Dingoes and Denisovans: Ancient Genetic Anomalies or New Genetic Realities

Dingoes and Denisovans: Ancient Genetic Anomalies or New Genetic Realities

By Steven & Evan Strong

06/07/20

Throughout all our research, books, reports and presentations there has always been a consistent division and sequence. To begin with, we must first establish that there is an error in current expectations or supposed facts, pursuing any alternative is a futile exercise unless a convincing argument is made on behalf of dispensing with accepted paradigms. If it turns out our offerings in response to this vacuum are indeed mistaken, that is secondary to the main error in transmission. The primary focus should always be that what is believed to be fundamentally true is now under question, whatever we come up with is merely part of the next step on the rung.

                When it comes to human presence at Point Ritchie, Victoria over 120,000 years ago, metal objects found in Australia still unidentified or far too sophisticated, flat-headed non-sutured skulls far smarter than us, rocks displaying knowledge and technology beyond our current capacity and so the inconvenient list continues, all of this archaeology just doesn’t fit. We see so much of what shouldn’t be, either in research or artefacts and sites, and from our perspective immediately dispensing with most of what is claimed to be true about ancient history and human evolution is pure common sense.

                To an extent, what closed this debate in prompting us to make a parting statement, were the last two printed copies of reports on archaeological topics Evan found and handed to me. One paper was centred solely on ancient developments in Australia, while in the other review the same continent is incidentally mentioned once on page three. The content of each paper is separated by the principle item under investigation, emphasis and locations, but bound together by one recurring enigma: Australia always seems to present contrary evidence, hominids, genes, dates and artefacts.

                To be honest neither paper was controversial nor added anything new to either topic, if anything both were still mainstream in complexion through clinging to conventional models. But what it did remind us of is that until the reason why there is now a ‘sea of square pegs in a round archaeological ocean’ is that each researcher is obliged to fall back on some very flawed models like survival of the fittest or Out–of–Africa. Once opting to travel down familiar settings, what they come up with always falls short. Maintaining that honesty, if we were to rank the top ten sites, artefacts or pieces of research that challenge conventional thinking and models, neither of these two recent arrivals would rate a mention, not even in the ‘reserves bench.’ Their value is not so much through overwhelming credentials, but more the ‘two straws that broke the camel’s back.’ The real issue here is not so much the undeniable quality of opposing research, but the sheer volume that never ceases to flow, of which these two are the latest to row downstream and take up a mainstream mooring.

The Non-Dog, Non-Wolf, Non-…

Of the three classifications provided in the sub-heading, at the present genetic state of proceedings, it is third Non-category of three consecutive dots trailing off into empty space that is the most likely contender. Ever since the results of extensive genetic research into the origins and canine connections of the dingo were released by Sydney University, the aftermath is a mixture of a wall of silence, confusion and political opportunism.

Michael Crowther begins his report (“The Dingo is a true-blue, native Australian species”)(1) by addressing a very recent casualty of this genetic research, “of all Australia’s wildlife, one stands out as having an identity crisis: the dingo.”(2) Such is the inability of mainstream channels to grasp or absorb, those with agendas inspired by profit or political opportunism have filled in the breach. “The Western Australian government recently made a controversial attempt to classify the dingo as “non-native fauna.”(3) Their logic, for want of a better term, seems to be that since dingoes no longer belong to any known dog, wolf or canine family, they have no kin and therefore lose their legal right of tenancy and every form of protection. The botanical equivalent of being legislated into “non-native fauna”(4) status would be that of a introduced weed like lantana.

What seems to have followed since the genetic readings were made public, is that no sensible explanation has risen to the surface. Simply because the findings that the dingo is not genetically related to any dog, wolf, fox, jackal or canine, when most academics were adamant it was directly related to the wild dogs of Southern India, was not welcome and never seriously addressed.

                It had been assumed that the ancestral canine of all Australian dingoes came from India accidentally, via driftwood or through falling into the water while on a fishing vessel, but the dingo’s genes deny a voyage from anywhere outside this continent. What we have coming out of this research is where these animals ended up with no comparative genetic markers nor departure point. What also seems to have been neglected in considerations (yet again) is the Original narrative. After all, irrespective of when the dingo supposedly came ashore, the Original people were already here and witnessed it occurring, all academics came onto the scene much later. And what needs to be appreciated is that there are plenty of Dreaming stories and Oral Lore accounts that provide clarity, specifics and undeniable evidence of a cross-species alliance that is unique, anywhere.

Three Dreaming Stories and No Journey Across the Oceans

From the thousands of Dreaming Stories spread over hundreds of tribal estates, very little if anything that took place was forgotten when it comes to what came here from other countries, what was permitted and that which was permanently denied entry. There are three Dreaming stories that directly relate to dismissing different aspects of the accepted a narrative of a dingo being imported from another country. To that end, before examining the special relationship that was forged between humans and a dog-like superior hybrid, we need to clear the Dreaming decks in determining what geography and ancestry does not apply.

                The first two Dreaming stories deal with the only two locations yet suggested as places from which a pre-dingo ancestor originated, India and Africa. Both stories were given to us in printed form by Bundjalung Elder and son of the revered Aunty Millie Boyd, Harry Boyd. At that time, Harry and a colleague of his approached us requesting we write a book about his mother and some assorted issues. Even though nothing came of the venture, the two copies we were given based on ancient events made no sense at the time, nor did they relate to any topics we were investigating. Until now we have never referenced them in articles or live presentations, but that is about to change.

                The first story leaves no room to manoeuvre in that nothing from Africa, be it animal or person, is welcome. In fact, anything African is prohibited from ever entering this country. Yes, that name is actually used, whether a different Original name was given for this continent to the west is unknown, but in this translation Africa is specified, as are the descriptions of quite few animals native to that continent. In each request, made by the ‘King of Africa’ to come ashore bringing a different animal as a gift, he is rebuffed by the ‘King of Australia,’ who denies entry because we already have this animal. Time after time the King of Africa offers a new animal, and on each occasion the reply is in the negative, and alas for the responder, untrue.

                Even though the Elder representing Australia at the point of prospective entry, is right to block entry and refuse permission, as none of the African animals are of this continent, have no residing Creation spirit in Australia and would undeniably upset the ecological balance, to lie repeatedly is a grave sin no matter what the circumstances. So, in breaking such an elemental Law in protocol with the Spirits, the Elder was punished and turned into a frog/spirit. To this very day that frog can still be heard croaking the same denial to all things African. “O we don’t want anything like that.  We’ve got ’em here in this place..”(5)

                In nominating Africa, the animals within and a formal denial of entry of all fauna from that continent, if one solitary dingo-like exception was made it would have to be included in this account, or followed up further in with another Dreaming story. Neither retraction took place. Therefore, the dingo did not come from Africa. However, Africa has always been the second choice. India has been the principle focus of the experts, and one native dog in Southern India, the preferred ancestral choice.

                The problem is, the second Dreaming story Harry gave us automatically excludes India from any further consideration. The contents specify when and where the last contact between Original and Dravidian tribes took place, and once again the Indian precursor to the dingo is totally absent in these ancient discussions and final separation. In this historical account, the Original women despaired of the men traveling across the now submerged section of land that joined Sri Lanka, India and the north-western section of Australia, to wage war in India.

                The warriors in India had long hair which was wrapped under turbans. The animosity between tribes was long-standing and unbeknown to either warring party, this conflict was about to come to a permanent cessation in hostilities. While the men were in battle the Original women took out their magic digging sticks and severed the connecting land-bridge. When the men returned from battle, they found their route home was now a huge expanse of blue with nowhere solid to set forth. It was only due to the very powerful magic of one Clever-fella did the warring party finally return, but after doing so they promised to the women never to fight the Indians who now lived across the ocean. During this quite specific account of continental plates separating, as certainly is the case with India and Australia which were once co-joined, no mention was made of the men taking with them any prize from the victorious battle, either before or after. Whether untold riches or even a few scrawny dogs, no acknowledgement was made of anything or species, other than the men and their weapons, being carried back home. If an animal as clever, loved and revered as the dingo undeniably is to both Original Dreaming stories and the tribal daily life, was actually an Indian gift or the spoils of war, surely this final parting of the continental ways would include mention of such a seminal addition to the national countryside?

Two Crosses and one Tick

With India and Africa ruled out and nowhere else ever suggested, we have run into an academic dead-end. Fortunately, Old Way history goes back well past pen and paper, and there is one Dreaming story that completes this trilogy in providing an original home base for the dingo: Australia, and possibly, beyond.

                My personal apologies, because even though I heard this particular Dreaming story at two tribal locations given by different Elders, it was some time ago and the locations are lost. But as to the general thrust of the content and consistency between versions, that still remains untarnished, simply because the content was so dramatic and memorable.

It was during a time of massive upheaval and rapid plate movement, and at one location the earth split apart and representatives of all animals and beings of Australia were assembled as the earth opened up. The Original humans ran in one direction and all the animals took the opposite path, but one animal tribe hesitated, then turned and ran towards their human compatriots. It was a late decision and almost fatal as the earth kept splitting further apart, but due to providence and the help of humans, all the dingoes survived and joined the human tribe in a special relationship no other species of non-humans enjoyed. Such was the depth of love and loyalty shown by the Dingo Tribe, from that point on they have been accorded a position that is nigh on equal to the rights and respect given to initiated tribal members.

                They were, from that point on, two tribes living beside each other, yet remained independent of each other. They would share in the hunt, in the distribution of food, in the love of the tribe and even suckle milk from the nipples of their female human friends. This is not the traditional master/servant or even human/slave relationship, but a beneficial alliance of equals bringing different talents into a harmonious blend of two into one. And most importantly, whether clad in fur or skin, both species came from the land of Australia. With that Indigenous residency and genesis established, it is time to step past the first merging of two tribal associations throughout Australia, and move further down the linear white-fella time line in examining post-Cook reports of dingoes and Original people in consort and co-operation.

Substitute People With fur

From the time of first liaison until well after the British Invasion, the two tribes lived beside and with each other, and as with all parts of Original life a code of behaviour and responsibilities was agreed to by both parties. No-one could ever hit or raise their voice in anger against any dingo, causing physical or emotional stress was forbidden. If no-one could yell at or hit a child, then so too the dingoes receive the same respect and consideration.

                No leashes or collars were made, if or when dingoes joined the men in the hunt was never a decision for the men. When they did, the chances of a successful hunt were much greater. Together the skill, guile and experience of humans and this semi-canine were formidable. When meat was caught and cut up, both humans and dingoes were catered for fairly.

                However, this was much more to this than just sharing the hunt and satisfying the appetite in this communion. Michael Ryan was born in 1899 “under a spirit tree.”(6) He wrote a book called “White Man, Black Man,”(7) which detailed his experiences as a child while living beside and being raised by Original tribal people in South-west Queensland. In one account he described his mother’s angst and seemingly justifiable apprehension that the Original wet-nurse Michael suckled from, had two ‘infants’ to feed. More often than not the three-month old white infant had to get in line and wait, as he was the second mouth on the breast. A young dingo pup had lost its mother, and this woman was more than happy to act as a surrogate lactating female dingo. From an Original perspective, there was no problem in the pup going first, as it was much smaller and needed less milk to satisfy its needs. If she did run dry when Michael was feeding, well then, he just had to wait for more. Whereas the dingo pup never went hungry.

                That the immediate needs of the dingo were satisfied at the expense of a human infant is a strong indicator this equality is well past what is given to a pet, it goes beyond that to permeate every level of tribal and pack Culture.

The Fringe Dwellers and Karno’s Dingo

The movie Fringe Dwellers is a movie about Original life on the outskirts of a country town, and an extremely fine piece of work I often used when teaching Aboriginal Studies in Secondary School. It was the setting, actors and script that is so real and authentic that made it such a valuable teaching asset. We do know that once the movie work crew constructed a very realistic Original settlement on the fringes of the town, the numbers of daytime dogs in the nearby town rapidly diminished on the days when filming took place. A multitude of dogs were gathered and placed on set by the local Original people. None were actually stolen as such, all were returned home when the filming wasn’t taking place, but while they were filming dogs were literally wandering through every scene en-masse. The reason the filmmakers were so insistent dogs were required is simply because at every camp, mission settlement and Original fringe community, all are replete with many dogs. The need to be surrounded by canines is inherent and such an integral part of the way the two tribes had taken up residence together. Even though dingoes were no longer camping with Original people and tribes, the second-best alternative, domestic dogs, has filled the void.

                That void certainly wasn’t part of Karno’s story, no distant canine relations would suffice. The first time I met Karno I also met his dingo. Never got to pat him and even sit that close, but I was near him and had the opportunity to learn the basics, barely the 101 of dingo life and philosophy. The very first observation made related to the canine hierarchy, among mere dogs this dingo was royalty. Other dogs would gingerly approach the dingo sitting beside Karno, but on every occasion bar one, each dog was not given the time of day and clearly told to move on. What happened next never varied, the approaching dog would stop, curl its tail inwards and slowly back off. They cowered and bowed their head as they departed, seemingly apologising for having the temerity to intrude on ‘caninish’ royalty.

                Of close to a dozen failed approaches, one dog was allowed to step a little closer, and for close to twenty seconds the dingo did show some interest. But just as the curiosity did momentarily bubble, Karno stood and walked away. The dingo followed him immediately, and the only dog permitted to approach was discarded for more important ‘Karno business.’ There wasn’t any aggression shown or even inconvenience caused to the other dogs, the dingo just had better things to do than ‘play with the puppies.’

Collective Amnesia, Continental Censorship or Permanent Residency

What never ceases to amaze is the number of times academics, archaeologists and historians pass comment on Australia pre and post Cook, but never consult with the people whose ancestors were here when whatever they are examining is under discussion. With the dingo there is no Dreaming story or ancient oral account of dingos coming from India, Africa or anywhere else except Australia. No Original dingo history begins with they came from…

The dingo is special to humans, more so than any other animal in Australia, and because of this its story and place of origin and residence is known of and maintained. The animal is unlike any other in Australia. In a land of pouched marsupials, this mammal is unique. It is the apex predator/hunter with only humans displaying the same degree of proficiency in the hunt. If it was an import from abroad, that is just too important a moment in Australian history to be cast aside with no record of this migration. It just doesn’t make sense for this arrival to be dismissed as inconsequential. If the dingo is not an import but local product, nothing needs to be stated beyond they are here. There is no need to say anything more than ‘once upon a time in a land …

To ignore that there is corroborating Original historical evidence and venture forth without effective Original consultation is bad science, bad form and bad manners. According to all Original records, the dingo did not originate in India, Africa or anywhere else but Australia. According to the geneticists from Sydney University, the recent analysis of dingo mtDNA shows it is not directly related to any other dog, wolf or canine found anywhere except in Australia.

So, when crossing the divide in combining the Dreaming and genetics, once extracting an overabundance of pre-existing bias and mistaken premises, what comes out of this esoteric overlay is that the dingo was made and evolved in Australia. Any other genetic variation or addition that could have taken place was also in Australia. If that did happen, which would explain why there is no direct match, that has to involve a Pleiadean involvement.

The reason why off-world genetic influences should at least be considered in the dingo’s case, is simply due to what an Elder said when on a sacred site. Darkinooong Elder Gavy Duncan was in ceremony wearing a grey kangaroo Law Man’s coat when being interviewed about the Bulgandry site by Georgio from Ancient Aliens. He was standing beside what Gavy called a spaceship and three kangaroos found very close by, reminding us that these animals were brought to the Earth via the engraved spaceship that came from another planet. Being the only female animal that can control whether she conceives a foetus for up to five years, that uses a tail like a fifth limb, will, two days after conception carry her young for a very long time in a pouch, the idea that this animal did not originate on this planet is not a huge stretch. If so, surely the same can be said for another species that is genetically unique and only found in Australia.   

Or perhaps this is just another one of our far-left Original theories, as we said it really doesn’t matter as the error still remains in regard to where, and even the best science there is in support of when sits on shaky ground. According to the mainstream dingo narrative, the dog originating from Southern India came here around 6,000 years ago. How do they know that? Simple, that is the oldest Carbon 14 date yet given when analysing dingo bones in Australia. They claim that bone solid date gives certainty in the time of entry, but does it?

If seeking precision, it appears that relying on bone dates and a time of arrival in Australia didn’t work well with humans. When I was a child (pardon the excursion into ancient history but there is a recurrent flaw here), upon entering kindergarten, the textbooks confidently declared that Original people had been in Australia for 20,000 years. Upon entering high school, the date was doubled to 40,000 years, as I began teaching there were rumours of 60,000 years and not so long ago the possibility of another 5,000 years was thrown into the total. The recent the date of 120,000 years, based on solid science and academics of high standing, is now the current baseline. That is an increase of six-fold over a little more than fifty years. So, the human experience is clear, standing by numbers in Australian archaeology then claiming any degree of precision is a fool’s errand.

All dingo bones found were never treated or buried, but left on the ground where the dingo fell. The bones were exposed to the elements, disturbed, walked over and at present the oldest dingo bones have been dated at 6,000 years. Going on the saga of the human bones and fluctuating dates as a guide, placing any value on one date seems to have been a risky bet, doubly so knowing that the locals have already made it clear that the date and notion of coming from anywhere else is wrong.

The Notion of Coming From Anywhere Else is Wrong

We made that observation in the last sentence when discussing the origins of the dingo, so say the Dreaming stories. We can repeat ourselves when investigating the paths, diversity and genetics of humans in Australia. Just as it is with the dingo, there is a growing uncertainty in relation to who, when, where and how. Amongst the fraying of the edges and shifting boundaries within an expanding global hominid family, as soon as anything Australian is thrown into the mix it all gets too simple or so contradictory.

Just as it is with the dingo paper Evan handed me, the second report on “nine human species”(8) who “walked the Earth 300,000 years ago,”(9) began by reinforcing our belief this numbers game in relation to dates and a hominid tally is never stationary and so difficult to keep extending and re-modelling. When I was in school the hominid population was primarily sapiens, with a few brutish Neanderthals thrown into the background. Hairy, crude and dribbling at the mouth, they barely deserved to stand in the shadow of our noble modern ancestors. That count stayed at two until after the beginning of twenty-first century. About fifteen years ago there was talk of a new species of hominin called Denisovan, past that discovery the floodgates opened. So much so, the claimed number of nine is now wrong, as Homo Heidelbergensis is now recognised as a distinct quite primitive looking species, yet has a larger brain than Homo sapiens sapien. Not only is this skull a weird combination of archaic facial features and a large over-sized modern cranium, it brings the number of different larger-brained hominins walking on this planet into double figures. May we suggest that the odds that revised number is going to increase are extremely high. Such is the incredible increase, the writer of this article, Nick Longrich, is in total agreement, conceding that “given how quickly we are discovering new species, more are likely waiting to be found.”(10)

Outside the concession of more to be found, increasing uncertainty and the increasing difficulty in accommodating this into conventional theories on human evolution and survival, there is nothing else in this article that does anything more beyond cobbling together a very traditional, and severely questionable, model of the apex intelligent hominids prevailing over their less talented and aware hominid kin and cousins.

“Nine Species of human Once Walked the Earth. Now There’s Just One. Did we Kill the Rest?”(11)

This is the title of Longrich’s paper, and although a bit spartan in the use of adverbs and adjectives, it does sum up the gist of his report. The opening sentence highlights a seminal fork in the Hominid road, there was a time when “nine human species walked the Earth 300,000 years ago. Now there is just one … By 10,000 years ago, they were all gone.”(12)

                During Longrich’s quest to determine what was the most likely cause of the extinction of no less than nine other human species, he falls back on a popular underlying assumption, and once attributing that primitive stereotype, it gets real easy to fill in the blanks. “History is full of examples of people warring, displacing and wiping out other groups over territory … like language or tool use, a capacity for and tendency to engage in genocide is arguably an intrinsic, distinctive part of human nature.”(13) So, being genetically ‘hot-wired’ with genocidal tendencies the Homo sapiens sapien conquered, pillaged and murdered simply because it is what we do.

                The problem is all written history has been recorded since sedentary life, cities, forts and money was most recently dominant from about 6,000 years ago, before that for a long time people lived a hunter-gatherer animistic society. As to whether the relations between tribes were as savage and aggressive in earlier times, there is no evidence of wholesale slaughter or debauchery in the archaeology in Australia until the British invaded. So that commentary has legs once humans began to fight nature, but that may well mean that this aggression and brutality is a product of a changing sedentary society and technology without a soul.

From the time modern man came onto the scene it was a “war.”(14) From Longrich’s viewpoint, it wasn’t as if the other nine, now ten, offended in anyway, quite the opposite, it seems that because the sapiens had no conscience, sense of pity or compassion, we wiped out all the others. What a charming notion, our ascendancy and pedestal is soaked in blood, senseless primal genocide and a complete disregard for the rights of any species, bar themselves.

                In seeking any potential justification, he feels it was not a deliberate planned holocaust of so many, but more they way things had to be. The implication being we are obeying Nature’s plan through conquest and arrogance. “Our elimination of other species probably wasn’t a planned, coordinated effort of the sort practised by civilisations, but a war of attrition. The end result, however, was just as final. Raid by raid, ambush by ambush, valley by valley, modern humans would have worn down their enemies and taken their land.”(15) This hypothetical scenario reeks of modern day thinking were the battlefields can be found in warfare, economics, politics and all places in between. The writer is assuming people from tens of thousands of years ago were selfish, competitive and aggressive, the problem is it these traits that are part and parcel of the competitive world of today. They are essential codes of behaviour if wishing to succeed and profiteer. Longrich seems to have completely forgotten all the hominids he cites were supposedly hunter-gatherers. That creates an entirely different mind-set if tribal territories remain secure in perpetuity, as was the case throughout pre-Cook Australia, interactions with neighbours close and far, take on new priorities and expectations.

The Skulls Demand a Different Pecking-Order

Throughout this short overview the author keeps returning to the pivotal foundation behind the carnage, the superior intelligence of modern man was the defining factor that ensure sapiens would prevail and annihilate. Longrich feels that “arsenal of early Homo sapiens probably included projectile weapons like javelins and spear-throwers, throwing sticks and clubs.”(16) “Probably”(17) denies certainty, what is interesting is the presumption that the ‘lesser’ hominids did not have such  “sophisticated weapons.”(18) Knowing that the sum total of Neanderthal bones found could fit on one table, I think it is huge call that verges on ridiculous to assert other hominids like Neanderthals or Denisovans were technologically and intellectually impoverished, especially since our investigations have found five species of non-sapiens that have much larger skulls than sapiens.

                It is our belief sapiens were nowhere near the smartest of the class of ten plus, in fact, it is possible it was the sapiens who permanently wore the ‘dunce-cap.’ It is now known that 50,000 years ago Denisovans were creating exquisite delicate jewellery that would fetch a very high price today, no less impressive is the recent archaeology out of Europe proving Neanderthal settlements had hot running water. While all this is going on one species remain in the dark, in the cold caves and certainly a long way behind in the civilised stakes. This should be no surprise as it is well known that both Denisovans and Neanderthals have larger skulls and brains, so we should expect to see a difference in refinement and sophistication, with the sapiens still scratching around in the caves.

                But it is not just the Denisovans and Neanderthals who sit at the top of the class, in fact the flat-headed skulls we have been involved with are at least 400 cc larger than sapiens and 300 ccs larger than either Neanderthal or Denisovan. It’s a flask-shaped skull which is at its widest (17 cms) at the back, while sapien skulls are 13 cms wide and that width is at the mid-point of the skull. But it doesn’t stop there, as the sapiens are also ‘out-measured’ by the newly reclassified Homo Heidelbergensis, which has a cranium capacity of around 1,400 ccs. And this is where it gets decidedly messy and hints at an actual regression in the size of the sapien skull, in that we have the remains of what two experts insist is an archaic Homo sapiens, the immediate pre-cursor to modern man, which until now had only been found in Africa. What still leaves us confused, is that the size of the supposedly primitive robust sapien skull we have is clearly larger than that of the modern man skull we use as a comparison.

                The rest of Longrich’s class admittedly do have smaller-sized brains, but before a lower grade is awarded it needs to be factored in that Homo naledi, Homo luzonensis and Homo florensis also have smaller-sized bodies. Therefore, that automatically doesn’t mean the sapiens can rightly claim sixth position in the class, we need to be more circumspect and observe how they lived and whether it was austere survival or joyful. What we do know is that Homo florensis has a brain marginally larger than a chimp, but had tools, a language, culture and lived in the same manner as the larger hominids. Dean Faulk examined the much smaller skull and found something unseen before, the frontal lobes were so much bigger in proportion to the rest of the brain and was larger than the lobes of the bigger hominids. Throw in the reality that we use less than 20% of our brain’s capacity today, and into that truth we ask the question, what if in earlier days more of the brain was activated and effectively functioning? Not that this is true, but if Lucy, who is at least 3,200,000 years old and has a brain size of around 600 cc, had her entire brain turned on, she would be three times smarter than us today. Why is it our brain is so large and so underused? Is that a recent regression? Is there any other human organ that is as ineffective in numerical capacity and application? Bearing in mind the archaic sapien ancestor we have has a much bigger skull, and one could ask has the shrinkage in the size of the skull been gradual, or sudden?

                Ranked six or lower in a hominid class of ten three hundred thousands years ago, the idea that a classmate from the bottom half would prevail and conquer is not a logical or rational explanation, it just doesn’t make sense to any teacher. Moreover, if we did “kill the rest,”(19) as Longrich maintains, what pride or honour is there in being sapien? If we are mindless genocidal killers, and our genes are programmed to destroy and exterminate, where is the grace in emulating Daleks? If this is all we amount to, then stop the world I want to get off.

An Honours Student

One of Longrich’s failed hominids, but an A Grade student sitting near the top of our class, are the Denisovans. Thought to be principally centred in Asia, recent evidence of Neanderthals and Denisovans living successfully on the plains of France 720,000 years ago has extended the Denisovan realm and duration of genetic influence. But what has not been even marginally understood or elaborated upon, is simply why is it my Denisovan genetic count is 4.7%?

                Knowing that any Denisovan count exceeding 3% and running all the way up to 6%, automatically means you are Original as all other counts are much lower, the question has to be asked, how can this be? If Africans first settled Australia 60,000 years ago and never left, and Denisovans are solely restricted to the continents of Asia and Europe, how did it such a huge genetic count remain to this day, of which I personally carry? This was not a romance through correspondence or smoke signals, but the outcome of personal contact and marriage between species, which was mutually agreed to by both parties. That obviously happened through a very up and close and personal liaison, but where? All the texts tell us they never passed by, met or even viewed each other from a distance. This unexplained relationship is an agreed part of the Denisovan legacy that Longrich omitted and should be included.

                In what only adds to the logistics and global movements unknown, the racial group that comes second with a Denisovan count of between 2-3%, are the people of the South Pacific. That is even further away by boat, second in lineage and again lacking in any reasonable explanation beyond silence and look the other way.

C­—-, (C Triple minus)

It’s an acceptable paper in saying all the right things that secure high marks and solid postings. The reporter maintains the top of the pyramid paradigm and survival of the most brutal and insensitive as the only explanation, as all other hominids were of lesser acumen and sophistication. So, this paper must be awarded a pass mark, that is compulsory under the current marking scale.

However, outside saying what is expected, nothing else is right. The tally is wrong, the sapien intellectual ascendancy is manifestly untrue and the attributed vicious ingrained uncaring nature of sapiens an insult and entirely unsubstantiated, as no-one knows of the motives and dealings of at least ten hominid species hundreds of thousands of years ago. They may have been enemies and could have been friends, or somewhere in between, all three protocols are possible. But in Longrich’s article there is complete certainty in that one violent tendency is mandatory and other two never considered.

                Both papers will be accepted and passed, but our response will never be accepted or even considered. The dingo will remain in limbo having ancestors who came from somewhere else just around the corner. Homo sapiens sapien prevailed because we hate everyone except us, and once they are all killed, we turn on ourselves, and everyone lives, and dies, happily ever after. The problem is that there are no facts behind either paper, just conventional thinking and assumptions. Because of this recurring error they keep missing the focal point and place of the ancient world, Australia (the main remnant landmass of Lemuria).

A+

There are two ways of looking at all of this, and it comes down to whether either one of them makes more sense, or doesn’t at all. From our Original perspective, this state of flux or satisfaction depends on whether off-world genes and involvement is factored into the science, history and future of the dingoes, of the many hominids that once walked on this planet, and in particular the one species that was destined to make a choice in the very near future that could resonate and energise throughout the galaxy.

                The dingo belongs here and nowhere else, the first modern humans began here and nowhere else and the Pleiadeans came here and nowhere else. The

Adnyamathanha believe that “it began here, it will end here, and it will begin again here.”(20) And from that Original foundation, the last part of this trilogy begins again here on December 21 at Uluru. 

References:  

(1) – (4): Associate Professor Matthew Crowther, March 7th, 2019. “The dingo is a true-blue, native Australian species”, The Conservation. In https://theconversation.com/the-dingo-is-a-true-blue-native-australian-species-111538

(5):  Tom Whaddy, “The Frog Who Was King,” in Aboriginal Narratives and Poems of New South Wales, ed. Roland Robinson (Sydney, Australia: Hale & Iremonger Pty Ltd, 1989), 61.   

(6)-(7):  W. Michael Ryan, 1969. “White Man, Black Man“, (Jacarnda press Pty Ltd: milton, Queensland), 1.

(8)- (19): Nick Longrich, November 22nd, 2019, “Nine Species of Human Once Walked Earth. Now There’s Just One. Did We Kill The Rest?”, Science Alert, in https://www.sciencealert.com/did-homo-sapiens-kill-off-all-the-other-humans

(20): Fiona Reynolds via  The Adnyamathanha , 2014. Personal Communication to Steven Strong (Email).