Institute spends a perverted amount of time attacking Darwin, which is pretty weird if you ask me. The dude has been dead for over 100 years and the field of biology has come a long way since the late 19th century. Maybe in a hundred years they'll start attacking Sewall Wright and JBS Haldane.

The Discovery Institute green screens their "scientists" into labs, so they can look sciencey.

As part of their scheme to come off as a scientific organization, the Discovery Institute proclaims themselves as proponents of Intelligent Design (and not creationists). It's an attempt to distance themselves from young earth creationists... and the multiple failed attempts of such creationists to force their religious garbage into public school systems across the United States.

Sometimes people try to tell me there is a difference between advocates of "Intelligent Design" and creationists. The only real difference I see is that proponents of ID are sneaky, dishonest, and completely disingenuous. I like creationists better. Although they might not be the sharpest tools in the shed, at least they are honest. That's an admirable quality. Just ask Ken Ham, founder of the Kentucky Creationist Museum and the Answers in Genesis website. That guy is totally up front about the fact that his dislike of evolution stems entirely from his interpretation of the bible.

I'm also sometimes told that not all religious people are creationists (as if I'm unaware). That's fine with me. I think most religious people are nice rational human beings (because most human beings are nice and rational). Furthermore, nearly all moderately religious people are usually willing to divorce themselves from scripture when it become inconvenient to living in the modern world. I think that's a great thing. Who has the time to make sure their outfit isn't composed of mixed fibers? Also, it can get a bit tiresome lugging rocks around all day just in case you see a queer.

But, I digress. Back to my main point. If we're going to combat the tyranny of religion, and more specifically its modern attacks on biological science, we need to stop using their ridiculous lexicon. There are no proponents of Intelligent Design, there are only creationists.

Sunken Taxa: Anthropopithecus, Pithecanthropus, and Sinanthropus

2016-02-17T10:28:00.001-05:00

Sometimes taxonomic names become obsolete. This can happen for a variety of reasons. Sometimes as researchers gather more fossils (and more data) it becomes apparent that two species previously believed to be distinct, are in fact the same species. Sometimes a new taxon can be proposed, but later deemed invalid as it was not named according rules of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature. And so on...

Throughout the history of paleoanthropology we've seen a lot of taxonomic names come and go. In this new blog series, Sunken Taxa, I plan to take a look at the some species (and genus) names which have fallen out of favor. As with anything to with paleoanthropology, this will likely spur some debate. Not everyone is going to agree with what I consider a sunken taxa. That's okay. I invite any dissenters to either voice their opinions in the comment section, or you can start your own blog. Now I begin.

Pithecanthropus erectus

Anthropopithecus, Pithecanthropus, and Sinathropus

In 1891 paleontologist Eugène Dubois put together a team of fossil hunters on the island of Java, Indonesia. Their goal was to find "the missing link"; a fossil species that bridged the gap between ape and man. Although a small handful of hominin fossils had been previously discovered by other researchers, Dubois' efforts marked the first real purposeful search for hominin fossils. Within a year Dubois and his team had discovered a skullcap, two femurs, and a tooth along the banks of the Solo River in East Java. Dubois named his species Anthropopithecus erectus, but then later renamed it Pithecanthropus erectus. These fossils became better known by their nickname "Java Man".

A few decades later Canadian paleoanthropologist Davidson Black found himself working in China. From 1923 to 1927 Black and his team excavated part of the Zhoukoudian cave system in which they found five skulls which appeared to represent a distinct previously unknown species of hominin. Black gave this new species the name Sinanthropus pekinensis. These fossils were given the nickname "Peking Man".

Sinanthropus pekinensis (Peking Man) Skull II

Pithecanthropus erectus and Sinanthropus pekinensis were among the most important fossil discoveries of the late nineteenth and early twentieth century. In fact these fossils were so influential in shaping how scientists thought about human evolution that when Raymond Dart discovered the first Australopithecus africanus fossil in 1924 almost no one believed it represented a human ancestor. This was largely because most professional paleoanthropologists firmly believed humans evolved in Asia.

Then, in the 1950s evolutionary biologist Ernst Mayr came along. After having helped revolutionize biology as a part of the modern evolutionary synthesis Mayr turned his eyes to the hominin fossil record and described it "chaos". Mayr believed that many early hominin paleontologists had gone beserk naming species. It seemed as though every new fossil discovery was being considered to be a brand new, never before seen species. Mayr decided it was time to study the fossils and begin synonymizing taxa. In doing so he folded Pithecanthropus erectus and Sinanthropus pekinensis into a single species which he dubbed Homo erectus. The change of genus name reflected Mayr's belief that these two species were morphologically similar enough to modern humans that they should be placed within the same genus. Still, they were sufficiently different enough that he thought a distinct species name should be retained. As Pithecanthropus erectus was named some thirty years before Sinanthropus pekinensis, its name took priority.

And thus, as Homo erectus became established, Pithecanthropus and Sinanthropus were sunk. It should be noted, however, that some paleoanthropologists still refer to the Java Man or Peking Man fossils by including a subspecies designation of either Homo erectus erectus (Java Man) or Homo erectus pekinensis.

Miocene Monday Primate: Chororapithecus abyssinicus

2016-02-15T17:58:00.001-05:00

Chororapithecus abyssinicus is late Miocene hominoid from Ethiopia. Its discovery was announced in 2007 with a hypodigm consisting of seven teeth and a few additional molar fragments (Suwa et al., 2007). Needless to say this isn't the most robust fossil sample, but the same could be said about quite a few Miocene primates.

Chororapithecus (Suwa et al., 2007).

Still, the researchers who discovered and named Chororapithecus felt they had enough material to claim that this newly discovered species is ancestral to the extent Gorilla lineage. They based their argument on a couple lines of evidence. First of all, there's a real big gap in the fossil record when it comes to Africa in the period between 12 - 7 million years ago. At an age of 10.7 - 10.1 million years old, it's quite possibly in the right time period, and if we assume that African apes initially evolved in Africa, Chororapithecus is also in the right place.

But that's not enough to really link Chororapithecus to extant hominids (living African apes) in any meaningful sense. For that we rely upon morphology. Interestingly, Suwa et al. (2007) suggested that although the occlusal surface of the Chororapithecus teeth do not have the sort of crests found in present day gorilla teeth, the underlying dentin is crest-like in structure (as observed via micro-CT scans). According to their evolutionary hypothesis, dentin crests evolved first, and then enamel crests evolved sometime afterwards.

I think it's a bit strange to suggest that the shape of the dentin was somehow driving the evolution of the enamel in a bizarre time delayed fashion. When we're talking about dental adaptations we're really talking about natural selection. It's the enamel that actually comes in contact with the environment/food, not the dentin. Having dentin crests don't help you grind up vegetation better, only enamel crests can do that. Dentin crests offer no increased chance of survival, so how could dentin they ever be positively selected for?

Just this past week in a letter to Nature, Katoh et al. (2016) reported some revised dates for the deposits in which Chororapithecus was found. It is now thought that the teeth are more likely to be about 8 million years old. Katoh et al. (2016) use this new data to suggest the split between the gorilla and human lineage took place at either 8 million or 10 million years ago, depending upon the phylogenetic position of another late Miocene hominoid, Nakalipithecus (I'll talk about this Miocene ape on some forthcoming Monday).

A date of 8 million years ago sounds too recent for me if we're talking about the divergence of the Gorilla and Homo/Australopithecus-Pan clades. After all, the earliest hominin, Sahelanthropus tchadensis, appears at 7 million years ago. I think 10 million years ago is probably a bit more reasonable, but there's a bigger problem. If Chororapithecus isn't an ancestral gorilla, then none of this data really informs when the African ape divergence actually took place. I do not believe there is presently enough data to substantiate the claim that dentin crests somehow telepathically will enamel crests into existence. That's the jerk way of saying I don't think there is convincing evidence to suggest Chororapithecus is in any way ancestral to the Gorilla lineage.

Perhaps my bias is showing, but I think there's much more convincing evidence that suggest the extant African ape clade originated in Europe. But that's a subject for another day. It's also the subject the new book by PhD supervisor: The Real Planet of Apes: A New Story of Human Origins by David R. Begun. I started reading this the other ape. It's pretty decent, informative and funny. It's also written for a general audience, so you don't have to be some sort of academic paleontologist nerd to enjoy it either.

Monday Miocene Primate: Pierolapithecus catalanunicus

2016-02-08T10:59:00.002-05:00

Image (Moya-Sola et al., 2004)

Pierolapithecus catalaunicus is an extinct species of ape which lived about 11.9 million years ago during the early Late Miocene. As a member of the Dryopithecini tribe, it is broadly considered to be ancestral to African apes (homininae) by some researchers, whereas others argue that it shares more in common with the Asian apes (ponginae).

Regardless of its phylogenetic position Pierolapithecus possessed specialized adaptations for tree climbing including curved phalanges, a stiff lower spine, a wide flat rib cage, and scapulae that are seemingly position for suspensory (below-branch) locomotion. Pierolapithecus was native to Spain

Monday Miocene Primate:Orrorin tugenensis

2016-01-25T09:47:00.002-05:00

Orrorin tugenensis is one of the earliest known hominins (the earliest being Sahelanthropus tchadensis). It comes from the late Miocene of Kenya, and has been dated to be somewhere between 6.1 and 5.7 million years old. O. tugenensis is known from about 20 fossil specimens which include the posterior part of a mandible in two pieces; a symphysis and several isolated teeth; three fragments of femora; a partial humerus; a proximal phalanx; and a distal thumb phalanx.

It is thought that O. tugenensis represents one of earliest ancestors (or earliest hominin side-branches) that arose after the divergence between the lineages which eventually led to humans and chimpanzees. The femur of O. tugenensis has a elongated neck with spherical head that is anteriorly rotated, while the lesser trochanter protrudes medially. These features have been used by some paleoanthropologists to suggest O. tugenensis was bipedal.

The rest of the postcranium, however, seems to indicate O. tugenensis may have also climbed trees, or at least inherited the traits typically associated with tree-climbing primates (curved proximal phalanges).

The paleoanthropologists who discovered O. tugenensis, Bridgette Senut and Martin Pickford, have argued that this species was more bipedally advanced later hominins like Ardipithecus and even Australopithecus. They suggest that O. tugenesis is our best known fossil ancestor and the Australopithecines constitute an evolutionary side branch not related to humans, This is not the opinion of most paleoanthropologists, as Australopithecines are typically viewed as being ancestral to the Homo genus.

Interestingly, one of the most famous paleoanthropologists of all time, Louis Leakey also had a similar opinion about Australopithecines. I sometimes wonder what his interpretation of O. tugenensis would have been. Would have thought it to be a direct human ancestor? Or would he have dismissed it as unimportant (because he didn't find it himself)? Personally, I'm more inclined to think that Australopithecines are ancestral to the Homo genus, but I'm also unsure as what to think about O. tugenensis and where it fits into the big picture of hominin evolution.

Again, we hear the sad refrain... We need more fossils.

Monday Miocene Primate: Homunculus patagonicus

2016-01-18T14:58:00.000-05:00

Approximately 40 million years ago or so anthropoid primates expanded their range into the New World. This branch of the primate family tree, formally known as Platyrrhini and colloquially as New World Monkeys, is composed of five families: Atelidae, Aotidae, Callitrichidae, Cebidae, and Pitheciidae. Homunculus patagonicus is the earliest know member of the Pitheciidae family and lived during the early Miocene.

A composite of Homunculus patagonicus made from CT
scans of multiple fossils (Perry et al., 2010)

H. patagonicus was originally discovered in the late nineteenth century and first described by the Argentinean paleontologist Florentino Ameghino. It was given the genus name of Homunculus (meaning "little man" in Latin) because Ameghino believed it was an ancestor of modern humans. Today, we know that New World primates are very distant relatives to catarrhine primates (Old World monkeys, apes, and humans) separated by over 40 million years of evolutionary divergence. In the late nineteenth century, however, it wouldn't have been so absurd to suggest that humans involved in the new world.

H. patagonicus is linked to the Pitheciidae family on the basis of craniodental similarities. Modern pitheciines feed primarily upon seeds and sclerocarps and have very characteristic anterior dentition. The incisor-canine complex of H. patagonicus is very similar to modern pitheciines, which suggests the dietary preferences of piithecines evolved relatively early in their lineage.

The holotype (the fossil specimen used to initially formally describe the species) was lost at some point over the course of the twentieth century. In 2008 paleontologists Marcelo Tejedor and Alfred Rosenberger described a neotype for H. patagonicus (a fossil selected to serve as the type specimen when an original holotype has been lost or destroyed). Interestingly, the neotype came from Ameghino's collection and had been left undescribed for over a hundred years.

Monday Miocene Primate: Otavipithecus namibiensis

2016-01-11T10:39:00.000-05:00

Otavipithecus was discovered in the early 1990s by a team of paleontologists led by Glen Conroy (Conroy et al., 1992). Although the entire hypodigm of this species consists of a single mandible, it's still a pretty fascinating discovery for a variety of reasons. First of all it comes from the Otavi Mountains in Namibia, whereas the majority of African Miocene hominoids come from geological contexts associated with the great rift valley in East Africa. Secondly, it has been remarkably difficult for scientists to determine the phylogenetic position of this ape with any real degree of certainty. Thirdly, at an age of 12 million years old, Otavipithecus looks considerably modern when compared to other apes of the middle Miocene epoch. Thus, Otvapithecus is an ape that appears to be both out of place and out of time.

Conroy's (1994) initial phylogenetic assessment determined that Otavipithecus formed a sister taxa with East African hominids (Australopithecus). According to Conroy this would mean that Otavipithecus represents something akin to the common ancestor of humans and African apes. Subsequent analysis has not upheld this claim, and a more recent cladistic analysis by Singleton (2000) has instead suggested that Otavipithecus forms a sister taxa relationship with Afropithecus (an early Miocene ape from 18 million years ago). It seems more likely that Otavipithecus is a divergent side branch on the ape family tree, and ultimately an evolutionary dead end with no living descendents.

Although this second scenario does seem much more likely, given the rest of what we know about Miocene fossil apes, the scarcity of Otavipithecus fossils makes it difficult the determine the phylogenetic position of this species with any degree of certainity. Afterall, Singleton's (2000) analysis relies solely upon 22 mandibular and dental characteristics. If Otavipithecus tells us anything it's that paleontologists need to return to the Otavi Mountains and find some more fossils.

ISIS vs. Neanderthals (and the Kurds)

2016-01-06T12:50:00.000-05:00

Shanidar Cave is a well known archaeological site in the Bradost Mountains of Northern Iraq (also known Iraqi Kurdistan). The cave is best known for being the location at which a team of archaeologists led by Ralph Solecki excavated the remains of ten Neanderthal skeletons in the late 1950s. Most notably, one of these skeletons, known as Shanidar 4, is thought to demonstrate evidence of Neanderthal burial practices. Huge clumps of pollen were found in the soil directly associated with Shanidar 4. This led Solecki to suggest that this individual had been purposefully buried with flowers.

Almost immediately upon the publication of Solecki's findings, paleoanthropologists argued that the pollen associated with Shanidar 4 could have accumulated due to wind. Solecki replied that the fact pollen was found throughout the site, but only large clumps in the burial of Shanidar 4, was unlikely to be a coincide caused by a stochastic natural process like wind.

For years the debate over Shanidar 4 has continued in the academic literature. Most recently, archaeologist Paul Pettitt argued the pollen clumps were accumulated by a small rodent known as a Persian jird. Persian jirds are known to have also occupied Shanidar Cave and they are also known to collect and store large deposits of seeds and flowers. The fact that none of the other Neanderthals burials show any signs of ritual treatment has lead Pettitt to conclude that the pollen found associated with Shanidar 4 was not purposefully placed there by other Neanderthals.

And, as with many long-standing academic debates, the argument continues. Or at least it did until ISIS took control of the Bradost Mountains in the summer of 2014. Prior to their invasion "scientists with 45 foreign missions from 16 countries were conducting archaeological excavations and surveys in the Kurdistan region of northern Iraq" (Live Science). As you can imagine, once the sexually repressed islamofacist zealots moved into the neighborhood any science in the vicinity came to a grinding halt.

Among the seemingly never ending list of shitty things ISIS likes to do (like killing and raping their fellow muslims) they also like to destroy history (and prehistory). Their narrow religious worldview doesn't allow them to imagine a world without the omnipotent child molester Allah at the helm. As such, blowing up ancient classical temples, statues of Buddha, and destroying numerous other culturally significant artifacts has become an important means for ISIS to demonstrate their religious ignorance on a global scale.

This time, however, ISIS wasn't able to destroy another of world's most cherish archaeological sites. A few months ago Kurdish resistance fighters (Peshmerga) reclaimed the Bradost Mountains and have since pushed ISIS almost completely out of Northern Iraq. Live Science reported earlier this week that archaeologists have now returned to Shanidar Cave and they are able to continue their research in peace.

Hopefully, more gains are made by the Kurds and ISIS is completely extinguished before they are able to destroy more of the world's heritage. The return to Shanidar Cave is good thing for archaeology, paleoanthropology, and much more importantly, humanity. Now we can get back to the good stuff, like debating the archaeological significance of pollen clumps.

Miocene Monday Primate: Mesopithecus

2016-01-04T16:49:00.002-05:00

This year I'm switching from featuring weekly Miocene mammals to focus exclusively upon Miocene primates. Although I'm probably going to feature a lot of apes I'd also like to get some monkeys, pliopithecoids, and other assorted Miocene primates in there too. To start things up I present you the first Miocene Monday Primate of 2016: Mesopithecus.

Mesopithecus (Kofous, 2009)

Mesopithecus was an old world monkey that inhabited parts of Europe and Asia during the late Miocene and early Pliocene. As such, it is the last known monkey to have been native to Europe. Paleoanthropologists have identified at least three distinct species: Mesopithecus pentelicus, Mesopithecus monspessulanus, and Mesopithecus delsoni.

Mesopithecus had a body length of approximately 40 centimetres making it about the size of modern macaque. Evolutionarily, it is thought that Mesopithecus is probably more closely related to Colobinae primates like snub-nosed monkeys (Rhinopithecus) and doucs (Pygathrix).

Mesopithecus pentelicus (Jesse Early Hyde Collection 1890-1930)

The dentition of Mesopithecus has been interpreted as demonstrating both signs of folivory and frugivory. Growing consensus now seems to favour the frugivore hypothesis. Various functional morphology studies of the fossilized remains of Mesopithecus have suggested that at the very least Mesopithecus was semi-terrestrial. This may have, however, varied between the various different species of Mesopithecus. M. monspessulanus is thought to have engaged in more frequent arboreal activity compared to other members of its genus.

Mesopithecus went extinct in the early Pliocene, most likely due to changes in the climate and forests of Europe that began to occur at the end of the Miocene. For some reason, however, Mesopithecus seems to have held out a bit longer than other European primates of the Miocene.

Last Year

2016-01-03T15:48:00.001-05:00

One of the many Southern Ontario farmer fields I walked last summer looking for artifacts.

It's a new year and I'm not one for making lists, I'll leave that to the click-bait websites. Still, I feel obliged to provide some sort of year end review. So, here goes...

Personally, it was a pretty awesome year for me. I got married to the most awesome person on the planet. She came equipped with three equally awesome kids. So, that definitely takes the cake for the best moment of 2015. I also started my PhD at the University of Toronto this past fall. My plan is to use geometric morphometrics look at the phylogeny of pliopithecoids... or something like that. I worked for a small archaeology firm surveying and excavating sites around the Greater Toronto Area. We worked a few prehistoric sites, but the majority were 19th century homestead sites. Historical archaeology isn't my favorite, but it pays the bills, and the crew I worked with was great. Sometimes that matters a lot more.

I haven't had the chance to listen to the best albums of 2015. I was a bit consumed with reviewing the nearly 50 year recording career of a certain Canadian musician. I will, however, mention that I released an album with my band FUCKHAWK and it's pretty damn good (we're currently No. 1 in the Toronto punk charts and No. 4 in National punk charts). You can download it for free on bandcamp or Reverb Nation or stream it on YouTube.

I didn't get to see the best movies of 2015 either. Although I did see Mad Max: Fury Road and that was awesome. More importantly, however, I discovered an old movie theatre down the street called the Royal Cinema that plays old films and weird obscure movies. I was able to catch two Neil Young films there, Journey Through the Past and Greendale.

There were some really big paleoanthropological discoveries this past year. I didn't get much of chance to discuss them, but this isn't always such a bad thing. I like to take my time when it comes to new scientific announcements and see how they play out. I think my excitement for new research can sometimes lead me to be a bit less skeptical than I generally am otherwise. I refer you to a 2012 post I wrote about the Red Deer People. I'm no longer convinced that these bones represent an previously unknown hominin species. Upon further review of the research I saw that the measurements of these fossils fit within the normal range of Homo sapiens variation. That being said, I think Homo naledi is probably going to be accepted into the regular pantheon on hominids despite the currently unpublished objections that it's probably just Homo erectus.

Live Like Dirt pageviews, 2010-2016.

I did a bit more blogging in this 2015. I wrote 109 blog posts this past year compared to 59 in 2014 and 97 in 2013. I largely attribute this increase in volume to my long Neil Young project (only one album left at the moment). I'd like to see this trend continue in 2016, but as motivated as I can be there's this thing called time that often limits my ability to achieve such goals. I'm doubtful that I'll ever return to the prolific kind of blogging I did back in 2009, but I have no intentions of ending this blog anytime in the near future. After living with the constant nagging guilt that I should be writing a blog post for the past 8 years I don't know what I'd do if I had to give that up.

Happy New Year. Have a good one.

Neil Young - The Monsanto Years (2015)

2016-01-01T16:50:00.000-05:00

Release date: June 29, 2015
Producers: Neil Young & John Hanlon
Track listing: A New Day For Love, Wolf Moon, People Want to Hear About Love, Big Box, A Rock Star Bucks a Coffee Shop, Workin' Man, Rules of Change, Monsanto Years, If I Don't Know
Musicians: Neil Young (vocals, guitar), Anthony Logerfo (drums), Corey McCormick (bass guitar, backing vocals), Tato Melgar (percussion), Lukas Nelson (guitar, backing vocals), Micah Nelson (electric guitar, electric charango, backing vocals)

A new year begins and my self-inflicted project to review all the Neil Young album continues. It's been a great journey, and as hard as may be to believe, I haven't grown tired of listening to Neil yet. I'm sure I'll continue listening to my favorite albums and songs long after this project comes to a close. But, alas, we're getting to the end of things. This past week I listened to Neil's latest studio album, The Monstanto Years.

On The Monsanto Years Neil plays alongside a new cast of musicians, Promise of the Real, a group lead by Lukas and Mich Nelson, the sons of Willie Nelson. This is the thirty-six studio record for Neil and the second for Promise of the Real. Produced by Neil and long time engineer John Hanlon, The Monsanto Years features nine songs about the agricultural biotech company Monsanto, the department store chain Wal-Mart, the coffee giant Starbucks, as well as Citizens United and various other oft despised enemies of the nouveau-left.

Musically, The Monsanto Years is one of the best records Neil has made in recent years. Crushing power chords, bright inventive and catchy guitar leads, new interesting instrumentation, and a steady back beat. Drummer Anthony Logerfo sounds like a young Ralph Molina at his prime and the Nelson brothers add some amazing backup vocals. At times the band is reminiscent of Crazy Horse, at their best way, and other moments Neil and Promise of the Real create a sound which truly unique; a hard feat given the long history of Neil. An amazing band and a great sounding album.

Lyrically, however, this album is a tribute to scientific ignorance, fear mongering, and internet based conspiracy theories. The idea is simple: Genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are bad and Monsanto is an evil multi-national corporation that travels around the world forcing farmers to grow GMOs against their will. Why? Because Monsanto is a greedy jerk. It reads like an ill-informed facebook post from your crazy hippy friend who is constantly trying to talk to you about auras and warn you about the evils of gluten.

It's sad to see, as I've always thought of Neil as one of the original smart, creative kinda hippies. He's previously championed well-informed scientific and environmental causes. He's been a strong advocate of Al Gore and educating people about global warming. He's worked with auto-mechanics to develop alternate fuel technology for old cars. But this time, Neil seems to have put reason and science aside in place of ideology.

I say this because there is no evidence which supports the claims made by Neil on this album that GMOs are bad. In fact, all the non-facebook based evidence (i.e. peer reviewed scientific journals) suggest otherwise. I could point to countless studies which support this position, but instead I'll point to just one. In a meta-analysis published in Critical Reviews in Biotechnology, Nicolia et al., (2013) reviewed over 1,783 studies about the safety and environmental impacts of GMO foods. The were unable to find a single credible example of GMOs causing harm to humans or animals.

In reality, GMOs help make the world a better place. They allow people around the world, particularly in developing countries, to more nutritionally valuable disease resistant crops. Objection to GMOs is first world privilege, and a highly ill-informed one at that. As the evidence clearly shows, it's not based on science, it's based on ideology and some dumbass naturalistic fallacy. As such, the anti-GMO crowd are the global warming deniers of the left.

With this album Neil moves from being a protest singer in league with greats like Woody Guthrie and Bob Dylan to becoming an anti-intellectual wack-a-loon in league with Jenny McCarthy. Think that's a bit far? I think it's kinda light considering the lyrics of "People Want to Hear About Love". The song is basically about how Neil wants to sing about the issues that matter, but they public doesn't want to hear about it. At one point he sings the following line:

"Don't say pesticides are causing autistic children, People want to hear about love."

Listen up, Neil, I'll say it and I'll say it very clearly. Pesticides do not cause autism. It's actually unclear what the cause of autism is, but current medical research suggests a strong genetic component (Frietag, 2006; Perisco and Bourgeron, 2006). You know what? There's something else that pisses me off about this too. It's the idea that autism is some sort of sickness from which people need to be cured. It's the idea that having autism means you're broken. It's a horrible message to send and it's completely untrue. Autistic people aren't sick or ill. They simply experience and interact with the world in a manner that is slightly different than people without autism. So, Neil, I love your music, but I have to say a curt "fuck you" for writing that bullshit line.

But we're not done yet. Neil's scientific ignorance makes him a complete hypocrite when it's comes to genetically modified organisms. From Forbes,

"Diagnosed with type 1 diabetes as a child, Young’s life depends on daily insulin therapy. The medication, which keeps over a million Americans alive every day, is produced using none other than the very genetic engineering techniques Young’s album demonizes. Prior to the 1970s, insulin was harvested and purified from the pancreases of slaughtered pigs. Today there’s a better way. Genetically engineered microbes are used to “manufacture” synthetic insulin on a large scale; a far safer, more humane and more energy and cost-efficient form of the naturally-occurring hormone."

In the end Neil is wrong about nearly everything he sings about on this record. As both a scientist and a Neil fan this really sucks for me. I find his disregard for evidence offensive, perhaps even too offensive to continue calling myself a fan. I guess you could say I'm a fan of his music, but I'm no longer a fan of Neil as a person.

It's possible Neil could change his mind. It's not exactly likely, as doing so would mean publically admitting that he was wrong and that he made a concept album about bullshit. He'd also have to start working to undo the damage his miseducation campaign has already done. But, it is possible. Just two years ago, longtime anti-GMO Mark Lynas, took took at the evidence and changed his stance completely. It's time for Neil to sit down and take a serious look at the evidence with a truly open mind. Wasn't that what being hippy was supposed to be about? Having an open mind?

NEXT WEEK:

Neil Young & The Bluenotes - Bluenote Cafe (2015)

Creationism is evolving, but it's also going extinct

2015-12-29T12:56:00.001-05:00

When attempts to force creationism into the American public school system failed in the 1980s, anti-evolutionist science deniers realized they needed to rebrand their image. Their primary problem was that the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution prohibited the state from teaching religion in a public school system. As a work around, the term Intelligent Design was created. Basically, it's the exact same thing as creationism, it's just dressed up in sciencey sounding words and it doesn't invoke a specific Abrahamic god. Instead, an amorphous human-like god is presented as the creator of all things because life is just too complex to evolve by series of stochastic processes over billions of years. It's a poorly constructed argument that has been defeated countless times and necessitates no further analysis other than to say it's just kinda dumb (but if you're interested in a more in depth analysis see Talk Origin's: An Index to Creationist Claims).

The first big attempt to push Intelligent Design into the public school system began in 2004 in Dover, Pennsylvania with the Kitzmiller vs. Dover Area School District trial. Creationists infiltrated the school system and replaced the standard fact-based biology textbook with a piece of creationist garbage called Of Pandas and People. Thanks to reason, logic, and evidence, the creationists failed and the textbook was removed from the Dover Area School District and replaced with a real one. It's all brilliantly documented in the PBS film Judgement Day: Intelligent Design on Trial. Since that time creationists have evolved to become even more sneaky, particularly when they attempt to get legislation passed which makes the teaching of religious bullshit in a public science class that much easier.

In new article appearing in Science's Education Forum evolutionary Biologist Nick Matzke has documented the attempts of creationists to change public policy. Most interestingly he did this by conducting a cladistic analysis of their legislation. His research shows, that much like biological organisms, creationism adapts to its environment and evolves over time.

Figure reproduced from Matzke (2015).

The irony of this study is likely lost on creationists, as is most non-Biblical information. It might even be a bit worrying if it wasn't for the fact that creationism is on the decline in the US. Another study published earlier this year clearly shows that creationism just isn't catching on with kids anymore. It's been a slow march to extinction, but things are finally starting to change in a positive way. It's doubtful that creationism will ever go away entirely, after all there are new morons being born every second. It does, however, seem that the effect of these morons is lessening and that's a good thing. It means the rest of us get to enjoy the beauty of evolution and science with fewer asinine comments from the peanut gallery.

Neil Young - Storytone (2014)

2015-12-24T11:13:00.000-05:00

Release date: November 4, 2014
Producer: Niko Bolas and Neil Young
Track listing: Plastic Flowers, Who's Gonna Stand Up?, I Want to Drive My Car, Glimmer, Say Hello to Chicago, Tumbleweed, Like You Used to Do, I'm Glad I Found You, When I Watch You Sleeping, All Those Dreams
Musicians: Neil (vocals, guitar, piano, banjo, ukulele),

So, after about 50 weeks of Neil Young reviews I'm turning one in a bit late. It's been a busy holiday week and it's been a lot of gun. Well, except listening to Storytone, which I believe is probably one of Neil's most horrible creations. This album features Neil singing alongside a 92 piece orchestra, which we're told was one of his life long dreams. Frankly, I think Storytone is more of a nightmare, a nightmare filled with whiny songs, weak lyrics, forced rhymes, and drab instrumentation. There are a few songs that feature Neil playing with a big band, and they're a bit better, but only because are contrasted against an album that is mostly garbage.

The album begins with a song called "Plastic Flowers". It's unoriginal, both musically and lyrically. It's tedious and uninteresting, and as such, serves as a great introduction to this album as it quickly alerts the listener not to get their hopes up. Next up, Neil gives us what is supposed to be some new environmentalist anthem with "Who's Gonna Stand Up?" This is one of those songs where you can guess what the rhymes are going to be (and get it right) the first time you hear it. With the third track, we're given the first band band song of the album, "I Want to Drive My Car". Neil sounds so bored on this track, like he's uninterested in even singing.

In a struggle to find something nice to say about Storytone, I will say Neil does play some interesting and uncharacteristic jazz influenced lead guitar on the big band tracks. The song "I'm Glad I Found You" is not as bad as the other songs, but it'll still be the worst song on just about any other Neil Young album.I guess the one good thing is that Neil isn't afraid to experiment and try new ideas. It just turns out some experiments are failures.

To make matters worse Neil released two versions of this album. The second version features Neil playing all the tracks by himself. I'm not sure which version I dislike more.

Here's a review from Rolling Stone that tells us that Storytone is an amazing album. This is the same magazine that said of After the Goldrush that "none of the songs here rise above the uniformly dull surface", and then decreed that Harvest as little more than After the Goldrush with slide guitar. Professional music critics aren't trend setters, they're slaves to conformity and they're always late to the party. This album, both versions, kinda stinks. It's quite simple really.

NEXT WEEK: Neil Young & Promise of the Real:
The Monsanto Years (2015)

FUCKHAWK - touch it

2015-12-18T10:00:00.001-05:00

Here's the brand new album I made with my band, FUCKHAWK. You can download it for free at http://fuckhawk.bandcamp.com. Also available streaming on YouTube.

Touch It by fuckhawk

Neil Young - A Letter Home (2014)

2015-12-15T12:55:00.002-05:00

Release date: April 19, 2014
Producers: Jack White III and Neil Young
Track listing: A Letter Home Intro, Changes, Girl From North Country, Needle of Death, Early Morning Rain, Crazy, Reason to Believe, On the Road Again, If You Could Read My Mind, Since I Met You Baby, My Hometown, I Wonder If I Care as Much
Musicians: Neil Young (vocals, guitar, piano, harmonica) with Jack White (piano and vocals on "On the Road Again" and guitar and vocals on "I Wonder If I Care as Much").

Once again Neil takes us on a journey through the past. On this occasion his time machine is a 1947 Voice-o-Graph Recording Booth. This week's album A Letter Home features Neil playing a collection of cover songs that span a time period from 1956 (Ivory Joe Hunter's "Since I Met You Baby") to 1983 (Bruce Springsteen's "My Hometown"). The album begins with a spoken word piece in which Neil address his mother. He tells her about a weather man named "Al", and asks her to speak to "Daddy" as they are both "up there together now."". A Letter Home is an unambiguous tribute to some of the artists that influenced Neil, particularly those from his formative years in Winnipeg, before he had a career as musician.

Even in 1947 The Voice-O-Graph Machine was not a state of the art recording device. Essentially, it's a soundproofed telephone booth sized box that allows you to directly record a vinyl record, or more accurately a laminated cardboard disc that only withstands a few playbacks. The Voice-O-Graph Machine was typically found at county fairs, arcades, and various tourist attractions throughout the USA from the 1940s through to the 1970s (although first known model was built in 1910). It allowed non-professional musicians the ability to make recordings which they could share with friends and family. During World War II they were also used by soldiers to record messages that were sent back home.

The Voice-o-Graph used on A Letter Home was acquired by Jack White (White Stripes, Third Man Records) through an novelty collector in early 2013. The machine only came with a few laminated cardboard discs, and these were in poor shape and as mentioned prone to rapid degeneration. As substitute Ben Blackwell (Dirtbombs drummer and Third Man Records employee) found that polyvinyl discs were able to be used without making modifications to the recording technology of the machine itself. They did, however, modified the recording speed from 78 rpm to 45 rpm as it allows for longer recordings. The machine is currently located at Third Man Records at Nashville, Tennessee and is available for public use. As the Voice-o-Graph records directly to disc it is unforgiving. You have one chance to get your song or message right, or it will cost you. In 1947 it cost 35 cents to make a record, today it costs fifteen dollars. A pretty reasonable price seeing as how this is sole functioning Voice-o-Graph machine still available for public use. For more info read Wondering Sound's A Brief History of the Voice-o-Graph.

A Letter Home begins you hear hiss and pop of the vinyl. Neil's voice sounds thin and more nasally than usual. The guitar is tinny, with no low end. One listen and you'll be able to quickly make up your mind whether you'll enjoy this record or not. Fans of lo-fi recordings will be cool, while those desiring a more modern studio sound will be upset. If you peruse the reviews on iTunes, you'll quickly see that iTunes users either rate this album 1 star or 5 stars, there is no inbetween.

The first song on this album is Phil Och's "Changes". Both an artist and song I was not previously familiar with, it's the perfect way to begin this album. The guitar is subtle, sometimes faint, sometimes loud. Neil's voice is quiet, but every word is legible. Following this Neil launches into Bob Dylan's "North County Girl" with. It's an interesting selection, as I find Neil has tended to cover better known, more obvious Dylan songs in the past.

The third song is Bert Jansch's "Needle of Death". I first heard the original version of this song earlier this year when I was reviewing Neil's 1974 album On the Beach, when I read the final song on that album, "Ambulance Blues", steals the rift from this song. When asked about this Neil replied,

"As for acoustic guitar, Bert Jansch is on the same level as Jimi (Hendrix). That first record of his is epic. It came from England, and I was especially taken by "Needle of Death", such a beautiful and angry song. That guy was so good. And years later, on On the Beach, I wrote the melody of "Ambulance Blues" by styling the guitar part completely on "Needle of Death". I wasn't even aware of it, and someone else drew my attention to it."

It's the kind of mistake that anyone who plays guitar and writes music can understand. I've definitely had that moment when I realize the great rift I just wrote is actually a song that you've heard before and got buried somewhere in your subconscious. It's fitting that Neil covers this song here, as it was obviously such an influence, and it also gives Jansch the recognition he deserves as an inadvertent co-collaborator of Neils.

Other great moments on this record include Gordon Lightfoot's "If You Could Read My Mind". It's an obvious selection and a song that I find is covered too way too much, often losing the emotional component that makes the original Lightfoot version such a good song. On A Letter Home Neil captures that feeling so well, and I might even say, better than the original. This is a sad song, and boy-oboy, do you hear that hear that here. I also particularly like Neil's cover of Willie Nelson's "Crazy", although I do associate this song Patsy Cline much more so than I do Willie even though he wrote it.

Jack White joins Neil on a couple tracks, one being another Willie tune, "On the Road Again", the other being the Everly Brothers' "I Wonder If I Care As Much". As the recordings are made in one take and the recording device is the size of phone booth I figure they must have just the left the Voice-o-Graph door open in order to record a guitar, piano, and two singers.

This album isn't for everyone. It isn't probably even for all Neil fans. It's a record for anyone who's ever wanted to time travel.

NEXT WEEK: Neil Young - Storytone (2014)

Neil Young - Live at the Cellar Door (2013)

2015-12-06T15:31:00.001-05:00

Release date: December 10, 2013
Producer: Neil Young
Track listing: Tell Me Why, Only Love Can Break Your Heart, After the Goldrush, Expecting to Fly, Bad Fog of Loneliness, Old Man, Birds, Don't Let It Bring You Down, See the Sky About to Rain, Cinnamon Girl, I Am A Child, Down by the River, Flying on the Ground is Wrong
Musicians: Neil Young (vocals, acoustic guitar, piano

Volume 02.5 in the performance archive series, Live at the Cellar Door, finds Neil playing another live solo show, this time in the fall of 1970. Chronologically, this recording was made a few weeks after the release of After the Goldrush. and about 2 months before volume 0.20 in the performance archive series, Live at Massey Hall 1971.

The song selection is a bit different than the two previous performance archive releases. This concert features more songs from After the Goldrush and less from Harvest. Although if you listen closely he slips little piano fragments from "A Man Needs a Maid" into "After the Goldrush". It's great to hear the Goldrush songs again, particularly in this stripped down bare bones versions. The rendition of "Only Love Can Break Your Heart" found here is amazing. I'm so used to the backing vocals, but I don't miss them at all. Neil makes up for with the way he pounds the life outta his acoustic guitar.

In fact pounding the life outta things is a bit of theme with this album. It sounds like he's smashing the piano with his fist while he plays "Expecting to Fly". And then, the current day Neil is pounding the life outta his early career with this performance archive series. Don't get me wrong. I like this album, but he's released three live albums that span a period of time of about two years. I wouldn't mind hearing some more live stuff from a slightly different era.

Again, I have to say this album is probably best enjoyed by the Neil Young completeist. It contains the only known recording of Neil playing "Cinnamon Gil" on piano, which is pretty damn cool.

Now, back to the future...

NEXT WEEK: Neil Young - A letter Home (2014)