₦airaland Forum

Crystyano:
I wish I could remember the exact thread

You can't remember what's only a product of your imagination that doesn't exist in reality.

Crystyano:
But you can actually swallow and digest Otem's words

Omo ode, when I don't swallow books in my areas of discipline, why will I swallow any other book?

When this your new moniker is banned because of your stupid posts, you'll soon delete it like the other one.

Crystyano:
It's an achievement, right?

Ask Google. It may help cure your mental health problems.

macof:
Is it not the book you got this information from? Abi my eyes dey pain me?

Can you mention where I told you the Luwabi stories in the book are historical facts?

It seems some so-called educated people here don't know the meaning of possibility, might, claim.

You can read my comments again. But this time, have a dictionary handy to clarify the meaning of those words in bold.

macof:
Like lmao how the hell is this even an issue you are trying to pass as facts? Or are there actual facts you are yet to mention?

A standard dictionary will help you know what's called a fact because you obviously don't know the difference between a fact and a claim.

Again, quote where I said the Luwabi history in that book is a historical fact.

macof:
So do tell me the facts because so far you have done a horrible PR for Otem or go call otem himself here since you say he’s on nairaland

Nairaland and silly remarks.

So I'm doing PR for the book, and other two I shared above and those sites? Lols. Because when you get the book or visit the sites, I get to earn some commission?

Lols. This is so hilariously silly!

It's not my business whether you read any book mentioned here or not.

Expressions like if you're interested, if that's necessary, the author claims, in my comments show you don't even know what's called a PR.

macof:
Are you in a cult? Is this book some kind of precursor to a cult initiation?

Are you the founder of this cult that only exists in your head?

If all it takes to become a cultist is to read a book and go through a language, that means many doctors and professors that work as archeologists, egyptologists, and linguists are cultists since many of such people have worked with and translated strange languages in the writings of ancient Egyptians, Sumeria, Mesopotamia.

Heck, students even study these things in school. They've automatically become cultists.

See childish thinking lols

macof:
Oh i have nothing against the book being a best seller
But you know it can’t be taken seriously if the author doesn’t know the difference between fiction and fact? You can’t write a good fiction and try to sell it as facts and expect people to take you seriously

Frank herbert who wrote Dune did not claim he was writing facts
Jk.rowlings who wrote Harry Potter didnt claim it was facts
J.r.r. Tolkien who wrote the lord of the rings didn’t claim it was real events
George R.R. Martin who wrote the Song of Ice and Fire series didn’t claim he was telling the history of the world

Africans like Chinua Achebe who wrote Things fall apart didn’t calm Okonkwo was his ancestor or someone from his village
Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie who wrote half of a yellow sun didn’t claim she was giving account of the biafran war

Maybe you should seek good authors who know what they are writing then your authors will be best sellers stop hiding under the guise of racism, tell your man to write a good book
If there are many facts do well to highlight the facts because all you have said are just hilarious make believe and fantasy

Lols. Do you have this book? Have you read it? How many pages are in it?

I'm sure you can't answer any of these questions because you don't have it and haven't read it.

Africans are a funny lot. Who criticizes or comments on a book he hasn't read? SMH.

It's glaring you've not even read it.

You can keep your opinions about the book (you don't know anything about) to yourself. They're of no use to me.

The author has given the appropriate title to his book. No one cares whether you regard it as a book of facts or fictions.

That's up to the individual reader to decide.

Crystyano:
If your definition of promotion is 'tell to worship"

Then , I don't have to make sense to you with the word 'promotion'


Well
I don't think there's a First Cause
I don't think there's anything like 'all things'



You wanna know why??



It's because Otem himself told me he assumes that existence is a sequence with a beginning




I don't have to ASSUME


I can deduce from my observation of the impossibility of anything to exist alongside nothing THAT there's no limit or there's neither a beginning nor an end towards what is real

Okay. Can you post where he made the highlighted assumption here?

In his book and threads, he never said anything about assuming.

Ask Ethan: What should everyone know about quantum mechanics?

Quantum physics isn't quite magic, but it requires an entirely novel set of rules to make sense of the quantum universe.

KEY TAKEAWAYS
1. The laws of physics always apply to every object in the universe, but on quantum scales, the behavior is far from intuitive.

2. At a fundamentally quantum level, everything is both wave and particle, and outcomes can only be predicted probabilistically.

3. Still, it's the most successful, most powerful framework ever developed to describe reality, and everything in existence obeys its rules.

The most powerful idea in all of science is this: The universe, for all its complexity, can be reduced to its simplest, most fundamental components.

If you can determine the underlying rules, laws, and theories that govern your reality, then as long as you can specify what your system is like at any moment in time, you can use your understanding of those laws to predict what things will be like both in the far future as well as the distant past.

The quest to unlock the secrets of the universe is fundamentally about rising to this challenge: figuring out what makes up the universe, determining how those entities interact and evolve, and then writing down and solving the equations that allow you to predict outcomes that you have not yet measured for yourself.

In this regard, the universe makes a tremendous amount of sense, at least in concept.

But when we start talking about what, precisely, it is that composes the universe, and how the laws of nature actually work in practice, a lot of people bristle when faced with this counterintuitive picture of reality: quantum mechanics.

That’s the subject of this week’s Ask Ethan, where Rajasekaran Rajagopalan writes in to inquire:

“Can you please provide a very detailed article on quantum mechanics, which even a… student can understand?”

Let’s assume you’ve heard about quantum physics before, but don’t quite know what it is just yet.

Here’s a way that everyone can — at least, to the limits that anyone can — make sense of our quantum reality.

Before there was quantum mechanics, we had a series of assumptions about the way the universe worked.

We assumed that everything that exists was made out of matter, and that at some point, you’d reach a fundamental building block of matter that could be divided no further.

In fact, the very word “atom” comes from the Greek ἄτομος, which literally means “uncuttable,” or as we commonly think about it, indivisible.

These uncuttable, fundamental constituents of matter all exerted forces on one another, like the gravitational or electromagnetic force, and the confluence of these indivisible particles pushing and pulling on one another is what was at the core of our physical reality.

The laws of gravitation and electromagnetism, however, are completely deterministic.

If you describe a system of masses and/or electric charges, and specify their positions and motions at any moment in time, those laws will allow you to calculate — to arbitrary precision — what the positions, motions, and distributions of each and every particle was and will be at any other moment in time.

From planetary motion to bouncing balls to the settling of dust grains, the same rules, laws, and fundamental constituents of the universe accurately described it all.

Until, that is, we discovered that there was more to the universe than these classical laws.

1.) You can’t know everything, exactly, all at once. If there’s one defining characteristic that separates the rules of quantum physics from their classical counterparts, it’s this: you cannot measure certain quantities to arbitrary precisions, and the better you measure them, the more inherently uncertain other, corresponding properties become.

Measure a particle’s position to a very high precision, and its momentum becomes less well-known.

Measure the angular momentum (or spin) of a particle in one direction, and you destroy information about its angular momentum (or spin) in the other two directions.

Measure the lifetime of an unstable particle, and the less time it lives for, the more inherently uncertain the particle’s rest mass will be.

These are just a few examples of the weirdness of quantum physics, but they’re sufficient to illustrate the impossibility of knowing everything you can imagine knowing about a system all at once.

Nature fundamentally limits what’s simultaneously knowable about any physical system, and the more precisely you try and pin down any one of a large set of properties, the more inherently uncertain a set of related properties becomes.

2.) Only a probability distribution of outcomes can be calculated: not an explicit, unambiguous, single prediction.

Not only is it impossible to know all of the properties, simultaneously, that define a physical system, but the laws of quantum mechanics themselves are fundamentally indeterminate.

In the classical universe, if you throw a pebble through a narrow slit in a wall, you can predict where and when it will hit the ground on the other side.

But in the quantum universe, if you do the same experiment but use a quantum particle instead — whether a photon, and electron, or something even more complicated — you can only describe the possible set of outcomes that will occur.

Quantum physics allows you to predict what the relative probabilities of each of those outcomes will be, and it allows you do to it for as complicated of a quantum system as your computational power can handle.

Still, the notion that you can set up your system at one point in time, know everything that’s possible to know about it, and then predict precisely how that system will have evolved at some arbitrary point in the future is no longer true in quantum mechanics.

You can describe what the likelihood of all the possible outcomes will be, but for any single particle in particular, there’s only one way to determine its properties at a specific moment in time: by measuring them.

3.) Many things, in quantum mechanics, will be discrete, rather than continuous. This gets to what many consider the heart of quantum mechanics: the “quantum” part of things.

If you ask the question “how much” in quantum physics, you’ll find that there are only certain quantities that are allowed.

Particles can only come in certain electric charges: in increments of one-third the charge of an electron.

Particles that bind together form bound states — like atoms — and atoms can only have explicit sets of energy levels.

Light is made up of individual particles, photons, and each photon only has a specific, finite amount of energy inherent to it.

In all of these cases, there’s some fundamental value associated with the lowest (non-zero) state, and then all other states can only exist as some sort of integer (or fractional integer) multiple of that lowest-valued state.

From the excited states of atomic nuclei to the energies released when electrons fall into their “hole” in LED devices to the transitions that govern atomic clocks, some aspects of reality are truly granular, and cannot be described by continuous changes from one state to another.

4.) Quantum systems exhibit both wave-like and particle-like behaviors. And which one you get — get this — depends on if or how you measure the system.

The most famous example of this is the double slit experiment: passing a single quantum particle, one-at-a-time, through a set of two closely-spaced slits. Now, here’s where things get weird.

If you don’t measure which particle goes through which slit, the pattern you’ll observe on the screen behind the slit will show interference, where each particle appears to be interfering with itself along the journey.

The pattern revealed by many such particles shows interference, a purely quantum phenomenon.

If you do measure which slit each particle goes through — particle 1 goes through slit 2, particle 2 goes through slit 2, particle 3 goes through slit 1, etc. — there is no interference pattern anymore.

In fact, you simply get two “lumps” of particles, one each corresponding to the particles that went through each of the slits.

It’s almost as if everything exhibits wave-like behavior, with its probability spreading out over space and through time, unless an interaction forces it to be particle-like.

But depending on which experiment you perform and how you perform it, quantum systems exhibit properties that are both wave-like and particle-like.

5.) The act of measuring a quantum system fundamentally changes the outcome of that system.

According to the rules of quantum mechanics, a quantum object is allowed to exist in multiple states all at once.

If you have an electron passing through a double slit, part of that electron must be passing through both slits, simultaneously, in order to produce the interference pattern.

If you have an electron in a conduction band in a solid, its energy levels are quantized, but its possible positions are continuous.

Same story, believe it or not, for an electron in an atom: we can know its energy level, but asking “where is the electron” is something can only answer probabilistically.

So you get an idea. You say, “okay, I’m going to cause a quantum interaction somehow, either by colliding it with another quantum or passing it through a magnetic field or something like that,” and now you have a measurement.

You know where the electron is at the moment of that collision, but here’s the kicker: by making that measurement, you have now changed the outcome of your system.

You’ve pinned down the object’s position, you’ve added energy to it, and that causes a change in momentum.

Measurements don’t just “determine” a quantum state, but create an irreversible change in the quantum state of the system itself.

6.) Entanglement can be measured, but superpositions cannot. Here’s a puzzling feature of the quantum universe: you can have a system that’s simultaneously in more than one state at once.

Schrodinger’s cat can be alive and dead at once; two water waves colliding at your location can cause you to either rise or fall; a quantum bit of information isn’t just a 0 or a 1, but rather can be some percentage “0” and some percentage “1” at the same time.

However, there’s no way to measure a superposition; when you make a measurement, you only get one state out per measurement.

Open the box: the cat is dead. Observe the object in the water: it will rise or fall. Measure your quantum bit: get a 0 or a 1, never both.

But whereas superposition is different effects or particles or quantum states all superimposed atop one another, entanglement is different: it’s a correlation between two or more different parts of the same system.

Entanglement can extend to regions both within and outside of one another’s light-cones, and basically states that properties are correlated between two distinct particles. If I have two entangled photons, and I wanted to guess the “spin” of each one, I’d have 50/50 odds.

But if I measured the spin of one, I would know the other’s spin to more like 75/25 odds: much better than 50/50.

There isn’t any information getting exchanged faster than light, but beating 50/50 odds in a set of measurements is a surefire way to show that quantum entanglement is real, and affect the information content of the universe.

7.) There are many ways to “interpret” quantum physics, but our interpretations are not reality.

This is, at least in my opinion, the trickiest part of the whole endeavor. It’s one thing to be able to write down equations that describe the universe and agree with experiments.

It’s quite another thing to accurately describe just exactly what’s happening in a measurement-independent way.

Can you?

I would argue that this is a fool’s errand. Physics is, at its core, about what you can predict, observe, and measure in this universe.

Yet when you make a measurement, what is it that’s occurring? And what does that means about reality? Is reality:

1. a series of quantum wavefunctions that instantaneously “collapse” upon making a measurement?

2. an infinite ensemble of quantum waves, were measurement “selects” one of those ensemble members?

3. a superposition of forwards-moving and backwards-moving potentials that meet up, now, in some sort of “quantum handshake?”

4. an infinite number of possible worlds, where each world corresponds to one outcome, and yet our universe will only ever walk down one of those paths?

If you believe this line of thought is useful, you’ll answer, “who knows; let’s try to find out.”

But if you’re like me, you’ll think this line of thought offers no knowledge and is a dead end.

Unless you can find an experimental benefit of one interpretation over another — unless you can test them against each other in some sort of laboratory setting — all you’re doing in choosing an interpretation is presenting your own human biases.

If it isn’t the evidence doing the deciding, it’s very hard to argue that there’s any scientific merit to your endeavor at all.

If you were to only teach someone the classical laws of physics that we thought governed the universe as recently as the 19th century, they would be utterly astounded by the implications of quantum mechanics.

There is no such thing as a “true reality” that’s independent of the observer; in fact, the very act of making a measurement alters your system irrevocably.

Additionally, nature itself is inherently uncertain, with quantum fluctuations being responsible for everything from the radioactive decay of atoms to the initial seeds of structure that allow the universe to grow up and form stars, galaxies, and eventually, human beings.

The quantum nature of the universe is written on the face of every object that now exists within it.

And yet, it teaches us a humbling point of view: that unless we make a measurement that reveals or determines a specific quantum property of our reality, that property will remain indeterminate until such a time arises.

If you take a course on quantum mechanics at the college level, you’ll likely learn how to calculate probability distributions of possible outcomes, but it’s only by making a measurement that you determine which specific outcome occurs in your reality.

As unintuitive as quantum mechanics is, experiment after experiment continues to prove it correct.

While many still dream of a completely predictable universe, quantum mechanics, not our ideological preferences, most accurately describes the reality we all inhabit.

Source: https://bigthink.com/starts-with-a-bang/basics-quantum-mechanics/

Please, post more updates.

https://www.nairaland.com/3780438/eta-ntagba

A guy that can put something so profound as the one in that thread together is nothing but a genius. Then, such a feat isn't even humanly possible (to formulate several contents like that) and still invent a new language that looks natural without any help from an early or higher being that religious people call god.

Considering all this, some are still wondering why Otem's fans on Nairaland take him seriously. Lols.

At least, I've been following his works since 2017.

Crystyano:
Otem says there's a God called the totality of existence




He says the other gods are in a cage yet that other guy is saying Otem doesn't promote the existence of Gods


Otem is confused

Yes, he says many of gods of religions have been subjected to a cage in the spiritual realm with their consciousness frozen scientifically (made unconscious) by the gods that are science-oriented because we're in the Age of Aquarius where organized religion will decline drastically and science and technology will grow exponentially.

That's a bold claim, which might be true or not. Whether in a cage or not, I have not seen any signs showing Allah, Jehovah, and the other gods of religions he talked about are in existence consciously.

If you're widely read, you'd know when the writer was still a Christian, there were few other people who aren't even Nigerian who also made the claim that some gods have caged the consciousness (soul) of their contemporaries worshipped in religions as God.

I can share one of the books with you written in 2012 (it's online) by an European author, four years before Otem started compiling his own book, which was released in 2018.

Now, where did Otem promote any god in particular? Where did he tell you to worship a particular god or you don't know a promoter of a god tells people to worship his own god as the only true God?

Where did he tell you this?

The Otemic philosophy has a unique perspective on God, which he calls the totality of existence or a great source of energy or a great consciousness without a specific form, name, religion, language, tribe.

You don't expect an author who compiled that book of history not to write a chapter on the Source or Origin of all things in existence or the First Cause.

The thread below details his scientific model (which even looks wondrous) describing this God he talks about. If you even research the sign (that looks like the DNA structure) he uses to represent God, you'll be able trace its origin to ancient Egypt.

https://www.nairaland.com/5994369/book-basotesh

He calls this God by other names in the book such as the Universe, the interconnectivity of all things, and it's not something to be worshipped or prayed to.

So your assertion is absurd.

Or where did he tell you to worship this unknown God he talks about or that the God wants you to worship it?

When it comes to God's existence or non-existence, the agnostic position is the best as far as I'm concerned.

macof:
That some random guy in a random book just happens to know personal details including the name of a homo erectus or is it homo sapiens (you called it both at different times) who lived 140,000 years ago

The line between facts and fiction shouldn’t be this thin and blurry

Come on people what’s going on?

Lols. You obviously haven't read his book. I already gave some of the reasons above.

If that book was written by a white author, it would have become a bestseller in no time with the author commanding millions of fans and followers.

Any smart person that read the book would know there are many facts in it, and many unverified claims as well (like the story of Luwabi above).

Who has now mixed up facts with fictions?

macof:
Lmao

This cracked me up, how do you people take these things seriously??
You know there are actual paleontologists and anthropologists right?
Is this Otem one?

OtemAtum is in the best position to answer this question regarding his educational background, but from what I know on Nairaland he didn't study any of those courses or History.

But what I can say is regarding the question is:

Which university did Herodotus, Faraday, Newton, and similar great thinkers attend to be able to write seminal works that millions have studied in courses for hundreds of years?

Were any of these figures professors in their field?

Which school of music did great artists like Da Vinci, Tupac, MJ, and many others go to have such wonderful gifts to produce records, which thousands of students have studied in school?

In history, many people have been able to leave indellible marks on the sands of time even without receiving formal education.

If one isn't educated within the four walls of a classroom, it doesn't mean such a one isn't educated at all.

Thomas Edison understands this deeply when he said, "genius is one percent inspiration and ninety-nine percent perspiration."

That one percent inspiration can be what makes all the difference in deciding whether a person lives and dies a common man or a god. Someone like Prof Wole Soyinka would also understand this clearly.

Looking at Otem's name, the source of the histories should be clear enough to people that know the various names given to Atum in ancient Egypt.

Then, anyone that has read the book with an open mind will recognize the genius of the writer.

People take him seriously because of many reasons:

1. The Seriot language, which has the elements of a natural language
2. It's beyond the capability of a single person to put the content of that book together with that depth and still invent a new language that looks natural
3. The author uses an approach that looks scientific and encourages skepticism and critical thinking
4. Some of the assertions of the author have a lot of depth and scientific explanations
5. Many of the histories in the book have a lot of depth and are consistent with some other books corroborating the author's assertions.
6. Atum is the creator of ancient Egypt and is the chief source of the author (ancient Egypt and their pyramids are fascinating)
7. The book doesn't promote any religion or god. It's a book of history and philosophy.

There are other reasons, but these ones are okay.

Whenever I read the book, the picture of Herodotus comes to mind.

Which school did the great thinker attend that earned him the title, "the father of history"?

During his time, some of his contemporaries also mocked him, saying that his works wouldn't stand the test of time. But they were wrong.

Workch:
many people think that the Doble slit experiment infers that two people can look at the same thing and see something different.

That's not what double slit experiment actually means

True.

Workch:
A lot of people misunderstand the double slit experiment.

How so?

Nice one, OP. But I advise you live wisely if you're based in Nigeria because religious people in this country can make one's life a living hell for being a freethinker.

macof:
Lmao

This cracked me up, how do you people take these things seriously??

Is it the existence of homo sapiens, homo erectus, and other human species or what in particular?

Workch:
Oh you think this is straightforward to a lot of people?

Not at all.

A001:
There are four fundamental forces of nature (universe):
1. Strong (nuclear) force
2. Electromagnetic force
3. Weak (nuclear) force
4. Gravity

In the subsequent updates, I'll discuss these forces briefly. More forces, I believe, will still be discovered in the coming years.

There are likely candidates of a fifth fundamental force of nature.

Still on the four fundamental forces of nature


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=669QUJrF4u0

When confronted with the question, "how did the universe come into existence?" this video (and others that will be posted on this thread) offers an insightful explanation to the problem rather than the simple, vague answer, "God created the universe."

True.

Workch:
How of you will get the joke?

You need a decent physics knowledge

It's quite straightforward. The picture is an illustration of Young's double slit experiment (showing that light and matter can display characteristics of both classically defined waves and particles) and also applies to the quantum superposition principle.

BlueMann:
Alright, but didn't do much in truth. Few occasions when he dropped deep to receive the ball and link up play, but I can remember him having just one shot that was blocked.

Okay.

BlueMann:
How many goals from King Kai today?
One? Perhaps two? Maybe even three ?

How did he perform in the first half?

pamcode:
lol a conqueror's historical pov will always overshadow that of the conquered. We Africans should know this and know peace

Yea. That's true.

Havertz10:
let the game end first, we will revisit these assertions, discovery by definition encompasses understanding the fundamental function of the thing discovered, just seeing it or using it first isn't discovery.

mungo park retains his W


there is nothing special in the name of a country, some can be based on a central principle like united states of america, some can describe landscape, landmarks and the rest, it's not valuable, why is the op of Nigeria a valuable issue that we should argue about?

Don't bother. I'm not interested in having the discussion with you.

I'd be willing to engage history buffs, which you aren't.

About the game, I couldn't watch the first half but will join the second half.

Interesting screenshots. When next anyone utters the farcical statement that Flora Shaw coined the name Nigeria, it's not true. It's one of the distorted histories taught to Africans by the white colonial masters and supremacists.

Why this guy just disappear from Nairaland since January?

emmyluizzz:
sense is leaving you

He's right now. People with a background in Physics or Geography will understand.

Olu317:
4. The author's claim of revelation seem interesting ,especially the assertion that the language of revelation is dead.

Before I can engage in any further discussion with you on the book, you'd have to read what you're criticizing (if you think that's necessary).

It's unreasonable to criticise and critique literature you know next to nothing about its content, merely judging the book by its cover.

So, I won't be engaging you further on this matter. It's a waste time.

Olu317:
Indeed such is quite funny ,considering the fact the same author identified orunmiela's timeline on earth,which is weird because a vastly renowned olúfá cannot claim the time frame of the existence of orunmiela who reigns eternally.

Again, you don't know anything about the book or the author you're criticizing or his sources.

I don't see the point in answering this question when the reasonable thing for you to do is to learn about what you're criticizing.

But you've not done that; you just made hasty conclusions replete with fallacious and erroneous statements.

Olu317:
5. Clarify the scientific conjecture such ọpọnifá which is as the components of world.

I won't clarify anything. I don't see why that's necessary.

It's a waste of time for me to be discussing a book or an author with you, who you know little about but have already reached conclusions hastily, ignorantly.

Olu317:
6. Assumption rose from the period the information on orunmiela was mentioned as humanoid.

Again, you're speaking from the position of ignorance about the literature. The reasonable thing is to first learn about the book, the author, and who his sources are.

In the 2018 edition that the author sent to many on Nairaland, the chapter on Orunmila hasn't been decoded at all from the original language of the revelations. The author says there will be a new edition soon.

I won't be engaging you further on this Otem's book unless you first learn about what you're criticizing (that's if you think doing so is necessary) .

Olu317:
7. You are wrong on my perspective as it relates to humans deified as gods/goddesses or seen as gods/goddesses .Contrarily, orisha are used for mankind and celestial bodies.

You sound like the average religionist when discussing all these deities and prefer to talk about them as supernatural, spiritual beings, who are objects of great mystery.

But I don't like such an approach. It's not healthy for intellectual discourse on the subject because it seeks to obfuscate information on these deities so they can't be scrutinized.

That's one reason why I consider Otem's book a seminal work because the author or his sources don't approach things supernaturally or spiritually but practically and scientifically.

They're revealing the lost histories and the identity of all these gods and goddesses people worship and regard as supernatural entities.

Anyone that reads this book and research some of the claims of the author will stop being an adherent of a religion and looking at these deities superstitiously and supernaturally.

The approach of the author encourages skepticism, carrying out research on claims before taking them as truth, and critical thinking.

That's an encouraging attitude for pedagogy and intellectualism, especially in this part of the world where critical thinkers are few and far between.

Olu317:
9. Risha-God
Risha- spirit messengers
Risha- defied humans
Risha- humans

This classification is vague, nothing concrete. It's better you learn the scientific methods of classifying human species. Those are comprehensive.

They're more detailed and give an estimate of the various epochs of humanity.
For a start, these links can help:
https://humanorigins.si.edu/education/introduction-human-evolution

https://humanorigins.si.edu/research/age-humans-evolutionary-perspectives-anthropocene

These aspects of science and evolution of humans covered in those resources are an ongoing research areas and subject to further improvement in the future like every other discipline in science.

Combining these sources with great works like Otem's book and "Sapiens: a Brief History of Humankind" by Yuval Noah Harari, an Israeli professor of History (free copy is available online), will educate anyone that seeks to learn (with an open mind) the history of humanity on this planet.

Otem's book traces the origin of humanity to all these gods and goddesses (deities) worshipped in religions and also evolution. It takes the origin back to at least 3.5 billion years ago (unlike millions of years in mainstream science) and provides a unique system of classification, different from the conventional ones used by mainstream scientists but with similarities.

According to the literature, the origin of humanity lies in both intelligent design and evolution, and not only evolution according to mainstream science.

I also share these views with the author, but so far, no scientific evidence is available to show both intelligent design and evolution are responsible for humans' origin.

The available bodies of data (evidence) are only in support of evolution for now.

With time and more understanding of the universe, scientists will make breakthroughs in these areas and the truth will be known.

We're yet to explore 99% of the universe, which means much more mysteries in the universe are unknown, which is why we need more people to become scientists instead of religionists.

Olu317:
In nutshell, understanding these things make separate gods and goddesses from God Almighty. This is explicitly arranged in ifaodu. The only prominent personality in Ifaodu is Ẹ̀làà, who talked about everything and every personality on earth, whom are classified into three groups: darkskin,light brownish-lightskin and white,ranging from albinism.

The native classification has its importance and uses. But the modern classifications and scientific methods and techniques are better and more detailed.

Crucial aspects of classifying humans are dating technologies and genetic science. Both are lacking in the corpus.

Olu317:
11. How did the highlighted gave thanks to Otem's conceive theories?

The statement is clear enough. Reading a book like Otem's will teach African Christians and Muslims the true histories of the gods they worship, encourage them to research about the origin of their religions (which is African traditional religions and others predating Christianity), and respect and value the native cultures and traditions.

The author says he was sent by the pagan gods and goddesses of Africa to connect Africans back to their roots.

The majority of Christians and Muslims don't know that almost all the practices in their religions have their roots in paganism, in Africa.

Personally, the interest I now have in our local cultures and traditions is because I read the book and did my own research on the author's assertions.

Olu317:
It is obvious that you do underestimated Yoruba religion. So, let me leave to this funny flaws and sees the two screenshots

Until some years ago, I didn't know much about the Yoruba religion even though I'm Yoruba. That's why I consider Otem's book a masterpiece.

What I have learnt in some years now and —what I'm still learning — about our cultures is due to the fact that I read the book. If not, I'd still continue to see the beautiful indigenous cultures as demonic because of religious indoctrination from childhood.

Anyone who sees his native culture as evil or demonic is in the mental slavery of (foreign) religion.

The screenshots are spot-on .

The reparation of looted bronzes by the UK, toeing the same path as Germany.

More of things like this.

https://www.nairaland.com/6826855/benin-bronzes-great-grandfather-sculpted-looted#107176446

1Sharon:
Some religious people will have a problem with believing humans came from great apes but instead believe God made man from dust with no question.

Lols.

Battle for the Benin Bronzes:
A Benin Bronze plaque depicting warriors of the oba on display at the British Museum.

A collection of intricately made brass and bronze sculptures and plaques from the palace of Oba Ovonramwen Nogbaisi
Created by specialist guilds working for the royal court.

The plaques provide a historical record of the Kingdom of Benin, including the first contact with Portuguese emissaries.

Many of the pieces were made for ancestral altars of past kings and queen mothers.

The term "Benin Bronzes" is also used to refer to artefacts made from ivory, leather, coral and wood.

In February 1897, the British launched a punitive expedition against the kingdom after seven British officials and traders were killed
Benin City was overrun; British forces looted the Royal Palace, which was burnt down. The oba, or king, was sent into exile.

Museums in Europe have agreed to lend on rotation some of their bronzes to a new museum to be built in Benin City more than six decades after Nigeria's independence.

Source: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-59065274

On the bustling streets of Nigeria's Benin City, residents cannot wait to get their Bronzes back - for them their return symbolises reparations for some of the wrongs committed by British troops during the colonial era.

A statue of a cockerel is one priceless artefact soon to be welcomed home, after Jesus College handed it over to a delegation from Nigeria at a ceremony at Cambridge University on Wednesday.

It is one of thousands of metal sculptures and ivory carvings made between the 15th and 19th Centuries and looted by British troops in 1897 from the West African kingdom of Benin, in modern day Nigeria's Edo state.

"I feel happy that the work of my great-grandfather will be coming back to Benin," says Monday Aigbe, who, like his ancestor, is a sculptor.

He runs a foundry in Benin City, the capital of Edo state, where his craftsmen work quietly on brass statues.

The skilled workers fashion a myriad of shapes out of metal, including busts of the Oba - the title of the traditional king of Benin - as well as statues of animals and carved doors.

They have been making bronzes here for six generations. In the middle of the foundry is a large statue of Mr Aigbe's great-grandfather.

He worked for Oba Ovonramwen Nogbaisi when the raid took place on the Royal Palace more than 120 years ago.

"It makes me upset because they came, they destroyed the palace, they made my great-grandfather run from the city to the village," says Mr Aigbe.

The loot was amongst the most valuable African artworks ever made - and was sold or gifted to private collectors and museums around the world.

With more and more of the stolen artefacts expected back in Nigeria - on Thursday the University of Aberdeen in Scotland will also be returning one of its Bronzes - Mr Aigbe plans to take his children to see them when they go on display.

Grand designs
This will be at the Edo Museum of West African Art - a grand initiative by the governor of Edo state to house all the returned Benin Bronzes.

The authorities say it will not be completed for at least five years - construction on the building, set to be designed by famous British-Ghanaian architect David Adjaye, has yet to start.

But for Theophilus Umogbai, deputy director and curator of the National Museum Benin, this is no excuse to delay returning the Bronzes.

The artefacts are akin to a library as they tell the history of the kingdom of Benin, he says.

"You now have empty shelves. The return of those objects will be like filling those shelves. There's a lacuna in our history because those objects were taken away."

The British government has argued that the Benin Bronzes "properly reside" in the British Museum, which has the largest collection of them in the world - with more than 900 pieces.

Hosting the ancient objects in London also ensures they are accessible to the world, the UK authorities say.

But it is an argument that Mr Umogbai takes exception to, saying that most Nigerians will never get to see them there given visa and travel costs.

"I went to the British Museum because my trip was sponsored. I wouldn't have been able to go otherwise, even as a public servant.

"It's easier for those abroad to visit us, because of the economic buoyancy of Europe, compared to Africa."

For him the Bronzes simply do not belong in Western museums.

"When I saw the Bronzes in the British Museum I was happy at first. Then that thought was replaced by the feeling that these objects were incongruously sitting where they shouldn't be. They should be back home."

The past 'feeds inspiration'
Twenty-eight-year-old artist Joe Obamina agrees - as he believes it is the past that inspires the future.

In his sunlit studio in Benin City he makes pixellated paintings - inspired by his childhood spent indoors, playing Tetris.

From a distance the paintings look like a collection of multicoloured boxes, small symbols peppering the odd square. But if you squint, or better yet, watch the paintings through your phone camera, the overall image becomes clear.

"Each pixel is a continuous story. Besides the overall image, I tell other stories inside each cube," says Mr Obamina.

Despite using modern imagery, some of his work does reflects the history and culture of Edo state.

One painting depicts the Idia mask, one of the most famous Benin Bronzes. It is said to be a carving of the face of the mother of an oba from the first half of the 16th Century.

"My painting of the Idia mask was inspired by the ongoing restitution of the Benin Bronzes," says Mr Obamina.

"We grew up without seeing the actual mask, just the replicas. Our heritage has been scattered, so I had to paint something to depict that: the scattered heritage that is abroad.

"But nevertheless we still have our own identity and cultural practices. That's why when you take a picture of it with your phone you can still see the mask in full."

Mr Obamina's paternal great-grandfather was a sculptor. Although he does not know whether he worked on any of the ancient bronzes, he believes that seeing them will help connect him to his past.

"I'm a Nigerian, I'm an Edo citizen - so I can't really detach myself from that, it's rooted in me.

"These artefacts being returned is going to mean a lot, because it will help me connect with my ancestors."

Source: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-59065274

Homo bodoensis lived more than half a million years ago.

Scientists have named a new species that may have been the direct ancestor of modern humans.

Homo bodoensis may help to untangle how human lineages moved and interacted across the globe.

The newly proposed species, Homo bodoensis — which lived more than half a million years ago in Africa — may help to untangle how human lineages moved and interacted across the globe.

Although modern humans, Homo sapiens, are the only surviving human lineage, other human species once roamed Earth.

For example, scientists recently discovered that the Indonesian island Flores was once home to the extinct species Homo floresiensis, often known as "the hobbit" for its miniature body.

Deciding whether a set of ancient human fossils belongs to one species or another is often a challenging problem open to heated debate.

For instance, some researchers suggest that skeletal differences between modern humans and Neanderthals mean they were different species.

However, other scientists argue that because there is recent abundant genetic evidence that modern humans and Neanderthals once interbred and had fertile, viable offspring, Neanderthals should not be considered a single species.

In the new study, researchers analyzed human fossils dating from about 774,000 to 129,000 years ago (once known as the Middle Pleistocene and now renamed the Chibanian).

Previous work suggested modern humans arose during this time in Africa, while Neanderthals emerged in Eurasia.

However, much about this key chapter in human evolution remains poorly understood — a problem paleoanthropologists call "the muddle in the middle."

Chibanian-era human fossils from Africa and Eurasia are often assigned to one of two species: Homo heidelbergensis or Homo rhodesiensis.

However, both species often carried multiple, and often contradictory, definitions of the skeletal characteristics and other traits that described them.

Recent DNA evidence has revealed that some fossils in Europe dubbed H. heidelbergensis were actually from early Neanderthals. As such, H. heidelbergensis was a redundant name in those cases, the scientists noted.

Similarly, recent analyses of many fossils in East Asia now suggest they should no longer be called H. heidelbergensis, the researchers added.

For instance, many facial and other features seen in Chibanian East Asian human fossils differ from those seen in European and African fossils of the same age.

In addition, Chibanian fossils from Africa are sometimes called both H. heidelbergensis and H. rhodesiensis.

The scientists also noted that H. rhodesiensis was a poorly defined label that was never widely accepted in science, due in part to its association with controversial English imperialist Cecil Rhodes.

To help deal with all this confusion, the researchers now propose the existence of a new species, H. bodoensis, named after a 600,000-year-old skull found in Bodo D'ar, Ethiopia, in 1976.

This new name would encompass many fossils previously identified as either H. heidelbergensis or H. rhodesiensis.

The researchers suggest that H. bodoensis was the direct ancestor of H. sapiens, together forming a different branch of the human family tree than the one that gave rise to the Neanderthals and the mysterious Denisovans, which Siberian and Tibetan fossils suggested they lived about the same time as their Neanderthal cousins.

"Giving a new name to a species is always controversial," study co-lead author Mirjana Roksandic, a paleoanthropologist at the University of Winnipeg in Canada, told Live Science.

"However, if people start using it, it will survive and live."

In this new classification, H. bodoensis will describe most Chibanian human fossils from Africa and the Eastern Mediterranean. Many Chibanian human fossils from Europe would get reclassified as Neanderthals.

The names H. heidelbergensis and H. rhodesiensis would then disappear. Chibanian human fossils from East Asia may get their own names with more research.

"We are not claiming to rewrite human evolution," Roksandic said. Instead, the researchers seek to organize the variation seen in ancient humans "in a way that makes it possible to discuss where it comes from and what it represents," she explained.

"Those differences can help us understand movement and interaction."

In the future, the researchers want to see if they can find any H. bodoensis specimens in Europe from the Chibanian, Roksandic said.

The scientists detailed their findings online Thursday (Oct. 28) in the journal Evolutionary Anthropology: Issues News, and Reviews.

Source: https://www.livescience.com/new-human-species-named-bodoensis

dawnomike:
Maybe we should just let go of the past and focus on the future... Different fossils keep bringing different twists to the evolution theory.

You sound like the average Nigerian.

Maybe they should just scrap the departments of archeology and paleontology in schools across the world then since the Western universities and governments that spend billions of dollars yearly to fund research in these fields are stupid.

That confused commenter that has no job offline and keeps himself busy by following me from one thread to the other, is better ignored.