Nick, it sort of reminds me of my AtomTotality theory in a way. For
there is a author in England around 1930 who wrote a book on the
history of the Atomic theory of Democritus and who makes claim that
Democritus perhaps (emphasize the perhaps) thought the entire Universe
itself could be one big atom. Then there is the passage in Carl
Sagan's book COSMOS where in a paragraph mentions the idea that "our
universe" is an electron inside a bigger universe both nested up and
nested down. And Sagan proceeds to say that this is an "ancient idea"
but gives no specifics as to what he means by ancient idea. And one
can see that the Democritus Universe-Atom is different from the
Electron-Universe Nested Up and Down. Then I came along in 1990 and
said essentially the same as the Democritus Universe Atom.

But, Nick, the difference I made is that I assigned a specific atom, a
specific element and a specific isotope 231Pu. In other words, I gave
it the ultimate in taking the idea Seriously.

Obviously if Democritus had the idea of a Universe-Atom he could not
have given it specifics for the Chemical elements as we know them
today were unknown 2,000 or more years ago. Impossible for Democritus
to make a Atom-Universe specific.

And Sagan's idea of nesting is different and is not as specific
oriented. But if Sagan had been serious or any of the believers of the
nested idea could have emerged into specifics and said something like
perhaps the observable universe is the last electron of a specific
chemical element.

I do not deny that other humans have had the idea that the Universe is
an elementary particle and even an atom. But, if any of my
predeccessors were serious. Actually believed in that idea. Then they
should have come forth with some specifics.

That is exactly what I did in year 1990. I believed in the
AtomTotality theory and I thus said the entire Universe is one big
atom where dots of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies and this atom
is 231Pu and the night sky of galaxies is the 5f6 of 231Pu and that is
the reason why most of the mass of the universe is hidden in the
nucleus and the reason that microwave background radiation is
blackbody radiation and that is the reason the Universe has two
different ages (Sandage 20 billion years and Freedman 8 billion years)
etc etc I can go on and on as to how this theory agrees with
observations.

My point Nick is that I agree the Stonethrowing theory is old and
hundreds of years old. But if anyone has taken it seriously they would
have understood that there exists unique bones of the human species
designed by "Stonethrowing behaviour" and which do not exist in any
ape skeletons nor in any nonhuman fossil skeletons. That Stonethrowing
behaviour came into existence first and then it created bipedalism.

Pickford became specific with bones on Orrorin when he proved Orrorin
femur groove implied bipedalism. By doing so, his Orrorin disproves
the Savannah Hypothesis.

But no-one except myself is replacing the Savannah Hypothesis with the
Stonethrowing theory. And I am serious because I state the specifics
that there exists unique bones of Orrorin that proves Orrorin was a
Stonethrower. Senut, Pickford's partner in discovery of Orrorin found
a humerus. She also found several finger bones. No skull of Orrorin
was found. But no-one is allowed to examine all of the Orrorin bones
for the unique Stonethrowing signatures. Especially the crests on the
humerus. It would be nice to have a full elbow of Orrorin.

Nick, there have been numerous Neanderthal fossil bones found. Yet if
anyone took the Stonethrowing theory seriously before me, would have
compared the bones to human and chimp bones of modern day and found
many unique signatures for Stonethrowing. They would have realized
that Neanderthal genetics did not allow Neanderthal to properly throw
stones and rocks and due to this fact would have been the prime reason
for the extinction of Neanderthal species as they encountered the
stonethrowing species of their age. In fact, all of the hominid
species who were less proficient in throwing would have been extincted
by the *most proficient* Stonethrower species. And the bones of the
less proficient throwers are different genetically from the bones of
the most proficient.

Neanderthal could throw overarm and could throw long distance and
could lob short distance of a heavy rock, but Neanderthal could not do
that throwing as proficient as Cromagnon.

So, Nick, I grant the Stonethrowing theory had existed for hundreds of
years, but few, perhaps no-one took it seriously to make the patterned
detail search into the bone morphology of the fossil record. Nor to
apply physics to detail how the bones must genetically change in order
to get to the stage of modern man who can throw 100 mph fast balls in
baseball. Who can pick up a rock weighing many times his own body
weight and accurately lob it onto a predator or rival standing nearby.

Stonethrowing theory existed hundreds of years in the past, but none
have taken it seriously. To take it seriously means finding the
Specifics and those specifics are the unique bone signatures-- the
unique genetics.

Archimedes Plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots
of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies