Podcasts about neanderthals

Send us a textThe ancient and profound Epic of Gilgamesh holds far more than just mythological storytelling—it contains clues to humanity's possible extraterrestrial origins. As we explore this Mesopotamian masterpiece dating back to 2100 B.C., we unravel fascinating connections between Sumerian accounts and Biblical narratives that suggest common source material predating both traditions.Many mistake Gilgamesh for the Mesopotamian equivalent of Noah, but the flood survivor in this epic is actually Utnapishtim, whom Gilgamesh seeks out during his quest for immortality. The wild beast-man Enkidu, created by gods to challenge Gilgamesh, represents what might be evidence of the "gods" carrying out genetic hybridization experiments. Sumerian artwork depicts mutated creatures that appear distinctly non-human, raising questions about what these representations may truly document.The creation accounts found in Akkadian texts describe how the Anunnaki gods created humans as a workforce, with passages stating they mixed their divine DNA with existing primitive beings. This aligns remarkably with the unexplained evolutionary leap that separated Homo sapiens from other hominids. Despite sharing nearly identical DNA with chimpanzees and coexisting with Neanderthals, humans developed unprecedented cognitive abilities and self-awareness. Could this advancement have resulted from external genetic manipulation?Both Gilgamesh's epic and the Bible share striking elements—sacred cedar forests, serpents that prevent immortality, divine beings with physical needs, and giants among men. Such parallels suggest these stories preserve memories of actual events involving advanced beings who were interpreted as prehistoric peoples as gods. The quest for immortality that drives Gilgamesh mirrors humanity's eternal struggle with the meaning and purpose of life, a theme that continue to resonate across cultures to this day.Join us as we examine this remarkable archaic story through the lens of the ancient alien theory, considering the compelling possibility that our creation myths contain literal truths about extraterrestrial intervention in human evolution. If our search for meaning is actually encoded memories of our origins, what other secrets might these ancient texts reveal?"Space Journey" by Geoff HarveyCopyright © 2021 Melody Loops LPFull License Royalty-Free Music https://www.melodyloops.com Support the showVisit our website

This week we're going to learn about a new finding about the skull referred to as the Dragon Man! Further reading: We've had a Denisovan skull since the 1930s—only nobody knew The proteome of the late Middle Pleistocene Harbin individual Show transcript: Welcome to Strange Animals Podcast. I'm your host, Kate Shaw. It never fails that only a few days after our annual updates episode, a study is published that's an important update to an older episode. This time it's an update so important that it deserves its own episode, so let's learn more about one of our own extinct close relations, the Denisovan people. We didn't know about the Denisovans until 2010, when DNA was sequenced from a finger bone found in Denisova Cave in Siberia in 2008. Scientists were surprised when the DNA didn't match up with Neanderthal DNA, which is what they expected, since they knew Neanderthals had lived in the cave at various times over thousands of years. Instead, the DNA was for a completely different hominin, a close relation of both humans and Neanderthals. Since then, researchers have found some Denisovan teeth, two partial mandibles, a rib fragment, and some other bone fragments, but nothing that could act as a type specimen. The type specimen is the preserved specimen of a new species, which is kept for scientists to study. It needs to be as complete as possible, so a handful of fragments just won't work. Even without a type specimen, having Denisovan DNA answered some questions about our own history as a species. Ever since scientists have been able to sequence genetic material from ancient bones, they've noticed something weird going on with our DNA. Some populations of people show small traces of DNA not found in other human populations, so scientists suspected they were from long-ago cross-breeding with other hominin species. When the Neanderthal genome was sequenced, it matched some of the unknown DNA traces, but not all of them. Mystery DNA sequences in a closely related population are called ghost lineages. The Denisovan DNA matched the ghost lineage scientists had identified in some populations of people, especially ones in parts of east Asia, Australia, and New Guinea. This is your reminder that despite tiny genetic differences like these, all humans alive today are 100% human. We are all Homo sapiens. Naturally, we as humans are interested in our family tree. We even have an entire field of study dedicated to studying ancient humans and hominins, paleoanthropology. Lots of scientists have studied the Denisovan remains we've found, along with the genetic material, but they really need a skull to learn so much more about our long-extinct distant relations. Luckily, we've had a Denisovan skull since the 1930s. But wait, you may be saying, you just said we didn't have anything but bone fragments and teeth! Why didn't you mention the skull? It's because the skull was hidden by its finder, a Chinese construction worker. The man was helping build a bridge and was ashamed that he was working for a Japanese company. That region of China was under Japanese occupation at the time, and the man didn't want anyone to know that he was working for people who were treating his fellow citizens badly. He thought the skull was an important find similar to the Peking Man discovery in 1929, so he hid the skull at the bottom of an abandoned well to keep it safe. He didn't dare share any information about it until he was on his death-bed, when he whispered his secret to his son. It wasn't until 2018 that the man's family took another look at the skull and realized it definitely wasn't an ordinary human skull. It was obviously extremely old and had a pronounced brow and really big teeth. In 2021 the skull was classified as a new species of hominin, Homo longi, where the second word comes from the Mandarin word for dragon. That's because the area where it was found is called Dragon River.

It’s time for another trip around the solar system on the BIGGER and BETTER Science Weekly! In this episode of the Fun Kids Science Weekly, we answer YOUR questions, have scientists battle it out to determine which science is the best, and this week we're learning all about a musical instrument so small- you need a microscope to see it! Dan kicks things off with the latest in science news. First, he dives into the discovery of a 43,000-year-old Neanderthal fingerprint found in a cave in Spain. Then, we hear about a mysterious new object that could be a dwarf planet making its way toward our solar system. And finally, Dan chats with Professor Kelly Morrison from Loughborough University, whose team has created the world’s tiniest violin — so small, it’s thinner than a human hair! Then, we answer your questions! Ned wants to know: How sunflowers follow the sun and Professor Mercedes Durham from Cardiff University answers Theo’s question: How did we evolve to talk? In Dangerous Dan, we learn all about the Philippine eagle... In Battle of the Sciences, zoologist Dr. Alex Dittrich from Nottingham Trent University joins us to uncover the creepy world of zombie plants What do we learn about? · A 43,000 year old discovery in Spain · An musical instrument you can't even see· Why sunflowers follow the Sun· How humans evolved to talk · And in Battle of the Sciences, we're learning all about zombie plants! All on this week's episode of Science Weekly!Join Fun Kids Podcasts+: https://funkidslive.com/plusSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Neanderthals existed at the same time as Homo sapiens hundreds of thousands of years ago.

Mi entrevistado en este episodio es Carlos A. Scolari, Catedrático del Departamento de Comunicación de la Universitat Pompeu Fabra – Barcelona. Ha sido Investigador Principal de diversos proyectos de investigación internacionales y estatales, desde el proyecto H2020 TRANSLITERACY (entre 2015 y 2018) hasta el proyecto LITERAC_IA, que comenzó en 2024 y dirige junto a María del Mar Guerrero. Sus últimos libros son Cultura Snack (2020), La guerra de las plataformas (2022) y Sobre la evolución de los medios (2024). Ahora está trabajando en un libro sobre los fósiles mediáticos.Notas del Episodio* Historia de ecologia de los medios* Historia de Carlos* Diferencias entre el anglosfero y el hispanosfero* La coevolucion entre tecnologia y humanos* La democratizacion de los medios* Evolucion de los medios* Alienacion y addiccion* Como usar los medios conscientementeTareaCarlos A. Scolari - Pagina Personal - Facebook - Instagram - Twitter - Escolar GoogleSobre la evolución de los mediosHipermediaciones (Libros)Transcrito en espanol (English Below)Chris: [00:00:00] Bienvenido al podcast el fin de turismo Carlos. Gracias por poder hablar conmigo hoy. Es un gran gusto tener tu presencia aquí conmigo hoy. Carlos: No gracias a ti, Chris, por la invitación. Es un enorme placer honor charlar contigo, gran viajero y bueno, yo nunca investigué directamente el tema del turismo.Pero bueno, entiendo que vamos a hablar de ecología de los medios y temas colaterales que nos pueden servir para entender mejor, darle un sentido a todo esto que está pasando en el mundo del turismo. Bueno, yo trabajo en Barcelona. No vivo exactamente en la ciudad, pero trabajo, en la universidad en Barcelona, en la zona céntrica.Y bueno, cada vez que voy a la ciudad cada día se incrementa la cantidad de turistas y se incrementa el debate sobre el turismo, en todas sus dimensiones. Así que es un tema que está la orden del día, no? Chris: Sí, pues me imagino que aunque si no te gusta pensar o si no quieres pensar en el turismo allá, es inevitable tener como una enseñanza [00:01:00] personal de esa industria.Carlos: Sí, hasta que se está convirtiendo casi en un criterio taxonómico, no? ...de clasificación o ciudades con mucho turista ciudades o lugares sin turistas que son los más buscados hasta que se llenan de turistas. Entonces estamos en un círculo vicioso prácticamente. Chris: Ya pues, que en algún memento se que se cambia, se rompe el ciclo, al menos para dar cuenta de lo que estamos haciendo con el comportamiento.Y, yo entiendo que eso también tiene mucho que ver con la ecología de los medios, la falta de capacidad de entender nuestros comportamientos, actitudes, pensamientos, sentimientos, etcétera. Entonces, antes de seguir por tu trabajo y obras, este me gustaría preguntarte de tu camino y de tu vida.Primero me pregunto si podrías definir para nuestros oyentes qué es la ecología de los medios y cómo te [00:02:00] interesó en este campo? Cómo llegaste a dedicar a tu vida a este estudio?Carlos: Sí. A ver un poco. Hay una, esta la historia oficial. Diríamos de la ecología de los medios o en inglés "media ecology," es una campo de investigación, digamos, eh, que nace en los años 60. Hay que tener en cuenta sobre todos los trabajos de Marshall McLuhan, investigador canadiense muy famoso a nivel mundial. Era quizá el filósofo investigador de los medios más famosos en los años 60 y 70.Y un colega de el, Neil Postman, que estaba en la universidad de New York en New York University un poco, digamos entre la gente que rodeaba estos dos referentes, no, en los años 60, de ahí se fue cocinando, diríamos, lo que después se llamó la media ecology. Se dice que el primero que habló de media ecology que aplicó esta metáfora a los medios, fue el mismo Marshall McLuhan en algunas, conversaciones privadas, [00:03:00] cartas que se enviaban finales dos años 50, a principios de los 60, se enviaban los investigadores investigadora de estos temas?Digamos la primera aparición pública del concepto de media ecology fue una conferencia en el año 1968 de Neil Postman. Era una intervención pública que la hablaba de un poco como los medios nos transforman y transforman los medios formar un entorno de nosotros crecemos, nos desarrollamos, no. Y nosotros no somos muy conscientes a veces de ese medio que nos rodea y nos modela.El utilizó por primera vez el concepto de media ecology en una conferencia pública. Y ya, si vamos a principio de los años 70, el mismo Postman crea en NYU, en New York University crea el primer programa en media ecology. O sea que ya en el 73, 74 y 75, empieza a salir lo que yo llamo la segunda generación, de gente [00:04:00] formada algunos en estos cursos de New York.Por ejemplo Christine Nystrom fue la primera tesis doctoral sobre mi ecology; gente como, Paul Levinson que en el año 1979 defiende una tesis doctoral dirigida por Postman sobre evolución de los medios, no? Y lo mismo pasaba en Toronto en los años 70. El Marshall McLuhan falleció en el diciembre del 80.Digamos que los años 70 fueron su última década de producción intelectual. Y hay una serie de colaboradores en ese memento, gente muy joven como Robert Logan, Derrick De Kerchove, que después un poco siguieron trabajando un poco todo esta línea, este enfoque. Y ahí hablamos del frente canadiense, eh?Toda esta segunda generación fue desarrollando, fue ampliando aplicando. No nos olvidemos de Eric McLuhan, el hijo de Marshall, que también fue parte de toda esta movida. [00:05:00] Y si no recuerdo mal en el año 2000, se crea la asociación la Media Ecology Association, que es la Asociación de Ecología de los Medios, que es una organización académica, científica, que nuclea a la gente que se ocupa de media ecology. Si pensamos a nivel más científico epistemológico, podemos pensar esta metáfora de la ecología de los medios desde dos o tres perspectivas. Por un lado, esta idea de que los medios crean ambientes. Esta es una idea muy fuerte de Marsha McLuhan, de Postman y de todo este grupo, no? Los medios - "medio" entendido en sentido muy amplio, no, cualquier tecnología podría ser un medio para ellos.Para Marsha McLuhan, la rueda es un medio. Un un telescopio es un medio. Una radio es un medio y la televisión es un medio, no? O sea, cualquier tecnología puede considerarse un medio. Digamos que estos medios, estas tecnologías, generan un [00:06:00] ambiente que a nosotros nos transforma. Transforma nuestra forma, a veces de pensar nuestra forma de percibir el mundo, nuestra concepción del tiempo del espacio.Y nosotros no somos conscientes de ese cambio. Pensemos que, no sé, antes de 1800, si alguien tenía que hacer un viaje de mil kilómetros (y acá nos acercamos al turismo) kilómetros era un viaje que había que programarlo muchos meses antes. Con la llegada del tren, ya estamos en 1800, esos kilómetros se acortaron. Digamos no? Ahí vemos como si a nosotros hoy nos dicen 1000 kilómetros.Bueno, si, tomamos un avión. Es una hora, una hora y cuarto de viaje. Hoy 1000 kilómetro es mucho menos que hace 200 años y incluso a nivel temporal, se a checo el tiempo. No? Todo eso es consecuencia, digamos este cambio, nuestra percepción es consecuencia de una serie de medios y tecnologías.El ferrocarril. Obviamente, hoy tenemos los aviones. Las mismas redes digitales que, un poco nos han llevado esta idea de "tiempo [00:07:00] real," esta ansiedad de querer todo rápido, no? También esa es consecuencia de estos cambios ambientales generados por los medios y las tecnologías, eh? Esto es un idea muy fuerte, cuando McLuhan y Postman hablaban de esto en los años 60, eran fuertes intuiciones que ellos tenían a partir de una observación muy inteligente de la realidad. Hoy, las ciencias cognitivas, mejor las neurociencia han confirmado estas hipótesis. O sea, hoy existen una serie de eh metodología para estudiar el cerebro y ya se ve como las tecnologías.Los medios afectan incluso la estructura física del cerebro. No? Otro tema que esto es histórico, que los medios afectan nuestra memoria. Esto viene de Platón de hace 2500 años, que él decía que la escritura iba a matar la memoria de los hombres. Bueno, podemos pensar nosotros mismos, no, eh?O por lo menos esta generación, que [00:08:00] vivimos el mundo antes y después de las aplicaciones móviles. Yo hace 30 años, 25 años, tenía mi memoria 30-40 números telefónicos. Hoy no tengo ninguno. Y en esa pensemos también el GPS, no? En una época, los taxistas de Londres, que es una ciudad latica se conocían a memoria la ciudad. Y hoy eso, ya no hace falta porque tienen GPS.Y cuando han ido a estudiar el cerebro de los taxistas de Londres, han visto que ciertas áreas del cerebro se han reducido, digamos, así, que son las áreas que gestionaban la parte espacial. Esto ya McLuhan, lo hablaba en los años 60. Decía como que los cambios narcotizan ciertas áreas de la mente decía él.Pero bueno, vemos que mucha investigación empírica, bien de vanguardia científica de neurociencia está confirmando todas estos pensamientos, todas estas cosas que se decían a los años 60 en adelante, por la media ecology. Otra posibilidad es entender [00:09:00] esto como un ecosistema de medios, Marshall McLuhan siempre decía no le podemos dar significado,no podemos entender un medio aislado de los otros medios. Como que los medios adquieren sentido sólo en relación con otros medios. También Neil Postman y mucha otra gente de la escuela de la media ecology, defiende esta posición, de que, bueno, los medios no podemos entender la historia del cine si no la vinculamos a los videojuegos, si no lo vinculamos a la aparición de la televisión.Y así con todos los medios, no? Eh? Hay trabajos muy interesantes. Por ejemplo, de como en el siglo 19, diferentes medios, podríamos decir, que coevolucionaron entre sí. La prensa, el telégrafo. El tren, que transportaba los diarios también, aparecen las agencias de noticias. O sea, vemos cómo es muy difícil entender el desarrollo de la prensa en el siglo XIX y no lo vinculamos al teléfono, si no lo vinculamos a la fotografía, si no lo vinculamos a la radio fotografía, [00:10:00] también más adelante.O sea, esta idea es muy fuerte. No también es otro de los principios para mí fundamentales de esta visión, que sería que los medios no están solos, forman parte de un ecosistema y si nosotros queremos entender lo que está pasando y cómo funciona todo esto, no podemos, eh, analizar los medios aislados del resto.Hay una tercera interpretación. Ya no sé si es muy metafórica. No? Sobre todo, gente en Italia como el investigador Fausto Colombo de Milán o Michele Cometa, es un investigador de Sicilia, Michele Cometa que él habla de l giro, el giro ecomedial. Estos investigadores están moviéndose en toda una concepción según la cual, estamos en único ecosistema mediático que está contaminado.Está contaminado de "fake news" está contaminado de noticias falsas, está contaminado de discursos de odio, etcétera, etc. Entonces ellos, digamos, retoman esta metáfora ecológica para decir [00:11:00] precisamente tenemos que limpiar este ecosistema así como el ecosistema natural está contaminado, necesita una intervención de limpieza, digamos así de purificación, eh? También el ecosistema mediático corre el mismo peligro, no? Y esta gente también llama la atención, y yo estoy muy cerca de esta línea de trabajo sobre la dimensión material de la comunicación. Y esto también tiene que ver con el turismo, queriendo, no? El impacto ambiental que tiene la comunicación hoy.Entrenar una inteligencia artificial implica un consumo eléctrico brutal; mantener funcionando las redes sociales, eh, tiktok, youtube, lo que sea, implica millones de servidores funcionando que chupan energía eléctrica y hay que enfriarlos además, consumiendo aún más energía eléctrica. Y eso tiene un impacto climático no indiferente.Así que, bueno, digamos, vemos que está metáfora de lo ecológico, aplicado los medios da para dos o tres interpretaciones. Chris: Mmm. [00:12:00] Wow. Siento que cuando yo empecé tomando ese curso de de Andrew McLuhan, el nieto de Marshall, como te mencioné, cambio mi perspectiva totalmente - en el mundo, en la manera como entiendo y como no entiendo también las nuestras tecnologías, mis movimientos, etcétera, pero ya, por una persona que tiene décadas de estudiando eso, me gustaría saber de de como empezaste. O sea, Andrew, por ejemplo tiene la excusa de su linaje, no de su papá y su abuelo.Pero entonces, como un argentino joven empezó aprendiendo de ecología de medios. Carlos: Bueno, yo te comento. Yo estudié comunicación en argentina en Rosario. Terminé la facultad. El último examen el 24 de junio del 86, que fue el día que nacía el Lionel Messi en Rosario, en Argentina el mismo día. Y [00:13:00] yo trabajaba, colaboraba en una asignatura en una materia que era teorías de la comunicación.E incluso llegué a enseñar hasta el año 90, fueron tres años, porque ya después me fui vivir Italia. En esa época, nosotros leíamos a Marshall McLuhan, pero era una lectura muy sesgada ideológicamente. En América latina, tú lo habrás visto en México. Hay toda una historia, una tradición de críticas de los medios, sobre todo, a todo lo que viene de estados unidos y Canadá está muy cerca de Estados Unidos. Entonces, digamos que en los años 70 y 80 y y hasta hoy te diría muchas veces a Marshall McLuhan se lo criticó mucho porque no criticaba los medios. O sea el te tenía una visión. Él decía, Neil Postman, si tenía una visión muy crítica. Pero en ese caso, este era una de las grandes diferencias entre Postman y McLuhan, que Marshall McLuhan, al menos en [00:14:00] público, él no criticaba los medios. Decía bueno, yo soy un investigador, yo envío sondas. Estoy explorando lo que pasa. Y él nunca se sumó... Y yo creo que eso fue muy inteligente por parte de él... nunca se sumó a este coro mundial de crítica a los medios de comunicación. En esa época, la televisión para mucha gente era un monstruo.Los niños no tenían que ver televisión. Un poco lo que pasa hoy con los móviles y lo que pasa hoy con tiktok. En esa época en la televisión, el monstruo. Entonces, había mucha investigación en Estados Unidos, que ya partía de la base que la televisión y los medios son malos para la gente. Vemos que es una historia que se repite. Yo creo que en ese sentido, Marshall McLuhan, de manera muy inteligente, no se sumó ese coro crítico y él se dedico realmente a pensar los medios desde una perspectiva mucho más libre, no anclada por esta visión yo creo demasiado ideologizada, que en América Latina es muy fuerte. Es muy fuerte. Esto no implica [00:15:00] bajar la guardia, no ser crítico. Al contrario.Pero yo creo que el el verdadero pensamiento crítico parte de no decir tanto ideológica, decimos "esto ya es malo. Vamos a ver esto." Habrá cosas buenas. Habrá cosas mala. Habrá cosa, lo que es innegable, que los medios mas ya que digamos son buenos son va, nos transforman. Y yo creo que eso fue lo importante de la idea McLuhaniana. Entonces mi primer acercamiento a McLuhan fue una perspectiva de los autores críticos que, bueno, sí, viene de Estados Unidos, no critica los medios. Vamos a criticarlo a nosotros a él, no? Y ese fue mi primer acercamiento a Marshall McLuhan. Yo me fui a Italia en la decada de 90. Estuve casi ocho años fuera de la universidad, trabajando en medios digitales, desarrollo de páginas, webs, productos multimédia y pretexto. Y a finales de los 90, dije quiero volver a la universidad. Quiero ser un doctorado. Y dije, "quiero hacer un doctorado. Bueno. Estando en Italia, el doctorado iba a ser de semiótica." Entonces hizo un [00:16:00] doctorado. Mi tesis fue sobre semiótica de las interfaces.Ahi tuve una visión de las interfaces digitales que consideran que, por ejemplo, los instrumentos como el mouse o joystick son extensiones de nuestro cuerpo, no? El mouse prolonga la mano y la mete dentro de la pantalla, no? O el joystick o cualquier otro elemento de la interfaz digital? Claro. Si hablamos de que el mouse es una extensión de la mano, eso es una idea McLuhaniana.Los medios como extensiones del ser humano de sujeto. Entonces, claro ahi yo releo McLuhan en italiano a finales de los años 90, y me reconcilio con McLuhan porque encuentro muchas cosas interesantes para entender precisamente la interacción con las máquinas digitales. En el a 2002, me mudo con mi familia a España. Me reintegro la vida universitaria. [00:17:00] Y ahí me pongo a estudiar la relación entre los viejos y los nuevos medios. Entonces recupero la idea de ecosistema. Recupero toda la nueva, la idea de ecología de mi ecology. Y me pongo a investigar y releer a McLuhan por tercera vez. Y a leerlo en profundidad a él y a toda la escuela de mi ecology para poder entender las dinámicas del actual ecosistema mediático y entender la emergencia de lo nuevo y cómo lo viejo lucha por adaptarse. En el 2009, estuve tres meses trabajando con Bob Logan en the University of Toronto. El año pasado, estuve en el congreso ahí y tuvimos dos pre conferencias con gente con Paolo Granata y todo el grupo de Toronto.O sea que, tengo una relación muy fuerte con todo lo que se producía y se produce en Toronto. Y bueno, yo creo que, a mí hoy, la media ecology, me sirve muchísimo junto a otras disciplina como la semiótica para poder entender el ecosistema [00:18:00] mediático actual y el gran tema de investigación mío hoy, que es la evolución del la ecosistema mediático.Mm, digamos que dentro de la media ecology, empezando de esa tesis doctoral del 79 de Paul Levinson, hay toda una serie de contribuciones, que un poco son los que han ido derivando en mi último libro que salió el año pasado en inglés en Routledge, que se llama The Evolution of Media y acaba de salir en castellano.Qué se llama Sobre La Evolución De los Medios. En la teoría evolutiva de los medios, hay mucha ecología de los medios metidos. Chris: Claro, claro. Pues felicidad es Carlos. Y vamos a volver en un ratito de ese tema de la evolución de medios, porque yo creo que es muy importante y obviamente es muy importante a ti. Ha sido como algo muy importante en tu trabajo. Pero antes de de salir de esa esquina de pensamiento, hubo una pregunta que me mandó Andrew McLuhan para ti, que ya ella contestaste un poco, pero este tiene que ver entre las diferencias en los [00:19:00] mundos de ecología de medios anglofonos y hispánicos. Y ya mencionaste un poco de eso, pero desde los tiempos en los 80 y noventas, entonces me gustaría saber si esas diferencias siguen entre los mundos intelectuales, en el mundo anglofono o hispánico.Y pues, para extender su pregunta un poco, qué piensas sería como un punto o tema o aspecto más importante de lo que uno de esos mundos tiene que aprender el otro en el significa de lo que falta, quizás. Carlos: Si nos focalizamos en el trabajo de Marshall McLuhan, no es que se lo criticó sólo de América Latina.En Europa no caía simpático Marshall McLuhan en los 60, 70. Justamente por lo mismo, porque no criticaba el sistema capitalista de medios. La tradición europea, la tradición de la Escuela de Frankfurt, la escuela de una visión anti [00:20:00] capitalista que denuncia la ideología dominante en los medio de comunicación.Eso es lo que entra en América Latina y ahí rebota con mucha fuerza. Quizá la figura principal que habla desde América Latina, que habló mucho tiempo de América latina es Armand Mattelart. Matterlart es un teórico en la comunicación, investigador de Bélgica. Y él lo encontramos ya a mediados de los años 60 finales de los 60 en Chile en un memento muy particular de la historia de Chile donde había mucha politización y mucha investigación crítica, obviamente con el con con con con el capitalismo y con el imperialismo estadounidense. Quizá la la obra clásica de ese memento es el famoso libro de Mattelart y Dorfman, eh, eh? Para Leer El Pato Donald, que donde ellos desmontan toda la estructura ideológica capitalista, imperialista, que había en los cics en las historietas del pato Donald.Ellos dicen esto se publicó a [00:21:00] principio los 70. Es quizá el libro más vendido de la comic latinoamericana hasta el día de hoy, eh? Ellos dicen hay ideología en la literatura infantil. Con el pato Donald, le están llenando la cabeza a nuestros niños de toda una visión del mundo muy particular.Si uno le el pato Donald de esa época, por lo menos, la mayor parte de las historia del pato Donald, que era, había que a buscar un tesoro y adónde. Eran lugares africana, peruviana, incaica o sea, eran países del tercer mundo. Y ahí el pato Donald, con sus sobrinos, eran lo suficientemente inteligentes para volverse con el oro a Patolandia.Claro. Ideológicamente. Eso no se sostiene. Entonces, la investigación hegemónica en esa época en Europa, en Francia, la semiología pero sobre todo, en América latina, era ésa. Hay que estudiar el mensaje. Hay que estudiar el contenido, porque ahí está la ideología [00:22:00] dominante del capitalismo y del imperialismo.En ese contexto, entra McLuhan. Se traduce McLuhan y que dice McLuhan: el medio es el mensaje. No importa lo que uno lee, lo que nos transforma es ver televisión, leer comics, escuchar la radio. Claro, iba contramano del mainstream de la investigación en comunicación. O sea, digamos que en América latina, la gente que sigue en esa línea que todavía existe y es fuerte, no es una visión muy crítica de todo esto, todavía hoy, a Marshal McLuhan le cae mal, pero lo mismo pasa en Europa y otros países donde la gente que busca una lectura crítica anti-capitalista y anti-sistémica de la comunicación, no la va a encontrar nunca en Marshall McLuhan, por más que sea de América latina, de de de Europa o de Asia. Entonces yo no radicaría todo esto en un ámbito anglosajón y el latinoamericano. Después, bueno, la hora de McLuhan es bastante [00:23:00] polisemica. Admite como cualquier autor así, que tiene un estilo incluso de escritura tan creativo en forma de mosaico.No era un escritor Cartesiano ordenadito y formal. No, no. McLuhan era una explosión de ideas muy bien diseñada a propósito, pero era una explosión de ideas. Por eso siempre refrescan tener a McLuhan. Entonces normal que surjan interpretaciones diferentes, no? En estados unidos en Canadá, en Inglaterra, en Europa continental o en Latinoamérica o en Japón, obviamente, no? Siendo un autor que tiene estas características. Por eso yo no en no anclaría esto en cuestiones territoriales. Cuando uno busca un enfoque que no tenga esta carga ideológica para poder entender los medios, que no se limite sólo a denunciar el contenido.McLuhan y la escuela de la ecología de los medios es fundamental y es un aporte muy, muy importante en ese sentido, no? Entonces, bueno, yo creo que McLuhan tuvo [00:24:00] detractores en Europa, tuvo detractores en América latina y cada tanto aparece alguno, pero yo creo que esto se ido suavizando. Yo quiero que, como que cada vez más se lo reivindica McLuhan.La gente que estudia, por ejemplo, en Europa y en América latina, que quizá en su época criticaron a McLuhan, todas las teorías de la mediatización, por ejemplo, terminan coincidiendo en buena parte de los planteos de la media ecology. Hoy que se habla mucho de la materialidad de la comunicación, los nuevos materialismos, yo incluyo a Marshall McLuhan en uno de los pioneros des esta visión también de los nuevos materialismos. Al descentrar el análisis del contenido, al medio, a la cosa material, podemos considerar a macl también junto a Bruno Latour y otra gente como pionero, un poco de esta visión de no quedarse atrapados en el giro lingüístico, no, en el contenido, en el giro semiótico e incorporar también la dimensión material de la comunicación y el medio en sí.[00:25:00] Chris: Muy bien. Muy bien, ya. Wow, es tanto, pero lo aprecio mucho. Gracias, Carlos. Y me gustaría seguir preguntándote un poco ahora de tu propio trabajo. Tienes un capítulo en tu libro. Las Leyes de la Interfaz titulado "Las Interfaces Co-evolucionan Con Sus Usuarios" donde escribes "estas leyes de la interfaz no desprecian a los artefactos, sus inventores ó las fuerzas sociales. Solo se limitan á insertarlos á una red socio técnica de relaciones, intercambios y transformaciones para poder analizarlos desde una perspectiva eco-evolutiva."Ahora, hay un montón ahí en este paragrafito. Pero entonces, me gustaría preguntarte, cómo vea los humanos [00:26:00] co-evolucionando con sus tecnologías? Por ejemplo, nuestra forma de performatividad en la pantalla se convierte en un hábito más allá de la pantalla.Carlos: Ya desde antes del homo sapiens, los homínidos más avanzados, digamos en su momento, creaban instrumentos de piedra. Hemos descubierto todos los neandertales tenían una cultura muy sofisticada, incluso prácticas casi y religiosas, más allá de la cuestión material de la construcción de artefactos. O sea que nuestra especie es impensable sin la tecnología, ya sea un hacha de piedra o ya sea tiktok o un smartphone. Entonces, esto tenemos que tenerlo en cuenta cuando analizamos cualquier tipo de de interacción cotidiana, estamos rodeados de tecnología y acá, obviamente, la idea McLuhaniana es fundamental. Nosotros creamos estos medios. Nosotros creamos estas tecnologías.Estas tecnologías también nos reformatean. [00:27:00] McLuhan, no me suena que haya usado el concepto de coevolución, pero está ahí. Está hablando de eso. Ahora bien. Hay una coevolución si se quiere a larguísimo plazo, que, por ejemplo, sabemos que el desarrollo de instrumentos de piedra, el desarrollo del fuego, hizo que el homo sapiens no necesitara una mandíbula tan grande para poder masticar los alimentos. Y eso produce todo un cambio, que achicó la mandíbula le dejó más espacio en el cerebro, etcétera, etcétera. Eso es una coevolución en término genético, digamos a larguísimo plazo, okey. También la posición eréctil, etcétera, etcétera. Pero, digamos que ya ahí había tecnologías humanas coevolucionando con estos cambios genéticos muy, muy lentos.Pero ahora tenemos también podemos decir esta co evolución ya a nivel de la estructura neuronal, entonces lo ha verificado la neurociencia, como dije antes. Hay cambio físico en la estructura del cerebro a lo largo de la vida de una persona debido a la interacción con ciertas tecnologías. Y por qué pasa eso?Porque [00:28:00] la producción, creación de nuevos medios, nuevas tecnologías se ido acelerando cada vez más. Ahi podemos hacer una curva exponencial hacia arriba, para algunos esto empezó hace 10,000 años. Para algunos esto se aceleró con la revolución industrial. Algunos hablan de la época el descubrimiento de América.Bueno, para alguno esto es un fenómeno de siglo xx. El hecho es que en términos casi geológicos, esto que hablamos del antropoceno es real y está vinculado al impacto del ser humano sobre nuestro ambiente y lo tecnológico es parte de ese proceso exponencial de co evolución. Nosotros hoy sentimos un agobio frente a esta aceleración de la tecnología y nuestra necesidad. Quizá de adaptarnos y coevolucionar con ella. Como esto de que todo va muy rápido. Cada semana hay un problema nuevo, una aplicación nueva. Ahora tenemos la inteligencia artificial, etc, etcétera. Pero esta sensación [00:29:00] no es nueva. Es una sensación de la modernidad. Si uno lee cosas escritas en 1,800 cuando llega el tren también la gente se quejaba que el mundo iba muy rápido. Dónde iremos a parar con este caballo de hierro que larga humo no? O sea que esta sensación de velocidad de cambio rápido ya generaciones anteriores la vivían. Pero evidentemente, el cambio hoy es mucho más rápido y denso que hace dos siglos. Y eso es real también. Así que, bueno, nuestra fe se va coevolucionando y nos vamos adaptando como podemos, yo esta pregunta se la hice hace 10 años a Kevin Kelly, el primer director de la revista Wire que lo trajimos a Barcelona y el que siempre es muy optimista. Kevin Kelly es determinista tecnológico y optimista al mismo tiempo. Él decía que "que bueno que el homo sapiens lo va llevando bastante bien. Esto de co evolucionar con la tecnología." Otra gente tiene una [00:30:00] visión radicalmente opuesta, que esto es el fin del mundo, que el homo sapiens estamos condenados a desaparecer por esta co evolución acelerada, que las nuevas generaciones son cada vez más estúpidas.Yo no creo eso. Creo, como McLuhan, que los medios nos reforman, nos cambian algunas cosas quizás para vivir otras quizá no tanto, pero no, no tengo una visión apocalíptica de esto para nada. Chris: Bien, bien. Entonces cuando mencionaste lo de la televisión, yo me acuerdo mucho de de mi niñez y no sé por qué. Quizás fue algo normal en ese tiempo para ver a tele como un monstruo, como dijiste o quizás porque mis mis papás eran migrantes pero fue mucho de su idea de esa tecnología y siempre me dijo como no, no, no quédate ahí tan cerca y eso.Entonces, aunque lo aceptaron, ellos comprendieron que el poder [00:31:00] de la tele que tenía sobre las personas. Entonces ahora todos, parece a mí, que todos tienen su propio canal, no su propio programación, o el derecho o privilegio de tener su propio canal o múltiples canales.Entonces, es una gran pregunta, pero cuáles crees que son las principales consecuencias de darle a cada uno su propio programa en el sentido de como es el efecto de hacer eso, de democratizar quizás la tecnología en ese sentido? Carlos: Cuando dices su propio canal, te refieres a la posibilidad de emitir o construir tu propia dieta mediática.Chris: Bueno primero, pero puede ser ambos, claro, no? O sea, mi capacidad de tener un perfil o cuenta mía personal. Y luego como el fin del turismo, no? Y luego otro. Carlos: Sí, a ver. Yo creo que, bueno, esto fue el gran cambio radical que empezó a darse a partir la década del 2000 o [00:32:00] sea, hace 25 años. Porque la web al principio sí era una red mundial en los años 90. Pero claro la posibilidad de compartir un contenido y que todo el mundo lo pudiera ver, estaba muy limitado a crear una página web, etcétera. Cuando aparecen las redes sociales o las Web 2.0 como se la llamaba en esa época y eso se suma los dispositivos móviles, ahí se empieza a generar esta cultura tan difundida de la creación de contenido. Hasta digamos que hasta ese momento quien generaba contenido era más o menos un profesional en la radio y en la televisión, pero incluso en la web o en la prensa o el cine. Y a partir de ahí se empieza, digamos, a abrir el juego. En su momento, esto fue muy bien saludado fue qué bueno! Esto va nos va a llevar a una sociedad más democrática. 25 años después, claro, estamos viendo el lado oscuro solamente. Yo creo que el error hace 25 años era pensar solo las posibilidades [00:33:00] buenas, optimistas, de esto. Y hoy me parece que estamos enredados en discursos solamente apocalípticos no?No vemos las cosas buenas, vemos solo las cosas malas. Yo creo que hay de las dos cosas hoy. Claro, hoy cualquier persona puede tener un canal, sí, pero no todo el mundo crea un canal. Los niveles de participación son muy extraños, o sea, la mayor parte de la población de los usuarios y usuarias entre en las redes. Mira. Mete un me gusta. Quizá un comentario. Cada tanto comparte una foto. Digamos que los "heavy users" o "heavy producers" de contenido son siempre una minoría, ya sea profesionales, ya sea influencers, streamers, no? Es siempre, yo no sé si acá estamos en un 20-80 o un 10-90 son estas curvas que siempre fue así? No? Si uno ve la Wikipedia, habrá un 5-10 por ciento de gente que genera contenido mucho menos incluso. Y un 90 por ciento que se [00:34:00] beneficia del trabajo de una minoría. Esto invierte la lógica capitalista? La mayoría vive de la minoría y esto pasaba antes también en otros, en otros sistemas. O sea que en ese sentido, es sólo una minoría de gente la que genera contenido de impacto, llamémoslo así, de alcance mayor.Pero bueno, yo creo que el hecho de que cualquier persona pueda dar ese salto para mí, está bien. Genera otra serie de problemas, no? Porque mientras que genera contenido, es un profesional o un periodista, digamos, todavía queda algo de normas éticas y que deben cumplir no? Yo veo que en el mundo de los streamers, el mundo de los Tik tokers etcétera, etcétera, lo primero que ellos dicen es, nosotros no somos periodistas. Y de esa forma, se inhiben de cualquier, control ético o de respeto a normas éticas profesionales. Por otro lado, las plataformas [00:35:00] Meta, Google, todas. Lo primero que te dicen es nosotros no somos medio de comunicación. Los contenidos los pone la gente.Nosotros no tenemos nada que ver con eso. Claro, ellos también ahí se alejan de toda la reglamentación. Por eso hubo que hacer. Europa y Estados Unidos tuvo que sacar leyes especiales porque ellos decían no, no, las leyes del periodismo a nosotros no nos alcanzan. Nosotros no somos editores de contenidos.Y es una mentira porque las plataformas sí editan contenido a través los algoritmos, porque nos están los algoritmos, nos están diciendo que podemos ver y que no está en primera página. No están filtrando información, o sea que están haciendo edición. Entonces, como que se generan estas equivocaciones.Y eso es uno de los elementos que lleva esta contaminación que mencioné antes en el en los ámbitos de la comunicación. Pero yo, si tuviera que elegir un ecosistema con pocos enunciadores pocos medios controlados por profesionales y este ecosistema [00:36:00] caótico en parte contaminado con muchos actores y muchas voces, yo prefiero el caos de hoy a la pobreza del sistema anterior.Prefiero lidiar, pelearme con y estar buscar de resolver el problema de tener mucha información, al problema de la censura y tener sólo dos, tres puntos donde se genera información. Yo he vivido en Argentina con dictadura militar con control férreo de medios, coroneles de interventores en la radio y la televisión que controlaban todo lo que se decía.Y yo prefiero el caos de hoy, aún con fake news y todo lo que quieras. Prefiero el caos de hoy a esa situación. Chris: Sí, sí, sí, sí. Es muy fuerte de pensar en eso para la gente que no han vivido en algo así, no? Osea algunos familiares extendidos han vivido en mundos comunistas, en el pasado en el este de Europa y no se hablan [00:37:00] exactamente así.Pero, se se hablan, no? Y se se dicen que lo que lo que no tenía ni lo que no tiene por control y por fuerza. Entonces, en ese como mismo sentido de lo que falta de la memoria vivida, me gustaría preguntarte sobre tu nuevo libro. Y sobre la evolución de medios. Entonces me gustaría preguntarte igual por nuestros oyentes que quizás no han estudiado mucho de la ecología de los medios Para ti qué es la evolución de los medios y por qué es importante para nuestro cambiante y comprensión del mundo. O sea, igual al lado y no solo pegado a la ecología de medios, pero la evolución de los medios,Carlos: Sí, te cuento ahí hay una disciplina, ya tradicional que es la historia y también está la historia de la comunicación y historia de los medios. [00:38:00] Hay libros muy interesantes que se titulan Historia de la Comunicación de Gutenberg a Internet o Historia de la Comunicación del Papiro a Tiktok. Entonces, qué pasa? Esos libros te dicen bueno, estaba el papiro, después vino el pergamino, el manuscrito, después en 1450 vino Gutenberg, llegó el libro. Pero eso el libro no te cuentan que pasó con el manuscrito, ni que pasó con el papiro. Y te dicen que llega la radio en 1920 y en 1950 llega la televisión y no te dicen que pasó con la radio, que pasó con el cine.Son historias lineales donde un medio parece que va sustituyendo al otro. Y después tenemos muchos libros muy buenos también. Historia de la radio, historia de la televisión, historia de internet, historia del periodismo. Como dije antes, retomando una idea, de McLuhan no podemos entender los medios aislados.Yo no puedo entender la evolución de la radio si no la vinculo a la prensa, a [00:39:00] la televisión y otro al podcast. Okey, entonces digo, necesitamos un campo de investigación, llamémoslo una disciplina en construcción, que es una teoría y también es metodología para poder entender el cambio mediático, todas estas transformaciones del ecosistema de medios a largo plazo y que no sea una sucesión de medios, sino, ver cómo esa red de medios fue evolucionando. Y eso yo lo llamo una teoría evolutiva o una "media evolution" Y es lo que estoy trabajando ahora. Claro, esta teoría, este enfoque, este campo de investigación toma muchas cosas de la ecología de los medios, empezando por Marshall McLuhan pero también gente de la tradición previa a la media ecology como Harold Innis, el gran historiador, economista de la comunicación y de la sociedad, que fue quizás el intelectual más famoso en Canadá en la primera mitad del siglo XX. Harold Innis que influenció mucho a Marshall McLuhan [00:40:00] Marshall McLuhann en la primera página de Gutenberg Galaxy, dice este libro no es otra cosa que una nota al pie de página de la obra de Harold Innis Entonces, Harold Innis que hizo una historia de los tiempos antiguos poniendo los medios al centro de esa historia. Para mí es fundamental. Incluso te diría a veces más que McLuhan, como referencia, a la hora de hacer una teoría evolutiva del cambio mediático. Y después, obviamente tomo muchas cosas de la historia de los medios.Tomo muchas cosas de la arqueología de los medios (media archeology). Tomo cosas también de la gente que investigó la historia de la tecnología, la construcción social de la tecnología. O sea, la media evolution es un campo intertextual, como cualquier disciplina que toma cosas de todos estos campos para poder construir una teoría, un enfoque, una mirada que sea más a largo plazo, que no sea una sucesión de medios, sino que vea la evolución de todo el ecosistema mediático, prestando mucha atención a las relaciones [00:41:00] entre medios, y con esta visión más compleja sistémica de cómo cambian las cosas.Yo creo que el cambio mediático es muy rápido y necesitamos una teoría para poder darle un sentido a todo este gran cambio, porque si nos quedamos analizando cosas muy micro, muy chiquititas, no vemos los grandes cambios. No nos podemos posicionar... esto un poco como el fútbol. Los mejores jugadores son los que tienen el partido en la cabeza y saben dónde está todo. No están mirando la pelota, pero saben dónde están los otros jugadores? Bueno, yo creo que la media evolution sirve para eso. Más allá de que hoy estemos todos hablando de la IA generativa. No? Tener esta visión de de conjunto de todo el ecosistema mediático y tecnológico, yo creo que es muy útil.Chris: Mm. Wow Increíble, increíble. Sí. Sí. Pienso mucho en como las nuevas generaciones o las generaciones más jóvenes en el día de hoy. O sea, [00:42:00] al menos más joven que yo, que la mayoría, como que tiene 20 años hoy, no tienen una memoria vívida de cómo fuera el mundo, sin redes sociales o sin el internet. Y así como me voy pensando en mi vida y como yo, no tengo una memoria de vida como fuera el mundo sin pantallas de cualquier tipo, o sea de tele de compus. No solo de internet o redes. Carlos: Sí, no, te decia que mi padre vivió, mi padre tiene 90 años y él se recuerda en el año 58, 59, su casa fue la primera en un barrio de Rosario que tuvo televisión y transmitían a partir de la tarde seis, siete de la tarde. Entonces venían todos los vecinos y vecinas a ver televisión a la casa de mi abuela. Entonces cada uno, cada generación tiene sus historias. No? Chris: Ajá. Ajá. Sí. Pues sí. Y también, como dijiste, para [00:43:00] entender los medios como sujetos o objetos individuales, o sea en su propio mundo, no? Este recuerdo un poco de la metáfora de Robin Wall Kimmerer que escribió un libro que se llama Braiding Sweetgrass o Trenzando Pasto Dulce supongo, en español. Y mencionó que para entender el entendimiento indígena, digamos entre comillas de tiempo, no necesitamos pensar en una línea, una flecha desde el pasado hacia el futuro. Pero, un lago, mientras el pasado, presente, y futuro existen, a la vez, en ese lago.Y también pienso como en el lugar, el pasado, presente, y el futuro, como todos esos medios existiendo a la vez, como en un lago y obviamente en una ecología de su evolución de sus cambios. Carlos: Es, muy interesante eso. Después te voy a pedir la referencia del libro porque, claro, [00:44:00] McLuhan siempre decía que el contenido de un medio es otro medio. Entonces, puede pasar que un medio del pasado deja su huella o influye en un medio del futuro. Y entonces ahí se rompe la línea temporal. Y esos son los fenómenos que a mí me interesa estudiar. Chris: Mmm, mmm, pues Carlos para terminar, tengo dos últimas preguntas para ti. Esta vez un poco alineado con el turismo, y aunque no estas enfocado tanto en en el estudio de turismo. Por mis estudios y investigaciones y por este podcast, he amplificado esa definición de turismo para ver cómo existiría más allá de una industria. Y para mí, el turismo incluye también el deseo de ver una persona, un lugar o una cultura como destino, como algo útil, temporal en su valor de uso y por tanto, desechable. Entonces, me gustaría [00:45:00] preguntarte, si para ti parece que nuestros medios populares, aunque esto es un tiempo, digamos con más libertad de otros lugares o tiempos en el pasado, más autoritarianos o totalitarianos? Si te ves la posibilidad o la evidencia de que nuestros medios digamos como mainstream más usados, están creando o promoviendo un , un sentido de alienación en la gente por efectivamente quedarles a distancia al otro o la otra.Carlos: Yo ya te dije no, no tengo una visión apocalíptica de los medios. Nunca, la tuve. Esto no quita de que los medios y como dijimos antes, tienen problemas. Generan también contaminación. Llamémoslo así si seguimos con la metáfora, ? El tema de alienación viene desde hace [00:46:00] muchísimos años. Ya cuando estudiaba en la universidad, nunca sintonicé con las teorías de la alienación.El concepto de alienación viene del siglo XIX. Toda una teoría de la conciencia, el sujeto, el proletario, llamémoslo, así que tenía que tomar conciencia de clase. Bueno, las raíces de esa visión del concepto alienación vienen de ahí. Yo, a mí nunca me convenció, justamente. Y acá si interesante.El aporte de América Latina en teorías de la comunicación siempre fue diferente. Fue reivindicar la resignificación, la resemantización el rol activo del receptor, cuando muchas veces las teorías que venían de Europa o Estados Unidos tenían esta visión del receptor de la comunicación como un ser pasivo. En ese sentido, la media ecology nunca entró en ese discurso porque se manejaba con otros parámetros, pero digamos que lo que era el mainstream de la investigación de estados unidos, pero también de Europa, siempre coincidían en esto en considerar el receptor pasivo, alienado, [00:47:00] estupidizado por los medios. Y yo realmente nunca, me convenció ese planteo, ni antes ni hoy, ni con la televisión de los 70 y 80, ni con el tiktok de hoy.Esto no quita que puede haber gente que tenga alguna adicción, etcétera, etcétera. Pero yo no creo que toda la sociedad sea adicta hoy a la pantallita. Deja de ser adicción. Okey. Esto no implica que haya que no tener una visión crítica. Esto no implica que haya que eventualmente regular los usos de ciertas tecnologías, obviamente.Pero de ahí a pensar que estamos en un escenario apocalíptico, de idiotización total del homo sapiens o de alienación. Yo no lo veo, ni creo que lo los estudios empíricos confirmen eso. Más allá que a veces hay elecciones y no nos gusten los resultados.Pero ahí es interesante, porque cuando tu propio partido político pierde, siempre se le echa la culpa a los medios porque ganó el otro. Pero cuando tu partido político gana, nadie dice nada de los medios. Ganamos porque somos mejores, [00:48:00] porque tenemos mejores ideas, porque somos más democráticos, porque somos más bonitos.Entonces, claro te das cuenta que se usan los medios como chivo expiatorio para no reconocer las propias debilidades políticas a la hora de denunciar una propuesta o de seducir al electorado.Chris: Claro, claro. Ya pues estos temas son vastos y complejos. Y por eso me gusta, y por eso estoy muy agradecido por pasar este tiempo contigo, Carlos.Pero los temas requieren un profundo disciplina para comprender, o al menos según yo, como alguien que está muy nuevo a estos temas. Entonces, a nuestra época, parece que somos, según yo, arrastrados a una velocidad sin precedentes. Nuestras tecnologías están avanzando y quizás socavando simultáneamente nuestra capacidad de comprender lo que está sucediendo en el mundo. Los usamos como protesta a veces como, como mencionaste, [00:49:00] pero sin una comprensión más profunda de cómo nos usan también. Entonces tengo la curiosidad por saber qué papel desempeña la ecología de los medios en la redención o curación de la cultura en nuestro tiempo. Cómo podría la ecología de los medios ser un aliado, quizás, en nuestros caminos? Carlos: Sí, yo creo que esta idea estaba presente, no? En los teóricos de la media ecology, digamos la primera generación.Ahora que lo pienso, estaba también en la semiótica de Umberto Eco, no? Cuando decía la semiótica más allá de analizar cómo se construye significado, también aporta a mejorar la vida significativa, o sea, la vida cultural, la vida comunicacional, nuestro funcionamiento como sujeto, digamos. Y yo creo que en ese sentido, la media ecology también.Digamos, si nosotros entendemos el ecosistema mediático, vamos a poder sacarlo mejor [00:50:00] coevolucionar mejor. Vamos a ser más responsables también a la hora de generar contenidos, a la hora de retwittear de manera a veces automática ciertas cosas. Yo creo que es todo un crecimiento de vivir una vida mediática sana, que yo creo que hoy existe esa posibilidad.Yo estoy en Twitter desde el 2008-2009 y sólo dos veces tuve así un encontronazo y bloqueé a una persona mal educada. Después el resto de mi vida en Twitter, es rica de información de contactos. Aprendo muchísimo me entero de cosas que se están investigando. O sea, también están uno elegir otras cosas.Y por ejemplo, donde veo que yo hay que hay redes que no me aportan nada, no directamente ni entro. También es eso de aprender a sacar lo mejor de este ecosistema mediático. Y lo mismo para el ecosistema natural. Así como estamos aprendiendo a preocuparnos de dónde viene la comida, [00:51:00] cuánto tiempo se va a tardar en disolver este teléfono móvil por los componentes que tiene. Bueno, también es tomar conciencia de eso. Ya sea en el mundo natural, como en el mundo de la comunicación. Y yo creo que todos estos conocimientos, en este caso, la media ecology nos sirve para captar eso, no? Y mejorar nosotros también como sujetos, que ya no somos más el centro del universo, que esta es la otra cuestión. Somos un átomo más perdido entre una complejidad muy grande. Chris: Mm. Mm, pues que estas obras y trabajos y estudios tuyos y de los demás nos da la capacidad de leer y comprender ese complejidad, no?O sea, parece más y más complejo cada vez y nos requiere como más y más discernimiento. Entonces, yo creo que pues igual, hemos metido mucho en tu voluntad y capacidad de [00:52:00] hacer eso y ponerlo en el mundo. Entonces, finalmente Carlos me gustaría a extender mi agradecimiento y la de nuestros oyentes por tu tiempo hoy, tu consideración y tu trabajo.Siento que pues, la alfabetización mediática y la ecología de los medios son extremadamente deficientes en nuestro tiempo y su voluntad de preguntar sobre estas cosas y escribir sobre ellas es una medicina para un mundo quebrantado y para mi turístico. Entonces, así que muchísimas gracias, Carlos, por venir hoy.Carlos: Gracias. Te agradezco por las preguntas. Y bueno, yo creo que el tema del turismo es un tema que está ocupa lugar central hoy. Si tú estuvieras en Barcelona, verías que todos los días se está debatiendo este tema. Así que yo creo que bueno, adelante con esa reflexión y esa investigación sobre el turismo, porque es muy pertinente y necesaria.Chris: Pues sí, gracias. [00:53:00] Igual yo siento que hay una conexión fuerte entre esas definiciones más amplias de turismo y la ecología de medios. O sea, ha abierto una apertura muy grande para mí para entender el turismo más profundamente. Igual antes de terminar Carlos, cómo podrían nuestros oyentes encontrar tus libros y tu trabajo?Sé que hemos hablado de dos libros que escribiste, pero hay mucho más. Muchísimo más. Entonces, cómo se pueden encontrarlos y encontrarte?Carlos: Lo más rápido es en en mi blog, que es hipermediaciones.com Ahí van a encontrar información sobre todos los libros que voy publicando, etcétera, etc. Y después, bueno, yo soy muy activo, como dije en Twitter X. Me encuentran la letra CEscolari y de Carlos es mi Twitter. Y bueno, también ahí trato de difundir información sobre estos [00:54:00] temas.Como dije antes, aprendo mucho de esa red y trato de también devolver lo que me dan poniendo siempre información pertinente. Buenos enlaces. Y no pelearme mucho.Chris: Muy bien, muy bien, pues voy a asegurar que esos enlaces y esas páginas estén ya en la sección de tarea el sitio web de El fin del turismo cuando sale el episodio. Igual otras entrevistas y de tus libros. No hay falta. Entonces, con mucho gusto, los voy compartiendo. Bueno, Carlos, muchísimas gracias y lo aprecio mucho.Carlos: Muchas gracias y nos vemos en México.English TranscriptionChris: [00:00:00] Welcome to the podcast The End of Tourism, Carlos. Thank you for being able to speak with me today. It's a great pleasure to have you here with me today.Carlos: No, thank you, Chris, for the invitation. It is a great pleasure and honor to chat with you, a great traveler and, well, I have never directly investigated the subject of tourism.Well, I understand that we are going to talk about media ecology and collateral issues that can help us better understand, give meaning to all that is happening in the world of tourism. Well, I work in Barcelona. I don't live in the city exactly, but I work at the university in Barcelona, in the central area.Well, every time I go to the city, the number of tourists increases every day and the debate on tourism in all its dimensions increases. So it is a topic that is on the agenda, right?Chris: Yes, well I imagine that even if you don't like to think or if you don't want to think about tourism there, it is inevitable to have a personal lesson [00:01:00] from that industry.Carlos: Yes, to the point that it is almost becoming a taxonomic criterion, right? ...of classification or cities with a lot of tourists, cities or places without tourists that are the most sought after until they are filled with tourists. So we are practically in a vicious circle.Chris: Well, at some point I know that it changes, the cycle breaks, at least to account for what we are doing with the behavior.And I understand that this also has a lot to do with the ecology of the media, the lack of ability to understand our behaviors, attitudes, thoughts, feelings, etc. So, before continuing with your work and deeds, I would like to ask you about your path and your life.First, I wonder if you could define for our listeners what media ecology is and how you [00:02:00] became interested in this field? How did you come to dedicate your life to this study?Carlos: Yes. Let's see a little bit. There is one, this is the official history. We would say media ecology, it is a field of research, let's say, that was born in the 60s. We must take into account above all the work of Marshall McLuhan, a Canadian researcher who is very famous worldwide. He was perhaps the most famous media researcher philosopher in the 60s and 70s.And a colleague of his, Neil Postman, who was at New York University, was a bit, let's say, among the people who surrounded these two references, no, in the 60s, from there it was brewing, let's say, what was later called media ecology. It is said that the first person to talk about media ecology, who applied this metaphor to the media, was Marshall McLuhan himself in some private conversations, [00:03:00] letters that were sent to each other in the late 50s, early 60s, by researchers on these topics?Let's say the first public appearance of the concept of media ecology was a lecture in 1968 by Neil Postman. It was a public speech that talked about how the media transforms us and how the media transforms us, forming an environment in which we grow, develop, and so on. And we are sometimes not very aware of this environment that surrounds us and shapes us.He first used the concept of media ecology in a public lecture. And then, if we go back to the early 70s, Postman himself created the first program in media ecology at NYU, at New York University. So, in 73, 74 and 75, what I call the second generation began to emerge, of people [00:04:00] some of whom were trained in these courses in New York.For example, Christine Nystrom was the first PhD thesis on my ecology; people like Paul Levinson who in 1979 defended a PhD thesis directed by Postman on the evolution of the media, right? And the same thing happened in Toronto in the 70s. Marshall McLuhan died in December 80.Let's say that the 70s were his last decade of intellectual production. And there are a number of collaborators at that time, very young people like Robert Logan, Derrick De Kerchove, who later continued to work a bit along these lines, along these lines. And there we talk about the Canadian front, eh?This whole second generation was developing, expanding and applying. Let's not forget Eric McLuhan, Marshall's son, who was also part of this whole movement. [00:05:00] And if I remember correctly, in 2000, the Media Ecology Association was created, which is the Media Ecology Association, which is an academic, scientific organization that brings together people who deal with media ecology.If we think at a more scientific epistemological level, we can think of this metaphor of media ecology from two or three perspectives. On the one hand, this idea that media create environments. This is a very strong idea of Marsha McLuhan, of Postman and of this whole group, isn't it? The media - "medium" understood in a very broad sense, no, any technology could be a medium for them.For Marsha McLuhan, the wheel is a medium. A telescope is a medium. A radio is a medium and television is a medium, right? I mean, any technology can be considered a medium. Let's say that these media, these technologies, generate a [00:06:00] environment that transforms us. It transforms our way, sometimes our way of thinking, our way of perceiving the world, our conception of time and space.And we are not aware of that change. Let's think that, I don't know, before 1800, if someone had to make a trip of a thousand kilometers (and here we are approaching tourism) kilometers was a trip that had to be planned many months in advance. With the arrival of the train, we are already in 1800, those kilometers were shortened. Let's say no? There we see as if today they tell us 1000 kilometers.Well, yes, we take a plane. It's an hour, an hour and a quarter of a journey. Today, 1000 kilometres is much less than 200 years ago and even in terms of time, time has changed. Right? All of that is a consequence, let's say, of this change, our perception is a consequence of a series of media and technologies.The railroad. Obviously, today we have airplanes. The same digital networks that have somewhat brought us this idea of "time [00:07:00] real," this anxiety of wanting everything fast, right? That is also a consequence of these environmental changes generated by the media and technologies, eh? This is a very strong idea, when McLuhan and Postman talked about this in the 60s, they were strong intuitions that they had from a very intelligent observation of reality. Today, cognitive sciences, or rather neuroscience, have confirmed these hypotheses. In other words, today there are a series of methodologies to study the brain and we can already see how technologies...The media even affects the physical structure of the brain. Right? Another thing that is historical is that the media affects our memory. This comes from Plato 2,500 years ago, who said that writing would kill the memory of men. Well, we can think for ourselves, right?Or at least this generation, who [00:08:00] lived in a world before and after mobile apps. 30 years ago, 25 years ago, I had 30-40 phone numbers in my memory. Today I don't have any. And let's also think about GPS, right? At one time, taxi drivers in London, which is a Latin city, knew the city by heart. And today, that's no longer necessary because they have GPS.And when they went to study the brains of London taxi drivers, they saw that certain areas of the brain had shrunk, so to speak, which are the areas that manage the spatial part. McLuhan already talked about this in the 60s. He said that changes narcotize certain areas of the mind, he said.But well, we see that a lot of empirical research, very cutting-edge neuroscience research is confirming all these thoughts, all these things that were said in the 60s onwards, by media ecology. Another possibility is to understand [00:09:00] this as a media ecosystem, Marshall McLuhan always said we cannot give it meaning,We cannot understand a medium in isolation from other media. It is as if media only acquire meaning in relation to other media. Neil Postman and many other people from the school of media ecology also defend this position, that, well, we cannot understand the history of cinema if we do not link it to video games, if we do not link it to the appearance of television.And so with all the media, right? Eh? There are some very interesting works. For example, about how in the 19th century, different media, we could say, co-evolved with each other. The press, the telegraph. The train, which also transported newspapers, news agencies appeared. I mean, we see how it is very difficult to understand the development of the press in the 19th century and we don't link it to the telephone, if we don't link it to photography, if we don't link it to radio photography, [00:10:00] also later on.I mean, this idea is very strong. It is also one of the principles that I consider fundamental to this vision, which would be that the media are not alone, they are part of an ecosystem and if we want to understand what is happening and how all this works, we cannot, uh, analyze the media in isolation from the rest.There is a third interpretation. I don't know if it's too metaphorical, right? Above all, people in Italy like the researcher Fausto Colombo from Milan or Michele Cometa, he is a researcher from Sicily, Michele Cometa who talks about the turn, the ecomedia turn. These researchers are moving in a whole conception according to which, we are in a unique media ecosystem that is contaminated.It is contaminated by "fake news" it is contaminated by false news, it is contaminated by hate speech, etc., etc. So they, let's say, take up this ecological metaphor to say [00:11:00] We have to clean this ecosystem just as the natural ecosystem is contaminated, it needs a cleaning intervention, let's say a purification, eh?The media ecosystem is also in the same danger, isn't it? And these people are also calling attention, and I am very close to this line of work on the material dimension of communication. And this also has to do with tourism, right? The environmental impact that communication has today.Training an artificial intelligence involves a huge amount of electricity; keeping social networks running, eh, TikTok, YouTube, whatever, involves millions of servers running that suck up electricity and also have to be cooled, consuming even more electricity. And that has a significant impact on the climate.So, well, let's say, we see that this metaphor of the ecological, applied to the media, gives rise to two or three interpretations.Chris: Mmm. [00:12:00] Wow. I feel like when I started taking that course from Andrew McLuhan, Marshall's grandson, as I mentioned, it changed my perspective completely - on the world, on the way I understand and how I don't understand our technologies, my movements, etc. But now, from a person who has been studying this for decades, I would like to know how you started. I mean, Andrew, for example, has the excuse of his lineage, not his father and his grandfather.But then, as a young Argentine, he began learning about media ecology.Carlos: Well, I'll tell you. I studied communication in Argentina, in Rosario. I finished college. The last exam was on June 24, 1986, which was the day that Lionel Messi was born in Rosario, Argentina, on the same day. And [00:13:00] I worked, I collaborated in a class in a subject that was communication theories.And I even taught until 1990, three years, because after that I went to live in Italy. At that time, we read Marshall McLuhan, but it was a very ideologically biased reading. In Latin America, you must have seen it in Mexico. There is a whole history, a tradition of criticism from the media, especially of everything that comes from the United States, and Canada is very close to the United States.So, let's say that in the 70s and 80s and until today I would tell you that Marshall McLuhan was often criticized because he did not criticize the media. I mean, he had a vision. He said, Neil Postman, yes, he had a very critical vision. But in that case, this was one of the big differences between Postman and McLuhan, that Marshall McLuhan, at least in [00:14:00] public, he did not criticize the media. He said, well, I am a researcher, I send out probes. I am exploring what is happening.And he never joined in... And I think that was very clever of him... he never joined in this worldwide chorus of criticism of the media. At that time, television was a monster for many people.Children were not supposed to watch television. A bit like what happens today with cell phones and what happens today with TikTok. At that time, television was the monster. At that time, there was a lot of research in the United States, which was already based on the premise that television and the media are bad for people.We see that it is a story that repeats itself. I think that in that sense, Marshall McLuhan, very intelligently, did not join that critical chorus and he really dedicated himself to thinking about the media from a much freer perspective, not anchored by this vision that I believe is too ideologized, which is very strong in Latin America. It is very strong. This does not imply [00:15:00] letting down one's guard, not being critical. On the contrary.But I think that true critical thinking starts from not saying so much ideology, we say "this is already bad. Let's look at this." There will be good things. There will be bad things. There will be things, which is undeniable, that the media, even if we say they are good, will transform us. And I think that was the important thing about the McLuhanian idea.So my first approach to McLuhan was from the perspective of critical authors who, well, yes, come from the United States, they don't criticize the media. We're going to criticize him, right? And that was my first approach to Marshall McLuhan.I went to Italy in the 90s. I was out of college for almost eight years, working in digital media, web development, multimedia products, and pretext. And in the late 90s, I said, I want to go back to college. I want to be a PhD. And I said, "I want to do a PhD. Well. Being in Italy, the PhD was going to be in semiotics." So I did a [00:16:00] PhD. My thesis was on semiotics of interfaces.There I had a vision of digital interfaces that consider, for example, instruments like the mouse or joystick as extensions of our body, right? The mouse extends the hand and puts it inside the screen, right? Or the joystick or any other element of the digital interface? Of course. If we talk about the mouse being an extension of the hand, that is a McLuhanian idea.The media as extensions of the human being as a subject. So, of course, I reread McLuhan in Italian at the end of the 90s, and I reconciled with McLuhan because I found many interesting things to understand precisely the interaction with digital machines.In 2002, I moved with my family to Spain. I returned to university life. [00:17:00] And there I began to study the relationship between old and new media. Then I recovered the idea of ecosystem. I recovered the whole new idea, the id

News items read by Laura Kennedy include: First-of-its-kind Roman artifact unearthed in Ireland (details) Dental study reveals the story of the domestication of wild boars in early Neolithic China (details)(details) Excavation reveals centuries of Veracruz history from the Aztec Empire to the present day (details) Computer simulation assists archaeologists in mapping millennia-long Neanderthal migration (details)(details)

Prehistoric people may have hunted and killed other members of their own species and eaten them, but probably not for food.史前的人可能已经狩猎并杀死了自己物种的其他成员并食用它们，但可能不是为了食物。That is what a new study written by James Cole of the University of Brighton in England says. Cole says compared to large animals, humans do not provide much food. His study was published in the journal Scientific Reports.这就是英格兰布莱顿大学的詹姆斯·科尔（James Cole）撰写的一项新研究。 科尔说，与大型动物相比，人类没有提供太多食物。 他的研究发表在《科学报告》杂志上。Cole studied nine places where fossils have been found and where researchers have found evidence of cannibalism. Such signs include cutting marks on the bones.科尔研究了发现化石的九个地方，研究人员发现了食人的证据。 这样的迹象包括在骨骼上切割痕迹。Scientists dated the sites to between 14,000 and more than 900,000 years ago. That is the so-called Paleolithic period, also known as the Stone Age.科学家将这些地点的日期约为14,000至90万年前。 那是所谓的旧石器时代，也称为石器时代。Five of the sites had Neanderthal fossils, the remains of earlier human ancestors. Two sites had fossils of prehistoric members of our own species and the others had fossils from much earlier human ancestors.其中五个地点有尼安德特人的化石，这是较早的人类祖先的遗迹。 两个地点有我们自己物种的史前成员的化石，而其他物种的化石是从较早的人类祖先的化石。Cole estimated how many calories each of the bodies at each site had. He used earlier studies that found eating an average-sized modern-day human could provide up to 144,000 calories. He then made his estimates, based on the ages of the bodies at the sites.科尔估计每个地点的每个尸体都有多少卡路里。 他使用了早期的研究，发现一个普通大小的现代人类可以提供多达144,000卡路里的热量。 然后，他根据现场的尸体年龄进行了估计。The researcher found that the hunters would not get as much energy from the humans as they would from one large animal -- like a mammoth, a woolly rhino or a bear. So, Cole asked, why would the early humans hunt and kill their own species?研究人员发现，猎人不会从人类那里得到像从一只大动物那样的能量 - 例如猛mm，羊毛犀牛或熊。 因此，科尔问，为什么早期的人类会狩猎和杀死自己的物种？“You're dealing with an animal that is as smart as you are, as resourceful as you are, and can fight back in the way you fight them,” Cole noted.科尔指出：“您正在与像自己一样聪明的动物打交道，像您一样足智多谋，可以反击他们的方式。”He says our ancestors may have eaten members of their species who had died because they did not have to be hunted. But he says cannibalism probably took place for reasons other than the need for food. He said it could have happened after times of violence or to defend territory.他说，我们的祖先可能已经吃掉了死亡的物种成员，因为他们不必被猎杀。 但是他说，出于食物的需要，可能是出于其他原因而发生的。 他说，这可能是在暴力或捍卫领土后发生的。Tim White of the University of California, Berkeley and Paola Villa of the University of Colorado Museum in Boulder said they do not know any scientists who believe our ancestors hunted each other for food. In an email, Villa said the new study “does not change our general understanding of human cannibalism.”加州大学，伯克利分校的蒂姆·怀特（Tim White）和博尔德分校博物馆的波拉维拉（Paola Villa）说，他们不认识任何科学家相信我们的祖先互相追捕食物。 维拉在一封电子邮件中说，这项新研究“不会改变我们对人类食人的一般理解”。But Palmira Saladie, of the Catalan Institute for Human Paleoecology and Social Evolution near Barcelona, Spain, said Cole's study “will undoubtedly be key in the interpretation of new sites (and) the reevaluation of old interpretations.”但是西班牙巴塞罗那附近的加泰罗尼亚人类古生态学与社会进化研究所的帕尔米拉·沙拉（Palmira Saladie）表示，科尔的研究“无疑将是对新地点的解释（和）重新评估旧解释的关键。”In an email, she wrote that, to understand why our ancestors sometimes ate each other, “we still have a long way to go.”她在一封电子邮件中写道，要理解为什么我们的祖先有时会互相吃，“我们还有很长的路要走。”

FEATURING: (00:00:00) New Business: Mario Kart World.(00:32:22) HDR, Zelda, Smash Bros bug... just "a menagerie of dumb BS".(01:14:45) F-Zero GX.(01:29:43) Valfaris.(01:49:08) Fantasy Life i: The Girl Who Steals Time.

Today, we delve into the timeless topic of sexuality through the ages. From the intimate lives of Neanderthals—did they interbreed with Homo Sapiens?—to the wild excesses of Ancient Rome and Greece, and even the romantic customs during the Great Depression in the United States, this episode covers it all! Join us for a fascinating journey into humanity's intimate history. Chapters: 00:00:00 - The Strange Truth About Neanderthal Sex Lives 00:07:44 - What It Was Like Being a Sex Worker In 18th Century London 00:17:51 - The Strange Truth About Puritan Sex Lives 00:28:00 - What Sex Was Like in Ancient Rome 00:37:06 - What Sex Was Like For British Royals 00:47:33 - What Sex Was Like In Ancient Greece 00:57:27 - What Dating During The Great Depression Was Like 01:07:02 - The Science Behind Our Strange Sex Practices 00:00:00: The Strange Truth About Neanderthal Sex Lives00:07:44: What It Was Like Being a Sex Worker In 18th Century London00:17:51: The Strange Truth About Puritan Sex Lives00:28:00: What Sex Was Like in Ancient Rome00:37:06: What Sex Was Like For British Royals00:47:33: What Sex Was Like In Ancient Greece00:57:27: What Dating During The Great Depression Was Like01:07:02: The Science Behind Our Strange Sex Practices #sexuality #history #Neanderthals #AncientRome #AncientGreece #GreatDepression #sexpractices See show notes: https://inlet.fm/weird-history/episodes/684c4b6c530cf6a852aa8bdf Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Humans are everywhere. How did we get from the savannahs of Africa across to the most northern reaches of Alaska and Greenland, to the outbacks of Australia and the islands of the Pacific millennia ago? How did we master fire, figure out how to craft tools and survive the Ice Ages?In this episode Dan is joined by Professor Chris Stringer, Research Leader in Human Evolution at London's Natural History Museum, to talk about how Homo Sapiens managed to outlive other human cousins like Neanderthals and Denisovans and cross oceans s hape landscapes and one day, build cities and space shuttles.Produced by James Hickmann, Mariana Des Forges and edited by Tim Arstall.You can now find Dan Snow's History Hit on YouTube! Watch episodes every Friday (including this one) here.Sign up to History Hit for hundreds of hours of original documentaries, with a new release every week and ad-free podcasts. Sign up at https://www.historyhit.com/subscribe.We'd love to hear your feedback - you can take part in our podcast survey here: https://insights.historyhit.com/history-hit-podcast-always-on.You can also email the podcast directly at ds.hh@historyhit.com.

From the earliest bipedal ancestors to the dawn of spiritual awareness, we delve into the archaeological, anthropological, and theological questions surrounding our shared past. Join us over two episodes as we uncover the blurred lines between ancient hominins and modern humans, and ponder the moments that shaped our anatomy, behavior, and spirit. n this first episode, we trace the incredible evolution of our ancient ancestors through the Paleolithic era. We explore how archaeologists piece together the puzzles of the deep past, discovering the fascinating story of hominins learning to walk upright, growing bigger brains, mastering tools and fire, and developing complex social behaviors. A significant part of this journey involves understanding the complex story of Neanderthals—who they were, what they did, and their eventual intermingling with Homo sapiens. We examine the archaeological evidence that reveals how our physical and behavioral traits developed, setting the stage for the emergence of modern humans. Theme song and credits music by Breakmaster Cylinder. Other music in this episode by Northern Points, Babel, Nick Petrov, Jonathan Boyle, Big Score Audio and High Street Music, courtesy of Shutterstock, Inc.

******Support the channel******Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/thedissenterPayPal: paypal.me/thedissenterPayPal Subscription 1 Dollar: https://tinyurl.com/yb3acuuyPayPal Subscription 3 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/ybn6bg9lPayPal Subscription 5 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/ycmr9gpzPayPal Subscription 10 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/y9r3fc9mPayPal Subscription 20 Dollars: https://tinyurl.com/y95uvkao ******Follow me on******Website: https://www.thedissenter.net/The Dissenter Goodreads list: https://shorturl.at/7BMoBFacebook: https://www.facebook.com/thedissenteryt/Twitter: https://x.com/TheDissenterYT This show is sponsored by Enlites, Learning & Development done differently. Check the website here: http://enlites.com/ Dr. Stefanos Geroulanos is the Director of the Remarque Institute and a Professor of European Intellectual History at New York University. He usually writes about concepts that weave together modern understandings of time, the human, and the body. He is the author or co-author of several books, with the latest one being The Invention of Prehistory: Empire, Violence, and Our Obsession with Human Origins. In this episode, we focus on The Invention of Prehistory. We start by talking about how people got interested in prehistory, what “invention” means in this case, what our understanding of the past is shaped by, and the example of the Neanderthals. We discuss European colonization, and concepts like “savage” and “civilization”; indigenous peoples and the first humans; “human nature” and political debates between socialists and capitalists; and eugenics and Nazism. We talk about the impact of popular books, like Yuval Harari's Sapiens, and claims about how we should live our present lives. Finally, we discuss whether there is any problem with anthropologists studying our past.--A HUGE THANK YOU TO MY PATRONS/SUPPORTERS: PER HELGE LARSEN, JERRY MULLER, BERNARDO SEIXAS, ADAM KESSEL, MATTHEW WHITINGBIRD, ARNAUD WOLFF, TIM HOLLOSY, HENRIK AHLENIUS, FILIP FORS CONNOLLY, ROBERT WINDHAGER, RUI INACIO, ZOOP, MARCO NEVES, COLIN HOLBROOK, PHIL KAVANAGH, SAMUEL ANDREEFF, FRANCIS FORDE, TIAGO NUNES, FERGAL CUSSEN, HAL HERZOG, NUNO MACHADO, JONATHAN LEIBRANT, JOÃO LINHARES, STANTON T, SAMUEL CORREA, ERIK HAINES, MARK SMITH, JOÃO EIRA, TOM HUMMEL, SARDUS FRANCE, DAVID SLOAN WILSON, YACILA DEZA-ARAUJO, ROMAIN ROCH, DIEGO LONDOÑO CORREA, YANICK PUNTER, CHARLOTTE BLEASE, NICOLE BARBARO, ADAM HUNT, PAWEL OSTASZEWSKI, NELLEKE BAK, GUY MADISON, GARY G HELLMANN, SAIMA AFZAL, ADRIAN JAEGGI, PAULO TOLENTINO, JOÃO BARBOSA, JULIAN PRICE, HEDIN BRØNNER, DOUGLAS FRY, FRANCA BORTOLOTTI, GABRIEL PONS CORTÈS, URSULA LITZCKE, SCOTT, ZACHARY FISH, TIM DUFFY, SUNNY SMITH, JON WISMAN, WILLIAM BUCKNER, PAUL-GEORGE ARNAUD, LUKE GLOWACKI, GEORGIOS THEOPHANOUS, CHRIS WILLIAMSON, PETER WOLOSZYN, DAVID WILLIAMS, DIOGO COSTA, ALEX CHAU, AMAURI MARTÍNEZ, CORALIE CHEVALLIER, BANGALORE ATHEISTS, LARRY D. LEE JR., OLD HERRINGBONE, MICHAEL BAILEY, DAN SPERBER, ROBERT GRESSIS, JEFF MCMAHAN, JAKE ZUEHL, BARNABAS RADICS, MARK CAMPBELL, TOMAS DAUBNER, LUKE NISSEN, KIMBERLY JOHNSON, JESSICA NOWICKI, LINDA BRANDIN, GEORGE CHORIATIS, VALENTIN STEINMANN, ALEXANDER HUBBARD, BR, JONAS HERTNER, URSULA GOODENOUGH, DAVID PINSOF, SEAN NELSON, MIKE LAVIGNE, JOS KNECHT, LUCY, MANVIR SINGH, PETRA WEIMANN, CAROLA FEEST, MAURO JÚNIOR, 航 豊川, TONY BARRETT, NIKOLAI VISHNEVSKY, STEVEN GANGESTAD, TED FARRIS, ROBINROSWELL, AND KEITH RICHARDSON!A SPECIAL THANKS TO MY PRODUCERS, YZAR WEHBE, JIM FRANK, ŁUKASZ STAFINIAK, TOM VANEGDOM, BERNARD HUGUENEY, CURTIS DIXON, BENEDIKT MUELLER, THOMAS TRUMBLE, KATHRINE AND PATRICK TOBIN, JONCARLO MONTENEGRO, NICK GOLDEN, CHRISTINE GLASS, IGOR NIKIFOROVSKI, PER KRAULIS, AND BENJAMIN GELBART!AND TO MY EXECUTIVE PRODUCERS, MATTHEW LAVENDER, SERGIU CODREANU, ROSEY, AND GREGORY HASTINGS!

Ghosts is a BBC sitcom about a young couple who inherit a mansion which happens to be haunted by a cast of spirits from various periods of Britain's history—including the Stone Age. Today we're reviewing the character Robin, who is some sort of caveman ghost who has been haunting the grounds since long before Button House was built. His is a tragic story of extreme loneliness and solitude, but through it all he's developed a strong sense of humour, a sage-like wisdom, and an appreciation of bums. Visit our new website! https://screensofthestoneage.com Get in touch with us: Bluesky: @sotsapodcast.bsky.social Facebook: @SotSAPodcast Letterboxd: https://letterboxd.com/sotsa/ Email: screensofthestoneage@gmail.com In this episode: 9 minutes of Robin chaos on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xrgFgyTGKwI Roger Clark (2012) A Natural History of Ghosts: 500 Years of Hunting for Proof: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Natural_History_of_Ghosts Greyfriar's Kirkyard: https://greyfriarskirk.com/visit/kirkyard/ Ghosts of Roman soldiers haunt ancient city of York: https://www.upi.com/Archives/1977/01/19/Ghosts-of-Roman-soldiers-haunt-ancient-city-of-York/6631571073639/ Jaubert et al. (2016). Early Neanderthal constructions deep in Bruniquel Cave in southwestern France: https://doi.org/10.1038/nature18291 The BBC article about the “highly inbred” Neanderthal woman from Denisova Cave: https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-25423498

Did we evolve from monkeys? What really is a Neanderthal? Go down the rabbit hole with Brandon and find out!

What an episode!  We start with a recap of the anatomical discussion. Did homo sapiens and neanderthals interbreed to create hybrid offspring... mighty men of renown?Then we plunge into a fascinating discussion on consciousness, the voice of God, auditory hallucinations, telepathy, and much, much more!Buy Trevor's Audiobook!: https://www.audible.com/pd/B0F55K2GT1/?source_code=AUDFPWS0223189MWT-BK-ACX0-444108&ref=acx_bty_BK_ACX0_444108_rh_usBuy the Physical Book: https://a.co/d/fMPgmFEJoin the Happy Fools Chatroom (Discord): https://discord.gg/hgCwDC6PEmail the Happy Fools @ happyfoolspodcast@gmail.com

This week, Emily Bazelon, John Dickerson, and David Plotz discuss this week's Supreme Court decision that validates Trump's firing of 2 officials without cause thus stealth-overruling a key check on presidents, the power dynamics around who benefits from Trump's attempts to destroy Harvard, and the challenges and rewards of male friendship in modern life.  Here are this week's chatters:   Emily: Emily Davies for The Washington Post: Trump's clemency spree extends to ex-gangster, artist, former congressmen; Aaron Blake for CNN: ‘No MAGA left behind': Trump's pardons get even more political   John: Jason DeParle for The New York Times: How a Generation's Struggle Led to a Record Surge in Homelessness; Malu Cursino for the BBC: Ancient human fingerprint suggests Neanderthals made art; Cara Tabachnick for CBS News: Last living grandson of 10th U.S. President John Tyler, a link to a bygone era, dies at 96; the Miller Center at the University of Virginia: President John Tyler (1790-1862); Sherwood Forest: More About Sherwood Forest and John Tyler.   David: Sarah Zhang for The Atlantic: The ‘Man Eater' Screwworm Is Coming   Listener chatter from Jody Litvak in Los Angeles: The Stamp Thief (trailer video 1:58)   For this week's Slate Plus bonus episode, Emily, John, and David discuss WilmerHale's court win this week, in which Judge Leon struck down the president's politically-motivated executive order against the law firm as unconstitutional.   In the latest Gabfest Reads, Emily talks with author Susan Dominus about her new book, The Family Dynamic: A Journey into the Mystery of Sibling Success.   Email your chatters, questions, and comments to gabfest@slate.com. (Messages may be referenced by name unless the writer stipulates otherwise.)   Research by Emily Ditto Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This week, Emily Bazelon, John Dickerson, and David Plotz discuss this week's Supreme Court decision that validates Trump's firing of 2 officials without cause thus stealth-overruling a key check on presidents, the power dynamics around who benefits from Trump's attempts to destroy Harvard, and the challenges and rewards of male friendship in modern life.  Here are this week's chatters:   Emily: Emily Davies for The Washington Post: Trump's clemency spree extends to ex-gangster, artist, former congressmen; Aaron Blake for CNN: ‘No MAGA left behind': Trump's pardons get even more political   John: Jason DeParle for The New York Times: How a Generation's Struggle Led to a Record Surge in Homelessness; Malu Cursino for the BBC: Ancient human fingerprint suggests Neanderthals made art; Cara Tabachnick for CBS News: Last living grandson of 10th U.S. President John Tyler, a link to a bygone era, dies at 96; the Miller Center at the University of Virginia: President John Tyler (1790-1862); Sherwood Forest: More About Sherwood Forest and John Tyler.   David: Sarah Zhang for The Atlantic: The ‘Man Eater' Screwworm Is Coming   Listener chatter from Jody Litvak in Los Angeles: The Stamp Thief (trailer video 1:58)   For this week's Slate Plus bonus episode, Emily, John, and David discuss WilmerHale's court win this week, in which Judge Leon struck down the president's politically-motivated executive order against the law firm as unconstitutional.   In the latest Gabfest Reads, Emily talks with author Susan Dominus about her new book, The Family Dynamic: A Journey into the Mystery of Sibling Success.   Email your chatters, questions, and comments to gabfest@slate.com. (Messages may be referenced by name unless the writer stipulates otherwise.)   Research by Emily Ditto Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This week, Emily Bazelon, John Dickerson, and David Plotz discuss this week's Supreme Court decision that validates Trump's firing of 2 officials without cause thus stealth-overruling a key check on presidents, the power dynamics around who benefits from Trump's attempts to destroy Harvard, and the challenges and rewards of male friendship in modern life.  Here are this week's chatters:   Emily: Emily Davies for The Washington Post: Trump's clemency spree extends to ex-gangster, artist, former congressmen; Aaron Blake for CNN: ‘No MAGA left behind': Trump's pardons get even more political   John: Jason DeParle for The New York Times: How a Generation's Struggle Led to a Record Surge in Homelessness; Malu Cursino for the BBC: Ancient human fingerprint suggests Neanderthals made art; Cara Tabachnick for CBS News: Last living grandson of 10th U.S. President John Tyler, a link to a bygone era, dies at 96; the Miller Center at the University of Virginia: President John Tyler (1790-1862); Sherwood Forest: More About Sherwood Forest and John Tyler.   David: Sarah Zhang for The Atlantic: The ‘Man Eater' Screwworm Is Coming   Listener chatter from Jody Litvak in Los Angeles: The Stamp Thief (trailer video 1:58)   For this week's Slate Plus bonus episode, Emily, John, and David discuss WilmerHale's court win this week, in which Judge Leon struck down the president's politically-motivated executive order against the law firm as unconstitutional.   In the latest Gabfest Reads, Emily talks with author Susan Dominus about her new book, The Family Dynamic: A Journey into the Mystery of Sibling Success.   Email your chatters, questions, and comments to gabfest@slate.com. (Messages may be referenced by name unless the writer stipulates otherwise.)   Research by Emily Ditto Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

El Gobierno aprueba los nuevos criterios para acceder a la jubilación anticipada en las profesiones de más riesgo y protagoniza la Actualidad de Cuerpos especiales, que sigue con el hallazgo de una piedra perteneciente un Neanderthal que habría sido elegida por sus características y sería la supueta huella digital más antigua del mundo.

Die Themen in den Wissensnachrichten: +++ Invasive Arten richten weltweit jährlich Milliardenschäden an +++ Ruinen von rätselhaftem Volk in den Anden entdeckt +++ Magma aus der Tiefe treibt Ostafrika auseinander +++**********Weiterführende Quellen zu dieser Folge:Using species ranges and macroeconomic data to fill the gap in costs of biological invasions, Nature Ecology and Evolution, 26.05.2025Discovery of Over 100 Archaeological Structures At Gran Pajatén. World Monuments FundNeon Isotopes in Geothermal Gases From the Kenya Rift Reveal a Common Deep Mantle Source Beneath East Africa, Geophysical Research Letters, 12.05.2025Grünes Band: längste Erfassung der Artenvielfalt Deutschlands gestartet. BfN 27.5.25More than a fingerprint on a pebble: A pigment-marked object from San Lázaro rock-shelter in the context of Neanderthal symbolic behavior, Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences, 24.05.2025Alle Quellen findet ihr hier.**********Ihr könnt uns auch auf diesen Kanälen folgen: TikTok und Instagram .

Neanderthals have long been considered not quite as human as we are. But the more we study them, the more obvious it becomes that they were humans just like us.

A new MP3 sermon from Answers in Genesis Ministries is now available on SermonAudio with the following details: Title: Neanderthals—They’re Our Relatives Subtitle: Answers with Ken Ham Speaker: Ken Ham Broadcaster: Answers in Genesis Ministries Event: Radio Broadcast Date: 5/26/2025 Length: 1 min.

A new MP3 sermon from Answers in Genesis Ministries is now available on SermonAudio with the following details: Title: Neanderthals—They’re Our Relatives Subtitle: Answers with Ken Ham Speaker: Ken Ham Broadcaster: Answers in Genesis Ministries Event: Radio Broadcast Date: 5/26/2025 Length: 1 min.

  Dr. Melvern Katzman is an amazing example of someone who is growing older with gusto and with a great sense of humor. He is a family man who cherishes his family connections, and has a revolving list of hobbies that keep him current and focused. He has the can do it spirit that has navigated him throughout his 97 years! --- Watch the episode here    Listen to the podcast here    Super Ager & Super Helper: Dr. Katzman, 97, Solves My Tech Crisis! Welcome to the show. We are continuing a series of episodes with people who are considered to be super-agers. Dr. Melvern Katzman, who lives in Toronto, is 97 years young and will be talking to us about what it takes to get to his age. Dr. Katzmann practiced optometry for 60 years, was actively involved in his professional organizations, his faith, and was a leader for Habitat for Humanity. Most recently, at age 97, he chaired his condo buildings 40th anniversary party. He is definitely growing older with Gusto. Let's get started.      Welcome to the show, Dr. Katzman. Thank you very much for having me. Staying Vital At Any Age: Dr. Katzman's Secret Sauce To Joyful Aging I just have to tell my listeners, this is like so impressive before we even start the conversation. Dr. Katzman was having some trouble getting onto the podcast recording platform. He showed you effort like within a half hour, he did it all figure out, and here we are. I'm so impressed because I am a techno Neanderthal, and you're 97 years old, and I couldn't do what you did. I'm impressed. I wanted to ask you, people who come on our show or are selected because they've shown by example, their attitude towards growing older, and you're growing older in a positive and productive way. What would you tell someone who's maybe 50 years old what to do and how to grow older without being fearful of growing older? Let's say this. I really provided for my old age. I have many hobbies and I'm involved in the community, involved in my condo. When my time came to retire, I had plenty of things to do to keep my mind off being feared. Tell us a little bit about what you did to stay vital all these years. What were some of your hobbies? I know you do genealogy, and check me out. That was pretty impressive, too. I'm a stamp collector, a coin collector, involved with the condo, which I expanded into being involved with the federal government, the provincial government, and the municipal government. I'm quite active in the community. What would you say to our readers that has given you the greatest strength as you navigate through life's ups and downs? I think I'd have to go back to my family, my mother, my father, my in-laws, and one uncle who is my mentor. They provided a lot to me. They were the ones who made Mel Katzman. A Love Story & Lasting Connections: Family & Friends At 97 Dr. Katzman, tell our readers the wonderful story about how you met your wife. Believe it or not, it was that mentor uncle who made a blind date. He once had a function. He saw my supposed next and my wife, and he said, “That would be a nice girl for Mel.” We made a date, but he didn't realize her age. She was 17 and I was 24 and she wouldn't refuse the date because of my uncle. When we saw each other, that was it. Love at first sight, right? It's amazing. Talk to our readers a little bit about the importance of creating and keeping a strong circle of friends. There aren't too many friends. There aren't too many of my friends left. I seem to be the last one. What has happened? Children learn by observing and copying the actions and habits of adults. Throughout your life, I know you must have had a wide circle of friends. I had a lot of friends. Most of them, believe it or not, were younger than my wife and I. From my synagogue was one source. We belong to many organizations, and my activities in the community have created a lot of friends. Why do you think that you and your wife were drawn to younger people, or I should say,

Did we evolve from Monkeys? What really is a Neanderthal? Go down the Rabbit Hole with Brandon and find out

Send us a textWhat if apocalypse doesn't mean the end of everything, but rather a revelation of new possibilities? Archaeologist Lizzie Wade turns our understanding of catastrophe upside down in this eye-opening conversation about how ancient societies transformed through crisis.Speaking from Mexico City, Wade takes us on a global journey through civilizations that faced devastating challenges yet emerged transformed. She dismantles our preconceptions about Neanderthals, revealing not brutish cave-dwellers but communities capable of care and connection—even interbreeding with our ancestors during climate instability. The DNA evidence speaks volumes: almost all modern humans carry about 2% Neanderthal ancestry, suggesting cooperation rather than conquest.The pattern continues across time and space. When Egypt's Old Kingdom collapsed amid severe drought around 4,200 years ago, elite texts described apocalyptic horror. Yet archaeological evidence from ordinary villages shows increased creativity, religious innovation, and more broadly distributed resources. Similarly, the Black Death decimated Europe's population but ultimately improved living conditions for survivors despite elites' desperate attempts to preserve feudal hierarchies. These historical patterns have striking parallels to our experience with COVID-19, suggesting we're still just beginning to understand the pandemic's long-term social effects.Wade's most powerful insight may be about who gets to tell these stories. Written records typically come from those with power and privilege, while archaeology reveals a more complete picture by examining the lived experience of ordinary people. This perspective shift is especially crucial when considering colonial narratives like the Spanish conquest of the Aztecs, which wasn't the inevitable triumph of "superior" civilization that European accounts depicted.As we face climate change and other global challenges, Wade's research offers profound hope. Throughout human history, apocalypse has never meant extinction but transformation. The question isn't whether we'll survive, but what kind of society we'll create in response to crisis. What holds us back isn't technological limitations but fear of change—particularly from those benefiting most from existing systems. Are we brave enough to imagine entirely new possibilities?

Send us a textThey really banned me off TikTok for telling the truth — meanwhile, deepfakes and lies are just fine. In this episode of R2 Cents, I talk about the mental gymnastics behind “community guidelines,” how saying the word discipline gets you age-restricted, and how calling someone a Neanderthal is somehow a violation.We cover the Palm Springs bombing and the motive behind it, the ridiculousness of job interview questions, and how fake meat has been on our plates longer than you think.Also: lasers starting fires, head transplants being real now, Trump's meeting with the Saudis (and how one guy there was on the FBI's Most Wanted list), and why sports talk podcasts ain't it. Welcome to the one place where you can still say the stuff they don't want you to. Keywords (for algorithm): TikTok ban, government mind control, fake memories, censorship on social media, YouTube age restriction, free speech online, Palm Springs bombing, fake meat truth, job interviews are stupid, why do you want to work here, laser fire conspiracy, head transplant news, Trump Saudi meeting, FBI most wanted 2025, podcast truth, R2 Cents podcast, Oscar R2 Cents, podcast exposing lies, truth podcast 2025  Thanks for listening to R2 Cents With Oscar! If you enjoyed the episode, please subscribe, rate, and leave a review on your favorite podcast platform — it helps us grow! Follow us for more updates and behind-the-scenes content: R2 Cents Store: https://my-store-107a697.creator-spring.com Buy Oscar a coffee: https://buymeacoffee.com/r2cents Official Site: www.r2centswoscar.com Subscribe on YouTube: www.youtube.com/channel/UCb-X7wvMYSyywC1X3kUjHUA Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/r2_cents/ Support the show by sharing it with friends or checking out our affiliate links in the description. Disclaimer: The views expressed on this podcast are for entertainment purposes only and do not reflect the views of any organizations or individuals mentioned.

In this eye-opening episode, Michael Shermer chats with evolutionist Telmo Pievani about the surprising coexistence—and hybridization—of Neanderthals and Homo sapiens. They discuss recent scientific discoveries, the evolving understanding of race and biology, and the crucial role of serendipity in advancing scientific knowledge. This episode offers a nuanced perspective on how unexpected findings continue to reshape our understanding of human origins and the scientific process itself. Telmo Pievani is Full Professor in the Department of Biology at the University of Padua, where he covers the first Italian chair of Philosophy of Biological Sciences. A leading evolutionist, science communicator, and columnist for Corriere della Sera, he is the author of The Unexpected Life, Creation Without God, and Imperfection (MIT Press). His new book is Serendipity: The Unexpected in Science.

Join us on a journey to uncover the explosive truth behind the volcanic eruption that wiped out the Neanderthals! In this video, we'll delve into the catastrophic event that changed the course of human history. From the massive pyroclastic flows to the devastating impact on the climate, we'll explore the scientific evidence that suggests a massive volcanic eruption was the final nail in the coffin for our ancient cousins. Get ready to AWAKENING the volcano that reshaped the fate of humanity! Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

In this extraordinary episode, we journey deep into the soul memories of an interdimensional being who incarnated as a Neanderthal during Earth's ancient past. Through regression hypnosis and past life therapy, this soul recalls their unique mission—anchoring higher consciousness into the early human timeline to assist in humanity's future awakening.Explore how this extraterrestrial soul navigated the primal world of early Earth or another planet, the challenges of dense physicality, and the profound spiritual dimensions they accessed even in that primitive form. We discuss the higher dimensions they came from, the advanced civilizations they left behind, and the soul contract that brought them here.#pastlifejourney #qhhtpractitioner #starseedawakens #whatisastarseed #alienencounter #pastlivesregression #pastlifestoryMayra Rath is a Spiritual Hypnotherapist specializing in Past Life Regression Therapy and QHHT Hypnosis. With over 25 years of experience, she has guided countless individuals through transformative journeys into their past lives, helping them uncover deep-rooted patterns and heal emotional wounds and traumas connected to previous incarnations.Based in Los Angeles, Mayra conducts sessions through her private practice, Soul Signs Hypnosis, both in-person and remotely.Connect with me Website: https://www.soulsigns.netSocial Media:TIKTOK:@SoulSignsHypnosisInstagram:@SoulSignsHypnosisFacebook Group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/1009959799420939 Youtube: @SoulSignsHypnosisPODCAST: Past Lives with Mayra Rath (Apple & Spotify)#pastlivespodcast #starseedmeaning #starseedactivations #qhhtpractitioner #qhhtsessions Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On today's episode: Neanderthals weren't as dumb as you thought! And we catch up on listener questions! All that and more today on All Around Science...RESOURCESNeanderthals invented their own bone weapon technology by 80,000 years agoZolpidem - StatPearls - NCBI Bookshelf.2-Minute Neuroscience: Zolpidem (Ambien)Beat Jet Lag with These Insider Tips | U30XHow to Fall Asleep on an Airplane​Health and Wellness: How Private Jets Ensure Passenger Wellbeing - Blog - The Aviation FactoryCREDITS:Writing - Bobby Frankenberger & Maura ArmstrongBooking - September McCrady THEME MUSIC by Andrew Allenhttps://twitter.com/KEYSwithSOULhttp://andrewallenmusic.com Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

  Today, Razib talks about a new paper, A structured coalescent model reveals deep ancestral structure shared by all modern humans: Understanding the history of admixture events and population size changes leading to modern humans is central to human evolutionary genetics. Here we introduce a coalescence-based hidden Markov model, cobraa, that explicitly represents an ancestral population split and rejoin, and demonstrate its application on simulated and real data across multiple species. Using cobraa, we present evidence for an extended period of structure in the history of all modern humans, in which two ancestral populations that diverged ~1.5 million years ago came together in an admixture event ~300 thousand years ago, in a ratio of ~80:20%. Immediately after their divergence, we detect a strong bottleneck in the major ancestral population. We inferred regions of the present-day genome derived from each ancestral population, finding that material from the minority correlates strongly with distance to coding sequence, suggesting it was deleterious against the majority background. Moreover, we found a strong correlation between regions of majority ancestry and human–Neanderthal or human–Denisovan divergence, suggesting the majority population was also ancestral to those archaic humans.

What is in the This Week in Science Podcast? This Week: Tiny Life, Human Fungus, Honeyguides, Survey Says, Vaccines and Menstruation, Art with Porpoise, Cuttlefish, Shrimp, Brain Computer Interface, Neanderthals, Tiny Town, On Being, and Much More Science! Become a Patron! Check out the full unedited episode of our podcast on YouTube or Twitch. Remember […] The post 7 May, 2025 – Episode 1014 – Science! You Get What You Pay For! appeared first on This Week in Science - The Kickass Science Podcast.

Una ensalada con muchos sabores de rock’n’roll, todos procedentes de la cosecha de discos de 1995. Una buena añada.Playlist;(sintonía) THE SATAN’S PILGRIMS “Spoke” (Soul pilgrim)THE NEANDERTHALS “Arula Mata Gali” (The last menace to the human race)SOUTHERN CULTURE ON THE SKIDS “Voodoo cadillac” (Dirt track date)FLAT DUO JETS “Goin’ to a town” (Introducing the…)BEN VAUGHN “Rock is dead” (Rambler’65)OBLIVIANS “Sunday you need love” (Soul food)THE GORIES “You little nothing”THE KAISERS “Watcha say” (Beat it up)THE SWINGIN' NECKBREAKERS “Wait” (Shake break!)THE FLESHTONES “Let’s go” (Laboratory of sound)ROCKET FROM THE CRYPT “On a rope” (Scream Dracula Scream)SUPERSUCKERS “The thing about that” (The sacrilicious sounds of...)THE LAZY COWGIRLS “Frustration, tragedy and lies” (Ragged soul)RANCID “Journey to the end of the East Bay” (...And out come the wolves)MR T. EXPERIENCE “Ba ba ba ba ba” (Love is dead)RIVERDALES “Back to you” (ST)THE MUFFS “End it all” (Blonder and blonder)LOS IMPOSIBLES “Epílogo” (En el país del niño mosca)Escuchar audio

The history of the Earth is littered with dramatic events that have shaped the planet itself and the lives of the human beings who live on it in profound ways. Be it floods, famine or disease pandemics. Human beings have so far survived. But what in modern times can we learn from these past catastrophes? In this episode, we speak to author Lizzie Wade about her latest book Apocalypse: How Catastrophe Transformed Our World and Can Forge New Futures. She tells us how even though Neanderthals died out many years ago they still live on in human DNA, how ancient civilisations that once thrived fell but their culture persists to this day and how the story of the human race is far from finished. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

Today we are joined by Dr. Denis Alexander, who will soon teach a class on Current Issues in Science and Theology (May 26-30). Denis is known for his research as a molecular biologist, so we start this conversation by discussing theistic evolution, genetics, DNA, and the difference between mind and brain. He also probes the implications of emerging issues and fields such as neuroscience, transhumanism, and AI. We are grateful to engage with someone who thoughtfully and insightfully participates in the scientific world, bringing Christian faith and reflection to bear on emerging knowledge and realities. If you are unsure whether his class is for you, Dr. Alexander assures us that this course suits those with no science background! BioDr. Denis Alexander is a prominent molecular biologist and Christian thinker known for his extensive work in the dialogue between science and religion. In 2006, Dr. Alexander co-founded The Faraday Institute for Science and Religion with Professor Bob White to conduct research and promote dialogue between the scientific and religious communities. He was the journal Science & Christian Belief editor from 1992 to 2013. He has been an active member of organizations such as Christians in Science and the International Society for Science and Religion. Throughout his career, Dr. Alexander has been a vocal proponent of the compatibility between scientific inquiry and religious faith, contributing significantly to discussions on how these fields intersect and inform each other. He'll join us from May 26-30 to teach on Current Issues in Science and Theology. He will also give an Evening Public Lecture in the Regent College Chapel on Monday, May 26, 2025.Previous Podcast AppearancesEvolution, Neanderthals and Original Sin (March 2021)Regent College Podcast Thanks for listening. Please like, rate and review us on your podcast platform of choice and share this episode with a friend. Follow Us on Social Media Facebook Instagram Youtube Keep in Touch Regent College Summer Programs Regent College Newsletter

In this episode of the Charter Cities Podcast, Mark speaks with Michael Muthukrishna, Associate Professor of Economic Psychology at LSE, about how cultural evolution explains the rise of human civilization. They explore why Homo sapiens prevailed over Neanderthals, the role of self-domestication and social learning in societal development, and how religion and cooperation have shaped social complexity. The conversation covers major historical shifts—from agriculture to the Industrial Revolution—and examines how modern challenges like declining fertility, institutional stagnation, and academic conformity can be better understood through the lens of cultural evolution.

Rumors of Neanderthal brutishness have been greatly exaggerated. Guest: Paige Madison, science writer For show transcripts, go to ⁠⁠vox.com/unxtranscripts⁠⁠ For more, go to ⁠⁠vox.com/unexplainable⁠⁠ And please email us! ⁠⁠unexplainable@vox.com⁠⁠ We read every email. Support Unexplainable (and get ad-free episodes) by becoming a Vox Member today: ⁠⁠vox.com/members Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices

  On this episode of Unsupervised Learning Razib comments on a new paper in Nature, Ancient DNA from the Green Sahara reveals ancestral North African lineage. Here is the abstract: Although it is one of the most arid regions today, the Sahara Desert was a green savannah during the African Humid Period (AHP) between 14,500 and 5,000 years before present, with water bodies promoting human occupation and the spread of pastoralism in the middle Holocene epoch1. DNA rarely preserves well in this region, limiting knowledge of the Sahara's genetic history and demographic past. Here we report ancient genomic data from the Central Sahara, obtained from two approximately 7,000-year-old Pastoral Neolithic female individuals buried in the Takarkori rock shelter in southwestern Libya. The majority of Takarkori individuals' ancestry stems from a previously unknown North African genetic lineage that diverged from sub-Saharan African lineages around the same time as present-day humans outside Africa and remained isolated throughout most of its existence. Both Takarkori individuals are closely related to ancestry first documented in 15,000-year-old foragers from Taforalt Cave, Morocco2, associated with the Iberomaurusian lithic industry and predating the AHP. Takarkori and Iberomaurusian-associated individuals are equally distantly related to sub-Saharan lineages, suggesting limited gene flow from sub-Saharan to Northern Africa during the AHP. In contrast to Taforalt individuals, who have half the Neanderthal admixture of non-Africans, Takarkori shows ten times less Neanderthal ancestry than Levantine farmers, yet significantly more than contemporary sub-Saharan genomes. Our findings suggest that pastoralism spread through cultural diffusion into a deeply divergent, isolated North African lineage that had probably been widespread in Northern Africa during the late Pleistocene epoch.

Shanidar Cave is a unique archaeological site in Kurdistan where scientists found the remains of 10 Neanderthal men, women, and children. Some of these individuals had survived serious injuries, and one seemed to have been buried with flowers beneath his body. The discoveries at Shanidar challenged long-standing ideas of who Neanderthals were and what separates our species from theirs. Now, more than 50 years after the original excavations, scientists have returned to Shanidar to answer lingering questions about the Neanderthals who lived and died there. Double your impact Support Origin Stories with a one-time or monthly donation. Your gift will be matched, and every dollar helps make this show possible. Go to leakeyfoundation.org/originstories to donate. Links to learn more The Shanidar Cave Project Ralph Solecki's excavations Ralph S. and Rose L. and Solecki Papers at the Smithsonian Shanidar Z: 75,000-year-old face revealed More about Shanidar Z Shanidar Cave location New Shanidar research on cooking Revisiting the flower burial Shanidar: The First Flower People (pdf of book by Ralph Solecki) Sponsors Origin Stories is a project of The Leakey Foundation, a donor-supported nonprofit dedicated to funding human origins research and sharing discoveries to advance public understanding of science.  This episode is generously sponsored by Dub and Ginny Crook. Dub and Ginny are long-time Leakey Foundation Fellows who directly support scientific research and science communication projects. They are passionate about human origins research and making science accessible for all. We are deeply grateful for their support. Are you interested in sponsoring a future episode? Email media@leakeyfoundation.org to learn more! Origin Stories is listener-supported. Additional support comes from Jeanne Newman, the Anne and Gordon Getty Foundation, and the Joan and Arnold Travis Education Fund. Credits This episode was produced and written by Ray Pang and Meredith Johnson. Sound design by Ray Pang. Our editor is Audrey Quinn. Michael Gallagher helped record the interviews at Cambridge. Our theme music is by Henry Nagle with additional music by Blue Dot Sessions and Lee Roservere. 

All the colours of the rainbow, plus oneResearchers have fired lasers directly into the eye to stimulate photoreceptors, and produce the perception of a colour that does not exist in nature. They describe it as a “supersaturated teal,” and hope the technique will allow them to better understand colour vision and perhaps lead to treatments for vision problems. Austin Roorda has been developing this technology using mirrors, lasers and optical devices. He is a professor of Optometry and Vision Science at University of California, Berkeley. The study was published in the journal Science Advances.Following in the footsteps of an ancient ankylosaurPaleontologists have found fossil footprints of an armoured dinosaur in the Canadian Rockies that fill in a critical gap in the fossil record. The footprints belonged to a club-tailed ankylosaur about five to six metres long, and are the first evidence of this type of dinosaur living in North America in a period known as the middle Cretaceous. The research was led by Victoria Arbour, curator of paleontology at the Royal B.C. Museum, and published in the journal Vertebrate Paleontology.Did the Neanderthals die from sunburn?Neanderthals disappeared 40,000 years ago, and new research suggests this corresponds to a period of weakness in the Earth's magnetic field that allowed an increase in the solar radiation reaching the surface. Researchers think they have evidence that modern humans were able to protect themselves from the sun better than Neanderthals could, and this might have contributed to the Neanderthal extinction. Raven Garvey is an anthropologist at the University of Michigan. Her team's research was published in the journal Science. Cloudy with a chance of ammonia mushballsNew observations and models of activity within Jupiter's stormy atmosphere is giving a weather report for the giant planet, and it's pretty extreme. Most interestingly, researchers predict conditions that could lead to violent lightning storms producing softball sized frozen ammonia “mushballs” that would rain through the upper atmosphere. The research was led by Chris Moeckel, a planetary scientist and aerospace engineer at the University of California-Berkeley Space Sciences Laboratory, and was published in the journal Science Advances.Shattering heat records: climate change is turning out to be worse than expectedIn the last few years, we've seen global temperatures rising faster, with more extreme localized heatwaves, than climate models predicted. Climate scientists are trying to understand this by investigating the underlying factors behind these heating trends. Richard Allan, from the University of Reading in the U.K., was expecting a larger than normal rise in global temperatures due to natural fluctuations, but global temperatures in 2023 and 2024 were much higher than expected. Their recent study in the journal Environmental Research Letters found a growing imbalance in the earth's heat system, with increasingly more heat coming in than leaving, in large part due to changes we've seen in global cloud cover.This global heating is not happening evenly around the world. Kai Kornhuber, from the International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis in Austria and Columbia Climate School in New York, found regional hotspots that are experiencing unexpected extreme heat, likely due to a combination of factors. That study is in the journal PNAS. 

Godfrey talks the seemingly prehistoric origins of MTG and more!Legendary Comedian Godfrey is LIVE from New York, and joins some of his best friends in stand up comedy, Hip-Hop and Hollywood to talk current events, pop culture, race issues, movies, music, TV and Kung Fu. We got endless impressions, a white producer, random videos Godfrey found on the internet and so much more! We're not reinventing the wheel, we're just talking 'ish twice a week... with GODFREY on In Godfrey We Trust.Original Air Date 04.18.25-------------------------------SUPPORT OUR SPONSORShttps://yokratom.com and get a $60 KILOhttps://www.smallbatchcigar.com/ use code GAS10 for 10% off plus 5% rewards points!-------------------------------

What does it mean to belong to a tribe? How does cultural psychology offer insight into politics, organizational behavior, and leadership? How does tribalism distinguish humans from other animals?Michael Morris is the Chavkin-Chang Professor of Leadership at Columbia Business School and also serves as Professor in the Psychology Department of Columbia University. Michael is also the author of the new book Tribal: How the Cultural Instincts That Divide Us Can Help Bring Us Together.Greg and Michael discuss the concept of tribalism, its historical and modern connotations, and how our evolved group psychology can both contribute to and resolve contemporary social conflicts. Michael emphasizes the importance of understanding cultural instincts like the peer instinct, hero instinct, and ancestor instinct, and how leaders can harness these to steer cultural evolution in organizations and societies. The conversation also explores real-world examples of cultural change, the pitfalls of top-down and bottom-up change strategies, and the critical role of managing cultural identities in fostering cooperation and successful adaptation.*unSILOed Podcast is produced by University FM.*Episode Quotes:What makes us human is our tribal nature14:22: We are the tribal animal. If we want to understand what distinguishes us, our brains are not that much bigger than chimpanzees'. Our brains are not bigger than Neanderthals'; they're smaller than Neanderthal brains. But what distinguishes us is that we have these adaptations for sharing culture that enable tribal living, and this wonderful force of tribal inheritance, of wisdom accumulating like a snowball across the generations. And it can be the generations of a nation, but it can also be the generations of a corporation or the generations of a motorcycle club. Generations don't have to be referring to the human lifespan. And so, that's our killer app. That's what makes us who we are. That's what made us the top of the food chain and the dominant species of the planet and solar system. So, we should not renounce our tribal nature. We shouldn't pretend that what makes us human is rationality, or ethics, or poetry, or something like that.Why tradition is actually a change maker's secret weapon19:02: Tradition can seem like an obstacle to change. And the traditionalism in our mind can seem like an obstacle to cultural change, but it's a change-maker's secret weapon.How we learn from our community through peer, hero, and ancestor instincts16:39 There are social learning heuristics, and I kind of label them in a way to try to make them more concrete and more accessible. I label them the peer instinct, the hero instinct, and the ancestor instinct. But I'm aggregating decades of research from evolutionary anthropologists and from a cultural psychologist about the fact that we tend to learn the culture that nurtures us, in part by paying attention to what's widespread. And that's peer instinct learning, by paying attention to what carries prestige. That's hero instinct learning. And by paying attention to what seems like it's always been the distinctive mark of our community, traditions, and that's ancestor instinct learning. And so we're sort of wired to form maps of our community in those three ways.Show Links:Recommended Resources:TribalismE. O. WilsonCesar ChavezPhilip E. TetlockMulticulturalismPolyculturalismSyncretismGuest Profile:Faculty Profile at Columbia Business SchoolMichaelMorris.comWikipedia ProfileSocial Profile on XHis Work:Tribal: How the Cultural Instincts That Divide Us Can Help Bring Us TogetherGoogle Scholar Page

In this edition of The Naked Scientists: Evidence of a carbon cycle on Mars has been unearthed by the Curiosity rover. What does it mean for the red planet's past habitability? Also, the cannabis-based painkiller as powerful as an opioid, but without the side effects. And, could fashion sense and a primitive sunscreen have been the deciding 'factor 50' which allowed us humans to outlast the Neanderthals... Like this podcast? Please help us by supporting the Naked Scientists

What happens when you put 15 scholars—scientists and theologians, Muslim, Jewish, and Christian—in a room to talk about creation? In this episode of The Biblical Mind Podcast, Dr. Dru Johnson shares his experience launching the Abrahamic Theistic Origins Project in Oxford. Far from being a formal academic conference, the gathering focused on “enduring collegial co-learning”—building trust and curiosity across disciplines and faith traditions. The participants explored how evolutionary biology, genetics, astrophysics, and artificial intelligence intersect with theological questions about human uniqueness, creation, and divine action. Dru explains why religious identity didn't hinder the conversation—it enriched it, and why the bigger challenge was translating between scientists and theologians. He also shares a fascinating insight on Neanderthals and menopause, and how that single biological feature opens a window into intergenerational care, legacy, and biblical values. The project raises bold questions: Can we build a biblical philosophy of science? Does Hebraic thought inform scientific methods? And what does it look like to think with Scripture—not just about it—in a scientific age? We are listener supported. Give to the cause here: https://hebraicthought.org/give For more articles: https://thebiblicalmind.org/ Social Links: Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/HebraicThought/ Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/hebraicthought/ Threads: https://www.threads.net/hebraicthought/ X: https://www.twitter.com/HebraicThought/ Bluesky: https://bsky.app/profile/hebraicthought.org Chapters 00:00 Exploring Creation Theology and Science 02:58 Building Collegial Relationships Among Scholars 05:43 Navigating Interfaith Dialogues 08:52 Understanding Diverse Perspectives on Origins 13:59 The Intersection of Science and Theistic Beliefs 21:40 Christian Views on Human Origins 30:08 Pragmatism and Empiricism in Biblical Thought

A couple are transported to the stone ages and are menaced by a Neanderthal. #RetroRadio EP0381Darkness Syndicate members get the ad-free version of #WeirdDarkness and #RetroRadio:https://weirddarkness.com/syndicateCHAPTERS & TIME STAMPS (All Times Approximate)…00:00:00.000 = Show Open00:01:50.000 = CBS Radio Mystery Theater, “The Russian Passport” (January 07, 1976) ***WD00:47:47.829 = X Minus One, “The Roads Must Roll” (January 04, 1956)01:16:31.029 = Strange Adventure, “The Phantom Signal” (1945) ***WD01:20:57.489 = Appointment With Fear, “And The Deep Shuddered” (November 20, 1945) ***WD01:48:11.359 = BBC Ghost Story, “School Story” (November 28, 1980)02:03:51.169 = Beyond The Green Door, “Mrs Curlew Poisoner Marries” (1966) ***WD02:08:31.729 = Box 13, “One One Three Point Five” (March 20, 1949)02:35:45.459 = Incredible But True, “The Man Who Said Mass”02:40:24.319 = Chet Chetter's Tales From The Morgue, “Peace To The Frifalites” (1989)03:08:50.339 = The Clock, “Uncle Amos” (May 18, 1947) ***WD03:33:58.639 = Confession, “James V Madsen” (August 23, 1953) ***WD04:03:14.169 = Sounds of Darkness, “Ticktock Death” (January 20, 1970)04:30:19.249 = The Devil and Mr. O, “Neanderthal” (September 24, 1971) ***WD04:59:03.780 = Show Close(ADU) = Air Date Unknown(LQ) = Low Quality***WD = Remastered, edited, or cleaned up by Weird Darkness to make the episode more listenable. Audio may not be pristine, but it will be better than the original file which may have been unusable or more difficult to hear without editing.Weird Darkness theme by Alibi Music Library= = = = ="I have come into the world as a light, so that no one who believes in me should stay in darkness." — John 12:46= = = = =WeirdDarkness® is a registered trademark. Copyright ©2025, Weird Darkness.= = = = =CUSTOM WEBPAGE: https://weirddarkness.com/WDRR0381

We are sure you know the story of Cinderella. Beautiful servant girl, fairy godmother, handsome prince, and tiny dainty feet - obviously. But you haven't heard Coco read you the Brother's Grimm version, and you don't want to miss it..We start with a brief history of the Cinderella story, and we bet you can't guess where the first recorded version comes from! Then we dive right into a very different telling than we're used to. Disney really should have done more with those birds!.Follow us to the festival where Cinderella meets the handsome prince and dances beautifully until she… gets bored and wants to leave? Listen as the prince chases her through the city streets and she find every opportunity to get away, causing him to go into full Neanderthal mode and AXE. Yes, axe is verb here. Stay with us through the bird-filled, bloody conclusion and decide for yourself if there is ANY hope for the future of this kingdom. Look, these two aren't rocket-scientists, ok?.Join our Patreon for extra content!https://www.patreon.com/c/spillthemeadYou can purchase Spill the Mead merchandise https://www.etsy.com/shop/SpilltheMeadPodcast/Find us on Instagram, and Facebook @spillthemeadpodcastFor tickets and information on Wars of the Roses Con, visit www.wotrcon.orgFind Madi @myladygervais on InstagramFind Betsy @betsy.hegge on InstagramFind Coco @spill_it_coco on InstagramFind Gabby @so_dym_gabulous on Instagram Find Chris @chrisrileyhistory on InstagramFind Taylor @tjonesarmoredamma on InstagramMusic is composed by Nicholas Leigh nicholasleighmusic.com

With evidence of burial rituals and culture, were Neanderthals spiritual beings like us? We explore their place in theology, along with topics like praying in dreams, moral behavior in animals, the nature of heaven, and whether we could ever learn like computers. Join The CA Live Club Newsletter: Click Here Questions Covered: 01:13 – What physical explanation can parapsychology offer? Because one thing is describing phenomena, another one is explaining it in a physical framework.  11:15 – How are we to consider our Neanderthal cousins? They were hominids, close enough to us that we interbred (I have more than the average Neanderthal DNA), they had a culture, and there is evidence that they not only buried their dead, but buried flowers and grave goods with them, hinting at a belief in the afterlife. Yet, they were different from us, and they went extinct millennia before the Incarnation. Theologically, how are they considered? semi-Neanderthal minds want to know!  16:31 – Can animals act in ways that are morally good or evil? i.e. the dog that saves the child vs the dog that bites the child. What implications, if any, would that have on the prospect of an animal afterlife?  22:44 – If I am asleep and I dream that I am praying, is it possible that God and the saints I ask for intercession hear those prayers? And if I receive a blessing in the context of my dream, is it possible that some minor intercession has occurred?  29:15 – If a sincere penitent in the confessional confesses that he has set a bear trap outside the priest's confessional, set to go off the moment the priest exits the confessional, could the priest require the penitent to remove the bear trap as a part of his penance? Or can the priest not make requirements like that in order to give absolution? (One that I've actually gotten from my students!)  34:34 – Tell us about your Arkansas accent. It's coming on pretty thick these days. I assume you lost it when you moved to CA and now that your back you just naturally fell back into it?  41:30 – I've never heard anyone address this: after the resurrection, we will be reunited with our physical bodies. So is heaven a physical place?  44:15 – Growing up I was told that our souls wander about while we sleep as an explanation for Deja vu. I know in the past you've attributed Deja vu to remote viewing, how similar are these 2 ideas?  52:45 – The mystery of learning and memory. Why can’t humans learn, store, and recall information in the same way a computer does (i.e. massive storage, data compressibility/extractability, can download and upload information, etc.)? It would seem extremely beneficial if humans could learn via download and share via upload like computers. Just to qualify I mean the speed of data transfer as well. For example, instead of spending years learning a new language, just download it and have perfect fluency (similar to the Matrix and how Neo could learn things). 

Dan Schneider, Vice President for Free Speech at the Media Research Center, joins me to discuss Big Tech's censorship of conservative voices and the legacy media's unwillingness to reform in the wake of Trump's 2024 election victory. - - -  Today's Sponsor: Helix Sleep - Go to https://helixsleep.com/klavan to get an exclusive offer.