The Stoned Ape Theory of Human Evolution - Terrence Mckenna

[cosmicaug]

Originally Posted by dlorde

Also consider that - leaving aside the purely speculative, hardly plausible mechanism - for this hypothesis to be a 'driving force' in evolution, a significant number of the population would have to be ingesting significant enough amounts of these plants or fungi to have a significant effect on reproductive rates in competition with all the really serious selective forces, not for just a few hundred years, but - by definition - for evolutionary timescales. What are the chances of this, and for a highly mobile and adaptable open-land primate, to have a constant supply of these psychedelics, across various landscapes, over that kind of timescale?

I suggest there's more chance that Samuel Hahnemann was right than the Stoned Ape hypothesis has any basis in reality whatever.

In my opinion, if the hypothesis were correct, it would never be a "driving force". It would only be a trigger for a driving force.

[quarky]

Originally Posted by dlorde

Also consider that - leaving aside the purely speculative, hardly plausible mechanism - for this hypothesis to be a 'driving force' in evolution, a significant number of the population would have to be ingesting significant enough amounts of these plants or fungi to have a significant effect on reproductive rates in competition with all the really serious selective forces, not for just a few hundred years, but - by definition - for evolutionary timescales. What are the chances of this, and for a highly mobile and adaptable open-land primate, to have a constant supply of these psychedelics, across various landscapes, over that kind of timescale?

I suggest there's more chance that Samuel Hahnemann was right than the Stoned Ape hypothesis has any basis in reality whatever.

We're back to the place I tried to describe:

Forget geography and botany for a moment...

Encountering psychedelic molecules is a given...at least to me.
It happened.
Even here, in bumphuck appalachia, psychoactive plants emerge like weeds.
They are weeds, actually. We try to kill them, so we can grow vegetables.

The role these exotic molecules played in our evolution, is indirect.

The old hairy bastards accidentally ate this, or that.
And they got a big idea.

Big like the internet big.

Then, the weird influence of that quasi-poisonous plant is felt.

Recently, it influenced the creation of one million millionaires.

I'm glad Steve Jobs didn't downplay the influence of these encounters with molecules that fall between the cracks of "Is it poison, or is it food?".

Personally, I'm allergic to psychedelic compounds.

They cause me to 'trip-out' and lose touch with the things that matter.
This sort of activity can cause loss of employment...and worse: questioning everything.

[quarky]

Originally Posted by quarky

I must play Devil's advocate briefly.
That I have no idea who the Devil is in all this, only adds to its demonic intent.

So, two thoughts:

1. Cetaceans evolved a very sophisticated neo-cortex, long before people did.
I doubt they took shrooms, though it is quite likely that they have encountered other exotic compounds on their long march. (swim)

2. Hypothetically, I wonder how the conversation would be affected by a massive dosing of the most pedantic amongst us?

(This is in no way a promotion of illegal drug use. Drugs are really bad. Except when prescribed by your doctor; especially in countries that have universal life-insurance.)

I don't plan on being suspended, ever again. It was awful.

In fact, it drove me to drink.

I'm too humble to nom that post, but someone should.
It covered so many bases, with minimal wordage.

Of course, I see my fundamental arrogance in this.
Maybe blobru would nom it?
Because I told him "I love you"?

Therefore he sort-of owes me?

[Dinwar]

Originally Posted by quarky

Encountering psychedelic molecules is a given...at least to me.
It happened.

That's irrelevant. Did it happen to humans BACK THEN? No answer has been given in this thread--and that's a rather important question here.

Quote:

The old hairy bastards accidentally ate this, or that.

Prove this part and we can begin to talk about the next. The proper order is to put the horse in front, not the cart.

Quote:

I'm too humble to nom that post, but someone should.
It covered so many bases, with minimal wordage.

You've read none of the criticisms of it, have you? If you're going to ignore us, why shouldn't we return the favor?

[quarky]

I've read the lot.

I have indigestion, even.

The horse I ride to this race is a joke.
Ribs are showing; saddle-backed old mare.

Bless her heart, I may have to put her down.

[cosmicaug]

Originally Posted by Dinwar

That's irrelevant. Did it happen to humans BACK THEN? No answer has been given in this thread--and that's a rather important question here.

How could it not? If it's out there and someone is hungry enough, someone will eat it.

[quarky]

Originally Posted by cosmicaug

How could it not? If it's out there and someone is hungry enough, someone will eat it.

For sure.

And they took notes. Even if they had no language.

[Dinwar]

Originally Posted by cosmicaug

How could it not? If it's out there and someone is hungry enough, someone will eat it.

Plausibility doesn't mean it happened. Lots of things could have happened--and many are even more plausible than this. Yet they didn't. Evolutionary history is dominated by chance events, and to pretend to do an evolutionary analysis without taking into account that fact is folly.

Humans COULD have invented metal smelting any time after we discovered fire. They had all the materials, after all. Yet it was a surprisingly long time between the invention of fire and the use of metal tools. By your logic, we should be looking for Neanderthals with copper axes (I chose that metal very carefully, by the way).

[gumboot]

I have a question. Do psychoactive chemicals cause genetic mutation in offspring?

Apologies if this has already been answered.

[pakeha]

Originally Posted by Zeuzzz

That's the same theory.

It's just a different psychedelic they consider, Iboga. Any consciousness altering drug gets you stoned by my definition of it, even if potheads have hijacked the term.

Maybe the title 'stoned' ape theory was not the best choice for this thread I think it has lead to all sorts of confusion. Mckenna was convinced it was mushrooms but I thikn that was just his personal bias. Still, I think they are one of the better candidates out of many.

Which candidates are you considering as likely for this theory?

[Bakers]

Motion: I nominate OP for a swift kick in the pants.

Stoned apes isn’t about evolution, even remotely. Its claim thus is pure pretense, and contemptible as such IMHO. Evolution is about intellectual honest and integrity of purpose – not oppositional defiance (the foundation of stoned apes).

If we check it out closely, we find (surprise!) – beneath Halloween costume as a theory, its thin disguise – stoned apes is actually all about -- how great Terence McKenna was, what a genius. Its a hymn of narcissistic adulation, exalting a charismatic cult leader - using psychedelics as banner, and evolution as mere occasion.

If we question stoned apes carnival barking, it reveals no respectable mode of reply. It proves to be a sermon that expels reason and integrity with consistency - and grim determination. Starts its routine wherever it sees opportunity (like people interested in discussing stuff). But under question, its idiom proves to be attitude, mockery and sarcasm. I think folks here who’ve tried to engage can testify as to the futility, for honorable intention and informed perspectives. Put to serious critical question, we discover a core of hostility - not unlike fanaticism of any kind. And it loves to troll-game, see if it can annoy or bother whoever it can't impress.

Among stoned apes most blatant deceptions is its ‘psilocybin enhances visual acuity’ claim - which TM attributed, as a scientific finding, to studies by Fischer et al. And the story proves to have been a fraud, that depended on nobody ever looking at that research, to see if it really says any such thing.

Fischer’s research has been reviewed, and TM’s story about it proves completely false and misleading; purely for consumption of gullible dupes who'd never even think to check it out. And couldn’t care less what’s true or factual - only what blows their bubble ...
(google: Fischer visual acuity psilocybin McKenna)

Apart from ‘point deceptions’ - its theoretically inept even by 19th century Lamarck standards. That there’s no evidence for it should come as no surprise. It defies evolutionary theory in ways that make “Sci” Creationism look like Einstein.

But its ineptitude is no mere ‘innocent' mistake. By his own admission TM fabricated the “I’ve Got a Theory” line as -- “consciously propaganda” his words (google his name along with 'gracie and zarkov unpublished interview'). Stoned apes is deliberate deception, conceived as such from the gitgo, top to bottom.

It didn’t take subpoena to find out, either. McKenna was apparently quite pleased with how crafty his contrivance. Thought himself clever. So much so, he couldn’t contain himself and blurted it out, like bragging - when he thought the coast was clear. As the gracie and zarkov interview (1992) reflects.

That’s a tactical blunder no Intel Design spokesman ever made; took a court case in Dover PA to find that out. How obliging of him to ‘fess up to his ‘covert op’ - thanks for letting us know. Theory schmeory – okay, noted. But don't cast your line this way.

TM’s ‘theorizing’ was about getting amens and wows from dupes, trippers who didn’t know any better, and want to hear something to get amazed about. He reeled them in by familiar brain-wash methods, well known, turning many fans into fanatics as many a charismatic cult leader before. Its a sort of Undead ‘theory’ that can’t die, its followers Renfield-like, enslaved to preaching it.

He gathered followers to treat him sweet and kiss his feet and rave about how brilliant and great he is - by playing upon their vain insecurities and egotistical anxieties, using simple pretension and flattery – siren songs he sung to lull and entice their devotion. The lyrics of stoned apes, decoded:

“Look how important we are! All mankind owes us trippers. Its only because of us, that our species even exists! Homo sapiens never would've evolved without us heroic dosers. And those idiot scientists have no clue! Here we are not only smarter than them, but brave psychonauts boldly going - the evolutionary spearhead of our species. And what thanks do we get from Society?”

With a message like that – it doesn’t matter that even Lamarck would roll his eyeballs at the ‘reasoning’ and ‘logic.’

I encourage anyone in attendance to check out the articles on line, busting the stoned apes hoax.

Don’t take it from me, if you need to hear it from the horse’s mouth. McKenna proudly details his stoned apes stunt as a Trojan horse tactic, in a youtube vid (posted by PrometheanReachXVI) called Terence McKenna – Tree of Knowledge – ¼: “... since I feel pretty much around friends and fringies here, it doesn't trouble me to confess that my book FOOD OF THE GODS, I really conceived as an intellectual Trojan horse. Its written as though it were a scientific study -- footnotes, bibliography, citations of impossible-to-find sources ... The idea is to leave this thing on their doorstep. Rather like an abandoned baby or a Trojan horse."

Referee call on OP. Foul - 5 minutes in the penalty box. Cheer up you won’t be alone - there are some Scientific Creationists in there, you can discuss among yourselves ....

[Bakers]

Recommended reading: Concerning Stoned Apes (Reality Sandwich).

If anybody's actually interested in prehistory, mushrooms etc -- suggested reading, article from ECONOMIC BOTANY last year: The Selva Pascuala mural. By the same author, with colleagues - as the Reality Sandwich article.

[Zeuzzz]

Originally Posted by Bakers

Motion: I nominate OP for a swift kick in the pants.

Stoned apes isn’t about evolution, even remotely. Its claim thus is pure pretense, and contemptible as such IMHO. Evolution is about intellectual honest and integrity of purpose – not oppositional defiance (the foundation of stoned apes).

If we check it out closely, we find (surprise!) – beneath Halloween costume as a theory, its thin disguise – stoned apes is actually all about -- how great Terence McKenna was, what a genius. Its a hymn of narcissistic adulation, exalting a charismatic cult leader - using psychedelics as banner, and evolution as mere occasion.

If we question stoned apes carnival barking, it reveals no respectable mode of reply. It proves to be a sermon that expels reason and integrity with consistency - and grim determination. Starts its routine wherever it sees opportunity (like people interested in discussing stuff). But under question, its idiom proves to be attitude, mockery and sarcasm. I think folks here who’ve tried to engage can testify as to the futility, for honorable intention and informed perspectives. Put to serious critical question, we discover a core of hostility - not unlike fanaticism of any kind. And it loves to troll-game, see if it can annoy or bother whoever it can't impress.

Among stoned apes most blatant deceptions is its ‘psilocybin enhances visual acuity’ claim - which TM attributed, as a scientific finding, to studies by Fischer et al. And the story proves to have been a fraud, that depended on nobody ever looking at that research, to see if it really says any such thing.

Fischer’s research has been reviewed, and TM’s story about it proves completely false and misleading; purely for consumption of gullible dupes who'd never even think to check it out. And couldn’t care less what’s true or factual - only what blows their bubble ...
(google: Fischer visual acuity psilocybin McKenna)

Apart from ‘point deceptions’ - its theoretically inept even by 19th century Lamarck standards. That there’s no evidence for it should come as no surprise. It defies evolutionary theory in ways that make “Sci” Creationism look like Einstein.

But its ineptitude is no mere ‘innocent' mistake. By his own admission TM fabricated the “I’ve Got a Theory” line as -- “consciously propaganda” his words (google his name along with 'gracie and zarkov unpublished interview'). Stoned apes is deliberate deception, conceived as such from the gitgo, top to bottom.

It didn’t take subpoena to find out, either. McKenna was apparently quite pleased with how crafty his contrivance. Thought himself clever. So much so, he couldn’t contain himself and blurted it out, like bragging - when he thought the coast was clear. As the gracie and zarkov interview (1992) reflects.

That’s a tactical blunder no Intel Design spokesman ever made; took a court case in Dover PA to find that out. How obliging of him to ‘fess up to his ‘covert op’ - thanks for letting us know. Theory schmeory – okay, noted. But don't cast your line this way.

TM’s ‘theorizing’ was about getting amens and wows from dupes, trippers who didn’t know any better, and want to hear something to get amazed about. He reeled them in by familiar brain-wash methods, well known, turning many fans into fanatics as many a charismatic cult leader before. Its a sort of Undead ‘theory’ that can’t die, its followers Renfield-like, enslaved to preaching it.

He gathered followers to treat him sweet and kiss his feet and rave about how brilliant and great he is - by playing upon their vain insecurities and egotistical anxieties, using simple pretension and flattery – siren songs he sung to lull and entice their devotion. The lyrics of stoned apes, decoded:

“Look how important we are! All mankind owes us trippers. Its only because of us, that our species even exists! Homo sapiens never would've evolved without us heroic dosers. And those idiot scientists have no clue! Here we are not only smarter than them, but brave psychonauts boldly going - the evolutionary spearhead of our species. And what thanks do we get from Society?”

With a message like that – it doesn’t matter that even Lamarck would roll his eyeballs at the ‘reasoning’ and ‘logic.’

I encourage anyone in attendance to check out the articles on line, busting the stoned apes hoax.

Don’t take it from me, if you need to hear it from the horse’s mouth. McKenna proudly details his stoned apes stunt as a Trojan horse tactic, in a youtube vid (posted by PrometheanReachXVI) called Terence McKenna – Tree of Knowledge – ¼: “... since I feel pretty much around friends and fringies here, it doesn't trouble me to confess that my book FOOD OF THE GODS, I really conceived as an intellectual Trojan horse. Its written as though it were a scientific study -- footnotes, bibliography, citations of impossible-to-find sources ... The idea is to leave this thing on their doorstep. Rather like an abandoned baby or a Trojan horse."

Referee call on OP. Foul - 5 minutes in the penalty box. Cheer up you won’t be alone - there are some Scientific Creationists in there, you can discuss among yourselves ....

Nominated that

This article speaks about the above reference you just dropped: The Selva Pascuala mushroom mural. Or not

Quote:

My ongoing project is, rather, to try and tackle academia head on, on its own terms, using reason, philosophy and argument to try and establish a case for psychedelic shamanism in such a way that it has to be taken seriously. The risk is that we might have to lose some of our cherished truths but I think that is a small price to pay. And hey, isn’t that why we’re psychedelic explorers in the first place, because we’re unsatisfied with old certainties? We're like the sea-captains of old who, when told they were nearing the rim of the world ordered the mainsail hosited and the spinnaker raised so they could go see for themselves. Here be dragons? Nonsense! (Though, er, actually...)

There’s a danger here that if we don’t question ourselves we’ll end up ossifying into a kind of entheogism, replete with its own mythology, founding fathers, saints, orthodoxies and cherished truths. I’m with the brothers McKenna: it behoves us to question.

[Dinwar]

Originally Posted by pakeha

Which candidates are you considering as likely for this theory?

Easy enough to find out. This is a fairly standard experimental question, and the protocols amount to putting a bunch of fruit flies in a box with the mushroom, a bunch in a box with the active chemical (in a from they'd eat--sugar-water or something), and a bunch in a box with normal food, and seeing whether the mutations rates in boxes 1 and 2 are higher than in box 3. Well, it's a bit more complicated than that, but that's what it boils down to--the complications amount to making sure the flies stay in the box and that you can tell how old the flies are.

[Bakers]

Sounds like you feel dodging the issue of deliberate fabrication and manipulation, deception and deceit - can work. Or, accomplish something. Might I ask, exactly what you feel that can achieve -- for your purpose. You want to comment, go ahead, let's hear it.

I'm not sure how original a tactic that is, to deflect and digress. Isn't it kind of a moldy old diversion strategy, try to change the subject? Really, how is that working for you?

I'm sure you can run, but I rather doubt you can hide. The stoned apes toothpaste is out of the tube. Good luck trying to put it back in ... whether by hook or crook.

[Zeuzzz]

Thisty one you are.

I'm sure Lamarckian inheritance (Lamarckism^WP) and epigenetic inheritance of behavioral traits is more than capable of explaining how the psychological effects of psychedelics has been inherited down the aeons of human evolution.

You might like my threads on the topic:

The Central Dogma
Epigentics

Nothing much more than a nice novel idea at the moment, but there are numerous reasons to suggest this is the direction that genetics and general inheritance is heading in the future, which would certainly provide a more than adequate scientific foundation to take Mckennas suppositions far more seriously than they ever were previously.

[Dinwar]

Until you can prove that it happened there is NO reason to take it seriously, even if humans somehow evolved to grow magic mushrooms out of our own skin. Proving that something is plausible does not mean you've proven that it happened.

[Zeuzzz]

The one thing I do find slightly impressive and in favor of Mckenna being ahead of his time is that he used the word epigenetics in 1990 as a mechanism through which these behavioral traits might be accommodated into the scientific literature in the future. "Science stands on the brink of an alive world to contend with, an epigenetic world of empowerment of thought and feeling over a mechanical grinding away of genes" were pretty much is words in a 1990 talk he gave, if I remember correctly.

Whether just logical/linguistic luck is more at play here than deep scientific insight is an open question, that can't really be answered retrospectively.

[porch]

Interesting posts, Bakers. I'll check in to some of what you've suggested.

Concerning the cult-y side of McKenna: It was years ago that I read Food of the Gods. There was one part that really stood out to me. It was later on in the book, so the backdrop was already set so that sex, drugs, inspiration, and wisdom are all intertwined. And he discussed how, across the cultures of the drug-enlightened primitives that he idealized, it was common practice for older, enlightened, shaman-y males to have a rotating harem of younger females to trip and have sex with, and how this practice was highly educational for the ladies. So not only is such a thing normal, it's healthy. And it's not only healthy, it's beneficial for everyone involved! I felt kind of stunned reading this. Such a transparent (though never outright stated) justification for Terrence McKenna to bang his groupies. Not that such a rock and roll lifestyle necessarily requires justification. It is what it is. But something about the way he framed the whole thing, especially the way he spoke around the topic, came off as creepy to me.

[Dinwar]

Doesn't make sense genetically, either. Older men demonstrably have more genetic annomalies than younger ones, meaning that horny old men increase the rate of genetic diseases--which would decrease fitness by almost any standard.

[Zeuzzz]

Ok that quote was a mishmash of other things he said throughout that speech, and was quite far from the mark, might as well quote it properly:

http://www.matrixmasters.net/podcast...manBeings.html

Quote:

A single species, ourselves, has broken from the ordinary constraints of animal nature and created a new world, an epigenetic world – meaning a world not based on gene transfer and chemical propagation and preservation of information, but a world based on ideas, on symbols, on technologies, on tools, on ideas downloaded out of the human imagination and concretised in three-dimensional space as choppers, arrowpoints, particle accelerators, gene sequencers, space craft, what have you… all of this complexification occurring at a faster and faster rate.

A good speaker. A good text in all. Even though half the time it's hard to tell what on Earth he's talking about.

[Bakers]

porch - well said, a perceptive point. Observant, and thoughtful. At the surface of McKenna's rap, its all self-contradiction confusion and absurdity. Enough to make a critical thinker scratch his head and wonder WTF - ? If he tries to engage with it, no replies no clarification, no answers. Only gaming and reel-in, bait and switch the whole way. If he tries to stick with it, sooner or later its insulting to the intelligence, informed imagination, and the entire perennial pursuit of better understanding. Its a subversive 'covert op' on - 'the paradigm of Western civilization.'

Its precisely in such little details like that one you noted - reading between the lines, that we can find its clear signal. Gotta look close, at the brush strokes - just like any counterfeit, has to be put under microscope. There we find, clear as day - definite pattern of purpose and consistency. For whatever little twists is innovates, whatever 'novelty ingresses' (ahem, I've studied its code, got the decoder ring) - it proves to be same old same old, retreaded (and, retarded).

An astute observation you made reading FOTG. Such little details are where the 'meaning' lies, and indeed it does prove to be - lies. Applause - not only for noticing that instead of being lulled and going "wow, that's exciting" - but also for reflecting clearly from a sound values.

Its not just reason and informed perspective excluded from the preoccupation with Terence - its conscience itself - values, honesty and integrity - not allowed. No room for stuff like that, indeed they're grimly opposed. That poses an unfortunate allure to sociopathic impulses, not just psychotic-schizoid. Its rampant deceit and ideological aggression go together, in all kinds of weather. I think that's what you'll notice, richly and abundantly. Exposed, Mckennist talk does like any religious fanaticism. It flies into a rage - unless it can find a trap door and just escape: Exit Stage Left style.

Ethics and values are indeed a core issue of stoned apes - as I think you'll find reflected in that Concerning Stoned Apes article. Its wrong at every level, from fact to theory, right down to the purposes of any good interest in anything it pretends to be about. From psychedelics to prehistory to evolution to consciousness and human experience.

Staying tuned to your broadcast, and again - kudos. You set a good example here, I think.

[Dinwar]

Quote:

A single species, ourselves, has broken from the ordinary constraints of animal nature

No we haven't. We've merely shifted what selection forces dominate--something every other organism in the history of our planet has done.

Quote:

an epigenetic world – meaning a world not based on gene transfer and chemical propagation and preservation of information, but...

This is not what epigenetics means. The fact that the guy looked up Greek/Latin prefixes and added one to "genetics" doesn't mean he was ahead of his time; it merely means he understood how scientists make up words. The concept he's discussing isn't, by any stretch of the imagination, the concept of epigenetics as discussed by biologists.

Originally Posted by Zeuzzz

A good speaker. A good text in all. Even though half the time it's hard to tell what on Earth he's talking about.

This is contradictory. If it's hard to tell what he's talking about he has failed at being a speaker (assuming, of course, you're his target audience).

[Dancing David]

Originally Posted by Bakers

Recommended reading: Concerning Stoned Apes (Reality Sandwich).

If anybody's actually interested in prehistory, mushrooms etc -- suggested reading, article from ECONOMIC BOTANY last year: The Selva Pascuala mural. By the same author, with colleagues - as the Reality Sandwich article.

Welcome

http://www.realitysandwich.com/teren...as_stoned_apes

[Dancing David]

Originally Posted by Zeuzzz

The one thing I do find slightly impressive and in favor of Mckenna being ahead of his time is that he used the word epigenetics in 1990 as a mechanism through which these behavioral traits might be accommodated into the scientific literature in the future.

Except no one has shown that behavioral influence in epigenetics. IE the topic at hand.

Might as well insert quantum.

[Dancing David]

Originally Posted by Zeuzzz

Ok that quote was a mishmash of other things he said throughout that speech, and was quite far from the mark, might as well quote it properly:

http://www.matrixmasters.net/podcast...manBeings.html



A good speaker. A good text in all. Even though half the time it's hard to tell what on Earth he's talking about.

Considering the leap from stone tools to particle tools took 1.5 million years, there is no evidence that it had anything to do with psychoactive chemicals.

[porch]

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

Here's a link to the vid of McKenna confessing that any appearance of academic sincerity in Food of the Gods was a ruse. I was a bit intimidated by the almost-3 hour length of the audio, but he begins with his confession and it's all laid out within the first two and a half minutes. Then he immediately begins to explain that if you think he's a flake, it is because you are inadequate. And how he is justified in lying to people because his own personal experience is just that important to humanity. That was all before three and a half minutes was up. Then I turned it off.

[Zeuzzz]

Originally Posted by Dancing David

Except no one has shown that behavioral influence in epigenetics. IE the topic at hand.

The study of 9/11 victims offspring with similar PTSD is one of a few.

[asydhouse]

Originally Posted by cosmicaug

In my opinion, if the hypothesis were correct, it would never be a "driving force". It would only be a trigger for a driving force.

"I swear by my mother's milk, this really happened to me! I tell you I was there, and this Being was alive all around me, and I got scared, but the Being took me on a journey and told me how we can keep Him sweet! Follow me and support me while I intercede myself between you puny humans and the Power!"

PS sorry, couldn't resist. If some zoned out family (tribe might be too grandiose a word for the small groups of humans in pre-language times... or should I say pre-human?) spent a couple of days dealing with the consequences of accidental ingestion of a psychedelic plant, they probably never left any descendants... the non-zoned predators in the neighbourhood would have enjoyed a feast... if my own experience with tripping and parties is anything to go by! Which it may not be, of course.

Then again, multi-drug parties are irrelevant (was at a party on the weekend, and I'm still feeling a bit zoned out!).... suddenly now thinking back, remembering all the actual trip post-clarity occasions.... that's where people get the illusion that tripping could bring about an evolution of consciousness into a newer fresher clearer more flowing intelligence.... cos that's how you feel after a good trip! But still, the Lamarckian desire for that to spread to everyone through direct ingestion inducing a spread of brain development.... it's surely unlikely!

[Zeuzzz]

Originally Posted by porch

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

Here's a link to the vid of McKenna confessing that any appearance of academic sincerity in Food of the Gods was a ruse. I was a bit intimidated by the almost-3 hour length of the audio, but he begins with his confession and it's all laid out within the first two and a half minutes. Then he immediately begins to explain that if you think he's a flake, it is because you are inadequate. And how he is justified in lying to people because his own personal experience is just that important to humanity. That was all before three and a half minutes was up. Then I turned it off.

Already listened to that talk. Was thought provoking, especially in the q&a where he gets some very tricky questions and has a good dialogue.

[Zeuzzz]

@ Porch: And if you thought that three hours was long, please be aware that that is the first three hours of four.

[Bakers]

Thanks Dancing Dave - a pleasure being in your company. My very good regards.

porch - wow, you got to the bottom of that fast. No surprise, with your eyes. And ears. There is indeed a 'creepy' core, under all the glittery 'wow' McKenna elicited with all the skill of a master manipulator. Glad you didn't waste any more time than it took.

And may I please endorse Dinwar too, some points you've made. Observant, the contradiction. TM-talk is in a special dialect, Contradictese. It speaks in Rorschach word blots. Inviting us to play along with its act. Or to try and figure it out - like its our problem what it means or how it makes sense. And if we don't get it -- well, we can feel stupid, that's what we get. Inadequate as porch notes, of that video jabber. Classic and typical of his - and his followers' - road show.

Hook-baited alternative, confronted with his lively jabberwocky - we can feel super-smart, and its so easy. All we need do is just project whatever meaning we feel like concocting onto it, then realize how intellectually brilliant we obviously are, to 'get' its Deep Profundity. And now we've got a merit badge - we have a License to act like we know better than whoever else.

To add juice to the bait - TM told his followers constantly and continually: "Nobody is smarter than you!" Good old brain-washing routines, such tactics and methods (sigh). They're dime a dozen, or - dime a doozie, more like.

I'd also like to affirm your note on epigenetics. As noted in an article about it by Adrian Byrd (it doesn't mention stoned apes or McKennism):

1) the epigenetic state of any nucleotide can be passed on to offspring but -- still not significant for evolution because of high error rate: 1 out of 25 errors during DNA copying. Evolution occurs across many generations, and requires accuracy of replication - as in DNA sequences, which has super high fidelity. You get maybe one base copied wrong in any sequence, on avg - out of every 50 million to a billion or so bases.

Unlike epigenetics states, which change every time the wind blows - DNA sequence replication provides genomic stability - a solid foundation for evolution across millenia, millions of years.

2) Apart from high error rate when copied: Epigenetic states flip, reverse and change easily during life time - very common compared to mutation. For evolution to occur, a small chance of genetic change is necessary - its how variation (new alleles) arise. But it can't be so chaotic and radical that the genome itself doesn't hold together.

But La-dee-da, know what I'm saying? As with "Scientific" Creationists, Mckenna's theorizing is just too far ahead intellectually (I know, right?). Its genius way beyond 'conventional' scientists. What do 'biologists' know about biology? They've never taken mushrooms, according to the Mckennist Broadcasting System. Or, they haven't tripped in high enough dosage. Or, not often enough.

[dlorde]

Originally Posted by quarky

The horse I ride to this race is a joke.
Ribs are showing; saddle-backed old mare.

Bless her heart, I may have to put her down.

Have a care - as Lincoln suggested, one shouldn't change horses mid-stream.

[pakeha]

Originally Posted by Dinwar

Easy enough to find out. This is a fairly standard experimental question, and the protocols amount to putting a bunch of fruit flies in a box with the mushroom, a bunch in a box with the active chemical (in a from they'd eat--sugar-water or something), and a bunch in a box with normal food, and seeing whether the mutations rates in boxes 1 and 2 are higher than in box 3. Well, it's a bit more complicated than that, but that's what it boils down to--the complications amount to making sure the flies stay in the box and that you can tell how old the flies are.

Hi, Dinwar.
You're streets ahead of me.
I framed my question poorly.
My real query is concerning just what psychotropic plants grew in the habitat of the emerging Homo sapiens back in the day.

Originally Posted by porch

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

How interesting to hear the man himself smugly describe his book as an intellectual fraud.
Thanks for the link.

[dlorde]

Originally Posted by Dancing David

http://www.realitysandwich.com/teren...as_stoned_apes

The style is rather heavy going, Brian.

[porch]

Originally Posted by Zeuzzz

@ Porch: And if you thought that three hours was long, please be aware that that is the first three hours of four.

Oh my, that is big!

Is that 12 hours taken from different talks, or was it a continuous, 12 hour session?

[porch]

Originally Posted by pakeha

How interesting to hear the man himself smugly describe his book as an intellectual fraud.
Thanks for the link.

Just to be clear, it was Bakers who provided the link, I just found it and posted it on their behalf. But yeah, fully agreed.

[jond]

And, according to this article, Mckenna is responsible for the whole 12/21 nonsense:

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/mayan-apoca...130852054.html

[Dinwar]

Originally Posted by pakeha

My real query is concerning just what psychotropic plants grew in the habitat of the emerging Homo sapiens back in the day.

Hm....That one's tricky.....Psychotropic chemicals don't generally fossilize (though if we found amber with plants preserved in it that might be worth looking into). Worse, you frequently don't get PLANTS that do X, but PLANT PARTS that do X. Take tomatoes. Delicious red orbs of goodness, yes, but they're part of the nightshade family and their leaves contain pretty potent toxins. Rhubarb is similar--eat the leaves and you're dead, but the stalk is delicious when baked into a pie (used to eat them raw as a kid). There are also plants that are poisonous unless treated in certain ways, like baked to a certain temperature in certain rocks (limestone helps neutralize some chemicals). Fungus is easier, because no one ever considers anything but the fruiting body of a fungus, which is mostly one type of tissue. Plants are far more complicated. It's one reason I didn't get into paleobotony (the other reason being that I like predators).

Quote:

How interesting to hear the man himself smugly describe his book as an intellectual fraud.

Very. If there weren't enough reasons to dismiss this idea, the fact that it wasn't a serious proposal anyway certainly makes such a dismissal justifiable!

[pakeha]

^
I know it's tricky- that's why I and others keep posting the query.
Unless it can be shown there were psychotropic plants in the right place at the right time, there's not a lot of reason to theorise about their role in human evolution, is there?