>I bring up Lucy because to me, this is the type of contrivance that
>is going on in "science" which causes the trouble.
Have you read Dean Falk's _Braindance_? It came out years ago -- I
found my copy in a bargain bin section of a local "alternative" bookstore in
about '92-3 -- but it has an excellent criticism of the Lucy case. It also
contains a hypothesis on the adaptations that allowed for* brain growth in
early homnids, something called the "radiator theory," which states that the
type of blood circulation allowed by certain skull structures allowed for
greater heat dissipation than others. Combined with Jaynes' and K. McKenna's
works (former: bicameral mind, latter: brain growth instigated by the
ingestion of hallucinogenic [entheogenic?] plants), the three make a
somewhat solid hypothesis for how the human brain developed into its current
state.
SGK
*: Falk admits that while the "radiator theory" explains how the potential
for brain growth could have arisen, it does not explain why that growth
occurred. She does mention some possibilities, however (along with the names
of those people advancing them).
Editor, The Stygian Forge -- http://www.deathsdoor.com/argos
Member: Order of the Jarls of Baelder @ http://www.student.hk-r.se/~tb96der/
Contemporary renaissance futures @ http://www.seraph.org/