The reason why it sounds counterintuitive is that neurology has the brain upside down. It teaches us that formal thinking occurs in the neocortex, and we need all that huge brain mass for that.
But in fact it works like an autoencoder, and it reduces sensory inputs into a much smaller latent space, or something very similar to that. This does result in holistic and abstract thinking, but formal analytical thinking doesn't require abstraction to do the math or to follow a method without comprehension. It's a concrete approach that avoids the need for abstraction.
The cerebellum is the statistical machine that gets measured by IQ and other tests.
To further support that, you don't see any particularly elegant motions from non mammal animals. In fact everything else looks quite clumsy, and even birds need to figure out flying by trial and error.
It isn't extremely high. I have no idea what you imagine that people used to eat. The typical pre 20th century diet was near 100% carbohydrate based, most people ate meat once a weak, if at all, and fat was scarce. The now typical meat-with-every-dish diet is a post WW2 development.
But we never get an explanation from them as to what exactly is IN the junk food or ultra-processed food that causes the disease.
You don't get it, because 1. there is something VERY CLEARLY wrong with it, and 2. what is wrong with it is at odds with what is hammered into them over and over.
The problem with IQ is that it measures the cerebellum. People who lack abstract thinking will learn to rely on the patterns and statistics, and intuitively score high on the tests.
The second problem is that people who don't have abstract thinking don't comprehend abstract thinking, and so they think that people with abstract thinking are dumb.
That could explain how the lead poisoning crowd took over.
No, there won't be any retractions, you will be "educated" that you are stupid, "anti science", and too stupid to understand the newly discovered "fact".
There is nothing wrong with sugar, people can't burn it, because the body needs lead to break it into pyruvate. Then you need arsenic to input that into the krebs cycle. The mitochondria need a wide assortment of metals (likely at least copper, arsenic, selenium, mercury, cadmium and possibly chromium) when you don't get those, your mitochondia begin to fail, and the tissues where they do turn into "fat tissue".
I suspect they don't do the research for real, they do some kind of simulation, and write it was in mice. They do know the metal changes the protein, but they incorrectly claim that the version without it works, but in reality the one with it does. They could'n make such an error if they actually did the research for real.
There is no evidence whatsoever that lead was widely known to be toxic, until a group of conspirationists took over the academia.
In fact such a belief couldn't have been widespread. The historical quotes appear to be fabricated.
In fact it's essential. Roman sewers and sanitation quickly flushed it down the drain, by 235 it was in chaos, long distance trade was no longer possible and a thousand years long dark age ensued. The original depletion happened deep in prehistory, the most major event happening around 26kya. Also by ice cores, substantiated by geological changes and mammoth skeletons.
The explanation is that IQ measures the cerebellum, and the declining nutrition and increasing brain damage forces people to rely more on the cerebellum, the statistical engine, instead of abstract thinking.
The angular resolution depends purely on the aperture diameter, not the f-number. There should be no difference between capturing the image in high resolution, and blowing it up for a lower resolution sensor.
All that should be needed is a 200mpx sensor that can output the entire frame in 12mpx, and 12mpx of the central area in full resolution. It's similar to how our eyes work.
I think the best solution would be to keep samples around in somewhat reachable parts. Occassionally, people will get sick, and learn that the signs mean danger, without causing an accident of catastrophic proportions, and recognize the huge radiation signs that label the actual storage as ominous signs.
I've been warning people for a long time that the drug only fakes the signal of fullness from the gut, and only makes you starve yourself. It doesn't actually fix anything.
Ornamentation makes perfect sense as long as it consumes rare resources.
When you can find enough resources to build expensive ornamentation in good times, you can probably survive hard times decently well, only your ornamentation will suffer.
But when you use all the resources that you can get for breeding as much as possible in good times, the population will probably collapse in bad times.
I don't get why so many such analyses get so focused on the textile industry, as if it was the only thing that mattered. It was the time of the rise of electricity, chemistry, and internal combustion engines. And England was an especially slow adopter - the traffic in London was entirely based on horses into the 20th century, long after many major cities adopted electric trams.
Sometimes I like to think that these silurians stayed around, and decided to "civilize" us, not realizing that in the meantime we evolved intelligence that exceeds theirs beyond their comprehension.
So they forced their civilization upon us, which they presumably consider highly advanced, but to us, it's nothing but primitivism repulsive to a healthy human.
Only if you assume it went the seemingly straightforward way, but it could have been more complex. Maybe at first there was no particular limit to unicellular life, and there were unicellular lifeforms both small or large. But the big ones had a terrible problem avoiding getting parasitized by microscopic ones. As, there is one wall to breach, and once it gets in, it's in for good. So maybe eventually one of the bigger ones developed multicellularity as a kind of internal defence wall system, rather than multicellular life evolving from tiny cells clumping together. This gave it an enormous advantage at larger sizes, as all pathogens had to invade the cells one by one, and most of the macroscopic unicellular organisms perished, and some unicellular eukaryotes evolved since then.
Loans cause a depression when there is plenty.
A farmer takes a loan when the price of wheat is $2 a bushel. But the economy improves, there is plenty of wheat for everybody, so the price of wheat halves. The farmer can't react to it by growing less wheat, he has a loan to pay, he may even need to increase his production to be able to pay even with the reduced prices. This is happening to everybody. Any time money is made, part gets used to pay off debts, and isn't spent on goods that others produced, which further drives the prices down. You will soon reach a point when nobody will buy any more wheat for any price. You go bankrupt, and the bank gets your farm, but the farm is worthless, nobody's going to buy a farm in such an economy from the bank. The bank now has no money to fulfill its obligations. The money it lent you, and which was lost, is still on other people's accounts, so the bank can't give them their money when people demand to withdraw it. Nothing about it can be fixed by giving further loans - loans for consumption only create more debt in the process, and there is no opportunity for bussiness lians, as there is already too much of everything.
Overproduction was the problem at the time, not shortages. There was a shortage of money caused by loans - it was impossible to make money to both buy all the goods and pay all the loans. This is why money lending has to be banned, as it makes the markets stuck like this and causes a depression when the economy improves.
Neither is true. 9kHz, with two sidebands, means that the transmitted audio is limited to 4.5kHz, which is way too low to sound good. It was this, and not the noise, that made it sound much worse.