ON THE DEFORMATION THEORY AND HOMO SAPIENS ALBINOS

Heralding Eurasia Excavations
If even the new discoveries about the origin of man in the Eurasia were to be accepted as genuine and authentic, this would not be capable of overthrowing the deformation theory and mobbing that has been advanced of late (as one of the reasons) for the explanation of the flight of the Homo sapiens Albinos into the Northern Hemisphere. But like so many other theories that were coined by researchers so many years ago, including the one lately discovered in the Sahara desert and publicly announced by researchers, these recent excavations in the Eurasia by palaeontologists would not do a thing to quite the Africa origin which had withstood successful major excavations made by the Albinos for centuries.

This recent attempt to find other areas of the planets where the Homo sapiens Albinos could have originated did not emerge without a surprise; in fact, there were expectations that this could surface in order to find other appropriate ways of diverting attention or casting doubt. But as have been reiterated several times, one of the reasons why science has progressed during the last century had been the dynamic manner in which scientists put theories or discoveries made to test or scrutiny in order to find out whether there were adequate evidence or “observable facts” to warrant the acceptance of any new thing suggested by this unique discipline.

The purpose of this piece of paper is to herald the discoveries that had been made in the distant planet of the Eurasia by palaeontologists and to issue the statement that these findings would be given proper scrutiny to discover whether it could withstand the proper theory of “Out of Africa” that had been maintained by prominent scientists for centuries. In addition to this, the article stresses the point that despite all the numerous findings that had been secured before, none of these could erase the deformation theory that compelled the Albinos to move toward the Northern Hemisphere. This defect, which is intrinsically connected with their emergence on the planet in the first place, can never be challenged.

New Research Findings and Eurasia Excavations

Science is progressive so any new findings brought about by the diligent work of scientists raise the hope of its recipients, that is, the academic community. But it is not the shouting and public proclamations that transformed the world we live in at present, but the content of the discoveries that has energised the world we live and visualise daily. Therefore, any discoveries made by scientists would have to go through the test by re-examination of the procedure of the enquiry and in some cases the places and the credibility of the scientists would be investigated. Why did they make or initiated such experiments? Who were the organisations that funded these projects, and what were the motives behind the carrying out of these projects? Why some of these intricacies had been neglected before in the world of science, nowadays these things would be given important scrutiny. For example, are the team of researchers only Europeans or there are African researchers, Japanese researchers, and Chinese researchers also among? These days some of the information that comes out would be viewed not only from the experts' point of view but also the general public about their objective analyses and viewpoints on the particular subjects. Especially if it has to do with public interests, people would be providing their own viewpoints. Those days where ethnocentric researchers with their uncritical minds travelled alone to another part of the planet in order to gather materials that are not representative would not only be rejected outright but also they shall be viewed with suspicions.

Therefore, the work of academic scientists is going to another extraordinary phase where the credibility of the people involved in a certain project would be investigated first, though these would not interfere with the objective look and investigation of the methods used in connection with the reliability and validity of the data employed. Science will always be science; therefore, the first and foremost purpose, which is to base research conclusions on facts and not speculations and myths, will always be maintained.

The Original Humans Maintain their Place
Irrespective of what the scrutiny of these findings would bring, there is the acceptance that the humans who originated in the pioneer continent were Negroid and they had been the sole humans wandering from the Africa to other parts of Asia, including India. Since the civilisations of the Ancient people had been carried and propagated first through oral tradition and later documentation, any attempts by people to use inappropriate methods to silence facts would not work. As I have asserted before, there were periods where researchers had thought that they had access to information and excellent technology, therefore, they could twist information and bring out things that favour them while covering important truth about nature. Those days are gone and so there is good news for the proclamation of these Eurasia excavations but that would not suffice to make us jump to the conclusion that we shall abandon the “Out of Africa theory” which had strenuously withstood all attempt to allow certain people to twist history to the way they want for their self-glorification. We are certainly glad for any new findings in science but we shall not easily succumb to the perspective of those who have led the world through manipulation and so have always coaxed us to think the way they want us to think and see the perspective they want us to see. If they want to see themselves as originating from Asia, that is fine, but that does not make us to change our stance unless the facts are so convincing to warrant the change.

Scandinavian Theory is Speculative
The theory that has been advanced by the Scandinavians concerning the Parallel theory (which this present Eurasia theory wants to prove) is speculative and as a result it will not hold even if they go around looking for evidence in favourite areas the world. It has always been the conspiracy of those researchers to interpret that they were different from all others. This has been pushed forward for centuries, and it was very naive and it has had to do with the “illusory superiority” which had been entertained by some people for centuries and which nearly brought the people of the world to its' kneels. At the moment, they may be in jubilation but only those who want it to be maintained would do so. It does not hold water. And those critical-mined are going to view this with suspicion. It is easy for people to coin a theory and then go around looking for some evidence to support the theory or hypothesis, and in the case of excavation of old bones to prove something without considering other vital conditions, it will not work so easily.

The Deformation Theory Holds
Homo sapiens Albinos were never in existence before the Negroid race that was the true original human beings on the earth. The later was the only human beings that wandered on the planet before the evolving of the former, which was a mistake, made by nature. We observe this taking place in our very eyes, and as Einstein has admonished us scientific theory must be based on “observable fact of experience” and not only on speculation which the Scandinavian theory had entertained for centuries to support the glorification of themselves. This mechanism by which they appeared was never the smooth way which they had purported to disseminate for centuries that had deceived the world. It was through deformations that they came forth as human beings and this appearance had been the result why they were mobbed in the pioneer continent in the first place.

Scientific Theory can be Challenged
Homo sapiens Albinos' “honey moon” is over as the world had grown and there is considerable access to information which today has made it possible for people to have judged for themselves all things considered as myths and did not conform to reality or scientific postulation. There is evidence that some myths that had been inherited from Old and Antiquity would remain because human beings have problems of discarding things that they had become used to them. But the myths about the Albinos' origin, which has to do with deformations of bodies, eyes, and etc and mobbing in the pioneer continent, will certainly not be one of them. The facts are there and they are too convincing that only the dumb person would find it difficult to comprehend. The conditions and circumstances concerning their origin are not complicated at all unless one looks for answers from “the place where there are no answers to be found,” this which concerns the Scandinavian Theory of Parallel. This theory does not hold water!

In conclusion, it can be asserted that the recent excavations in the Eurasia by Palaeontologists to support the Scandinavian Theory of Parallel origin does not hold water because it is a theory that had been discarded long time ago as untenable. Only certain people would recognise this and in their jubilation think that it could replace the authentic theory of “Out of Africa” which no naive theory had been capable of overthrowing it for centuries.

Bibliography
Bendyshe, T. Ed. (1865). The Anthropological Treatise of Johan Friedrich Blumenbach. London: Anthropological Society; 1865: 99, 269.

Cohen, M. R. & Nagel, E. (1949). An Introduction to Logic and Scientific Method. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul Limited.

Close, F. (1989). The quark structure of matter. In The New Physics. Pp. 396-424. (Ed.) Davies, P. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Darwin, C. (1889). On the Origin of Species… (Authorised edition from English ed. II); New York.

Davies, P. (Ed.) (1989). The New Physics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Davies, P. (1989). The new physics: a synthesis. In The New Physics. Pp. 1-33. (Ed.) Davies, P. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Einstein, A. (1952). “The Foundation of the General Theory of Relativity,” In: The Principle of Relativity. A Collection of Original Memoirs on the Special and General Theory of Relativity. Transl. by W. Perrett and G. B. Jeffery, Pp. 111-164). New York: Dover Publications, Inc. (Also in Annalen der Physik, 49, 1916).

Einstein, A. (1952). “On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies,” In: The Principle of Relativity. A Collection of Original Memoirs on the Special and General Theory of Relativity. Transl. by W. Perrett and G. B. Jeffery, Pp. 37-65. New York: Dover Publications, Inc.

Einstein, A. (1952). “On the Influence of Gravitation on the Propagation of Light,” In: The Principle of Relativity. A Collection of Original Memoirs on the Special and General Theory of Relativity. Transl. by W. Perrett and G. B. Jeffery, Pp. 99-109. New York: Dover Publications, Inc.

Epstein, L. C. (1992). Relativity Visualized. San Francisco: Insight Press.

Ford, J. (1989). What is chaos, that we should be mindful of it? In The New Physics. Pp. 348-371. (Ed.) Davies, P. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Gay, P. (Ed.) (1973). The Enlightenment. A Comprehensive Anthology. New York: Simon and Schuster.

Garraty, J., & Gay, P. (Eds.) (1972). The Columbia History of the World. New York: Harper & Row.

Georgi, H. M. (1989). Grand unified theories. In The New Physics. Pp. 425-445. (Ed.) Davies, P. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Guerlac, H. (1961). Lavoisier—the Crucial Year. Ithaca, New York.

Guth, A. & Steinhardt, P. (1989). The inflationary universe. In The New Physics. Pp. 34-60. (Ed.) Davies, P. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hawking, S. (1989). The edge of spacetime. In The New Physics. Pp. 61-69. (Ed.) Davies, P. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hawking, S. (2001). The Universe in a Nutshell. The Inspiring Sequel to A Brief History of Time. London: Transworld Publishers.

Heath, T. L. (1897). The Works of Archimedes. Cambridge: University Press.

Heath, T. L. (1908). The Thirteen Books of Euclid's Elements Translated from the Text of Heiberg with Introduction and Commentary. 2 Ed. Cambridge: University Press.

Heath, T. L (1949). Mathematics in Aristotle. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Hutchins, R. M. (Ed.) (1952). Newton & Huygens 34. Great Books of the Western World. Chicago: Encyclopaedia Britannica, Inc.

Isham, C. (1989). Quantum gravity. In The New Physics. Pp. 70-93. (Ed.) Davies, P. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Jönsson, A-M. (2007). “Ett öppet krig—per correspondens,”Forskning & Framsteg. Nr 1, Jan-Feb, pp. 22-25.

Knight, P. (1989). Quantum optics. In The New Physics. Pp. 289-315. (Ed.) Davies, P. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Kuhn, T. S. (1970). The Structure of Scientific Revolution. 2nd Edition. The International Encyclopedia of Unified Science. Vol2., No. 2. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Lave, L. (1988). Cognition in Practice. Mind, Mathematics and Culture in Everyday Life. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Leggert, A. (1989). Low temperature physics, superconductivity and superfluidity. In The New Physics. Pp. 268-287. (Ed.) Davies, P. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Lerner, E. J. (1991).The Big Bang Never Happened. A Startling Refutation of the Dominant Theory of the Origin of the Universe. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Lloyd, E. (1980). Handbook of Applicable Mathematics Vol. II Probability. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Longair, M. (1989). The new astrophysics. In The New Physics. Pp. 94-208. (Ed.) Davies, P. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Lorentz, H. A. (1931). Lectures on Theoretical Physics. Delivered at the University of Leiden. Vol. III Transl. by L. Silberstein & Trivelli. London: Macmillan and Co., LTD.

Lorentz, H. A., Einstein, A., Minkowski, H. & Weyl, H. (1952). The Principle of Relativity. A Collection of Original Memoirs on the Special and General Theory of Relativity. Transl. by W. Perrett and G. B. Jeffery, New York: Dover Publications, Inc.

Lorentz, H. A. (1952). “Electromagnetic Phenomena in a System Moving with any Velocity less than that of Light,” In The Principle of Relativity. A Collection of Original Memoirs on the Special and General Theory of Relativity. Transl. by W. Perrett and G. B. Jeffery, Pp. 11-34. New York: Dover Publications, Inc.

Maddox, J. (1998). What Remains to be Discovered. London: Macmillan.

Mach, E. (1976). Knowledge and Error. Dordrecht: D. Reidel Publishing Company.

Maxwell, J. C. (1877ed). Matter and Motion. London.

Nagel, E. (1961). The Structure of Science. Problems in the Logic of Scientific Explanation. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, Inc.

Newton, I. (1999). The Principia. Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy. Transl. By Cohen, Bernard & Whitman, Anne. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Nicolis, G. (1989). Physics of far-from-equilibrium systems and self-organisation. In The New Physics. Pp. 316-347. (Ed.) Davies, P. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Nilsson, E. (2007). “Blommar som kunde gjort Linné till Darwin,” Forskning & Framsteg. Nr 1, Jan-Feb, pp. 26-31.

Partington, J. R. (1951). A Short History of Chemistry. London.

Piaget, J. (1972). The Principle of Genetic Epistemology. Transl.: Mays, W. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

Smith, N. K. (Transl.) (1982). Immanuel Kant's Critique of Pure Reason. Kant, E. (first published 1929). London: Macmillan Press LTD.

Suppes, P. (1957). Introduction to Logic. New York: D. Van Nostrand Company.

Von Linné, Carl. (1956). A Photographic Facsmile of the First volume of the 10th Edition. London: British Museum of Natural History; 1956:20-22.

Witzig, R. (1996). The Medicalization of Race: Scientific Legitimization of a Flawed Social Construct. Annals of Internal Medicine, October Vol. 125, 8: 675-679.

By Desmond Ayim-Aboagyye

Ghana / Africa / Modernghana.com

   Comments0