The NP [Neanderthal predation] theory is based on the three Darwinian mechanisms of evolution: natural selection, sexual selection, and artificial selection. Speaking of sexual selection, in one of the first chapters of Them and Us, Vendramini tells us:
Among the higher mammals—and this is particularly true of primates— it is usually the female that is proactive in selecting a mate. While males will mate with any female in oestrus, females are more discriminating. This would suggest that Skhul-Qafzeh females [our ancient hominid ancestors, represented above in the figure on the right (on the left, a Neanderthal)] used sexual selection as an evolutionary tool more than the males did. But, as we are about to see, the final mechanism of selecting anti-Neanderthal traits was wielded almost exclusively by males.
A little further on, he adds about artificial selection:
When Darwin coined the term natural selection, he meant that nature was doing ‘the selecting’—that the natural environment the organism lived in was a major determinant of which members lived and which died. In addition, Darwin described artificial selection: the way farmers and breeders intentionally select certain traits in domestic animals, which is a relatively benign form of artificial selection. However, the term also applies to the lethal form of selection—almost always applied by human males—as to who lives and who dies.
So the third way that anti-Neanderthal adaptations spread was by artificial selection—where coercion, ostracism, banishment and lethal violence by Skhul-Qafzehs gradually removed from the gene pool any individual who (for whatever reason) they considered too Neanderthaloid. NP theory holds that, throughout the Late Pleistocene, coalitionary groups of human males increasingly resorted to infanticide and homicide to eradicate Neanderthal-human hybrids, excessively hairy individuals, deviant neonates, or anyone who looked like a Neanderthal.
One of the most salient features of artificial selection is its speed. Unlike natural selection, which tends to create gradual change over thousands of generations, even benign forms of artificial selection can occur very quickly. A good example is the selective breeding experiments carried out in the 50s by the Russian geneticist Dmitri Belyaev to produce tame foxes. By selecting only the tamest foxes to breed, Belyaev and his team turned a colony of wild silver foxes into domestic pets within ten generations. The new animals were not only unafraid of humans, they often wagged their tails and licked their human caretakers in shows of affection. Even their physiology changed—the tame foxes had floppy ears, curled tails and spotted coats.
In eastern Spain, scrawled on a cave wall in red ochre, is one of the earliest known depictions of intergroup violence.
However, this rapid transformation of Belyaev’s foxes pales into insignificance compared to lethal and pernicious forms of human artificial selection—including genocide, ethnic cleansing, racial vilification [emphasis added], religious persecution and pogroms—that can exert a significant evolutionary impact almost overnight. The long history of such affronts and their ubiquitous application by disparate cultures separated by thousands of years supports the hypothesis that aggressive Skhul-Qafzeh males would have no compunction in eradicating anyone they felt was more them than us.
Historically, lethal violence and genocide have not been the business of women. Throughout human history, they have mostly been the preserve of males, and there is no reason to believe it was any different in the Late Pleistocene. Males claimed lethal violence as their own instrument of artificial selection. Groups of men decided what constituted a Neanderthaloid trait, and who felt like a Neanderthal. Men became the ultimate arbiters of who and what was acceptable. It was they who decided who lived and who died.
Given this, the use of artificial (or lethal) selection to remove anti-Neanderthaloid traits would be more prevalent on females, children and infants than on adult males. Sociological and anthropological evidence appears to support this more nuanced view.
Evolutionary biologist Ronald Fisher observes that when a trait conferring a survival advantage also becomes subject to sexual selection, it creates a positive feedback loop that leads to very rapid uptake of the trait. But we can now see that in the Levant it was not only natural selection and sexual selection that were working together to rid the population of hybridised individuals and Neanderthaloid characteristics. The process was also being logarithmically boosted by artificial selection—as coalitions of aggressive males banished or murdered their way towards the same common objective—towards a new kind of human that looked, sounded, smelt and behaved less like a Neanderthal. This blind, inexorable process would have made a substantial contribution to human evolution by identifying and quickly culling vestigial Neanderthal genes from the nascent human genome.
When the original Levantine population of Skhul-Qafzeh early humans was decimated by Neanderthal predation, the survivors became the nucleus of a new founding population of modern humans.
Although it may seem like a joke, this entry and others about how, through sexual and artificial selection, our ancestors eliminated all simian traits to produce the physiognomy of modern humans could be titled “How prehistoric men designed women” (see article here).
____________
N.B. You can read the first 35 pages of Vendramini’s book here.
I’ve continued reading Danny Vendramini’s book, Them and Us: How Neanderthal Predation Created Modern Humans, and I plan to read the whole thing. At my age, that almost never happens to me: I only devour books when they add information that potentially can revolutionise my worldview, and just as William Pierce’s Who We Are revolutionised my view of history, Vendramini’s book might revolutionise my view of prehistory.
It must be understood that academic distortion doesn’t only come from Jews, like Franz Boas. The Christian mania of seeing noble savages in infanticidal and even cannibalistic cultures has been extended to prehistory throughout universities that suffer from “atheistic hyper-Christianity”. That’s why it’s worth listening to voices like Vendramini’s.
Years ago, a racialist commenter confessed in the comments section of this site that he was hurt by my use of prehistoric Neanderthals to argue about what I call historic Neanderthals. This commenter exemplifies that those who claim they aren’t influenced by the System are in fact influenced by it (what is taught in universities is the System, including benign reconstructions of what prehistoric Neanderthals looked like).
Vendramini proposes something radically different, and until a frozen Neanderthal’s mummy is found we won’t know who is right: the neochristian academy, which projects love towards all wingless bipeds of the present and past, or Vendramini.
Originally I added a couple of pics in my article “Neanderthal extermination” but I deleted them as I continued reading Vendramini’s book, who says the following:
Twenty-eight thousand years after the last Neanderthal roamed the earth, forensic science is able to reconstruct a far more accurate representation of a Eurasian Neanderthal. Their thick coat of fur, hunched back, bow legs and distinctive gait added to their unique appearance.
A creature that looks like an athletic gorilla but uses complex weapons to hunt its prey is so foreign and counterintuitive it has hampered our understanding of Neanderthals for one hundred years. Anthropologist John Shea’s description of Neanderthals as “wolves with knives” comes close to describing their paradoxical nature.
The forensic reconstruction of the La Ferrassie Neanderthal began with a computer scan of its skull. Digital sculptor Arturo Balseiro (pictured) then used NP theory to reconstruct detailed features of its anatomy.
Today and tomorrow I will continue reading Them and Us…
____________
N.B. You can read the first 35 pages of Vendramini’s book here.
If there is one phrase that captures my spirit, which is practically identical to Kalki’s spirit if we draw inspiration from the most revealing passages of Savitri Devi, it is to exterminate the obsolete versions of Homo sapiens.
Only those whom these Neanderthals have martyred in a truly bestial manner, and who have managed to survive—like Benjamin and me (for Ben’s autobiography see here; mine, here)—have reached level 10 on Mauricio’s scale. Those who have not been martyred by the System and survived won’t understand our passion for exterminating the primitive version of humans which for decades I have called, in my soliloquies, “Neanderthals”.
But oh surprise! That expression of mine from so long ago may have an equivalent in the Aryan collective unconscious. According to Jung, even very ancient events could be unconsciously contained within our psyches, and Danny Vendramini’s book, Them and Us: How Neanderthal predation created modern humans serves me wonderfully to explain myself.
Darwinian scholar Danny Vendramini.
It doesn’t matter if only thirty per cent of what Vendramini says has a genuine scientific basis and the rest is mere conjecture. The fact is that since the Jew Franz Boas, anthropology has become an anti-white ideology; and every time I watch videos on YouTube about prehistory I get extremely upset because this ideology permeates our view of our distant past to such an extent that not only does it portray the first Homo sapiens as Negroes, but these YouTubers have dared to depict cities of historical blondes, such as Sparta, with figures of mulattos among Caucasians and a few blondies: as if historical Greece were ethnically a replica of a modern-day American metropolis! (see, e.g., the first comment in the comments section).
In the prologue to his book, Vendramini tells us:
When I applied Teem theory to what had transformed humans from stone-age African hominids into fully modern humans, why we look and act the way we do, and even why we’re obsessed with sex and violence and good and evil, it proposed a single simple explanation that was both extraordinary and unexpected.
The result is a unified theory of human origins called Neanderthal Predation theory (or NP theory) which is based on a fundamental reassessment of Neanderthal behavioural ecology. Exciting new evidence reveals Neanderthals weren’t docile omnivores, but savage, cannibalistic carnivores—top flight predators who hunted, killed and cannibalised our archaic ancestors in the Middle East for 50,000 years. What’s more, Neanderthals were also sexual predators, who raided human camps to rape, and abduct young females, leaving a trail of half-cast ‘inbreds’.
This multi-faceted predation eventually drove our ancestors to the brink of extinction. Genetic evidence reveals that at one stage our entire ancestral population was reduced to as few as 50 people.
The only humans to survive the predation were those born with mutations for ‘survivalist adaptations’—modern human traits like language capacity, Machiavellian intelligence, coalition building, creativity, risk-taking and aggression. These traits effectively transformed them from a prey species to a virulent new hunter species—Homo sapiens.
Armed with these new attributes, the first modern humans systematically exterminated their former predators, firstly in the Middle East and then in a blitzkrieg invasion of Europe. They then spread out to colonise the world. Guided by an innate sense of them and us, hyper-aggressive men killed anyone who looked or behaved even remotely like a Neanderthal, including hybrids and other humans [emphasis added]. It was this lethal process of artificial selection that gradually unified human physiology and behaviour.
It’s a fairly radical theory, but its strength lies in its predictions and ability to explain aspects of human evolution, physiology and behaviour that have frustrated philosophers, biologists and anthropologists for centuries.
The book has been written for a general readership which has an interest in how we got here. I’ve included ‘boxes’ to explain peripheral subjects and there’s a glossary of ancillary terms at the end. But to help academics evaluate the theory, I’ve also included my references—all 800 of them.
Because the evolutionary events I am investigating happened so long ago, some aspects of the scenario I propose are speculative. For instance, I speculate on the psychological impact that Neanderthal predation had on our ancestors, how the menfolk felt seeing their women abducted and raped. I do this because the psychology of ancestral humans had a direct bearing on our evolution and needs to be considered as part of a holistic theory.
For some scholars, though, the use of speculation and the imagination are anathema—but historically there has always been a legitimate place for the imagination in science. A scientific model can be subjected to rational debate and analysis only once it exists in a tangible form. The day before Einstein conceived his theory of relativity, there was nothing to think about. It existed in a netherworld beyond deductive reasoning, and required an act of imagination to bring it into existence.
Einstein is famously quoted as saying, “Imagination is more important than knowledge” and he explains, “For while knowledge defines all we currently know and understand, imagination points to all we might yet discover and create.”
For radical, big-idea science, imagination isn’t just ancillary to the scientific process, it is an indispensable ingredient.
With human evolution, it could be argued that the reluctance of academics to imagine alternative evolutionary scenarios, or to encourage lateral thinking beyond the narrow pathways of orthodoxy, has hampered progress in this field.
While imagination played a role in the formulation of the NP theory, the resulting evolutionary scenario has, of course, been subjective to an exhaustive six-year process of scientific scrutiny and verification which involved sifting through 3000 scientific papers and other pieces of evidence. Ultimately, the theory’s credibility rests on the rigour of this process.
But let’s not fool ourselves. Although, unlike academics who study prehistory Vendramini uses his vivid imagination, this writer is a normie as revealed in the following passage of the first chapter:
Until we understand the evolutionary imperatives that subliminally drive universal human behaviours, xenophobia, superstition, sexism, war, racism [my emphasis], homicide, ecological vandalism, genocide and the nuclear arms race will continue to hold sway over humanity.
This reminds me of what I have said about Tom Holland’s Dominion: we can perfectly appropriate Holland’s conclusions, but at the same time revalue his Christian-sympathetic values.
Only an academy of the future, in an Aryan state whose academic fields are linked to archaeology, palaeontology and prehistorical geology, will evaluate the Neanderthal Predation theory and clarify the matter. But by then, the extermination of the Neanderthals—and here, unlike prehistory, I am using my historical metaphor (cf. Mauricio’s scale)—will already be underway, if not already complete.
What is valid about Vendramini and others’ NP theory is that prehistoric Orcs were exterminated by us in the real world, and that this process could potentially be repeated with those I call Neanderthals—although that would imply a complete reversal of Christian values to the values of our distant ancestors: the prehistoric exterminators.
____________
N.B. You can read the first 35 pages of Vendramini’s book here.
