Traveller-digest       Friday, August 13 1999       Volume 1999 : Number 957



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Oops... Off Topic...
Decided on system...
Re: Vilani  Stature, human origins
Alternate Game Mechanics (Re: What's the News on T5?)
Re: Comment on GT Stuff?
Re: Cool site and stuff to download
Re: Iron Chef
Re: The Babe Scale and the Gwendi Chronicle
Re: Oops... Off Topic...
Re: Vilani  Stature, human origins
Re: More back to topic?
Re: Alternate Game Mechanics (Re: What's the News on T5?)
Re: More back to topic?
Re: The Babe Scale and the Gwendi Chronicle 
Re: Iron Chef
Re: Vilani  Stature, human origins

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 13:58:45 -0700
From: "Benyamene' ZeAbe' Akella" <xrp@sierratel.com>
Subject: Re: Oops... Off Topic...

>>BZA
>>////////////////////////////////////////
>>Akella 0609 C654474-6 S kk+ hi++ as+ va+ dr+ da+ so@ zh- vi+  A523
>>IMTU tc++ ?t4 ru@ 3i+(-) c+ jt au@ st- ls+ pi+ ta@ he+
>
> Where can I generate a Traveller code like the ones above? :)
>
> Badman

http://downport.com/eaglestone/imtu.html

I am still a little hazy on the parsec#, 0609 is what I came up with, but
I'm not sure I grok the formula.
BZA

Son of the Right Hand
The Ravenous Wolf
Patriarch of Clan Hendricks
Prince of the Undeclared
Warder of the Sacred Herb
Lord of House Akella
High Epopt of the Brotherhood for the Abolition of Temporal/Spatial Reality
and the Unification of the Shekinah

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 16:17:19 -0500
From: Kenneth Bearden -- Walker Jane Productions <dreamer@brokersys.com>
Subject: Decided on system...

OK, so I have decided to return to Traveller, and here's the system I'm
going to use for this next campaign.

Kenneth.


- -----------------------



TRAVELLER     KENNETHS TWEAKS



TWEAK 1:  CAMPAIGNS BASE RULES

CT Rules Set:  The base set of rules for this Traveller campaign is the
CT version.  Items from MT and T4 will be taken to modify the set.
(Very sparingly, a mechanic may be modified from TNE).



TWEAK 2:  COMBAT RULES

CT Combat:  Use CT combat system (except for armor mods).

Combat Rounds:  Use a six second combat round.

Kinetic Energy Rule:  Use the KE rule from pg. 57 of T4.

Marginal Success:  Adapted from pg. 70 of MT.  If a hit is made on exact
count, damage is cut in half (drop fractions).

Exceptional Success:  Use the MT rule from pg. 71.



TWEAK 3:  ARMOR

Armor Value:  Use AVs from the T4 and MT versions.  As in T4, a number
of damage dice equal to the AV is subtracted from the damage dice.  The
amount left over is rolled as damage vs. the character.

Armor Type:  Use the Rigid/Flexible rule from pg. 57 of T4.



TWEAK 4:  HIT LOCATION

Hit Location Chart:  Use the hit location chart on pg. 84 of MTJ4.



TWEAK 5:  MOVEMENT

T4 Movement:  Use the T4 movement definitions starting on pg. 52 of T4.

Range Bands:  Range bands represent 15 meters (not 25 meters), as stated
in MT.



TWEAK 6:  MULTIPLE ACTIONS

Actions:  Each character is allowed to move and act in each round.  (1
action and 1 move action).

Multiple Actions:  Characters may attempt more than one action in a
single round (only one move action is allowed per round), but each
action attempted in the round incurs a penalty.  The more actions that
are attempted, the bigger the penalty to all actions taken during the
round.

+4 penalty to all actions in the round.

Penalty is cumulative for each additional action attempted.



TWEAK 7:  INITIATIVE

Initiative:  Combat will be instantaneous, not simultaneous, and
initiative will be thrown using a T4/Snapshot hybrid.

 1D + End + Dex

Leadership skill modifies the throw for the individual.  Leadership
skill can apply to the entire PC group (as noted on pg. 52 of T4) if the
character with the skill is taking an actual leadership role in the
encounter.



TWEAK 8:  TASK SYSTEM

MT Task System:  When a task system is called for during the game, use
the MT system.

Snake Eyes:  Snake Eyes constitutes a Fumble, as per the MT rules.

Marginal Success:  Success on the task throw by exact count constitutes
a marginal success, as per the MT rules.

Exceptional Success/Failure:  This is covered in the MT task system
rules.



TWEAK 9:  SKILLS

Default Skills:  Default skills, as covered in both MT and CT, are
level-0 skills.  No bonus or penalty applies when using these skills.

No Skill?  Some skills cannot be used without training.  Others can be
used, but used at a penalty.  If (A) a character does not have a skill,
(B) can attempt the skill throw without having the skill, and (C) does
not have a default skill that applies, the character may attempt a throw
on the skill with a penalty.

 -5 penalty on skill attempt



TWEAK 10:  MEDICAL TREATMENT

Medical Treatment:  Follow the rules listed on pg. 32 of TD13.



TWEAK 11:  COMBAT POOLS

T4 Pools:  Use the T4 Tactics, Str, Dex, and End Pools as listed and
modified on pg. 60 of T4.

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 14:59:01 -0600
From: "Christopher B. Thrash" <thrash@io.com>
Subject: Re: Vilani  Stature, human origins

I forwarded Bruce Johnson's post on human origins to my wife, the
anthropologist. This is her response:

>Return-Path: <RedTrowel@cs.com>
>From: RedTrowel@cs.com
>Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 10:16:41 EDT
>Subject: Re: Vilani  Stature, human origins
>To: thrash@io.com
>
>Let me give this a shot.  This is the quick and dirty version -- any 
>references I could feed you are currently in storage.  Ask me your questions, 
>though, I'm not afraid!
>
>There is only one thing that "drives" evolution: reproductive fitness.  If it 
>increases reproductive fitness, it's a go.  If it's neutral to reproductive 
>fitness, it's a go when it works and a loser when it doesn't, but it won't 
>get far.  If it's detrimental to reproductive fitness in a native environs, 
>it gets snuffed out of the gene pool.  These are the most important things
to 
>remember when discussing evolution, be it human or amoebae.  Having said 
>that...
>
>The "Out of Africa" theory mentioned goes further than you stated.  Not only 
>did species of proto-humans emerge from Africa and spread, but they were all 
>*completely* wiped out by successive emerging waves.  It wasn't just One 
>Great Migration.  These adherents claim that several waves came out, each 
>utterly destroyed by the next.  What a bunch of hooie!  No evidence to 
>support this -- how do they know each wave wasn't incorporated by the 
>previous?  How do they know there was no interbreeding?  How do they know,
if 
>butt-kicking did ensue, that the new guys were the victors?  Too many 
>questions.  Yes, the mitochondrial Eve idea was clever, but it doesn't
work.  
>mtDNA goes away *forever* as soon as one daughter of one daughter of one 
>daughter (you get the idea) doesn't have a daughter.  Boom. It's gone.  I am 
>the only female in my generation from my mother's side.  She was an only 
>child.  Her mtDNA lineage stopped with me - I don't have a daughter.  So, 
>they're saying that One Woman, some gazillion years ago, has had complete 
>lineage of daughter-producing daughters in every generation, and we are all 
>somehow related to One Woman through one of her daughters. Now that, my 
>friends, is Science Fiction.
>
>The multiple origin theory isn't as simple as it sounds.  It doesn't hold 
>that humans popped up around the world just 'cuz.  Groups migrated out and 
>either joined forces with the folks they happened upon who were already out 
>there, or they edged those folks further along, or they went past them 
>enroute to other places.  But they were all basically the same type of 
>critter, and slowly they all evolved into the humans we know and love.  They 
>didn't all evolve in the same areas, and there may be something to this, but 
>the somethings are cosmetic.  When you get to the skeleton, we're all
human.  
>When you get to the brain, we're all human.  When you get to *anything*, 
>we're all all-human.  Whether or not Neandertal is included in that is still 
>waiting for the jury.  It could be that we (and by we I think I mean Western 
>European descent folk) descended from Neandertal.  And those tricky critters 
>have been found in most places in the world where human ancestors have been 
>found -- we just call them other things, like H. erectus.  At this point, I 
>really need my notes to back me up, so I'll shut up on 
>evolution/migration/species naming.
>
>The evolution of speech is trickier.  I don't believe it happened simply 
>because of the glorious human brain.  We can speak because of a resonant 
>chamber (the larynx).  We have this little marvel of evolution because we 
>stood up.  (There is a large body of literature I can direct you to if you 
>want the skinny on upright posture.)  We stood up, the neck bones 
>straightened, and our head lost that front-jut silhouette of our 
>predecessors.  As the skull adjusted to gravity, and lots of stuff moved 
>around, the back of throat extended, and we could suddenly make noise.
There 
>was a great deal of physiology involved before the brain got involved in 
>speech.  Speaking of brains, did you know that on average, from the skulls
we 
>have (and we have a bunch), Neandertal had a bigger brain than modern
humans? 
> So much for the stupid caveman idea...
>
>So there.  I'm not quite a "real" anthropologist, but I am a real graduate
in 
>anthropology with a lot of evolutionary biology and physical anthropology in 
>my background.  Don't all jump at once, and give me time to get my notes and 
>books and stuff, and we can talk evolutionary biology all day...
>
>Sherry
>
>

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 16:59:34 -0500
From: "Kurtis Rodgers" <kurtis@fastlane.net>
Subject: Alternate Game Mechanics (Re: What's the News on T5?)

[lstTrav.LurkMode = trvFlameBait]

Hey all,

I know these game mechanics discussions are a never ending topic
'done-to-death', but its a subject near and dear to me.  Up 'til lately, it
was merely a theoretical issue for me since I wasn't running a Traveller
game.  That and my tendency to lurk vs. post kept me out of such discussions
in the past.  I am currently in serious thought about starting a new Trav
campaign, however.  My last Trav game was over ten years ago.  So I'm game.
:)

I've seen several different systems from other games mentioned in use on
this list with TUs of some kind.  Remember when GT was just another set of
common enthusiast house rules?  I am putting serious thought to using
Shadowrun (SR3) rules for a M:0 (er, M:20?) campaign.  [Me quickly dons
Rating 9 heresy armor.  :]  There are a lot reasons for this, the primary of
which is that I ran a successful SR campaign for several years with the same
group of players.  Thus, everyone is already comfortable with these rules,
but they have little to no experience with any of the existing Trav rules.

I have barely ever heard mention of SR on this list, but if there is anyone
here who is familiar with this game, I would be interested in any informed
opinions on this idea.  I'd also like to mention that I think game rules are
largely a matter of taste.  Given any group of players, some rule systems
will be inherently superior to others due to quality design, but I do not
believe in some absolute, global scale of superiority.  One size does not
fit all.

It also seems to me that SR is something of an acquired taste.  I have heard
from some RPGers in general that SR has a cool universe, but they dislike
the mechanics.  (I have heard the same thing said of many games, Traveller
being no exception).  Although we (my players and I) have some house-rules
patches for a few things that really do annoy us, on the whole I find the
basic SR task resolution system to be powerful, flexible, and fairly slick
all around.  I believe 80%-90% of the complexity overhead of Shadowrun (and
it can be quite complex) is created by advanced character development in
cyber/bioware and magic, neither of which will be relevant in MTU.

In relation to the T5 speculation: I would personally be much more
interested in a completely new 'modern' system that still captured the
general CT feel.  IMHO, this is possible.  My interest in T4.x, or a T5
derived from such, is limited to source ideas for my SR implementation.  For
example, T4 kind of dipped its toes in the shallow end of 'dice pools' with
the Tactics skill.  SR makes extensive use of dice pools, so the idea of a
Tactics Pool fits right into the existing SR mechanics.

Anyway, if there is any interest on the list for suggestions, criticisms,
questions, or the results of my 'SRT' implementation, please let me know.

Cheers,
Kurtis

[lstTrav.LurkMode = trvFullDefense]

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 15:50:28 -0600
From: "Christopher B. Thrash" <thrash@io.com>
Subject: Re: Comment on GT Stuff?

>Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 15:38:42 -0400
>From: Michael Peters <travelleri@home.com>
>Subject: Re: Comment on GT Stuff?

Ordinarily, I would answer something like this off the list -- to avoid
mispeaking myself, or being mistaken for an official representative of SJ
Games (which I am not). But I think this is of enough general interest to
justify an attempt to respond. Mr. Miller or Mr. Wiseman will please
correct *my* misperceptions, if they are listening.

>
THe main comment I wanted to throw you way was
>in reference to "Forbidden Canon". My understanding of the DGP stuff and
>reprints in general was that the ideas and concepts involved were open
>game, as long as qoutes and direct wording lifts were nt done. 

As I understand it, when Marc Miller sold SJ Games the license to produce
GURPS Traveller material, he (and they, I believe) contacted the current
holder of the DGP copyrights to see if he would participate in the deal.
That individual wanted an inordinately high fee for the material, and
therefore the license specifically excludes anything produced by DGP. Other
former Traveller licenses are still under discussion.

The original license from GDW to DGP included the provision that all
concepts and proper names created by DGP would be available to future GDW
products; the text itself, however, belongs to DGP. This relationship has
been inherited by FarFutures and the current DGP copyright holder.

SJ Games, on the other hand, is understandably leery about legal
complications in its licensed products. Their guidance to freelance GT
authors (including me) is to avoid any material or concept originally
appearing in DGP products.

The GT freelancers therefore refer to DGP as the "Forbidden Canon". Our
solution generally has been to work diligently to find a GDW precedent for
any key concept that was elaborated in DGP material. If none can be found,
we attempt to find a solution that, while not referring to DGP material, at
least does not invalidate it.

>However, if my
>interpretation is correct then a new SOP can be written, it just can be
>a direct reprint fo the DGP material. Humm, I'd really like to see this
>cleared up since SOP was a neat idea, as was some fo the other DGP
>material and it would be BAD (IMHO) to let the CONCEPTS die, 'specially
>if we didn't have to!

There are four basic problems with this --

(1) The licensing difficulties described above.

(2) I was not hired to do a reprint of Starship Operator's Manual. I have a
different set of criteria to meet:

http://www.io.com/~thrash/starship.html

(3) Some of the "neat ideas" in SOM are not compatible with GURPS
(especially GURPS Vehicles) and the GURPS Traveller material printed to
date. I have an obligation to support what has already been printed for GT.

(4) As Eris mentioned, it would in fact be *very* difficult to improve on
the original; to a certain extent, I am disinclined to try. However, just
as Far Trader was not a word-for-word rehash of Merchant Prince, nor First
In a copy of Scouts or WBH, I intend to produce a sourcebook on starships
in GT that is useful in its own right. It will necessarily overlap SOM in
many areas, but the approach will not be the same.

GT: Starships is actually a collaborative effort: I invite anyone
interested in contributing to read through the website above. The project
is on hiatus right now (while I get settled into my new assignment) but
should pick up again in September. 

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 16:54:08 -0500
From: "Smart, David J (David)" <dasmart@lucent.com>
Subject: Re: Cool site and stuff to download

GypsyComet@aol.com wrote:
> 
> "Dan Eveland" <develand@mindspring.com> types:
> 
> >Here is a (semi) brief mention of my site.
> >
> >I have updated several sections, and now also have a selection of deck
> >plans. These are PDF (Acrobat Reader version 4 is required) files drawn
at
> >25mm, so they can be output at the correct size for figures. They also
have
> >1 yard hexes on them for GURPS. I consider these deck plans much better
then
> >the published ones, as several things I saw as flaws have been corrected.
> 
>  Very nice, though you missed the big one:  The Safari Ship and both
Traders
> are the same displacement (200 tons).  Look at the real estate covered by
> all three sets of deckplans and try to convince yourself that these are
all
> the same volume...
> 
> >The Safari ship turned out especially nice, IMHO.
> 
>  I agree. The Safari ship has always appealed to me, and yours is a very
> nice rendition.

ARRGH!!!

The 'helpful' person on my company's helpdesk just deleted all my bookmarks
while poking around my harddrive with Timbuktu.

Would some kind soul please resend me Dan's URL so I can start rebuilding
all the Traveller bookmarks it took me a FREAKING THREE YEARS to collect?

Dang! What a Friday the 13th this has been!

'sigh'

Please, someone?

David

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 14:32:44
From: "Douglas E. Berry" <dberry@hooked.net>
Subject: Re: Iron Chef

At 10:38 AM 8/13/99 -0700, you wrote:

>"IRON CHEF!"

Kirsten and I vote for Battle Corndog, with Morimoto vs. a Hiver Chef.
- -- 
Douglas E. Berry       dberry@hooked.net
http://www.hooked.net/~dberry/index.html

I hate to advocate drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity to anyone,
but they've always worked for me.
             -- Hunter S. Thompson

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 15:03:02 -0700
From: "Kiri Aradia Morgan" <tiamat@tsoft.com>
Subject: Re: The Babe Scale and the Gwendi Chronicle

>"Ryder Hook" was ruggedly handsome, "
>---
>
>Ahh, so I am not the only one who has read "A whirlpool of Stars" with the
>main character, Ryder Hook.  :)
>___________________________________________________________
>

I haven't.  But apparently one of the guys I was playing with had.

Kiri

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 15:08:18 -0700
From: "Kiri Aradia Morgan" <tiamat@tsoft.com>
Subject: Re: Oops... Off Topic...

>>     You know you do not have to.  *weg*  I didn't.  One thing I would
like to add is the idea of an orgasm inducer, would make the subbies life
quite interesting, would it not?
>
>No more so that the "classic" SF weapon usually called a "neuronic whip".
Basicly fires a beam that triggers the pain nerves. May have been invented
as a "non-lethal weapon" but quickly banned in most places due to the
*tremendous* abuse potential.
>The "orgasm inducer" could have a similar history. It'd definitely *stop* a
suspect. But there might be addiction problems. Almost as bad as a tasp.
>
I had a supers character whose powers were a combo of orgasm inducer/tasp.

It was very effective.  However, a number of supervillains wanted to date
this character later, which was a problem, and then they really got mad when
they found out that the tall, willowy Asian in the black spandex and lace
was actually a slender *man*...

Kiri

>--
>Leonard Erickson (aka Shadow)
> shadow@krypton.rain.com        <--preferred
>leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com     <--last resort
>

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 15:09:16 -0700
From: "Benyamene' ZeAbe' Akella" <xrp@sierratel.com>
Subject: Re: Vilani  Stature, human origins

> Now that, my friends, is Science Fiction.

OK, but is it *good* Science Fiction? ;)

I am not really well versed on this topic, so I did some research on the
Web. I am learning a whole lot, and thought that maybe others on the list
might not know much either. I found a brief over view you might like to read
at:
http://ampere.scale.uiuc.edu/anth102/amhs_models.html
Now back to research...
BZA
////////////////////////////////////////
Akella 0609 C654474-6 S kk+ hi++ as+ va+ dr+ da+ so@ zh- vi+  A523
IMTU tc++ ?t4 ru@ 3i+(-) c+ jt au@ st- ls+ pi+ ta@ he+

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 15:12:35 -0700
From: "Kiri Aradia Morgan" <tiamat@tsoft.com>
Subject: Re: More back to topic?

>>And in ST:TNG, Data is *fully* functional.
>Programmed in multiple techniques, even.
>
I always wondered about that.  I'm surprised the slashies didn't do more
with that... given the huge numbers of techniques, I was fairly sure they
weren't all just for females.

Kiri

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 15:28:33 -0700
From: "Benyamene' ZeAbe' Akella" <xrp@sierratel.com>
Subject: Re: Alternate Game Mechanics (Re: What's the News on T5?)

> Rating 9 heresy armor.

And where might one get *that*? ;)

Seriously, though, I think the SR rules set should work well for M:0, I like
the Comp rules, and some of the vehicle stuff would be great. Like the
silloette(sp) rules. Maybe that isn't even the term used, it's been a while.
They pioneered (AFAIK) the "target per die" system Storyteller uses, and the
Condition Monitor too. How about d12's though? They give a greater range
without going too crazy (ie: d20's). Oh, and thecybernetics rules too! Joy!

Methinks I might get some SR books, as my SR arbiter took his away. :(
BZA
////////////////////////////////////////
Akella 0609 C654474-6 S kk+ hi++ as+ va+ dr+ da+ so@ zh- vi+  A523
IMTU tc++ ?t4 ru@ 3i+(-) c+ jt au@ st- ls+ pi+ ta@ he+

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 15:30:36 -0700
From: "Benyamene' ZeAbe' Akella" <xrp@sierratel.com>
Subject: Re: More back to topic?

>>Programmed in multiple techniques, even.
 But can it rotate?
Sorry, couldn't resist...
;)

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 18:42:27 -0400
From: "Keven R. Pittsinger" <jamstar@accesstoledo.com>
Subject: Re: The Babe Scale and the Gwendi Chronicle 

> >"Ryder Hook" was ruggedly handsome, "
> >---
> >
> >Ahh, so I am not the only one who has read "A whirlpool of Stars" with the
> >main character, Ryder Hook.  :)
> >___________________________________________________________
> >
> 
> I haven't.  But apparently one of the guys I was playing with had.

I missed that one.  It any good?

Keven

- -- 
tc++ tm+ tn t4- to ru++ ge+ 3i c+ jt au st- ls pi+ ta+ he+ so- vi zh sy
- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                     Science-Fiction Adventure
                                                     In Reavers' Deep

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 15:49:20 -0700
From: "Kiri Aradia Morgan" <tiamat@tsoft.com>
Subject: Re: Iron Chef

>>"IRON CHEF!"
>
>Kirsten and I vote for Battle Corndog, with Morimoto vs. a Hiver Chef.
>
That'd be fun to watch, but I don't think you can use Corndog because it's
not a natural ingredient.  I'm pret'sure that they always begin with a
fresh, natural ingredient.

Battle Corn would be amusing, though judging it would kill me dead (I'm
allergic).  Battle Dog would be more so.  What would Iron Vargr say?

Kiri

------------------------------

Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 16:03:33 -0700
From: Bruce Johnson <johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu>
Subject: Re: Vilani  Stature, human origins

Christopher B. Thrash wrote:
> 

> >There is only one thing that "drives" evolution: reproductive fitness.  If
> it
> >increases reproductive fitness, it's a go.  If it's neutral to reproductive
> >fitness, it's a go when it works and a loser when it doesn't, but it won't
> >get far. 

Say that to the approximately 80-90% of our DNA that seems to do nothing
but came along for the ride...cf: 'The Selfish Gene' ;-)

> > If it's detrimental to reproductive fitness in a native environs,
> >it gets snuffed out of the gene pool.  These are the most important things
> to
> >remember when discussing evolution, be it human or amoebae.  Having said
> >that...
> >
> >The "Out of Africa" theory mentioned goes further than you stated.  Not only
> >did species of proto-humans emerge from Africa and spread, but they were all
> >*completely* wiped out by successive emerging waves.  It wasn't just One
> >Great Migration.  These adherents claim that several waves came out, each
> >utterly destroyed by the next.  What a bunch of hooie!  No evidence to
> >support this -- how do they know each wave wasn't incorporated by the
> >previous?  How do they know there was no interbreeding?  How do they know,
> if
> >butt-kicking did ensue, that the new guys were the victors?  Too many
> >questions.

I wasn't completely up on the current debate. Stated like this the 'Out
of Africa' theory does have a lot of holes.

> >  Yes, the mitochondrial Eve idea was clever, but it doesn't
> work.
> >mtDNA goes away *forever* as soon as one daughter of one daughter of one
> >daughter (you get the idea) doesn't have a daughter.  Boom. It's gone.  I am
> >the only female in my generation from my mother's side.  She was an only
> >child.  Her mtDNA lineage stopped with me - I don't have a daughter.  So,
> >they're saying that One Woman, some gazillion years ago, has had complete
> >lineage of daughter-producing daughters in every generation, and we are all
> >somehow related to One Woman through one of her daughters. Now that, my
> >friends, is Science Fiction.

Actually, since that's _exactly_ how mtDNA works, yes, that's what their
research means. Also, there have been other studies recently, notably on
patrilineal DNA that seem to give _similar_ although not identical
results. This is the big kicker for the 'Out of Africa' theory, and
sticking point of the 'Evolved Everywhere' theory. Any transmissible
trait linked to a single gender displays this behavior. The
geneaologists got this idea _immediately_ as patrilineal family names
behave in exactly this fashion. Were we to have practiced _strict_
patrilineality, ie: we only ever get our fathers name, we would almost
all be named either Smith or Li, and the genetic clock on mtDNA goes
back a lot farther than name registries.

What this means in the light of the various theories is of course, the
muddle in the middle...it means that the last wave out of Africa
contributed a lot to our DNA. This of course doesn't mean that our
ancestors went out and kicked ass all over the earlier humans, but that
they moved rather fast and interbred everywhere. Eve and her daughters
must have been pretty good looking ;-)


> >The multiple origin theory isn't as simple as it sounds.  It doesn't hold
> >that humans popped up around the world just 'cuz.  Groups migrated out and
> >either joined forces with the folks they happened upon who were already out
> >there, or they edged those folks further along, or they went past them
> >enroute to other places.  But they were all basically the same type of
> >critter, and slowly they all evolved into the humans we know and love.  They
> >didn't all evolve in the same areas, and there may be something to this, but
> >the somethings are cosmetic.  When you get to the skeleton, we're all
> human.
> >When you get to the brain, we're all human.  When you get to *anything*,
> >we're all all-human.  Whether or not Neandertal is included in that is still
> >waiting for the jury.  It could be that we (and by we I think I mean Western
> >European descent folk) descended from Neandertal.  And those tricky critters
> >have been found in most places in the world where human ancestors have been
> >found -- we just call them other things, like H. erectus.

This mean that H. erectus is probably just a subspecies of H. sap under
the skin? This has _direct_ bearing on the very topic, meaning that if
the Ancients _did_ come down and scoop up a pile of H. erectus
populations, then scattered them about, they all _did_ evolve into h.
sapiens (vilanis, zhodani, etc, etc, etc)

> >The evolution of speech is trickier.  I don't believe it happened simply
> >because of the glorious human brain.  We can speak because of a resonant
> >chamber (the larynx).  We have this little marvel of evolution because we
> >stood up.  (There is a large body of literature I can direct you to if you
> >want the skinny on upright posture.)  We stood up, the neck bones
> >straightened, and our head lost that front-jut silhouette of our
> >predecessors.  As the skull adjusted to gravity, and lots of stuff moved
> >around, the back of throat extended, and we could suddenly make noise.

And given we were then in need of yelling like crazy, since this was
when we'd left the saftey of the trees and moved out onto the savannah,
it _was_ advantageous to be able to say "HEY HEY HEY There's a Lion over
THERE", even if it was only so that we guaranteed slower running humans
scattering to tempt the lion more than ourselves. <Wilderness mantra: 'I
don't have to run faster than the bear, just faster than _you_'>

- -- 
Bruce Johnson
University of Arizona
College of Pharmacy
Information Technology Group

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1999 #957
**********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe
"local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
