maanantai, 15. lokakuu 2018

Alkkariyhtyhmän valehtelupotaskaa muka Neuvostoliiton tieteestä

TYHMÄLÄSSÄ EI OLE ALKEELLISIMPAANKAAN FAKTANTARKASTUKSEEN PYSTYVÄÄ VÄKEÄ

https://historianet.fi/tiede/neuvostoliitto-suunnitteli-voittamatonta-apinamiesarmeijaa

Neuvostoliitto pyrki maailmanvaltaan muun muassa lääketieteellisten kokeiden ja lajien risteyttämisen avulla.

10. oktober 2018 av Therese Boisen Haas

Neuvostoliitto suunnitteli voittamatonta apinamiesarmeijaa

Pohjoisnavan sulattaminen valtavan padon avulla,vanhuuden voittaminen nuorella verellä ja apinamiesten armeija ovat vain muutamia esimerkkejä Neuvosto­liitossa keksityistä villeistä ideoista, joissa tiede piti valjastaa valtion palvelukseen. "

HM: Apinajuttu perustuu tämän englanninkielisen Wikin lainaaman lähteen mu-kana science-fiction-kirjailija Eremei Iudovich Parnovin jutuille ja hänen jostakin muka löytämäl-leen ”anomukselle” neuvostohallitukselle ”tutkimusprojektista”. Fiktio on har-sittu kokoon käyttäen mm. erästä löysästi todenperäistä tapausta, joka tapahtui Ranskassa.

9785790520419-us-300.jpg

Fantasiakirjailija Jeremei Judovits Parnov


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ilya_Ivanovich_Ivanov

https://www.brown.edu/Research/Primate/LPN48-1.html#center

”… The most disturbing distortion of the center’s history has been the sensational “revelation” in the press and on national television that the center was created for the purpose of crossing humans with apes to breed new races of primate. In the late 1990s, the science fiction writer E. Parnov obtained documents related to the foun-ding of the center, which he claimed were previously classified. These included a “Project Decree of the Scientific Section of the Soviet of the People’s Commissars (USSR government): Petition by the Institute of Experimental Endocrinology”, which he cited often in highly distorted or fictional reports. For example, in an article, “Wo-men for Monkeys” (Parnov,1998), he reported attempts by Professor Il’ia I. Ivanov, Director of the Physiology Division of the Moscow Institute of Experimental Veterina-ry Medicine, “to cross humans with apes,” first in Africa and then at the Sukhum primate center. Parnov writes, “Virtually unlimited resources were allotted.”

Parnov artificially knits together his “discovery” with a host of unrelated, often distant events from the same era. These include shocked reference to gonadal transplants from nonhuman primates by S. A. Voronov, who in France conducted extensive but ultimately unsuccessful attempts to restore sexual function to elderly men, a goal reached only recently through pharmacological treatment of erectile dysfunction.

Parnov further included the confiscation by Russian secret police of the manuscript of M. Bulgakov’s novel Heart of a Dog. In the novel Bulgakov explored the potential consequences of transplanting the pituitary gland of a drunken donor into a stray dog, which becomes more human-like in its mission to clear the city of “vagrant quadru-peds” (cats). (The work is generally considered a biting satire of social climbers and crass opportunists in the early Soviet era.) Excerpts from documents in those “special files”, writes Parnov, “would strike fear into the heart of even the most hardened of brutes.” The goal, he alleges, was “to flout the laws of God and man, to bring forth a breed of ‘Yahoo Sovieticus’, dumb, obedient slaves to perform heavy labor.” All of this was cited as evidence that the center was intended to create hybrids and develop a new breed of worker.

After Parnov’s publication of such provocative accounts,a series of similar reports ap- peared in the press and on television, where the theme of hybridizing species at Su-khum was intertwined with stories of the abominable snowman and other wonders, including aliens from outer space.Not only journalists but also professional scientists, such as A. Potapov of the Russian Military Medical Museum, the medical historian, T. Grekova, and other scholars joined the fray. For several years running, a govern-ment channel television series “Rossiya” has shown a production written by O. Shishkin and directed by D.Demin with the title “Red Frankenstein”.The sensationa- listic title persists to this day even though, within the film itself, the point is made that Ivanov was not a Frankenstein. Half-truths are mixed with rumors and outright false-hoods, but with no word about Ivanov’s true objectives and scientific activities, his actual role in establishing the center, or the critical scientific questions facing medical primatology during that time.

From the first, these writers proclaimed the “revelation of secrets” and the uncovering of long-standing “mysteries of the KGB” that were based with few exceptions on infor-mation readily available in open archives of the Sukhum center, in the Leningrad Ar-chive of the Russian Academy of Sciences, and in the personal archive of Professor Ivanov at the Academy of Sciences’ Institute of Natural History and Technology in Moscow. Ivanov’s research proposal, his “Report on the Expedition to Africa”, his proposal for the creation of a primate center, and other pertinent materials are all available to anyone interested.

Several authors have reported that Stalin was impressed by the prospect of “cross-breeding humans with apes” and of creating a “new breed” of people. We have no in-tention to issue an apologia for Stalinism or for Stalin’s “organs of surveillance”, parti-cularly in relation to the scientists and staff of the Sukhum center.They suffered dear-ly from the political repression of the times.Ivanov himself was ruined. Nestor Lakoba, an outstanding and devoted local patron of the center, died as a result of NKVD (People’s Commissariat for Internal Affairs) intrigue. The distinguished Soviet scien-tist and organizer of research at the center, Academician P. F. Zdrodofsky, was impri-soned,as were the talented director, Pavel V.Lebedinsky,and employees Dyachenko, Bogdanov, and Fel’dman, who built the North Laboratory Building. Another who suf-fered significant persecution at the hands of “the organs of surveillance” was D. I. Mi-minoshvili, a former prisoner of war and military hero, who joined the center to lead a world-renowned research effort on social stress and hypertension in primates.

Few are aware that during the repression years these “enemies of the people” com-pleted for publication two volumes of scientific reports on research conducted at the center. By the early 1960s they had accumulated more than 500 finished but unpub-lished reports for the literature. The decades-long delay in publication deprived other institutions, which were establishing research primate colonies around the world, of valuable knowledge compiled at the Sukhum center. Of course, it also deprived the center of priority in credit for discoveries on the acclimatization and adaptation of primates for laboratory research. By the time its findings were published the center was no longer the sole institution to have addressed such challenges by systematic scientific research.

Attempts by the media to portray as history reports that so cavalierly distort the true origins and accomplishments of this famous center should not go unchallenged. In 1925, when the decision was made to create a primate center, Stalin was still far from ascending to the status of “Great Leader” of the Soviet Union. He was not concerned with nonhuman primates and is quite unlikely to have known of the initiative by N. A. Semashko, then Minister of Public Health, and other Moscow scientists to establish the center.The Politburo itself did not then know who was to emerge as Great Leader; a mortal battle for power was in progress.

In a televised program, Parnov was introduced as an “expert on the history of the Sukhum primate center”. He had written, “It is unlikely that anyone would guess what really was being done there during those long years” (italics added). The truth is that from its inception and throughout its 80-year history there was never an attempt to hybridize apes, much less to cross-breed apes with humans. Professor Ivanov had proposed cross-breeding experiments early on, but his purpose was merely to deter-mine the degree of phylogenetic relationship between apes and humans. There was no absurd thought to create a “new breed of human”. In the spring of 1927, before the center was established, he had conducted an experiment in Africa that involved arti-ficial insemination of three chimpanzee females with human sperm. The attempt took place under formidable conditions in Conakry, then part of French Guinea, in West Africa. Two of the animals died on the ship between Dakar and Marseilles. Autopsies of the two, conducted on the ship, and of the third, by a pathologist at a local Sukhum hospital, yielded no evidence of conception. The experiment terminated before the center existed.

The Russian primate center was founded on August 24, 1927, the date that the first animals arrived. Professor Ivanov was never a staff member of the center. In fact he visited there only once for a few days in the early summer of 1928. He was a member of a team sent to inspect the new facilities. The center had no great apes at the time of his visit.

Later, in October, 1928, the center obtained six chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) and five orangutans (Pongo pygmaeus), together with 20 baboons (Papio hamadryas). The animals were obtained through the German firm, L. Rueh. They were shipped from Genoa, Italy, with transfer through Batumi, a port city on the Black Sea coast south of Sukhum. The great apes were so ill that some were accepted only on con-dition that they survive in a healthy state. Several died even before the supplier departed. Only the younger, sexually immature animals survived. The unsuccessful outcome of this delivery led to a long lawsuit with the Rueh firm. The last group of apes received at the center before World War II consisted of five chimpanzees, which arrived in the summer of 1930. They were accompanied by 11 macaques and 16 ba-boons. During those early years almost no ape survived at the center for more than a year and a half; only one lived longer, an orangutan, which died in 1933.

In short, neither Ivanov nor any other investigator ever conducted great ape hybridization experiments at the center.

Ilya Ivanovich Ivanov
Ilya ivanov.jpg
Ilya Ivanov, 1927
BornAugust 1 [O.S. July 20] 1870
Shchigry, Kursk gubernia, Russian Empire
Died20 March 1932 (aged 61)
NationalityRussian
Alma materUniversity of Kharkiv
Known forartificial insemination
Scientific career
Fieldsbiology

H: " Talvivehnä: Darwinin ylenkatsominen johti nälänhätään

Uuden superviljan piti poistaa nälkä lopullisesti Neuvosto­liitosta. 

Niin lupasi agronomi Trofim Denisovitš Lysenko,joka väitti 1930-luvulla keksineensä, miten karu Siperia voitaisiin muuttaa tuottoisaksi viljelymaaksi.

Lysenkon suunnitelman ensimmäinen osa oli ihan hyvä. Hän oli tehnyt isänsä tilalla kokeita, joissa hän altisti siemeniä kylmälle. 

Hautaamalla siemenviljaa lumi­kasoihin hän kehitti talvivehnän, joka kylvettäisiin syksyllä ja kestäisi talvehtimisen maassa. Siten se voisi hyötyä pitkästä kasvu­kaudesta heti kevään koittaessa.

Suunnitelman toinen osa oli kuitenkin katastrofi.Lysenko ja neuvostojohtajat nimittäin ylenkatsoivat Darwinin oppia hankittujen ja geneettisten ominaisuuksien erosta ja uskoivat, että hankittu kylmänkestävyys siirtyisi automaattisesti eteenpäin.

Lysenko kylvi siis edellisen sadon siementä jäätyvään maahan sellaisenaan, ja sadon epäonnistuminen johti nälänhätään.

darwin-Tk9MckH-Il66w4voqdZLSA.jpg

Talvivehnän piti todistaa Lysenkon teoria siitä, että vilja ”oppisi”  itsestään kestämään kylmyyttä.

© Polfoto & Shutterstock "


Lysenkon geenimielipiteet eivät vaikuttaneet ruokatilanteisiin, sillä leipäviljaa viljeltiin pääasiassa jäätymättömillä alueilla.

Lysenko tutki ensin pohjoisten, parempilaatuisten lajikkeiden viljelyä etelässä ja näi-den siemeniä jäädytettiin, koska sulaminen oli sitten itämisen signaali joillekin lajik-keille. Ne lajikkeet eivät yleensä kestäneet etelän tuholaisia eivätkä kasvitauteja.

Sitten hän yritti toisin päin: parantaa mitä erilaisimpien kasvien pakksenkestävyyttä ja siirtää pohjoisemmaksi. Hän oli oikeassa siinä, että kasvailla oli erilaisia simenten pakkaskäyttäytymisen mekanismeja, jotka vaihtuivat tosin osin perinnöllisesti, epigeneettisesti.

Kuten Ilja Ivanovilla, Lysenkollakaan ei ollut mitään tekemistä ihmistieteiden kanssa.

https://hameemmias.vuodatus.net/lue/2011/09/trofim-lysenko-ei-edustanut-noudattanut-eika-muuttanut-neuvostoliiton-tieteen-ideologiaa-1998

Lysenkoa ei ikinä tuomittu mistään huijauksesta eikä hän edes menettänyt akateemi-kon arvoaan, nostettiin vain ns. hyllylle aktiivisesta tutkimuksesta. Häntä pidettiin tavallisena väärässä olijana.



Veripankki: Nuoren veren piti hidastaa ikääntymistä

51-vuotias lääkäri Aleksandr Bogdanov etsi Stalinin siunauksella parannusta ikääntymiseen.

Hän halusi siirtää nuorten ihmisten verta vanhemmille, ja tavoitteena oli lopulta luoda koko neuvosto­kansalle yhteinen verenkierto.


Tehtyään 11 onnistunutta verensiirtoa itselleen Bogdanov muun muassa väitti, että hänen kaljuuntumisensa oli hidastunut. 12. verensiirto oli kuitenkin kohtalokas. 

7. huhtikuuta 1928 hän sai 21-vuotiaan opiskelijan veren mukana tuberkuloositartunnan. 

Hän kuoli kaksi viikkoa myöhemmin. Kokeet lopetettiin, mutta Bogdanovin veren­siirtokeskus jatkoi toimintaansa. "


Tohtori, lääkäri, kansanedustaja, menshevikki, puoluejohtaja (ideologi) Aleksandr Bogdanov oli sama mies jonka ernst machilaista, kautskylaista filosofiaa Lenin kumosi filosofisessa pääteoksessaan Materialismi ja empiriokritisismi.

Bogdanon johti ns. otzovisteja eli ryhmää, joka vaati kieltäytymistä osallistumasta tsaarin neuvoa-antavaan Duumaan. Stalin säesti häntä lshevikkien puolelta, ja epäili tsaarin kutsuneen kolle Duuman vain tappaakseen sopivan tilaisuuden tullen sinne kokoontuneet vaarallisimmat kilpailijansa. Bolshevikit laittoiuvatkin sitten Duuman vaaleihin C-joukkueen. menshevikit ja eserrät laittoivat tärkeimmät oikeat johtajansa.

https://encyclopedia2.thefreedictionary.com/Bogdanov%2c+Aleksandr+Aleksandrovich

” Bogdanov, Aleksandr Aleksandrovich

(pseudonym of A. A. Malinovskii; other pseudonyms, Verner, Maksimov, and Riado-voi). Born Aug. 10 (22), 1873, in Sokolka, Grodno Province; died Apr. 7,1928, in Moscow. Economist, philosopher, political activist, and experimental scientist.

Bogdanov graduated from the medical department of the University of Kharkov in 1899. He participated in the Narodnik (Populist) movement and in 1896 became a member of the Social Democratic Party. In 1903 he sided with the Bolsheviks and was elected to the Central Committee at the third (1905),fourth (1906),and fifth (1907) congresses of the RSDLP. Even at that time, Bogdanov’s theoretical differences with V. I. Lenin made themselves apparent; however, they did not affect the possibility of collaboration between the two men. In a letter to A.M.Gorky, Lenin wrote: “In the sum- mer and autumn of 1904, Bogdanov and I came to an agreement as Bolsheviks and made that tacit alliance that set philosophy aside as a neutral zone and… gave us the possibility of jointly carrying out during the revolution … the tactic of revolutionary social democracy” (Poln. sobr. soch., 5th ed., vol. 47, p. 142).

From 1905 to 1907, Bogdanov and L. B. Krasin headed the Bolshevik military techni-cal group.After being arrested and exiled from the country,Bogdanov returned to Rus- sia illegally and served on the editorial boards of the Bolshevik press publications (Proletarii, Vpered and Novata Zhizn’). On the question of Bolshevik participation in the Third State Duma, Bogdanov took the position that this duma should be boycot-ted. In 1908 he headed the group of so-called Ultimatumists, who protested against the work of the Bolsheviks in legal bodies, and was one of the organizers and lec-turers at the Capri school, from which the factional Vpered (Forward) group later arose. He was later an organizer and lecturer at a similar school in Bologna. In 1909, Bogdanov was expelled from the party for factional activity. During World War I he took an internationalist stand. After the October Revolution he became a member of the Communist Academy and gave lectures on economics at Moscow University. In this period Bogdanov opposed the policies of the party primarily in the field of culture. In 1918 he became an ideologist of Proletkul’t (Proletarian Culture) and participated in the organization of the so-called Proletarian University. After 1921 he devoted him-self entirely to scientific experiments, primarily in the fields of gerontology and hema-tology. Bogdanov was the organizer and director of the first institute for blood trans-fusions in the world (1926), now called the Central Order of Lenin Institute for Hema-tology and Blood Transfusions. He died as a result of an experiment in blood trans-fusion that he performed on himself. His name was then conferred on the institute.

The evolution of Bogdanov’s philosophical views went through four stages. The first three were elemental materialism (The Fundamental Elements of the Historical Out-look on Nature,1899);fascination with the energetics of W.F.Ostwald (Cognition From the Historical Viewpoint, 1901); and the transition to mechanism and Machism (Empi-riomonism: Articles on Philosophy, books 1–3, 1904–06). The fourth and last stage is connected with Bogdanov’s denial of philosophy in the traditional sense and his sub-stitution for it of strictly scientific values. In his view, philosophical concepts such as spirit, matter,and substance are essentially “idols and fetishes of cognition” which are brought into being by the labor relations of particular epochs and do not make any sense outside those epochs (see Essays on the Philosophy of Marxism, St. Peters-burg, 1908, pp.215–42). Truth, for Bogdanov, is a form in which collective experience is organized (see The Philosophy of Living Experience,1913). Regarding the Marxist dialectic as a form for the organization or ordering of knowledge, Bogdanov advoca-ted his own “organizational dialectic” as a more complete form (see Tectology,part 3). Production relations, in his view, are in essence “groups of ideological combinations which organize at the primary level” (Empiriomonism, book 3,St. Petersburg, 1906, p. 54,footnote) and therefore “social existence and social consciousness are, in the pre- cise sense of these words, identical” (From the Psychology of Society,St. Petersburg, 1906, p. 57). “Whatever ’exact’ meaning Bogdanov may have invented for the terms ’social existence’ and ’social consciousness,’ there can be no doubt that the state-ment we have quoted is incorrect” (V. I. Lenin, Poln. sobr. soch., 5th ed., vol. 18, pp. 342–43). Bogdanov’s conception was criticized by Lenin, who categorized his philo-sophical views as idealistic and reactionary. At the same time Lenin stressed that “personally, Bogdanov is a sworn enemy of reaction in general and of bourgeois re-action in particular” (ibid., p. 346). In his work The Universal Science of Organization (vols. 1–2, 1913–17), Bogdanov proposed the idea of creating a science of general laws of organization, which he called “tectology”; thus,he became one of the pioneers of the systems approach in modern science. It has been noted in a number of recent investigations by Soviet and foreign authors that some of the propositions of Bogda-nov’s tectology anticipated the ideas of cybernetics (the principle of feedback, the idea of constructing models, and so forth). Bogdanov’s mechanistic errors were also reflected in tectology.

Bogdanov was the author of several economics works, including A Short Course in Economic Science (1897), which was praised highly by Lenin (see Poln. sobr. soch., vol. 4, pp. 35–43). Bogdanov reviewed economic development from primitive society to socialism. He was one of the first to correctly evaluate the establishment of trusts and syndicates as “the highest form of capitalism.” Bogdanov developed the Marxist concept of the theory of value in connection with the history of the development of trade. However, in his later works (Introduction to Political Economy, 1914, and A Course in Political Economy, vols. 1–2, 1910–19), he viewed value from the standpoint of the “energetics approach.”

Bogdanov was also the author of science fiction novels about the future of society — Red Star (1908) and The Engineer Menni (1912).
WORKS
Revoliutsiia i filosofiia. St. Petersburg, 1905.
“Filosofiia sovremennogo estestvoispytatelia.” In Ocherki filosofii kollektivizma, collection 1. St. Petersburg, 1909.
Bor’ba za zhiznesposobnost’. [Moscow], 1927.
“Predely nauchnosti rassuzhdeniia (Doklad . . . ).” Vestnik Kommunisticheskoi Akademii, 1927, book 21, pp. 244–290.
REFERENCES
Lenin, V. I. Poln. sobr. soch., 5th ed., part 2. Moscow, 1970. Page 418. (Index volume.)
Asmus, V. F. “Logicheskaia reforma A. Bogdanova.” Vestnik Kommunisticheskoi Akademii, 1927, book 22.
Setrov, M. I. “Ob obshchikh elementakh tektologii A. Bogdanova, kibernetiki i teorii sistem.” Uch. zap. kafedr obshchestvennykh nauk vuzov g. Leningrada 1967, issue 8.
Belova, A. A. “Odnaiz pamiatnykh stranits proshlogo.” Problemy gematologii i perelivaniia krovi, 1967, no. 6, pp. 54–57.
Chistova, S. P. “Rol’ A. A. Bogdanova v razvitii sovetskoi meditsiny.” Sovetskaia meditsina, 1967, [no.] 6, pp. 147–50.
Kotarbiński, T. “Rozwój prakseologii.” Kultura i Spoleczenstwo, 1961, vol. 5, no. 4. ”

Bogdanov oli mitä urhoollisin ja kunnoitettavin tohtori ja hoitomies ja myös myös poliitikko, mutta hänellä oli yksi iso ongelma kuten Lysenkollakin: hän oli yhdessä isossa asiassa periaatteellisesti väärässä, joron jäljillä.

Hän pyrki bolshevikkipuolueeseen, mutta häntä ei sinne huolittu Stalin ei ottanut Leninin kuoleman jälkeenkään.

Vernsiirto keuhkotaudista parantuneelta toivottomalle potilaalle on toimiva hoitome-netelmä. Sillä pelastettiin mm. Ho Tshi Minh ja myöhempi NATO:n ja CIA:n pääpsy-kologi, kova pavlovisti kanadalainen Donald O. Hebb. Mutta silloin vaan ei tunnettu veriryhmiä eikä Rh-tekijöitä, joten se oli aina riskaabeli. Tohtori oli itsekin parantunut tubista, ja kelpasi siis myös parantamaan verellään. Hänkuoli tällaisen toimenpiteen seurauksena, potilas sellvisi, eräs parikymppinen sotilaspoika, ja kuoli n. 90 -vuotiaana 90-luvulla.

https://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1908/mec/



topbillede-ezRbd0G_sKSdSXAqOdPmkw.jpg

Supersotilas: Uusi laji voittaisi ihmiset ja jopa jumalat

Vuonna 1925 Stalin käski maan tiedeakatemian tutkijoita ottamaan yhteyttä biologiin nimeltä Ilja Ivanovitš Ivanov, sillä hän uskoi tämän voivan luoda Neuvostoliitolle mutanttiarmeijan, jonka supersotilaat noudattaisivat mukisematta käskyjä eivätkä tuntisi kipua.

Kansainvälisesti tunnustettu lisääntymisbiologi Ivanov oli 15 vuotta aiemmin esitellyt luonnontieteellisessä kongres­sissa ajatuksen siitä, että risteyttämällä apina ja ihminen voitaisiin luoda uusi vahva laji. 

Stalin uskoi, että tällaisista apina­ihmisistä koottu armeija saisi muut maailman maat vapisemaan pelosta ja tunnustamaan Neuvostoliiton ylivertaisuuden.

Uusi laji veisi Stalinin mielestä myös pohjan pois kaikilta uskon­noilta, sillä se todistaisi, että ihminen – eikä mikään jumala – pystyi luomaan aivan uusia lajeja. 

Vuonna 1926 Neuvostoliiton johto rahoitti Ivanovin tutkimusmatkaa Länsi-Afrikkaan, missä hän yritti hedelmöittää kolmea simpanssinaarasta ihmisen sukusoluilla. 

Kokeen epäonnistuttua hän palasi Neuvostoliittoon mukanaan noin 15 apinaa ja perusti tutkimuskeskuksen Suhumiin Georgiaan. 

Siellä naarasapinat kuolivat pian, jolloin useat neuvostoliittolaiset naiset tarjou­tuivat vapaaehtoisesti hedelmöitettäviksi apinan sukusoluilla, jotta he saisivat kunnian synnyttää ensimmäiset ”uudet ihmiset”. 

Ennen kokeen alkamista vii­meinenkin apina, Tarzan-niminen oranki, kuitenkin kuoli vuonna 1929.

Epäonnistuminen ajoi Ivanovin epä­suosioon kommunistipuolueessa. Kokeet lopetettiin ja Ivanov joutui Siperiaan vuonna 1930. Hän kuoli vuonna 1932. "

Valetta ja hölynpölyä.

Kaikki osumat Googlella ”ihmisen riteyttämisestä” ja keinosiemennyksen keksijä ja käyttönottaja Ilja Ivanovits Ivanovista (1870 – 1932) vievät virolaiseen huumorikirjallisuuteen. "

Risto Koivula

Kommenttisi odottaa hyväksyntää.

Valetta ja hölynpölyä.

Kaikki linkit ”ihmisen riteyttämiseen” ja keinosiemeenyksen keksijä ja käyttäänottaja Ilja Ivanovits Ivanoviin (1870 – 1932) ovat virolaiseen huumorikirjallisuuteen.

https://encyclopedia2.thefreedictionary.com/Ivanov%2c+Ilia

” Ivanov, Il’ia Ivanovich

Born July 20 (Aug. 1), 1870, in the city of Shchigry, in present-day Kursk Oblast. Died Mar. 20, 1932, in Alma-Ata. Soviet biologist and professor (1907).

Ivanov graduated from the University of Kharkov in 1896.He worked at the State Insti- tute of Experimental Veterinary Science (1917–21, 1924–30), the Central Experimen-tal Station on Questions of the Reproduction of Domestic Animals (1920-24),the Mos- cow Higher Zootechnical Institute (1928–30), and the Kazakh Veterinary and Zoo-technical Institute (1931–32). He initiated the study of the problems of the biology of the propagation of farm animals and worked out a zootechnical method of artificial in-semination,which was improved by his school and is used widely in animal husband- ry in the USSR. He recommended the use of interspecific hybridization in animal husbandry to breed new strains.

WORKS

Izbrannye trudy. Moscow, 1970.

REFERENCE

Skatkin, P. N. Il’ia Ivanovich Ivanov — vydaiushchiisia biolog. Moscow, 1964. ”


Ivanovilla ei ollut tekemistä ihmisten ”jalostamisen” kanssa, hän lienee ollut ennen kaikkea armeijan hevosjalostaja, varsinkin tsaarinaikaan.

Vuonna 1922 tehdystä kokeesta, voisiko simpanssinaaras hedelmöittyä ihmisen spermasta NL:n johto ei luultavasti tiennyt mitään. Se oli tutkimua, joka oli aloitettu tsaarin aikana ja Afrikassa, jossa vapaaehtoisia ei löytynyt sellaisiin kokeisiin. Siksi-pä tohtorit keksivät tuoda vallankumouksen jälkeen pari simpanssia NL:on, jossa ei ehkä olisi täysin kireäpipoista.

https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%98%D0%B2%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%B2,_%D0%98%D0%BB%D1%8C%D1%8F_%D0%98%D0%B2%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B8%D1%87_(%D0%B1%D0%B8%D0%BE%D0%BB%D0%BE%D0%B3)

Vuonna 1929 hän sai jostakin orankin, joka kuitenkin kuoli, ennen kuin kokeita päästiin tekemään.

Tästä oli televisiossakin jokin törkyjuttu.

http://keskustelu.skepsis.fi/Message/FlatMessageIndex/340215?page=1#340215

” Pavlovin.verihurtta
19.08.2011 00:03:35
340215

Historiaa: Neuvostoliiton ihmiskokeet (YLE)

Tällainen dokkari tuli YLE:ltä jokunen päivä sitten. Dokkarissa käydään läpi, miten NL:ssä harjoitettiin alkuaikoina fasistista ”Keeni-tiedettä”, ja miten pavlovismista loppujen lopuksi tuli NL:n ”virallinen totuus”:

http://areena.yle.fi/ohjelma/1414437

http://tv1.yle.fi/juttuarkisto/dokumentit/historiaa-neuvostoliiton-ihmiskokeet

”Venäjän vallankumouksen jälkeen neuvostohallituksella oli kovat paineet. Takapa-juinen maa oli monessa asiassa kilpailijoitaan jäljessä juuri, kun se olisi halunnut näyttää maailmalle tietä uuteen teknologiseen aikakauteen.

Biologia, tiede ja tekniikka tuntuivat vastaukselta kaikkiin ongelmiin, mutta uskottiin myös, että vanhassa kapitalistisessa maassa kasvanut kansa ei yksin riittäisi toteuttamaan muutosta, vaan tarvittiin uudenlaisia ihmisiä.

Näin ihmiskehostakin tuli vallankumouksen näyttämö 1920-luvulla. Maan laboratorioissa tehtiin salaisia kokeita uuden superrodun kehittämiseksi.

Ihmisiä ja apinoita risteytettiin, jotta saataisiin rotu, jota voitaisiin käyttää raskaaseen tai vaaralliseen työhön. Naisia hedelmöitettiin älykkäiden vallankumousjohtajien spermalla. Vanhojen ihmisten verta siirrettiin nuorempiin ja päinvastoin.

Vaikka kokeilu epäonnistui, Neuvostoliiton miljoonat kansalaiset joutuivat sopeuttamaan elämäänsä valtion asettamiin normeihin.

Tuotanto: ARTE, Lichtfilm, Mirumir, MDR.”

Ketonen
19.08.2011 00:03:44
340224

Kokeita lienee tehdy yhdysvalloissakin.

bush-expression_1016531i.jpg

https://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/01016/bush-expression_1016531i.jpg

Risto Koivula

Re: Historiaa: Neuvostoliiton ihmiskokeet (YLE): asiapuoli vähissä…

http://keskustelu.skepsis.fi/Message/FlatMessageIndex/340215?page=1#340302

Pavlovin verihurtta

” >RK kirjoitti 19.08.2011 (340238)…

>>Pavlovin.verihurtta kirjoitti 19.08. 2011 (340215)…

>>>Tällainen dokkari tuli YLE:ltä
>>jokunen päivä sitten. Dokkarissa
>>käydään läpi, miten NL:ssä
>>harjoitettiin alkuaikoina fasistista
>>”Keeni-tiedettä”, ja miten
>>pavlovismista loppujen lopuksi tuli
>>NL:n ”virallinen totuus”:

Väitätkö, että Pavlovilla olisi ollut jotakin erityistä GEENEJÄ VASTAAN?

>>Asiapuoli rajoittui tähän, jossa
>neuvostoliiton hallintojärjestelmä
>selviytyi hyvin:

>http://keskustelu.skepsis.fi/html/KeskusteluViesti.asp?ViestiID=317886

>>Loppuoli tsaarin ajalta periytyviä
>yksityisiä skitsoiluja, ja sellaista,
>mitä EI tullut, vaikka joku ehdotti,
>kuten tiedemiesten ym. spermapankkia.

>Lysenkolaisuudesta tuossa dokkarissa ei yllättäen puhuttu sitten mitään.

Senkö helvettiä SILLÄ oli ihmistieteiden kanssa tekemistä??!! Ei niin yhtään mitään!

>Pavlovista puolestaan tuli kuolemansa jälkeen (osittain sitä ennenkin) NL:n tieteen ”ikoni”, mistä kertoo esim. seuraava:

>http://books.google.com/books?id=kUuDTvyq8X8C&lpg=PP1&ots=lxASuw7TKQ&dq=Scientific%20Session%20on%20the%20Physiological%20Teachings%20of%20Academician%20Ivan%20P.%20Pavlov&pg=PP1#v=onepage&q&f=false

Olet hyvä löytämään netistä materiaaleja!

Hänen oppinsa oli Leninin asetuksella NL:N LAISSAKIN, ainoana erityistieteenalana (että sen kaikinpuoliset toimintaedellytykset on turvattava):

http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1921/jan/24.htm

Silloin, kun puhutaan LENINISMISTÄ, puhutaan AINA myös PAVLOVISMISTA.
(Lenin oli jossakin määrin jopa pavlovistisempi kuin Pavlov itse.)

>ht tp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pavlovian_session

>”Pavlovian session

>The Pavlovian session was the joint session of the USSR Academy of Sciences and the USSR Academy of Medical Sciences held on June 28-July 4, 1950.[1] The session was organized by the Soviet Government headed by Joseph Stalin in order to fight Western influences in Russian physiological sciences. During the session, a number of Pavlov’s former students attacked another group of his students (L.A. Orbeli, P.K. Anokhin, A.D. Speransky, I.S. Beritashvili) whom they accused of deviating from Pavlov’s teaching.

Tässä on nyt ihan puhdasta paskaa, jonka väärennöksen takana arvelen olevan ”icobonilaisten peilisolujen” kannattajat, joille INSRUMENTAALINEN (OPERANDINEN) EHDOLLINEN REFLEKSI on maailman karmaisevin kirosana:

http://www.vapaa-ajattelijat.fi/keskustelu/read.php?3,14549,18798#msg-18798

Se, mitä mm. Fieldsin tutkimukset tukevat on nimenomaan ”SESSION PAVLOVISMI”, johon liittyy myös symbolirakenteinen pavlovin 2. signaalisysteemi.

RK
21.08.2011 00:05:03
340303

Re: Historiaa: Neuvostoliiton ihmiskokeet (YLE): asiapuoli vähissä…

Pavlovin.verihurtta kirjoitti 20.08.2011 (340290)…

>RK kirjoitti 19.08.2011 (340238)…

>>Pavlovin.verihurtta kirjoitti 19.08.
>>2011 (340215)…

>”Pavlovian session

>The Pavlovian session was the joint session of the USSR Academy of Sciences and the USSR Academy of Medical Sciences held on June 28-July 4, 1950.[1] The session was organized by the Soviet Government headed by Joseph Stalin in order to fight Western influences in Russian physiological sciences. During the session, a number of Pavlov’s former students attacked another group of his students (L.A. Orbeli, P.K. Anokhin, A.D. Speransky, I.S. Beritashvili) whom they accused of deviating from Pavlov’s teaching.

Tässä on nyt ihan puhdasta paskaa, jonka väärennöksen takana arvelen olevan ”iacobonilaisten peilisolujen” kannattajat, joille INSRUMENTAALINEN (OPERANDINEN) EHDOLLINEN REFLEKSI on maailman karmaisevin kirosana:

Se, mitä mm. Fieldsin tutkimukset tukevat on nimenomaan ”SESSION PAVLOVISMI”, johon liittyy myös symbolirakenteinen pavlovin 2. signaalisysteemi.

Esimerkiksi Puna-armeijan Sotilaskirurgisen tukimuslaitoksen johtajasta, psyykkis-ten toimintojen lokalisaation tutkija Pjotr Kuzmitš Anohinista on Sovjetskaja entsiklopejassa pelkää kehua. Samoinpsykologian titeosanakirjassa:

http://encyclopedia2.thefreedictionary.com/Anokhin%2c+Petr+Kuzmich

Ihan samaa voi sanoa hyvin samanlaisen taustan omaavan Kirovin sotilaslääketie-deakatemian (joka tutki muun ohella myös avaruus-ilamilu ja sukelluslääketiedettä) johtajasta,Setšenov-instutuuin perustajasta lääkintäkenraaliluutnantti Levon Abgarovitš Orbelista:

http://encyclopedia2.thefreedictionary.com/Orbeli%2c+Leon+Abgarovich

>As the result of this session, Soviet physiology self excluded itself from the international scientific community for many years.[2][3]

Aleksei Dmitrijevitš Speranski topimi Pavlovin assistenttina tämän kirjoittaessa ”ehdollisia refleksejä” ja sitten Tiedeakateimia neurokirurgian laitoksen johtajana.

http://encyclopedia2.thefreedictionary.com/Speranskii%2c+Aleksei+Dmitrievich

Vuonna 1985 101-vuotiaana kuollut Ivan Solominovitš Beritašvili oli Pavlovin työto-veri jo Tsaarin aikaan, nimitettiin Tbilisin yliopiston neurofysiologian ja -patologian-professoriksi 1919 ja vuodesta 1945ko. Akatemian lääketieteen johtajaksi. En ole ennen kuullut, että hätä vastaan olisi ollut jotkin huomauttamista.

Consequence

In 1982, M.G. Yaroshevsky, criticizing the Pavlovian session,

Herra Jaroševskysta sen sijaan tieteelliset lähteet tai Wikikään eivät ole kuulleet mitään.

wrote that, in fact, Ivanov-Smolensky and his disciples did nothing but pervert the ker-nel of Pavlovian teaching, substituting for it a mechanistic view of the brain activity. [10]: 42 These so-called scholars of Pavlov emasculated the ground of his theory and extremely damaged the prospects of Soviet science. [10]:42

Sen sijaan Anatoli Georgijevitš Ivanov-Smolenskia pidetään INSTRUMENTAALIS-TEN ELI OPERANTTISTEN EHDOOLISTEN REFLEKSIEN ensimmäisenä kokeel-lisena toteennäyttäjänä jo vuonna 1927, 10 vuotta ennen B.F.Skinneriä, ja 5 vuotta ennen Pavlovin 2. signaalisysteemiä.

Hänen asemansa psykologiankehityksessä on jossakin määrin avoin,ja hän on niitä, jotka sattavat paukahtaa uusissa muutoksissa ”kaapin päältä” tarkoin tutkituiksi ”elä-viksi” auktoriteeteiksi.Hänellä oli eräitä poikeuksellisia näkökantoja:hän puolusti kan- taa, erityisesti keskustelussa Pavlovin teorian roolista 2. maailmansodan jälleen, että ihmisen psyykkisiä ilmiöitä aivoissa ei voida lainkaan tutkia luonnontieteellisin menetelmin. Tämä ei ole kuitenkaan aivan sam kun Skinnerin kanta, koska hän ei kiistänyt YHTEIKUNTATIETEILTÄ tieteellisyyttä, kuten (ääri)positivistit.

Hän puolusti lapsen kehityksessä Skinneriä muistuttava ”verbaalisten reaktioiden vaihetta”, josta lopputuloksena kuitenkin oli (tavallisesti!) tietoinen ajattelu ja tajunta.
hän suhtautui vakavasti temperamenttiteoriaan ja katsoi ehdollistumisjärjstelmän pa-rametreillä olevan diskreetti tai liukuva jakautuma hän tutki jo 50- ja 60-luvulla äärim-mäisen epäpopulaaria aihetta: ympäristö(myrkkyje)n ja muuttuneiden elintapojen mahdollisia vaikutuksia korkeimpiin aivotoimintoihin ja niiden koneistoon.


Häntä pidetiin ”psyykkisesti tappelunhakuisena” henkilönä (minkä ei tarvinnut välttämättä pitää paikkaansa).

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/7948469

” Ivanov-Smolensky conditioning: relationship between CR and UR form and intensity.

Tarpy RM, Scharer JB.
Source
Department of Psychology, Bucknell University, Lewisburg, PA 17837.
Abstract
The Ivanov-Smolensky conditioning procedure involves a CS followed by a com-mand (US). There are two URs – an instructed UR and a reflexive UR such as an au-tonomic reaction. Anticipatory responses during the CS, of either the instructed or ref-lexive UR,provide a measure of conditioning. We examined whether the reflexive CR and UR are similar in form,and whether larger reflexive CRs and URs are associated with larger instructed URs. Subjects were asked to exhale ”quickly and powerfully” (exhalation was thus the instructed UR) either following (Forward) or prior to (Back-ward) a light CS; a change in heart rate to the CS (reflexive CR) alone was the index of conditioning. The heart rate CR and UR were both deceleratory in nature, although the onset of the CR was faster than the UR. In addition, Backward-conditioned sub-jects demonstrated some degree of inhibitory control by the CS. Finally, the CR intensity was inversely related to exhalation magnitude. ”

” IVANOV-SMOLENSKY AND OPERANT CONDITIONING:
AN HISTORICAL NOTE
PAUL TOUCHETTE1
EUNICE KENNEDY SHRIVER CENTER
”The operant method has been popularized by Skinner and his stuzdents, but the initial systematic studies of operant conditioning with children were conducted by Ivanov-Smolensky.”
-H. W. STEVENSON (1970)2

This statement was inspired by a 1927 article in Brain, a British journal of neurology. 3 Recent findings have rekindled interest inwhether certain behaviors are products of stimulus-response, stimulus-reinforcer or response-reinforcer dependencies. The discourse was initiated by Skinner in 1937, when he identified a functional response class called ”operant” in his Reply to Konorski and Miller. The article reprinted below predates that conceptual breakthrough by 10 years . . . and it shows.


Ivanov-Smolensky considered the differences between his teclhnique and that of his colleague, Pavlov, inconsequential. Skinnerwould, in 1938, point out and clarify the importance of the difference for all time in ”The Behavior of Organisms”. Ivanov-Smo-lensky had made a food reinforcer contingent in order to maintain responding, estab-lish discriminations, and allow generalization testing. Today, the analysis of the variables that account for these phenomena is still to be completed.

Anatoly Grigorievitch Ivanov-Smolensky described his apparatus and procedures in several publications circa 1927.They have been used to study the behavior of normal and damaged children in the U.S.S.R. ever since. The simple elegance of the tech-nique makes one wonder why it was not widely adopted outside of the Soviet Union. More than likely, the article was overshadowed by the appearance, in the same year, of Anrep’s translation of Pavlov’s collected studies.


ON THE METHODS OF EXAMINING THE CONDITIONED FOOD REFLEXES IN CHILDREN AND IN MENTAL DISORDERS


By A. G. IVANOV-SMOLENSKY, M.D.


Lecturer on Psychiatry in the Military Medical Academy and Professor in the Hertzen Institute, Leningrad.


The work on ”Conditioned Food Reflexes in Children” was begun in Russia twenty years ago by N. I. Krasnogorsky, one of Professor Pavlov’s pupils.


Krasnogorsky studied the conditioned motor reflexes in the form of opening the mouth and swallowing after associating different optic, acoustic and skin signals with feeding. He mainly examined small children. Lately, Miss E. Mateer, an American, has made use of Krasnogorsky’s method on a great number of children. In the course of the last two years the following methods for the study of conditioned motor reflexes in children, aged 5 to 12, have been applied in my laboratory at the Hertzen Pedago-gical Institute, and also at the Military Medical Academy:- Through a wall of the expe-rimental room a sloping metal tube is constructed (length 55 cm., diameter 3 cm.), NN’ (fig. 1).

On the side of the experimentater the slide is closed by a simple photographic shutter which is connected: (1) with a signal (D); and (2) with a rubber bulb (R). By pressing this bulb the experimentater opens the upper aperture (a) of the tube NN’;at the same time the shutter puts the signal into action, and thus the moment of opening can be registered on the kymograph.

In front of the opening there is a small sloping shelf (L) on which the experimentater places a piece of chocolate. When the shutter opens the chocolate falls into the tube and quickly moves to the lower opening (a’).Here also there is a photographic shutter which is opened by a rubber bulb (R’); the latter is held by the person being examined; it is connected not only with the shutter but also with a Marey tambour (M), and when the person being examined presses the bulb to open the shutter that movement is registered on the kymograph by a manometer, or by a special apparatus which indicates the force of the motor reflex of the hand.

The upper wall of the metal tube in its lower third has a glass plate (V), allowing the person that is being examined to see the moving chocolate. In front of the lower opening of that slide there is a metal saucer, upon which the chocolate falls when the shutter is opened.

Fig. 1 is a drawing of this apparatus.

The experiment is made in the following way: The child sits in front of the lower shutter of the apparatus in such a manner that he faces the glass part of the tube with the rubber bulb (R’) in his hand. While the chocolate is moving in the tube past the glass (V), the experimentater presses the child’s hand and thus also the bulb held in his hand. Having done so several times he succeeds in teaching the child to press the bulb every time he sees the chocolate in the tube. The chocolate when it falls into the saucer is at the disposal of the child and the latter eats it at once. When the child has become accustomed to deal with the apparatus, the experimentater begins to form the grasping conditioned reflex (as squeezing) to a bell,to the lighting of an elec- tric lamp, to some tactile stimulation, &c.For instance, after having started the ringing of an electric bell, two or three seconds later he adds a food stimulus to the sounding of the bell by opening the upper shutter and allowing the chocolate to slide down, which the child receives by opening the lower lock.After several times ringing the bell and giving food simultaneously, a motor reaction (pressing on the bulb) is noticed in response to the sounding of the bell, i.e., a conditioned motor reflex has been formed. The latent period of the seizing reflex is measured eitlher by means of a stopwatch, or when a kymograph can be applied by means of a Jaquet chronograph.

The intensity of the conditioned reflex (the force applied by the child in squeezing the bulb) is registered in the above-mentioned way by a manometer, or by means of a Marey drum and a kymograph. The conditioned signal and the feeding are registered by a Deprez signalizer. Records of conditioned (bell) and unconditioned (food) refle-xes with the responsive reactions of the child are found in the following diagram (see fig. 2).
The intervals between the single stimuli (bell, feeding) were varied in duration from 0.25 to 2 minutes.
If, after having established a conditioned reflex, we apply several times the condi-tioned stimulus (bell) without feeding, the latent period begins to increase gradually, the intensity of the reflex (i.e., the force of pressure on the bulb) decreases and finally the reflex disappears,i.e.,the conditioned reflex is extinguished.When the conditioned reflex to bell A had been formed, we generally, in consequence of the process of ge-neralization, obtained same reaction to otlher bells: B,C,D. If every time while feeding with bell A we applied from time to time bell B, always without accompanying the lat-ter by feeding,we soon attained differentiation: A produced a conditioned reflex, while B destroyed it, i.e., an inhibitory effect was produced (a negative or inhibitory conditioned reflex).

If we combined every time the sounding of an electric bell with feeding, while a com-bination of that bell with the switching on of an electric light was not accompanied by a gift of chocolate, we transformed the electric lamp into a conditioned inhibitor; at the same time the bell ceased to produce a reaction.

By continuing to sound the bell for ten to fifteen seconds (instead of two to four seconds) thie reaction was retarded and the conditioned reflex appeared only by the eighth or fourteenth second.
Thus we can study all four kinds inhibition in children: the extinguishing, the differen-tiating, the conditioned and the retarded inhibition. If we introduced different external stimulations while a certain conditioned stimulation was acting, we could observe conditioned inhibition.
Experiments lhave been performed in my laboratory (Novikova, Fadeeva, Hackel, Ronczievsky and Aksenov) on the highest nervous activity of children, aged from 6 to 12 years, and on the speed and durability of forming the positive and inhibitory conditioned reflexes (i.e., on differentiating, on conditioned inhibition and on delayed reflexes).
These experiments have proved that we can distinguish three groups of children:
(a) children with a healthy nervous activity in whom positive and inhibitory conditioned reflexes are formed quickly and remain stable;
(b) children with feeble internal inhibition, i.e.,those in whom nervous irritation is predominant;
(c) children in whom cortical inhibition is more prominent than irritation (Novikova, Bronstein, Hackel).
At present we are investigating the functional value of the cerebral hemispheres, and the peculiarities of age and type of the nervous activity of children aged from 5 to 15 years. We are now successfully applying the methods described above, as has been proved by experiments, in examining the conditioned re flexes of some categories of individuals in imbecility, mental debility, schizophrenia and general paralysis. Thus by means of the method here described we can examine the grasping conditioned reflex, which is a reaction of apparently great biological importance.

1Reprints may be obtained from Paul Touchette, Eunice Kennedy Shriver Center, 200 Trapelo Road, Waltham, Massachusetts 02154.
2 Stevenson, H. W. Learning in Children. In P. H. 2Stevenson, H. W. Learning in Children. In P. H.
Mussen (Ed), Carmichael’s manual of child psychology, Vol. I. 3rd ed.; New York: John Wiley & Son s, 1970. Pp. in which the person to be examined is placed,856.
3 Reprinted here with the permission of Oxford University Press.


Beljajev oli klassinen darvinistinen tutkija, joka kohtasi uransa aluksi melkoista vastustusta.

© Ria Novosti/SPL/Scanpix


" Jokien kääntäminen: Siperian jokien virtausta haluttiin muuttaa

Neuvostoliiton johtaja Nikita Hruštšov esitteli vuonna 1961 suunnitelman tehostaa maataloutta. 

Hän halusi kääntää Siperian suuret joet virtaamaan pohjoisesta etelään, jotta ne kastelisivat Keski-Aasian kuivia aroja. 

Suunnitelma ei kuitenkaan edennyt, ennen kuin 1970-luvulla, jolloin insinöörit yrittivät rakentaa Petšora- ja Kamajokien välille kanavaa räjäyttämällä ydinpommeja. 

Ympäristötutkijat vastus­tivat menetelmää, ja hanke keskeytettiin. Unelma jokien virtauksen kääntämisestä elää silti yhä.

Keinokastelu: Keinokastelu kuivatti Araljärven

Lähes miljoona ihmistä kuoli nälkään Neuvostoliitossa vuonna 1947. Syynä oli kuivuus, ja siksi Stalin esitteli vuotta myöhemmin kunnianhimoisen suunnitelman muuttaa luonnontilaa ja ilmastoa lopullisesti. ”Luonto on alistettava”, oli Stalinin johtoajatus.

Yksi keino suunnitelmassa oli istuttaa metsävyöhykkeitä suojelemaan aroja tuulelta ja eroosiolta, ja sitä varten 5 300 kilometrin matkalle piti kylvää 6 000 tonnia puiden ja pensaiden siemeniä 117 900 hehtaarin laajuiselle alueelle Uralvuorten ja Kaspianmeren välille. 

Suunnitelma kuitenkin keskeytyi, kun Stalin kuoli vuonna 1953 ja hänen arvostelijansa alkoivat häivyttää hänen jälkiään kaikkialta hallinnosta.

Yksi osa Stalinin hankkeesta kuitenkin toteutui myöhemmin – tuhoisin seurauksin. Kyseessä oli keinokasteluhanke, jonka keskus oli tuolloin maailman neljänneksi suurin järvi Aral. 

Järvestä merta kohti virtaavat kaksi laskujokea padottiin, ja vesi johdettiin Keski-Aasian aroille. Tarkoituksena oli lisätä puuvillantuotantoa varsinkin Uzbekistanissa, joka oli tuolloin osa Neuvostoliittoa.


1980-luvulla Uzbekistanista tulikin yksi maailman suurimmista puuvillan tuottajista, mutta kastelujärjestelmän vuoksi Araljärvi on nykyisin kuivunut jo lähes olemattomiin. 

Se on aiheuttanut laajan ympäristökatastrofin, jota vielä pahentavat järveen aikoi-naan upotetut kemialliset jätteet. Nyt nuo jätteet nou­sevat järven pohjasta ja leviävät laajalti alueen hiekkamyrskyjen mukana. "

clip_image004_thumb9.jpg

OB-joen käätäminen säännetävässä määrin etelään olsi hyvä idea, jolla voitaisiin jopa estää Ob- ja Jenisei-jokien yhteisen suiston sulaminen.

http://ristokoivula1.puheenvuoro.uusisuomi.fi/174715-pitaisiko-siperian-joet-kaantaa-virtaamaan-etelaan-ilmaston-suojaamiseksi


Jättiläispato: Tutkija halusi sulattaa arktisen alueen jäät

Tutkija Pjotr Mihailovitš Borisov esitteli vuonna 1957 suunnitelmansa valtavasta kelluvasta betonipadosta, joka rakennet­taisiin Beringinsalmeen Alaskan ja Siperian välille. 

Padon piti sekä estää Tyynenmeren kylmiä merivirtoja pääsemästä Jäämerelle että pumpata valtavien propellien avulla kylmää vettä pois Jäämerestä. 

Borisov uskoi, että silloin Atlantin lämmin Golfvirta sulattaisi napajäät ja Neuvostoliitto pääsisi helpommin käsiksi pohjoisen napa-alueen maanalaisiin öljyvarantoihin.

Ihanneihminen: Uusi, yhteisöllinen ihminen, ”homo sovieticus”

Neuvostoliitossa ihannoitiin vahvaa työläistä, joka epäitsekkäästi uhrasi itsensä yhtei-sen hyvän edestä. Kaikki ”porvaril­liset” tavat ja ajatusmallit oli korvattava yhteisöllisillä arvoilla. Kansalaisten piti oppia sanomaan ”me”, eikä ”minä”.

Valtavissa uudelleenkoulutushankkeissa ihmiset pantiin asumaan yhteisiin taloihin, joissa he jakoivat kaiken kylpyvedestä vuodepaikkoihin. 

Tehdastyöntekijöiden keskuu­dessa oli 1920-luvulla käytössä iskulause: ”Nuku nopeasti, jotta väsynyt toverisi saa tyynyn päänsä alle.”

Naiset työskentelivät tehtaissa ja maataloudessa rinta rinnan miesten kanssa, ja Neuvostoliitossa lapsia hoidettiin ensimmäisenä suurissa lastentarhoissa. 

Äidillisyys tuomittiin itsekeskeisen perhekulttuurin jäänteenä. Väitettiin, että rikollisuutta ei enää ollut. Jos joku silti teki jotain tuomittavaa, hänet lähetettiin ”uudelleenkoulutukseen” työleirille. "


Kesyt ketut: Ketuista jalostettiin kesyjä

1950-luvulla geenitutkija Dmitri Konstantinovitš Beljajev jalosti Siperian reservaatis-saan hopeaketuista niin kesyjä, että ne oppivat syömään kädestä ja vinkuivat ilosta, kun hän saapui paikalle. 

Hän oli valinnut 130 hopeaketun joukosta kesyimmät ojentamalla kätensä kohti eläimiä: jos yksilö puri, se poistettiin. Sen jälkeen kaikkein rauhallisimmat ketut oli paritettu keskenään. 

Kymmenen suku­polven ja aggressiivisten yksilöiden karsimisen jälkeen Beljajev oli jalostanut ketuista koirien tapaan kesyjä eläimiä.


Koe ei silti hyödyttänyt Neuvostoliiton turkisteollisuutta, koska kesyiksi jalostettujen hopeakettujen turkki oli pilkullinen eikä kelvannut myytäväksi kansainvälisillä turkismarkkinoilla.


***

Tätä "apina-armeijan" kakkaa on matalalla rohviililla syötetty  jo pitempään:


https://www.ess.fi/uutiset/kotimaa/2015/03/23/apinaa-ja-ihmista-yritettiin-risteyttaa-100-vuotta-sitten-neuvostoliitossa

Kotimaa 23.3.2015

Apinaa ja ihmistä yritettiin risteyttää 100 vuotta sitten Neuvostoliitossa

1196058.jpg

Ihminen on 99-prosenttisesti simpanssi, mitä dna:han tulee. Ilmeissä, eleissä ja käyttäytymisessäkin meillä on yhtäläisyyksiä.

Ihminen ja apina voisivat nykytekniikalla jopa risteytyä keinotekoisesti, mutta siinä ei olisi mitään järkeä. Silti biologi Ilja Ivanov yritti sitä tosissaan 1920-luvulla.

Neuvostojohtaja Josif Stalinin tavoitteena näet oli vahva uusi ihmislaji, jota olisi voitu käyttää sotilaallisiin tarkoituksiin. Ivanovin keinohedelmöitysyritykset eivät kuitenkaan onnistuneet ja hän päätyi Siperiaan.

Lähisukulaisuutta simpanssin kanssa ei voida hyödyntää elinsiirroissa, mutta kudossiirroissa kenties.

- Ehkä joitain sellaisia kudoksia voisi käyttää,jotka eivät liity verenkiertoon. Todennäköi- simmin siirtoja varten kasvatettaisiin kudoksia,ihmiskudosten kantasoluja tai kokonaisia elimiä, pohtii biologi, tietokirjailija Juha Valste.

Uusin tieto apina-ihminen-tutkimuksessa on, että simpanssit ja orangit pystyvät ymmärtämään ja jopa muodostamaan puhetta, kunhan kuuntelevat sitä riittävästi.

- Aiemmin sitä pidettiin täysin mahdottomana.

Valste täräyttää simpanssin lisäksi korkeita dna-prosentteja muidenkin eläimien ja ihmisen välillä: kissa 90, lehmä 80, hiiri 75 ja banaanikärpänen 60 prosenttia.

- On kuitenkin muistettava, että ihmisen toiminnat ovat täysin irrallaan dna:sta, hän huomauttaa.

Ihmisen ja apinan yhtäläisyyksistä enemmän maanantaina Etelä-Suomen Sanomien tiedesivulla.

***

Sepitetty  "HUMPANSSI-projekti"...

http://drvitelli.typepad.com/providentia/2017/11/the-humanzee-project.html

Providentia

A biased look at psychology in the world

November 24, 2017

The Humanzee Project

It is still one of the most bizarre scientific experiments in history.  

While crossbreeding between species has been occurring for thousands of years, gene-tic dissimilarities between most animal species make successful crossbreeding ex-tremely rare.In the case of horse-donkey crossbreeds,for instance,mules (the offspring of male horses and female donkeys) and hinnies (the rarer offspring of male donkeys and female horses) combine the best elements of both parent species due to hybrid vigour. Unfortunately,mules and hinnies are almost always sterile given the different number of chromosomes in the two parent species. While lion-tiger crossbreeds also exist, they invariably depend on human intervention to bring them into being and the same sterility issues usually apply.  For that matter, climate change has led to a significant rise in coy-wolves (coyote/wolf hybrids) and "grolar bears" (polar bear/grizzly hybrids) in recent years.  

But what about other highly similar species such as humans and chimpanzees / bono-bos?   Despite the strong genetic similarities between homo sapiens sapiens and pan troglodytes/pan paniscus,the genetic differences between the species appears too great to allow any kind of viable intermating. With the human genome containing 46 chromo-sones versus 48 for the chimpanzee/bonobo, the gap seems no greater than the genetic difference between horses and donkeys. As a result, the concept of deliberately creating a humanzee or a chiman has attracted a certain morbid interest despite the vast legal and ethic issues involved.Genetic evidence has even suggested that interspecies se-xual activity occurred long after the human and chimpanzee lineages diverged allowing chimpanzee genes to enter the gene pool of early humans.   While there have been rumours of humanzees, "missing links", and other human-animal crossbreeds occurring, no real evidence that humans and other species of primates could  be capable of producing viable offspring has ever surfaced. 

Still, by the turn of the 20th century, the distinction between humans and chimpanzees seemed far less rigid than it does now. Along with Charles Darwin's revolutionary contri-butions to biology, advances in genetics and comparative anatomy demonstrated that chimpanzees were far more similar to humans than anyone realized. The primate re-search pioneered by Alexander and Nadiya Ladygina-Kohts at Moscow's Darwin Insti-tute showed that chimpanzees were capable of the same sort of cognitive development previously seen only in human beings.   Such research, along with the radical discove-ries of Ivan Pavlov,  suggested that even the most unlikely projects into human and chimpanzee intelligence might be attainable.

Which brings us to Ilya Ivanovitch Ivanov...

Born in 1870 in Russia's Kursk region, Ivanov went on to become one of Tsarist Rus-sia's most prominent authorities in veterinary medicine and a pioneer in the use of artifi-cial insemination in horse breeding. Already a full professor at Kharkov University, Iva-nov founded Russia's first institute for artificial insemination in 1901.   He also became well-known (or notorious in some circles) for his radical ideas on interspecies hybridi-zation. Using artificial techniques, Ivanov successfully created zebra-donkey and Euro- pean bison-cow hybrids and demonstrated similar pairings with rodents. But Ivanov had more ambitious plans in mind.   As early as 1910, he presented a paper at the World Congress of Zoologists raising the possibility of human-ape hybrids. Though the Tsarist government had no interest in such a project, the Russian Revolution of 1917 would bring new opportunities.

It was during his time at the Pasteur Institute in Paris that Ivanov began planning the ape-human hybrid project that would make him notorious.   The Pasteur Institute had an experimental primate research station in French Guinea which Ivanov decided would be a perfect setting for his experiments.   All that remained was to seek funding from the Soviet government.    According to a 2005 news story describing Ivanov's project,  it was Joseph Stalin who had personally authorized the project stating that,"I want a new invin- cible human being, insensitive to pain, resistant and indifferent about the quality of food they eat."    Since the Red Army had been left dangerously depleted following the Rus-sian revolution and the infighting that  followed, replacing them with human-ape hybrids seemed to make sense.   Creating strong, servile workers who did what they were told without complaining appeared to be the perfect way to complete Stalin's new Five-Year-Plan. 

Given that the Soviet Union was already carrying out massive social engineering pro-jects including farm collectivization, egalitarianism,and industrialization,Ivanov's project  seemed plausible enough to attraact funding.   According to Cambridge professor Ale-xander Etkind, another explanation for Ivanov's success in obtaining funding rested in the political value of demonstrating the link between humans and animals.   As Etkind pointed out in a 2008 paper:

If he crossed an ape and a human and produced viable offspring then that would mean Darwin was right about how closely related we are.   Ivanov’s approach to the government stressed how proving Darwin right would strike a blow against religion— Ivanov of course knowing that religion was something the authorities ‘were struggling to stamp out" which made his proposal all the more attractive.

Whatever the motivation, Ivanov received the equivalent of $1,000 to put his plan into action.   Using the Pasteur Institute's research station in Africa, the plan involved artifi-cially inseminating female chimpanzees with human sperm.  The identity of the sperm donor is still unknown though Ivanov reportedly used the sperm of local men based on racial theories arguing that Africans were more closely related to apes than people of European stock. Since there were no sexually mature chimpanzees already at the station, Ivanov was obliged to do his experiment with three female chimpanzees at the zoo in French Guinea's capital.    Not surprisingly, none of the chimpanzees became pregnant and Ivanov returned to the Soviet Union to continue his work there.

By this time, the Soviet government had built the Sukhumi Primate Centre near Stalin's birthplace in Georgia. Intended to become a world leader in primate research, the Soviet government decided to use the centre to raise Ivanov's hybrids.  Still, his failure in Africa meant that Ivanov needed to move on with the next stage of his project:   artificially inse-minating human females with chimpanzee sperm. That failed as well when the last post-pubescent male chimpanzee available to him in Sukhumi died.To keep his project alive, Ilya Ivanov decided on a new, and more desperate, gamble.   He wrote a Cuban heiress named Rosalie Abreu requesting her help with his breeding experiments.   Abreu had a large ape colony outside Havana and was well-known for her success in breeding chimpanzees in captivity. 

In his letter, Ivanov requested a male chimpanzee for use in impregnating a female sub-ject known to history only as "G". Though  Abreu was initially agreeable to the proposal, she quickly changed her mind after approaching Charles Smith of the American Associ-ation for the Advancement of Atheism for funding.   It was Smith who leaked the story to the press with explosive results. The New York Times reported the story under the head- line, "Soviet Backs Plan To Test Evolution" and the Ku Klux Klan began crusading against the entire project.  They even went so far as to threaten Abreu since the entire project was "abominable to the Creator."    She quickly withdrew her support.

While he was still trying to find another chimpanzee breeder, Ivanov found the political climate in the Soviet Union changing rapidly.   Presumably Stalin was no longer so en-thusiastic about human-ape hybrids and the tide turned against Ivanov and his experi-ments. By 1930, Ivanov and many of his fellow scientists at Sukhumi lost their positions and he came under political attack.  Whether he was deemed to be an embarassment to Stalin or simply due to bad luck, Ilya Ivanov was arrested and sentenced to five years in exile in Kazakhstan.   His sentence put him to work at the Kazakh Veterinary Zoologist Institute though his science career was effectively over.  He died of a stroke on March 20, 1932 as he was waiting for a train to Moscow. 

Despite an obituary written by Ivan Pavlov,Ilya Ivanov's place in the history of science is hard to determine.    His achievements with animal breeding and artificial insemination are still noteworthy but  it his "humanzee" project for which he is best remembered. The Sukhumi Primate Centre remains active though the stigma of Ivanov's long-ago experi-ments continue to linger. Along with media accusations that the Centre was founded by Stalin for the purpose of raising human-ape hybrids, the breakup of the Soviet Union also brought accusations of other bizarre experiments conducted there. During the 1990s, after Russian science fiction writer, E. Parnov, managed to gain access to many documents about the Centre's founding, he published his findings with various specu-lations about the type of research that researchers carried out with Stalin's full approval.  While there is no evidence that any human-ape hybrid experiments had actually been conducted there (largely because Ivanov could not find a sexually mature ape), the centre seemed to have no shortage of human volunteers.   According to some sources, they were beseiged with letters from willing subjects but no actual experiments took place prior to Ivanov's arrest.

Though most of these media stories were largely exaggerated, they also called attention to the legitimate primate research at Sukhumi that Western researchers would not see until decades later. The centre was also the hub of some of the Soviet Union's most am-bitious biomedical research including tests of the Sabin polio vaccine and treatment of radiation poisoning.   It also became the model on which the U.S. National Primate Re-search Centers were based (and similar centres around the world).    Since the end of the Soviet Union, the centre continues to do research though economic hardship has meant a large reduction in staff and resources.

Still,that the centre exists at all can be viewed as a testament to the cutting-edge primate research done there.   Though the lingering stigma of Ilya Ivanov continues to give the centre an undeserved media notoriety, the researchers there can claim enough legitimate achievements to earn respect from primatologists around the world.  

Ivanov and Stalin never got their ape-men but  the legacy that the centre leaves behind is likely far more important. "



sunnuntai, 14. lokakuu 2018

Järjetön aivopiereskely "kantauralin paikasta" veromaksajien rahoillaa

Current distribution of the Uralic languages


ETTÄ MUKA "KANTAURALIA OLISI PUHUTTU VASTA 2000 e.a.a. URALILLA, ELI  1000 VUOTTA SEN JÄLKEEN, KUN SUOMEEN OLI TULLUT VASARAKIR-VESKANSA, JOKA N ITÄBALTTILAISEEN KIELEEN JOKI SU-KIELI OLI (MÄÄ-RITELMÄLLISESTI, ITÄBALTTILAISENA) VAIKUTTANUT JO SEN LÄHTÖSI-JOILLA VOLGALLA, JA JOKA SUOMESSA YHDISTYI URALILAISEN KAMPA-KERAAMISEN KIELEN KANSSA, JOKA OLI TULLUT TÄNNE 5000 e.a.a. YHDESSSÄ KAMPAKRAMIIKAN, TATTARINVILJENLYN, N1c-HAPLORYHMÄN JA ASTUVANSALMEN TYYPPISTEN KALLIOMAALAUSTEN KANSSA!!!?

https://wikivividly.com/wiki/Proto-Uralic_homeland_hypotheses

Proto-Uralic homeland hypothes

 From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Various Proto-Uralic homeland hypotheses on the origin of the Uralic languages and the location (Urheimat or homeland) and the period in which the Proto-Uralic language was spoken have been advocated over the years.

Europe versus Siberia

The Proto-Uralic homeland has always been located near the Ural Mountains, either on the European or the Siberian side. The main reason to suppose a Siberian home-land has been the traditional taxonomic model that sees the Samoyed branch split-ting off first. Because the present border between the Samoyed and the Ugric branch is in Western Siberia, the original split was seen to have occurred there too.

However, because the Ugric languages are known to have been spoken earlier on the European side of the Urals, a European homeland would be equally possible. In recent years, it has also been argued that on the phonological basis the oldest split was not between the Samoyed and the Finno-Ugric but between the Finno-Permic and the Ugro-Samoyedic language groups.[1] The lexical level is argued to be less reliable, and lexical innovativeness (a small number of shared cognates) can be con-fused because of the great age of the division. For a long time, no new arguments for a Siberian homeland have been presented.

Both European and Siberian homeland proposals have been supported by palaeo-linguistic evidence, but only such cases in which the semantic reconstructions are certain are valid. A Siberian homeland has been claimed on the basis of two conife-rous tree names in Proto-Uralic, but the trees (Abies sibirica and Pinus cembra) have for a long time been present also in the far east of Europe. A European homeland is supported by words for 'bee', 'honey', 'elm' etc.[2] They can be reconstructed already in Proto-Uralic, when Samoyed is no more the first entity to split off.[3]

More recently also the loanword evidence has been used to support a European homeland. Proto-Uralic has been seen borrowing words from Proto-Indo-European,[4][5] and the Proto-Indo-European homeland has rarely been located east of the Urals. Proto-Uralic even seems to have developed in close contact with Proto-Aryan, [6] which is seen to have been born in the Poltavka culture of the Caspian steppes before its spread to Asia. [7]

Although Proto-Uralic is now located on the European side of the Urals, Pre-Proto-Uralic seems to have been spoken in Asia on the basis of early contacts with the Yukaghir languages [8] and typological similarity with the Altaic (in the typological meaning) language families. [9]

Continuity theories

Archaeological continuity has long been applied as an argument for linguistic conti-nuity in Uralic studies since Estonians Paul Ariste and Harri Moora in 1956. [10] Just as long, this kind of argumentation has also been heavily criticised. The oldest version of the continuity theories can be called the moderate or shallow continuity theory. It claims that linguistic continuity in Estonia and Finland can be traced back to the arrival of Typical Combed Ware, about 6,000 years ago. This view became mainstream in the multidisciplinary Tvärminne symposium in 1980, [11] when there seemed to be no serious linguistic results to contradict that archaeological view.

The continuity argumentation in the Uralic studies gained greater visibility in the 1990s, when the next step was popularised (even though this line of reasoning had been occasionally sported). In the radical or deep continuity theory, it is claimed that the linguistic continuity in Finland could be traced back to the Mesolithic initial colonization, beyond 10,000 years.[12][13]

However, in Indo-European studies, J. P. Mallory had already thoroughly scrutinized the methodological weakness of the continuity argumentation in 1989.[14] In Uralic studies, it was also soon noted that the one and the same argument (archaeological continuity) was used to support contradicting views, which revealed the method's unreliability.[15][16][17][18]

At the same time, new linguistic results appeared to contradict the continuity theories: the datings of Proto-Saami [19][20] and Proto-Finnic [21] and of Proto-Uralic (Kallio 2006; Häkkinen 2009)[3][22] both are clearly younger than were thought in the framework of the continuity theories.

Now, linguists rarely believe in continuity theories because of their shown methodo-logical flaws and their incompatibility with the new linguistic results, but some archaeologists and laymen may still claim such arguments.

Modern view

After the rejection of continuity theories, recent linguistic arguments have placed the Proto-Uralic homeland around the Kama River or, more generally, close to the Great Volga Bend and the Ural Mountains. The expansion of Proto-Uralic has been dated to about 2000 BC (4000 years ago), and its earlier stages go back at least one or two millennia earlier. Either way, that is considerably later than the earlier views of the continuity theories, which would place Proto-Uralic deep into Europe. [3][22]

Evidence from population genetics

The characteristic genetic marker of Uralic-speaking peoples is haplogroup N1c-Tat (Y-DNA), also known as N-M46. 63% of Finns,[23] and 47% of Saami [24] and 41% of Estonians [23] belong to this haplogroup. Samoyedic peoples mainly have more N1b-P43 than N1c. [25] Haplogroup N originated in the northern part of China in 20,000 - 25,000 years BP [26] and spread to north Eurasia,through Siberia to Northern Europe. Subgroup N1c1 is frequently seen in Finno-Ugric people, N1c2 in Samoyedic peoples.In addition,haplogroup Z (mtDNA),found with low frequency in Saami, Finns, and Siberians, is related to the migration of Uralic peoples.

In recent genetic analysis of ancient human bones excavated from the remains of Liao civilization, haplogroup N1 (Y-DNA) is found with a high frequency, of 60-100%. [27] Therefore, a new possibility arises that the origin of Uralic languages (and per-haps also of the Yukaghir languages) may be Liao River region. The oldest Pit-Comb Ceramic, related to Finno-Ugric peoples,is also found in Liao civilization. That is also corroborated by the works of Vladimir Napolskikh, who studied the origins of the "earth-diver" creation myths and concluded that a certain variety of those myths, which is found in the folklore of Uralic peoples and other N1(Y-DNA) populations, originated in Northern Asia, possibly in the northeastern regions of today's China. [28]

See also

References

1. Häkkinen, Jaakko 2007: Kantauralin murteutuminen vokaalivastaavuuksien valos-sa. "Archived copy". Archived from the original on 2012-05-23. Retrieved 2012 - 04 - 16.

2. Sebestyén-Németh, Irene 1951–1952: Zur Frage des alten Wohngebietes der uralischen Völker.

3. Häkkinen, Jaakko 2009: Kantauralin ajoitus ja paikannus: perustelut puntarissa. – Suomalais-Ugrilaisen Seuran Aikakauskirja 92, p. 9–56.

http://www.sgr.fi/susa/92/hakkinen.pdf

4. Rédei, Károly 1986: Zu den indogermanisch-uralischen Sprachkontakten. (Toim. Manfred Mayrhofer & Volfgang U. Dressler.) Veröffentlichungen der Kommission für Linguistik und Kommunikationsforschung, Heft 16. Wien.

5. Koivulehto, Jorma 1991: Koivulehto, Jorma 1991: Uralische Evidenz für die Laryn-galtheorie. Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften.Philosophisch-Historische Klasse. Sitzungsberichte, 566. Band. Wien 1991.

6. Häkkinen, Jaakko 2012: Uralic evidence for the Indo-European homeland. http://www.elisanet.fi/alkupera/UralicEvidence.pdf

7. Mallory, J. P. & Adams, D. Q. (editors) 1997: Encyclopedia of Indo-European Culture. London and Chicago: Fitzroy Dearborn Publishers. p. 439

8. Häkkinen, Jaakko 2012: Early contacts between Uralic and Yukaghir. Tiina Hyyti-äinen, Lotta Jalava, Janne Saarikivi & Erika Sandman (editors): Per Urales ad Orien-tem Iter polyphonicum multilingue Festskrift tillägnad Juha Janhunen på hans sextio-årsdag den 12 februari 2012. Suomalais-Ugrilaisen Seuran Toimituksia 264, p. 91 – 101. Helsinki: Suomalais-Ugrilainen Seura.

http://www.sgr.fi/sust/sust264/sust264_hakkinenj.pdf

9. Janhunen, Juha 2001: Indo-Uralic and Ural-Altaic: On the diachronic implications of areal typology. – Carpelan,Parpola & Koskikallio (editors): Early Contacts between Uralic and Indo-European: Linguistic and Archaeological Considerations, p. 207 – 220. Suomalais-Ugrilaisen Seuran Toimituksia 242.

10. Moora, Harri (editor) 1956: Eesti rahva etnilisest ajaloost. Tallinn.

11. Gallén, Jarl (editor) 1984: Suomen väestön esihistorialliset juuret. Tvärminnen symposiumi 17.–19.1.1980. Bidrag till kännedom av Finlands natur och folk, 131. Helsinki: Societas Scientiarum Fennica.

12. Nuñez, Milton G. 1987: A Model for the Early Settlement of Finland. – Fennoscandia Archaeologica 4.

13. Wiik, Kalevi 2002: Eurooppalaisten juuret. Jyväskylä: Atena.

14. Mallory, J. P. 1989: In Search of the Indo-Europeans. Language, Archaeology and Myth. London: Thames and Hudson.

15. Mallory, J. P. 2001: Uralics and Indo-Europeans: Problems of time and space. Carpelan et al. (edited): Early Contacts between Uralic and Indo-European: Linguis-tic and Archaeological Considerations, p. 345–366. Suomalais-Ugrilaisen Seuran Toimituksia 242.

16. Aikio, Ante & Aikio, Aslak 2001: Heimovaelluksista jatkuvuuteen. Suomalaisen väestöhistorian tutkimuksen pirstoutuminen. – Muinaistutkija 4/2001, p. 2–21. Helsin-ki: Suomen arkeologinen seura. "Archived copy" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2008-02-27. Retrieved 2008-01-07.

17. Häkkinen, Jaakko 2006: Studying the Uralic proto-language. http://www.elisanet.fi/alkupera/Uralic.html [Translation from: Uralilaisen kantakielen tutkiminen. – Tieteessä tapahtuu 1 / 2006, p. 52–58.]

18. Häkkinen, Jaakko 2010: Jatkuvuusperustelut ja saamelaisen kielen leviäminen (OSA 1). – Muinaistutkija 1 / 2010, p. 19–36. http://www.elisanet.fi/alkupera/Jatkuvuus1.pdf

19. Aikio, Ante 2004: An essay on substrate studies and the origin of Saami. – Irma Hyvärinen, Petri Kallio & Jarmo Korhonen (toim.): Etymologie,Entlehnungen und Ent- wicklungen. Festschrift für Jorma Koivulehto zum 70. Geburtstag, s. 5–34. Mémoires de la Société Néophilologique de Helsinki, LXIII. Helsinki: Uusfilologinen yhdistys ry.

20. Aikio, Ante 2006: On Germanic-Saami contacts and Saami prehistory. – Suoma-lais-Ugrilaisen Seuran Aikakauskirja 91, p. 9–55. Helsinki: Suomalais-Ugrilainen Seura. http://www.sgr.fi/susa/91/aikio.pdf

21. Saarikivi, Janne & Grünthal, Riho 2005: Itämerensuomalaisten kielten uralilainen tausta. Muuttuva muoto. Kirjoituksia Tapani Lehtisen 60-vuotispäivän kunniaksi, s. 111 – 146. Kieli 16.

22. Kallio, Petri 2006: Suomen kantakielten absoluuttista kronologiaa. – Virittäjä 1 / 2006, p. 2–25. http://www.kotikielenseura.fi/virittaja/hakemistot/jutut/2006_2.pdf

23. Rosser ZH, Zerjal T, Hurles ME, Adojaan M, Alavantic D, Amorim A, Amos W, Armenteros M, Arroyo E, Barbujani G, Beckman G, Beckman L, Bertranpetit J, Bosch E, Bradley DG, Brede G, Cooper G, Côrte-Real H. B., De Knijff P,Decorte R, Dubrova YE, Evgrafov O, Gilissen A, Glisic S, Gölge M, Hill EW, Jeziorowska A,Kalaydjieva L, Kayser M et al. (2000). "Y-Chromosomal Diversity in Europe is Clinal and Influenced Primarily by Geography, Rather than by Language". The American Journal of Human Genetics 67 (6): 1526–1543. doi:10.1086/316890. PMC 1287948. PMID 11078479. Vancouver style error (help)

24. Tambets K, Rootsi S, Kivisild T, Help H, Serk P, Loogväli EL et al. (2004). "The western and eastern roots of the Saami--the story of genetic "outliers" told by mito-chondrial DNA and Y chromosomes". Am. J. Hum. Genet. 74 (4): 661–82. doi:10.1086/383203. PMC 1181943. PMID 15024688. Vancouver style error (help)

25. Tambets, Kristiina et al. 2004, The Western and Eastern Roots of the Saami - the Story of Genetic “Outliers” Told by Mitochondrial DNA and Y Chromosomes

26. Shi H, Qi X, Zhong H, Peng Y, Zhang X,et al. (2013) Genetic Evidence of an East Asian Origin and Paleolithic Northward Migration of Y-chromosome Haplogroup N. PLoS ONE 8(6): e66102. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0066102

27. Yinqiu Cui, Hongjie Li, Chao Ning, Ye Zhang,Lu Chen,Xin Zhao,Erika Hagelberg and Hui Zhou (2013)"Y Chromosome analysis of prehistoric human populations in the West Liao River Valley, Northeast China. " BMC 13:216

28. Napolskikh V. V. (Izhevsk, Russia). Earth-Diver Myth (А812) in northern Eurasia and North America: twenty years later.

torstai, 11. lokakuu 2018

Aiheellisia kysymyksiä Bellingcat-”Peltikissalle”…

Englannissa majaileva (hölynpöly)tomittaja Eliot Higginsin luoma nettisivusto Bellingcat väittää ratkaisseensa kaikki suuret kansaiväliset rikosmysteerit Malesia-laisten Boing-matkustajakoneiden putoamisista ja katoamisista Syyrian kaasuiskui-hin ja Englannin loikkariagenttien myrkytystapauksiin.  Koulutukseltaan Higgins on kirjanpitäjä, kaikkea muuta kuin minkään jamesbondin näköinen ja oloinen pullukka.


Eliot Higgins

Hän väittää jenkkiläisessä feministilehdessä Huffington Postissa (mm. ”naisen orgasmi ihmiskunnan suurimpana terveysuhkana”) joutuneensa vahingossa näiden kysymysten pariin ”seurattuaan huvikseen läppäriltä Syyrian sisällissodan rakettilii-kennettä” ja ”21. elokuuta 2013 havaittuaan kaksi outoa rakettia, jotka eivät räjähtä-neetkään” (mistä hän siis tiesi ne juuri raketeiksi?) putoavan Zamalkan kaupunkiin Damaskosta etelään.

Seuraavana päivänä ”insinööri Muhammed al-Jazaeri” (nimi on sama kuin erään Saddamin-vastaista maihinnousua ajaneen päätoimittajan 10 vuotta aikaisemmin, tämän myöhemmän on kuitenkin sittemmin tarkennettu olleen tuolloin 27-vuotias) laittoi Youtubeen tietoja kyseisessä paikassa tapahtuneesta kaasuiskusta. Täältä saadaan ihan eri päivämäärä, 3. tammikuuta (2013?). Päivämäärät on ainakin jossa- kin asetettu jälkikäteen. Ilmeismiin samainen Muhammed al-Jazaeri siitemmin ”haa-voittui al-Assadin kaasuiskussa Ghoutassa” (jollaista ei ollut!) marraskussa 2017:
” Cases of suffocations were found as "Assad’s regime" targeted eastern Ghouta with  poisongas.  Media  workers Muhammed al-Jazaeri, Diaa al-Shami, Abdulmunim Issa and Mazen al-Shami were injured by the attack on 16 November 2017. Lieneekö suorastaan kuollutkin…? Vai olisko tämä ollutkin se vanha päätoimittaja?

Kukahan tuo Jokapaikan-Muhammed al-Jazaeri oikein todella on?

"Tietääkö" Huffpo?

(Hän on epäilyttävästi vähän prinssi Harryn näköinen, jos tämä värjäisi partansa ja tukkansa mustiksi... ainakin tuolla Belingcatin rasterilla tarkasteltuna...)

Mistä sellaisia ohjelmia saa,  joilla läppärikauppias (?) seurasi reaaliaikaisesti Syy-rian rakenttiliikennettä? Oliko ohjelmassa jokin tekoäly, joka osoittaa raketit, keiden tutkasta? Voisinko minä ladata sellaisen jostakin?

Yhteistä kaikille "Koristekissan" "saavutuksille" on kolme seikkaa: muka ARMOTON "moukantuuri", paikkoihin ja tilanteisiin ja henkilöihin nähden uskomattoman edistynyt NASA-tasoinen informaatioteknologia, erityisesti vakoilusellainen - ja huijaus-?, ... ja ennen kaikkea muuta aina sama "syyllinen ja suurroisto" - PUTIN!

 

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/skripals-bellingcat-gru-novichok-anatoly-chepiga-alexander-mishkin-putin-russia-a8577161.html

We should be asking for answers about the Skripals and Bellingcat – and not just from Russia

Bellingcat has grown rather a lot beyond its shoestring origins. It has money – where from? It has been hiring staff. It has transatlantic connections. It has never, so far as I am aware, reached any conclusion that is inconvenient to the UK or US authorities

Mary_Dejevsky.png?w=525&ssl=1

It is now more than seven months since assassins from Russia’s military intelligence service tried to kill a former double agent and his daughter with a nerve agent in Salisbury. Or did they? The only incontrovertible fact in that assertion is the location, Salisbury. Pretty much everything else remains speculative.

The Skripal case has troubled me since the first news broke in March. It is not the im-probability of what was reported to have happened – improbable things are the stuff of news. It is rather the mixture of utter certainty, unsubstantiated claims and glaring information gaps that is so disconcerting, from the immediate rush by UK officials to blame the Russian state, to the way the main figures in this drama have simply va-nished, and now to the contradictions that have gained blithe, and almost universal, acceptance.

 

When the Metropolitan Police showed the passports of two Russians they believed to be the assassins,they strongly hinted that the names on the documents were false. The invitation to establish their real names was taken up by investigative organi-sation Bellingcat, which has now – amid a blizzard of documentation, seductive re-ference to “open source” techniques,and not a little help from Russian whistleblowers – come up with what it says are their real identities.

 

One of them is Colonel Anatoly Chepiga; the other is a medically qualified agent called Alexander Mishkin, and both have received state honours from President Putin.

 

 

What’s so suspect about this, you may ask. Well, let’s start with Bellingcat, which has presented itself in the past as a microcosm of well-meaning and very British amateu-rishness, based in a Leicestershire bedroom, producing results that put the professio-nal sleuths to shame. In fact, Bellingcat has grown rather a lot beyond its shoestring origins. It has money – where from? It has been hiring staff. It has transatlantic con-nections. It has never, so far as I am aware, reached any conclusion – whether on the downing of the Malaysian plane over eastern Ukraine, or chemical weapons use in Syria, or now, with the Skripals – that is in any way inconvenient to the UK or US authorities.

That need not cast doubt on its findings. But should the authenticity of the documents it cites not be subject, at very least, to the same scrutiny as might be applied to other evidence? And when, as this week, UK officials say they do not “dispute” Bellingcat’s identification of Chepiga and Mishkin, does this not prompt a few questions about whether, say, our “agencies” reached the same conclusions long ago, but kept quiet, or why most of the UK’s media apparently find Bellingcat a more trustworthy source than the UK intelligence services (possible answer: Iraq)? Might not the group’s good name be being used to get information into the public domain that officials do not want to vouch for? And, if so, would this be to inform, or to mislead?

 

What else do I find troubling? How about the UK and US focus on Russian military intelligence, still referred to as the GRU? I don’t recall any specific Soviet or Russian agency being so clearly fingered in this way before. Accusations might have been levelled at the KGB – or its Russian successor, the FSB – but this was usually in a generic, not specific, sense. Why the change?

Read more

It could be, of course, because the UK knows for certain that it was the GRU that tar-geted the Skripals. But it could equally be that officials simply assumed this because the GRU was Sergei Skripal’s agency, or because the GRU was already in the dock in the US for alleged involvement in hacking. Or it could be because it sounds much scarier than just saying “intelligence”, or even – though I concede this is unlikely – to make clear to Vladimir Putin that we are not blaming him, because the GRU was never “his” agency.

But there is a big contradiction here. On the one hand,the GRU is being presented as a bunch of duffers, whose decorated and highly qualified agents were booked into an east London dive, behaved badly, were deterred by a bit of snow, abysmally failed in their mission, and now face the wrath of Putin. On the other hand, we are told that the GRU is the crème de la crème of state agencies, that Russia is mighty and malevolent and that we should be very, very afraid. Which is it?

Lastly,let’s consider the connections that the UK public is being encouraged to make. Between the two Bellingcat identifications of Chepiga and Mishkin, a clutch of wes-tern states, including the UK and the US, came out with a coordinated condemnation of specific cases of Russian cyber-espionage. One related to the chemical weapons watchdog, the OPCW, back in April;another to the World Anti-Doping Agency in Swit-zerland. All this was presented to the UK public at least in the context of the Skripal case.

But there is a broader and more obvious explanation for Russia’s “behaviour” here – which is that, whether in sport or in matters of chemical weapons, the western allies have closed ranks to exclude Russia from information it is entitled to as a member of these international organisations. In such circumstances, wouldn’t you try to find out what was going on? Might you not also wonder why an apparent attack in an English city was being treated not as a crime – so a police matter – but as “the first use of a chemical weapon in Europe since the Second World War”, which allowed it to be immediately shut behind the impenetrable wall that supposedly protects UK intelligence and state security? "

And the point that troubles me. For all the “revelations” of recent days, we are no fur-ther forward in knowing what happened to the Skripals – or to Dawn Sturgess, who remains the only person to have died, or to her partner,Charlie Rowley,who has now, like the Skripals and Detective Constable Nick Bailey, disappeared from the media. The two men caught on CCTV in Salisbury may indeed be GRU agents - though why the GRU would squander its brightest and best on such an apparently incompetently executed operation raises doubts. But no UK court would convict them of even attempted killing on the “evidence” that has so far been produced.

The CCTV footage from Salisbury has huge lacunae - though it is established that the cameras were working in Salisbury that day - and does not include any of the pair less than 500m from the Skripals’ house, nor any of the Skripals themselves. Why not? We still do not know where they were for most of that Sunday morning, who they might have met, or for what purpose,or precisely when the presumed attack occurred. Those are huge gaps.

Now, it is also true that Russia’s information machine has hardly covered itself in glo-ry. Its response to at least some of the UK accusations have been weak or in dubious taste, to put it mildly.The RT interview (which was also broadcast on Russian domes- tic TV) seemed designed to make the Salisbury “tourists” a laughing stock. And Russia has not been as vocal as might perhaps have been expected in demanding consular access to Yulia Skripal, which might seem to cast doubt on its claims of innocence.

But the flaws in the way Russia has presented its case are not my prime concern. I am in the UK, a British citizen and a UK journalist, and I find the evidence and the ex-planations so far offered by our own side in what is becoming an all-out information war both deficient and scandalously short on credibility – and so, I suggest, should you. ”


***

 

Tuo Zamalkan lavastettu Al-Nusran/Al-Qaidan kaasuisku elokuussa 2003 oli lopulta käänteentekevä tyräys "Länneltä" Syyrian sodassa: YK ei mennyt retkuun,  eikä sitten "Länsi" itsekään uskaltanut ilman sitä lähteä maahyökkäykseen:


https://hameemmias.vuodatus.net/lue/2013/10/yk-n-kriisinhallintaa-haukutaan-turhasta-kun-sita-ei-osata-eika-haluta-kayttaa-1

" perjantai, 25. lokakuu 2013

YK:n kriisinhallintaa haukutaan turhasta, kun sitä ei osata eikä haluta käyttää

Eilinen YLE:n A-studio 11.09.2013 taas tihkui ja kipinöi "pettymystä" ja harmistusta, että "Länsi" ei näytäkään hyökkäävän Syyriaan ilman YK:n Turvallisuusneuvoston lupaa. Erityinen kestomarina kohdistuu Turvallisuusneuvoston pysyväisjäsenten ve-to-oikeuteen, josta annetaan väärä kuva, ikään kun se kohdistuisi kaikkeen, mitä YK tekee,ja ikään kuin TN olisi YK:n suvereeni korkein päättäjä.Sitä se ei ole,vaan se on YK:n tärkein erityiselin,jonka toimialue on rajattu turvallisuus- ja erilaisiin siihen välit- tömästi liittyviin asioihin, kuten jäsenmaiden hyväksymiseen ja erottamiseen sekä sihteeristön kokoonpanoon.Erikoisjärjestönä KAIKEN,MITÄ TN TEKEE,ON PERUS- TUTTAVA (YLEMPÄÄN) LAKIIN, Peruskirjaan ja yleiskokouspäätöksiin (General Assembly Resolution, GER).


... YK:n sotarikostuomioistuimen tuomari Carla del Ponte toteaa faktat:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o5RWC9joWKk

UN's Carla Del Ponte: "2013 chemical attack was done by Syrian rebels, not Assad".

Ranskan tutkijoiden argumentti vuonna 2016 oli , että myrkky oli samaa erää kuin 2013!

https://hameemmias.vuodatus.net/lue/2017/06/ranskan-tutkimus-syyrian-kaasuista-todistaa-tosiasiassa-etta-hallitus-ei-ollut-syypaa-vuoden-2013-kaasuihinkaan

 

***

EDUSKUNNAN ALASELLE ULKOPOLIITTISELLE INSTI - TUUTILLE BELLINGCAT EI OLE VAIN "TOTUUDEN KRITEERI" VAAN MYÖS "TOTUUDEN MÄÄRITELMÄ"!!!

totuudenjalkeen.jpg.jpg

 

Helvetin Kuustoista!!!

http://jarmokoponen.puheenvuoro.uusisuomi.fi/262678-totuuden-jalkeen

Jarmo Koponen

Helsinki

Jarmo Koponen on toimittaja.

" Totuuden jälkeen (Teos, 2018) on mainio kirja. Se pureutuu hyvin isoon ongelmaan, jonka ydin on mediassa, toimituksissa, joissa tehdään samoja virheitä yhä uudelleen.

...

Propagandaa tehdään tietoisesti, ja se onkin jo toinen juttu. Nimittäin kirjassa muistutetaan, että ulkopoliittisen harhauttamisen vastinparina ei ole tieteellinen konsensus, vaan vaihteleva määrä todistusaineistoa ja asiantuntijoiden tilannearvio. Aukottoman todisteen, savuavan aseen, peräänkuuluttaminen saattaa toimia puolustustaktiikkana, jolla on myös läpimenomahdollisuuksia liberaalin demokratian perinteessä käytävässä keskustelussa.

”Tässä voidaan vetää harhaanjohtava analogia yksityishenkilöön ja riippumattomaan oikeuslaitokseen, vaatia aina lisää näyttöjä, neutraalia prosessia ja mahdollisuutta puolustautumiseen – eihän pelkän syytteen voida katsoa riittävän tuomioon. Krimin miehittäminen, MH-17-lennon alasampuminen, Syyrian hallinnon toistuvat kaasuiskut sekä Skripal-myrkytystapaus ovat viime vuosina nostaneet tämän kyseenalaisen ulkopolitiikka käräjäoikeutena -argumentin esiin. Tasapuolisuuden ylittäminen, Venäjän puolustusministerin tai Putinin esittämän narratiivin haastaminen vaatii työtä ja ammattitaitoa.”

 

 
 
Totuuden jälkeen – Miten media selviää algoritmien ja paskapuheen aikana
 
Ilmestynyt 25.9.2018
 
Antto Vihma, Jarno Hartikainen, Hannu-Pekka Ikäheimo & Olli Seuri
 
Vuonna 2016 Yhdysvaltain presidentinvaalien ja Britannian EU-kansanäänestyksen seurauksena syntyi laajalti jaettu tunne siitä, että politiikan tekemisen tavat ja julkisen keskustelun säännöt olivat muuttuneet pohjiaan myöten. Tunteet ja räikeät valheet jättivät faktat jalkoihinsa. Oli siirrytty totuudenjälkeiseen aikaan.
 
Maailma ei kuitenkaan muuttunut vuodessa. Totuudenjälkeisen ajan keskeiset ajurit – yhteiskunnallinen polarisaatio ja teknologinen kehitys – olivat muokanneet maaperää vuosikymmenten ajan. Ne ilmenivät perinteisen median ja asiantuntijuuden kriisinä, vanhojen hierarkioiden murtumisena ja verkostojen vallan kasvuna, sekä uusina julkisuuden hallinnan keinoina. Räikeimmillään ilmiöt tulivat esiin Yhdysvalloissa, mutta samat voimat ovat käynnissä myös Suomessa.
 
Totuuden jälkeen on ensimmäinen suomalainen yleistajuinen kokonaiskatsaus tähän murrokseen. Kirjassa tarkastellaan kriittisesti totuudenjäl- keisen ajan ilmiöitä sekä niiden historiaa. Politiikan eri alueisiin syventävät tapaustutkimukset paljastavat suomalaisen julkisen keskustelun karikot.
 
 
VTT, dosentti Antto Vihma (s. 1978) on Ulkopoliittisessa instituutissa työs- kentelevä kansainvälisen politiikan tutkija. Vuosina 2015 ja 2016 hän toimi vierailevana tutkijana Yhdysvalloissa Massachusetts Institute of Technologyssä (MIT).
 
FM Jarno Hartikainen (s. 1985) työskentelee Helsingin Sanomien politiikan ja talouden toimituksessa. Työssään hän on perehtynyt energia- ja ilmastopolitiikkaan, EU-kysymyksiin ja kansainväliseen kauppaan.
 
YTM Hannu-Pekka Ikäheimo (s. 1983) työskentelee asiantuntijana Sitran ennakointi- ja strategiayksikössä. Politiikan tutkimuksen alaan kuuluvassa väitöskirjassaan Ikäheimo tutkii EU-journalismin ja demokratian välistä suhdetta.
 
YTT Olli Seuri (s. 1983) on Yleisradion toimittaja ja journalismin tutkija. Hän on väitellyt journalistiikasta Tampereen yliopistossa vuonna 2016. Lisäksi Seuri on palkittu Vuoden journalistina Bonnierin Suuri journalistipalkinto -kilpailussa 2017.

sunnuntai, 7. lokakuu 2018

Tiedettä vai neurohölynpölyä?

Täytyy sanoa, että en ole asiasta toistaiseksi aivan varma.

Mutta Tampereen yliopistolla "tutkitaan" "rotumurhapeilineuroonikin",joten asiaa on tarkasteltava...

http://www.uta.fi/med/icl/results/index/Peltola%20etal-emergence%20and%20stability%20of%20fear%20bias-%20submitted.pdf

 

The emergence and stability of the attentional bias to fearful faces in infancy

Mikko J. Peltola 1, 2, 3,

Jari K. Hietanen 1,

Linda Forssman 4

, & Jukka M. Leppänen 4

1 Human Information Processing Laboratory, School of Social Sciences and Humanities, University of Tampere, Finland

2 Centre for Child and Family Studies, Leiden University, The Netherlands

3 Leiden Institute for Brain and Cognition, Leiden University, The Netherlands

4 Tampere Center for Child Health Research, School of Medicine, University of Tampere, Finland

Corresponding author: Mikko Peltola Centre for Child and Family Studies Leiden University P.O. Box 9555

2300 RB Leiden The Netherlands E-mail: mikko.peltola@uta.fi Tel: +31 6 1461 4895

 

Abstract

Several studies have shown that at 7 months of age, infants display an attentional bias toward fearful facial expressions. In the present study, we analyzed visual at-tention and heart rate data from a cross-sectional study with 5-, 7-, 9-, and 11-month-old infants (Experiment 1) and visual attention from a longitudinal study with 5- and 7-month-old infants (Experiment 2) to examine the emergence and stability of the attentional bias to fearful facial expressions. In both experiments, the attentional bias to fearful faces appeared to emerge between 5 and 7 months of age: 5-month-olds did not show a difference in disengaging attention from fearful and non-fearful faces, whereas 7- and 9-month-old infants had a lower probability of diseng aging attention from fearful than non-fearful faces. Across the age groups, heart rate (HR) data (Experiment 1) showed a more pronounced and longer-lasting HR deceleration to fearful than non-fearful expressions.

The results are discussed in relation to the development of neural systems respon-sible for the perception and experience of fear and the interaction between emotional and attentional brain systems.

The emergence and stability of the attentional bias to fearful faces in infancy

One of the developmental challenges infants face during the first year of life is to acquire the ability to use emotional information from others’ nonverbal signals for the service of behavioral regulation and learning about novel and potentially threatening situations. Potential early precursors to the ability to learn from others’ emotional signals may be observed in young infants’ selective attentional responses to facial expressions.

A number of studies have shown that during the second half of the first year of life, infants preferentially attend to fearful facial expressions over positive and neutral emotion cues (Leppänen & Nelson, 2009). It is likely that an att entional bias toward fearful expressions over other stimuli fosters associative learning in situations invol-ving expressions of fear and impending danger. When two different facial expres-sions are presented side by side on a computer screen for a period of 10-20 seconds in a visual paired comparison (VPC) task, 7-month-old infants spontaneously look longer at fearful than at happy faces (Kotsoni, de Haan,& Johnson, 2001; Nelson & Dolgin, 1985). Using electroencephalography (EEG), Nelson and de Haan (1996) observed that in 7-month-old infants, an event-related brain potential (ERP) compo-nent associated with allocating attention to visual stimuli (i.e.,the Nc component) was larger for fearful than happy faces, indicating increased attention to fearful faces (for similar findings, see also de Haan, Belsky, Reid, Volein, & Johnson, 2004; Grossmann et al., 2011; Leppänen, Moulson, Vogel-Farley, & Nelson, 2007).

Previous studies have used a modification of the Overlap paradigm (Aslin & Salapa-tek, 1975) to further understand infants’ attentional biases toward emotional expres-sions. In the Overlap paradigm, non-emotional stimuli are presented in the visual pe-riphery to attract attention to their location after attention has first been engaged on a centrally presented facial expression stimulus. The pattern of results emerging from these studies is that 7-month-old infants are less likely (Nakagawa&Sukigara, 2012; Peltola, Leppänen, Palokangas,&Hietanen, 2008) and slower (Peltola, Leppänen, Vogel-Farley, Hietanen, & Nelson, 2009) to disengage their attention away from fearful than from happy and neutral faces or control stimuli matched for low-level visual properties.

The reasons for the increased attentiveness to facial signals of fear at the expense of other stimuli are not perfectly clear, and some authors (e.g., Kagan & Herschkowitz, 2005; Nelson&de Haan, 1996; Vaish, Grossmann,& Woodward, 2008) have raised the possibility that instead of a response to the emotional content of the fearful ex-pression, the attentional bias may reflect a novelty preference (i.e., the fact that facial expressions of fear are relatively rare in young infants’ rearing environment; Malates-ta & Haviland, 1982) or attention capture by salient low-level visual features such as the increased exposure of the sclera (eye white) in fearful expressions. Studies using the Overlapparadigm have shown, however, that the attentional bias is not simply reducible to these types of factors as facial stimuli controlling for novelty (i.e., novel, non-emotional grimaces) and distinctive visual features (i.e., fearful eyes embedded within an otherwise neutral expression) do not attract attention in a similar fashion as fearful faces do (Peltola et al., 2008; Peltola, Leppänen, Vogel-Farley et al., 2009).

Although studies employing ERP and eye movement measures have repeatedly shown an attentional bias to fearful faces in 7-month-old infants, the developmental time-course of the attentional bias has been considerably less well documented.

Available evidence indicates, however, that the enhanced attentiveness toward fearful expressions emerges between 5 and 7 months of age. Peltola, Leppänen, Mäki, and Hietanen (2009) analyzed attention-related ERPs and looking times from 5- and 7-month-old infants while they were shown fearful and happy faces. For the 7-month-old infants, the results replicated earlier studies in that the ERP responses were larger and the looking times longer for fearful than happy faces. No significant differences were observed with either measure in 5-month-old infants. By measuring attention-related ERPs to neutral and fearful faces with the eyes looking toward or away from a laterally presented object, Hoehl and Striano (2010) found no differen-ces in the magnitude of the ERP responses between the two expressions in 3-month-old infants, whereas in 6-month-old infants the responses were larger to fearful faces with the eyes looking toward the object. Bornstein and Arterberry (2003) also did not observe differences in 5-month-olds’ looking times to fearful and happy faces.

Vaish et al. (2008) even argued for the existence of a “positivity bias” during the first six months as there are findings of longer looking times to happy than fearful expres-sions in newborns (Farroni, Menon, Rigato, & Johnson, 2007) and happy com-pared to angry expressions in 4- to 6-month-old infants (LaBarbera, Izard, Vietze, & Parisi, 1976; Wilcox & Clayton, 1968). To gether, these findings suggest a change in the relative weighting of attention to fear-related signals at around 6 months of age.

The present study aimed at further delineating the developmental course ofattention to fearful faces. To this end, we pooled data from cross-sectional studies conducted with 5-, 7-, 9-, and 11-month-old infants (Experiment 1) and an ongoing longitudinal study with 5- and 7-month-old infants (Experiment 2) to examine age-related changes in attention to fearful expressions. The experimental setups varied slightly between Experiment 1 and 2, but in both experiments, data were available for infants’ attention to neutral, happy,and fearful facial expressions measured with the Overlap paradigm. The ability to disengage and shift attention from an attended to another stimulus is sufficiently developed by the age of 5months (e.g.,Colombo, 2001; Hunnius & Geuze, 2004) to consider the Overlap paradigm suitable for the age range in question.

The first aim was to investigate whether the change in attentiveness to fearful faces between 5 and 7 months of age would be replicated using the Overlap paradigm. In the Overlap paradigm, the attentional bias should manifest in a lower probability of disengaging attention from fearful than happy and neutral faces. Second, it was of interest to test whether the attentional bias to fearful faces remains present until the end of the first year. Although studies using comparable methods with infants older than 7 months of age are limited, the available evidence points to a continuing at-tentional preference toward fearful faces. Using a VPC task, LoBue and DeLoache (2010) demonstrated longer looking times for fearful than happy faces in a group con-sisting of 8- to 14-month-old infants. Hoehl and Striano (2010) observed enhanced attention-related ERP responses for fearful relative to neutral faces in 9-monthold in-fants. Recently, Nakagawa and Sukigara (2012), using a slightly modified version of the Overlap paradigm, found that infants show a lower probability of disengaging at-tention from fearful than happy and neutral faces from 12 to 36 months of age. These data led us to expect similar modulation of attention by fearful faces in the Overlap paradigm in infants aged 7, 9, and 11 months.

In the cross-sectional dataset (Experiment 1), the eye movement measurements were complemented with recording of electrocardiography (ECG), allowing us to examine age-related changes in heart rate (HR) responses to facial expressions. Orienting of attention to external stimuli is typically accompanied by a rapid HR deceleration in adults (Graham& Clifton, 1966) and in infants (Reynolds & Richards, 2007). In adults, the HR deceleration response is augmented by emotionally negative stimuli,such as  unpleasant scenes or angry faces (Bradley, Lang, & Cuthbert, 1993; Bradley, 2009; Kolassa & Miltner,2006; Lang & Bradley,2010). Bradley (2009) regarded the momen- tary threat-related slowing of HR as a part of an automatic defense-related orienting reflex that acts to facilitate perceptual processing and extraction of information about potentially significant stimuli. Studies measuring HR from 7-month-old infants during the Overlap paradigm have shown a correspondence between HR and behavioral measures of attentional bias to fearful faces in that the HR orienting response (i.e., deceleration) is larger during trials with fearful than happy/neutral faces (Leppänen et al., 2010; Peltola, Leppänen, & Hietanen, 2011). Thus, we investigate whether the relatively automatic threat-related modulation of HR deceleration follows a similar developmental course as the attention measures based on eye movements.

To summarize,we analyzed both cross-sectional and longitudinal datasets in the pre- sent study to chart the emergence and stability of the attentional bias toward fearful faces in infancy. We hypothesized that the attentional bias to fearful faces would emerge between 5 and 7 months of age and remain present until 11 months of age. The attentional bias should manifest in a lower probability of disengaging attention awayfrom fearful than happy and neutral faces (Experiments 1 and 2) as well as in larger HR deceleration during fearful face trials (Experiment1).

Experiment 1

Methods

Participants.

Experiment 1 is based on data from a previous study with 7-month-old infants (reported in Peltola et al., 2011) and new data collected from 5-, 9-, and 11-month-old infants. The full sample consisted of 113infants in separate age groups of 5-month-olds (n = 29, mean age = 153 days, SD = 4.14, 16 girls), 7-month-olds (n = 29, mean age = 216 days, SD= 4.41, 8 girls), 9-month-olds (n = 29, mean age = 274 days, SD= 3.79, 10 girls), and 11-month-olds (n = 26, mean age = 336 days, SD = 2.93, 12 girls). Apart from two infants who were excluded from the analyses due to pre-term birth (one 5-month-old and one 7-month-old), the infants were born full term (≥ 37 weeks), had a birth weight of >2400 g and no history of visual or neurological abnormalities.

In the 5-month-olds’ group, 3 infants were excluded from all data analyses due to technical errors resulting in unusable video files and 1 infant from the HR analyses due to a technical error resulting in missing HR data. In the 7-month-olds, 2 infants were excluded from all data analyses due to sleepiness (n = 1) and due to providing <2 trials in one or more stimulus condition (n= 1), and 7 infants from the HR analyses due to a technical error resulting in missing HR data. In the 9-month-olds, 1 infant was excluded from all data analyses due to a technical error resulting in an unusable video file and 1 infant from the HR analyses due to excessive artefacts in the ECG signal. In the 11-month-olds, 1 infant was excluded from all data analyses due to providing <2 trials in one or more stimulus condition, and another 4 infants were excluded from the HR analyses due to excessive artefacts in the ECG signal. Thus, 104 infants remained in the disengagement probability analyses (5-month-olds: n = 25; 7-month-olds: n = 26; 9-month-olds: n = 28; 11-month-olds: n = 25) and 91 infants remained in the HR analyses (5-month-olds: n = 24; 7-month-olds: n = 19; 9-month-olds: n = 27; 11-month-olds: n = 21). Approval for the project was obtained from the University of Tampere and Tampere Area Ethical Review Board and an informed, written consent was obtained from the parent of each child.

Stimuli and procedure.

The stimuli were color images of neutral, happy, and fearful facial expressions of two female models. With an approximately 60-cm viewing distance, the faces measured 15.4° and 10.8º of vertical and horizontal visual angle, respectively. Prior to data col-lection, a group of adults (n = 18) rated the facial expressions for happiness and fear-fulness on a scale from 1 to 7. The ratings confirmed that the happy (M = 5.9) and fearful (M = 6.2) facial expressions used were considered good examples of the respective emotions. In addition, 3 to 4 trials with a monkey face were also presented during the testing session as occasional attention-getters. The data for the monkey stimuli were not analyzed.

Infants were seated on the parent’s lap in a dimly lit room while stimuli were presen-ted on a 19-inch computer monitor that was surrounded by black panels. A video ca-mera hidden above the monitor recorded the infant’s face and enabled the experi-menter to control stimulus presentation. Infants’ heart rate and eye movements were measured during the Overlap paradigm (Figure 1). A fixation image (an animated underwater scene from the movie “Finding Nemo”) preceded each trial.

Once the infant’s attention was focused on the fixation image, one of the face stimuli was presented on the center of the screen on a white background. After 700 ms from the onset of the face stimulus, the face was flanked by a peripheral stimulus presen-ted 13.6° equiprobably on the left or right for 2000 ms. The peripheral stimuli were black-and-white vertically arranged circles or a checkerboard pattern, measuring 15.4° and 4.3° vertically and horizontally, respectively. Every infant saw only one model’s face.

During the first 15 trials, neutral, happy, and fe arful expressions were presented in random order with the constraint that the same expression was presented no more than twice in a row and the flanker on the same side of the screen no more than three times in a row. The present analyses are based on these trials. After the first 15 trials, only happy and fearful expressions were presented until the infant became inatten-tive or fussy. The latter trials were added for the specific purposes of simultaneous ECQ, EEG and eye movement recording but the EEG was eventually recorded only from the 7-month-old infants and is thus not reported here.

Insert Figure 1 about here

Analysis of the behavioral data.

An independent observer coded the videos with frame-by-frame playback using VirtualDubMod 1.5.10.

2.Trials including excessive movement,anticipatory eye movements (eye movements commenced within 160 ms after the onset of the peripheral stimulus), and incorrect responses (eye movements away from the face that were not directed towards the peripheral stimulus) were excluded from the analyses. The mean number of scorable trials included in the analyses was 13.16 (neutral = 4.40;happy = 4.37; fearful = 4.38), with no significant differences in the number of scorable trials between the age groups, F (3,101) = 1.85,p >.14. The mean numbers of trials are comparable to earlier studies using the Overlap paradigm (Leppänen et al.,2011; Peltola et al.,2008; Peltola, Leppänen, Vogel-Farley et al., 2009).

For the behavioral data, disengagement probability from fearful, happy, and neutral faces was analyzed. It was calculated as the proportion of trials with a correct sac-cade out of the total number of scorable trials (i.e., a sum of trials with a correct sac-cade as well as no-saccade trials on which the child did not shift attention away from the face during the whole trial). Analyses of attention disengagement latencies are not reported because a large number of infants failed to provide a minimum of 2 trials with saccades away from the central stimulus in each stimulus condition.To establish the reliability of the data coding procedures, another independent observer who was blind to the stimulus condition coded the data from 28 subjects (~25%;7 infants within each age group). The interobserver agreement (Cohen’s Kappa) for the classification of responses to different response categories (i.e., correct saccade present, saccade absent, non-scorable trial) was on average .94.

Acquisition and analysis of the HR data.

Electrocardiogram (ECG) was recorded throughout the task with two pre-gelled and self-adhesive electrodes placed on the participant’s chest. The ECG was band-pass filtered from 0.05 to 30 Hz, amplified with a gain of 1000 (range +/-2750 μV; Accuracy .084 μV/LSB), and stored on a computer disk at the sample rate of 1000 Hz (Neuros can/Synamps). Offline, the data were analyzed by using an in-house (Matlab-based) algorithm to identify QRS complexes in the ECG signal, and to measure the time in-tervals between two successive R-waves (i.e., interbeat intervals or IBI). Lengthening of the IBI corresponds to HR deceleration and shortening to HR acceleration. After an algorithm-based detection of R-peaks, the data were manually corrected for falsely detected and missing peaks. As with the eye movement coding, trials with anticipato- ry eye movements, incorrect responses, and excessive movement causing distortion in the ECG signal were excluded from the analyses. To be included in the statistical analyses of the HR data, a minimum of 2 good trials were required for each stimulus condition. The mean number of trials retained for the HR analyses was 13.08 (neutral = 4.37; happy = 4.34; fearful = 4.36), with no significant differences between the age groups, F (3, 90) = 2.01, p > .12. For a period between 500 ms pre-stimulus and 2500 ms post-stimul us within each trial, the IBIs were quantified and assigned to 500-ms intervals by weighting each IBI by the proportion of the 500-ms interval occupied by that IBI (see Richards & Turner, 2001). Finally, IBIs were converted to beats per mi-nute (BPM) and averaged across different trials within each stimulus condition. The analyses were performed with HR change scores which were calculated by subtrac-ting the BPMs of each post-stimulus 500-ms interval from the BPM during the presti-mulus period. Accordingly, negative change score values indicate HR deceleration while positive values indicate HR an cceleration during the trial.

Statistical analyses.

As the eye movement data were not normally distributed,the analyses of the behavio- ral data were conducted using nonparametric methods.First,to provide data on poten- tial age differences in the overall attention disengagement from facial stimuli, age dif-ferences in disengagement probability across facial expressions were analyzed with the Kruskal-Wallis test and Mann-Whitney U -tests were used for pairwise compari-sons between age groups. Second, the effects of facial expressions on disengage-ment probability were analyzed within each age group separately by using Friedman tests for main effect analyses and Wilcoxon tests for pairwise comparisons.

Third, a fear bias score was calculated to further examine the potential age differen-ces in the magnitude of the attentional bias to fearful faces. The fear bias score was calculated by subtracting the disengagement probability score for fearful faces from the average disengagement probability score for happy and neutral faces. As the HR data were normally distributed, the HR change scores were subjected to a 3 × 5 × 4 repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) with Emotion (neutral, happy, fear-ful) and Time (0-500, 500-1000, 1000-1500,1500-2000,2000-2500 ms) as within-sub- ject factors and Age (5, 7, 9, 11) as a between-subjects factor. In all analyses, Bonfer-roni correction was applied for the p-values in cases where the number of pairwise comparisons was higher than three.

Results

Behavioral data.

Across facial expressions, age differences were observed in the overall probability in disengaging attention from faces, χ2 = 7.80, p < .05.

Disengagement probability decreased markedly after 5 months of age, with the 5- month-olds (M =.74) differing from 7-month-olds (M = .62),Z = -1.94, p ≤ .05, 9- month-olds (M = .56), Z = -2.42, p < .05, and 11-month-olds (M = .57), Z = -2.28, p < .05. The age groups differed in the effects of facial expressions on disengagement probability (Figure 2a) in that no effects of facial expressions were found for the 5- month-olds, FR = 3.91, df = 2, p > .14, and the 11-month-olds, FR = 3.98, df = 2, p > .13.

Significant effects of facial expressions on disengagement probability were observed in the 7-month-olds, FR = 7.77, df = 2, p < .05, and the 9-month-olds, FR = 14.22, df = 2, p < .01. Pairwise comparisons indicated that in the 7-month-olds, dis-engagement probability was significantly lower for fearful than happy faces,z =-3.12,p <.01, where- as the differences between fearful and neutral or happy and neutral expressions failed to reach significance,ps >.08. In the 9-month-olds, fearful faces resulted in a lower disengagement probability than happy, z = -2.91, p < .01, and neutral faces, z = -3.15, p < .01, with no differences between happy and neutral faces, z = -0.92,p > .35. A direct comparison of the fear bias scores (see Figure 4a) between all age groups did not,however,result in a significant effect of age on the magnitude of the attentional bias to fearful faces, χ2 = 4.43, p > .21.

Insert Figure 2 about here

HR data.

A 3 × 5 × 4 ANOVA revealed a main effect of Time, F(4, 348) = 27.69, p < .001, and an Emotion × Time interaction, F(8, 696) = 3.01, p < .05, but no interactions involving Age, ps > .11. The Emotion × Time interaction reflected the fact that the HR decele-ration became more pronounced during fearful than happy and neutral trials during the course of stimulus presentation (Figure 3). To reduce the number of paired com-parisons, fearful faces were contrasted with non-fearful (i.e., an average of happy and neutral) faces to compare the strength of HR deceleration within each time window. Paired sample t-tests with Bonferroni correction revealed a difference between fearful and non-fearful faces only during the last time window (2000-2500 ms), t(90) = - 2.63, p < .05, all other ps >.5. An inspection of the effects separately within each age group showed that the Emotion × Time interaction was significant in the 5-month-olds, F(8, 184) = 3.29,p < .05.The Emotion × Time interactions were not significant in 7-, 9-, and 11-month-old infants, all p s > .15, although a similar trend toward more pronounced HR deceleration during fearful face trials was observed in all age groups.

Insert Figure 3 about here

Discussion

The data from Experiment 1 showed age-related differences in the behavioral mea-sures of attention disengagement from fearful, happy, and neutral faces. The infants aged 7 and 9 months were less likely to disengage their attention from fearful faces, whereas the effects of facial expressions on diseng agement probability were absent in infants aged 5 and 11 months. The HR data showed a more pronounced and lon-ger-lasting HR deceleration during fearful than happy and neutral trials.This effect did not, however,show an interaction with the infants’ age and appeared to reflect a more generalized influence of fearful faces on HR decele ration across the age groups, al-though separate tests showed a significant effect only in the 5-month-old infants. The eye movement data provided support for the hypothesis that the attentional bias to fearful faces emerges between 5 and 7 months of age. The in terpretations of the ef-fects observed in Experiment 1 are hindered, however, by the fact that the direct com-parison of the fear bias scores (i.e., the probability of disengaging attention from fear-ful faces subtracted from the average disengagement probability score for happy and neutral faces) between the age groups was not significant. To provide a further test of the emergence of the attentional bias to fearful faces between 5 and 7 months of age, we analyzed additional data from an independent sample of infants tested longitudinally in Experiment 2.

Experiment 2

Methods

Participants.

The participants in the present analyses were a subsample of infants in an ongoing longitudinal cohort study, started in April 2012. All infants tested at 5 and 7 months of age by September 5th 2012 were included in the present analyses. The final sample included in the analyses consisted of 41 healthy and full-term (≥ 37 weeks) infants (18 girls) who were tested at both 5 (mean age = 152 days, SD = 3.70) and 7 (mean age = 213 days, SD = 3.25) months of age. Nine additional infants participated in the study but were excluded from all analyses because of pre-term birth (n = 1), technical errors (n = 1), not being tested at 7 months of age (n = 1, due to moving) and for provi-ding <2 scorable trials in one or more stimulus condition (n = 6). Approval for the pro-ject was obtained from the Ethical Committee of Tampere University Hospital and an informed, written consent was obtained from the parent of each child.

Stimuli and procedure.

As a part of the longitudinal study, infants’ attention to facial expressions were exa-mined at 5 and 7 months of age by using the Overlap paradigm (see Leppänen et al., 2011 for details of the methodology).In a difference to Experiment 1 and previous stu- dies (Leppänen et al., 2010, 2011), the present experiment was started by net place-ment for the recording of EEG (Electrical Geodesics, Inc., Eugene, OR, USA) and a calibration procedure for corneal-reflection eye-tracking (TobiiTX300, Tobii Techno-logy, Sweden). Following successful net placement and calibration (or three unsuc-cessful attempts to calibrate the eye-tracker), the infants were presented with the Overlap paradigm.The procedure and stimuli in the Overlap paradigm were similar to those used in Experiment 1,with the following exceptions: a) the stimulus onset asyn- chrony between the face and the peripheral stimulus was 1000 ms and the peripheral stimulus was presented for 3000 ms, b) monkey faces were not shown but a phase-scrambled face was presented as a non-face control stimulus, and c) a total of 24 tri-als (6/condition) were run in the first part of the testing session. The present analyses are based on the disengagement probabilities from neutral, happy, and fearful facial expressions during the first part of the experiment (the second part of stimulus presentation was added for the purposes of EEG meas urement and will be reported separately).

Analysis of the behavioral data.

Visual attention was analyzed from videorecordings of infants’ eye movements during the presentation of stimuli and the procedures for calculating disengagement probabilities from fearful, happy, and neutral faces were identical to Experiment 1. The mean number of scorable trials included in the analyses was 16.28 (fearful = 5.45; happy = 5.38; neutral = 5.45), with no significant difference in the number of scorable trials between the 5- and 7-month measurements, t(40) = 0.85, p > .40. The statistical analyses of the eye movement data were conducted in an identical fashion to Experiment 1.

Results

The overall probability of attention disengagement (i.e., an average of fearful, happy, and neutral trials) did not differ between the 5- and 7-month measurements (M = .79 and .77, respectively), z = -1.09, p >.27. Again,significant effects of facial expressions on disengagement probability were observed at 7 months of age, FR = 18.96, df= 2, p < .001,but not at 5 months of age, FR = 3.98,df = 2, p > .13 (see Figure 2b). The signi- ficant effect at 7 months of age was due to disengagement probability being lower for fearful than happy, z = -3.60, p < .001, and neutral faces, z = -3.95, p < .001, whereas no difference between happy and neutral faces was found, z = -0.70, p > .48. A com-parison of the fear bias scores between the two measurement points (Figure 4b) also indicated that the magnitude of the attentional bias to fearful faces increased significantly from 5 to 7 months of age, z = -2.02, p < .05.

Insert Figure 4 about here

Discussion

Experiment 2, using a within-subjects design, provided strong evidence for a deve-lopmental change in attention to fearful facial expressions between 5 and 7 months of age. Whereas at 5 months of age, facial expression of the central stimulus did not have an effect on infants’ probability of disengaging attention, the same infants at 7 months of age were significantly more likely to maintain their attention on fearful as compared to happy and neutral faces throughout the trial. With different samples of infants and experiments employing both between- and within-subjects designs, Experiments 1 and 2 converge in providing no evidence for preferential attention to fearful faces in 5-month-old infants, whereas the evidence for an attentional bias in 7-month-old infants is clear.

General Discussion

The present research investigated the potential developmental changes in patterns of attention to fearful, happy, and neutral faces between 5 and 11 months of age. Based on previous research, we hypothesized that the attentional bias to fearful faces would appear between 5 and 7 months of age and remain evident also at 9 and 11 months of age.

The attentional bias was expected to manifest in a decreased probability of disenga-ging attention from fearful faces and in a larger attention-related HR deceleration to fearful faces from 7 months onwards.

The results supported our hypothesis regarding the emergence, but not the stability of the attentional bias. First, the emergence of an attentional bias to fearful faces by 7 months of age was confirmed: facial expression did not have a significant effect on the probability of disengaging attention in the two samples of 5-month-old infants whereas 7- and 9-month-old infants had a lower probability of disengaging attention from fearful than non-fearful faces. According to Experiment 1, the attentional bias appeared to have dissipated by 11 months of age. Across the age groups, the HR data (Experiment 1) showed a more pronounced and longer-lasting HR deceleration during fearful than happy and neutral trials. In Experiment 1, the probability of disen-gaging attention from facial stimuli toward peripheral stimuli decreased from 5 to 7 months of age,after which the probability remained constant. This difference between 5 and 7 months of age was not, however, replicated in Experiment 2.

The observed emergence of the attentional bias to fearful faces between 5 and 7 months of age is in line with previous research (Peltola, Leppänen, Mäki et al., 2009) and with the model of the development of emotion-processing put forward by Leppä-nen and Nelson (2009, 2012). At the turn of the second half of the first year, major transitions in emotional development are observed. As infants progress towards the ability to move independently (typically between 6 and 8 months of age; Adolph, Ver-eijken, & Denny, 1998), increasing their distance and time away from the caregivers, it becomes increasingly important to be able to detect and direct attention to potential signals of threat and danger emanating from others’ facial, vocal, or bodily reactions. In parallel with changes in infants’ motor abilities,caregivers typically start to show in- creased variability in their expressive behaviors toward the infant, including a heigh-tened propensity to display emotionally negative facial signals in attempting to regu-late the infant’s actions in situations involving potential harm (Campos, Kermoian, & Zumbahlen, 1992). As a result, facial expressions begin to gain more direct referen-tial significance, which may enable infants to form associations between emotional signals and different contextual events. Whether or not the development of indepen-dent locomotion had an influence on the present pattern of results is not known, how-ever, as data about the participants’ motor abilities were not collected. To date, there are no studies that would have tracked the development of emotional face-proces-sing abilities in parallel with motor development. Leppänen and Nelson (2009, 2012) suggested that the shift in attentiveness to fear-related signals during the second half-year of life is related to a functional maturation of a neural circuitry that is responsible for directing attention to emotionally significant signals (i.e., connectivity between the amygdala and the prefrontal cortex).

The putative maturation of this system coincides with an increased distance and time away from the caregiver (due to motor development) and may even give rise to a sen-sitive period during which infants “expect” exposure to threat-alerting cues and show heightened readiness to process and store informati on about associations between emotions and objects in the environment (Leppänen & Nelson, 2012). In theory, such a sensitive period for processing fear-related inform ation could account for the pro-nounced attentiveness to fearful faces at 7 and 9 – but not at 11 – months of age. It is important to note,however,the results of Nakagawa and Sukigara (2012) who found a longitudinally stable effect of lower disengagement probabilities to fearful than happy and neutral faces from 12 to 36 months of age. Their results strongly suggest that the attentional bias to fearful expressions, emerging between 5 and 7 months of age, is an enduring phenomenon.

It is intriguing to note that there appears to be a developmental correspondence bet-ween the increase in infants’ attentiveness to fearful facial signals and the onset of emotional fear responses such as fear of heights (Campos et al., 1992) and wariness toward strangers (Braungart-Rieker, Hill-Soderlund, & Karrass, 2010). Cross-species data are available to suggest that it is a common pattern for the offspring of altricial species to show an apparent inability to respond fearfully to conspecifics or form threat-related associations toward the caregiver in the early phases in development (Moriceau & Sullivan, 2005). Only after reaching a certain developmental phase that is linked with an increase in independent locomotion and functional maturation of the amygdala do the species-typical fear responses begin to emerge.Such developmen-tal transitions in fear-related behaviors have been documented in monkeys (Bauman & Amaral, 2008) and in depth in rodents (Moriceau, Roth, & Sullivan, 2010). Sullivan and colleagues (Moriceau & Sullivan, 2005; Moriceau et al., 2010) have argued that the absence of fear-learning during early development may function to optimize and protect the infant’s attachment formation and proximity-seeking to the caregiver and, conversely,to prevent learning aversion toward the caregiver.Whether or not a similar inhibition of fear-learning – that might also account for the absence of an attentional bias to fearful facial signals in the youngest age group in the present study – exists in human infants until the age of 5 to 7 months remains to be tested experimentally.

In Experiment 1, the HR data did not conform to our hypothesis in that there was no interaction between age and the strength of cardiac deceleration. Across age groups, there appeared to be a pronounced HR deceleration to fearful faces, although sepa-rate tests showed a significant effect only in the 5-month-old infants. While the rea-sons for the absence of significant effects in separate tests with the other age groups are not clear, the pattern of results nevertheless raises an interesting possibility of a dissociation between the attentional measures based on eye movements and heart rate. It might thus be that the influences of emotional expressions on overt attention disengagement require functional interaction between limbic circuits providing modu-latory signals related to the emotional significance of stimuli (i.e., the amygdala) and areas controlling attentional focus (i.e., PFC), and that such functional connectivity may not be sufficiently matured until the age of 5 to 7 months (Leppänen & Nelson, 2009,2012).The HR deceleration response to threat-related stimuli,on the other hand, may more closely reflect an obligatory, subcortically mediated attentional orienting response that is less dependent on cortical processing (Bradley, 2009; Lang & Brad-ley, 2010). The subcortical structures enabling infants to respond with cardiac dece-lerati on to various stimuli (e.g., simple auditory stimuli and visual figures) appear to be functional already during the newborn period (Graham & Jackson,1970; Reynolds & Richards, 2007; Sameroff, Cashmore,& Dykes, 1973). Therefore, it may be feasible to suggest that also the neural circuitry responsible for producing the autonomic res-ponse to stimuli conveying potential emotional significance (i.e.,connections from the amygdala to the brainstem structures controlling autonomic responses) may mature considerably earlier than the amygdalocortical circuitry enabling controlled attentive-ness to emotional signals and producing the types of behavioral effects observed in the present experiments.

The pattern of age-related changes in the overall attention disengagement (i.e., across facial expressions) in Experiment 1 may reflect an increase in the capacity for endogenous attention control. In Experiment 1, the peripheral stimuli produced shifts of attention to their location on a majority of trials in 5-month-old infants, whereas infants from 7 to 11 months of age were more likely to maintain their attention on the central stimulus. In line with the present data, endogenous attention control has been shown to develop rapidly during the second half of the first year (Colombo, 2001; Kannass, Oakes, & Shaddy, 2006; Ruff & Rothbart, 1996), enabling infants to inhibit unwanted attention shifts and to prioritize interesting stimuli.

The increase in self-regulated control of attention is likely attributable to the matu-ration of prefrontal cortical structures which undergo major structural and functional maturational changes especially during the second half of the first year (Chugani & Phelps, 1986; Matsuzawa et al., 2001). However, similar changes in overall attention disengagement were not replicated in Experiment 2, limiting the interpretability of the results from Experiment 1.

In conclusion, the present study adds to the growing body of data indicating a tran-sition in processing emotional information at a round 5 to 7 months of age (Hoehl & Striano, 2010; Leppänen & Nelson,2009, 2012; Peltola, Leppänen, Mäki et al., 2009).

Attention was allocated to fearful faces preferentially in 7- and 9-month-old, but not in 5-month-old infants. The emerging prioritization of emotional saliency in processing social signals may provide a crucial scaffold for an infant with a newly found level of independence to navigate in an increasingly complex social and physical environ-ment. A replication is needed to ascertain whether the pattern of results in the 11-month-old infants represents a genuine effect (i.e., an absence of attentional bias to fearful faces) or whether the attentional bias remains present over time (cf. Nakagawa & Sukigara, 2012).

A promising agenda for future studies is to determine the importance of developmen-tal timing, i.e., whether variation in the onset of the attentional bias to threat-related signals is relevant in relation to future social and emotional outcomes.

A replication is needed to ascertain whether the pattern of results in the 11-month-old infants represents a genuine effect (i.e., an absence of attentional bias to fearful faces) or whether the attentional bias remains present over time (cf. Nakagawa & Sukigara, 2012).

A promising agenda for future studies is to determine the importance of developmental timing, i.e., whether variation in the onset of the attentional bias to threat-related signals is relevant in relation to future social and emotional outcomes.

References

Adolph, K. E., Vereijken, B., & Denny, M. A. (1998). Learning to crawl. Child Development, 69, 1299-1312.

Aslin, R. N., & Salapatek, P. (1975). Saccadic localization of visual targets by the very young human infant. Perception and Psychophysics, 17, 293-302.

Bauman, M. D., & Amaral, D. G. (2008). Neurodevelopment of social cognition. In C. A. Nelson, & M. Luciana (Eds.), Handbook of developmental cognitive neuroscience (2nd ed., pp. 161-185). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Bornstein, M. H., & Arterberry, M. E. (2003). Recognition, discrimination and categorization of smiling by 5-month-old infants. Developmental Science, 6, 585-599.

Bradley, M. M. (2009). Natural selective attention: Orienting and emotion. Psychophysiology, 46, 1-11.

Bradley, M. M., Lang, P. J., & Cuthbert, B. N. (1993). Emotion, novelty, and the startle reflex: Habituation in humans. Behavioral Neuroscience, 107, 970-980.

Braungart-Rieker, J. M., Hill-Soderlund, A. L., & Karrass, J. (2010). Fear and anger reactivity trajectories from 4 to 16 months: The roles of temperament, regulation, and maternal sensitivity. Developmental Psychology, 46, 791-804.

Campos, J. J., Kermoian, R., & Zumbahlen, M. R. (1992). Socioemotional transformations in the family system following infant crawling onset. In N. Eisenberg, & R. A. Fabes (Eds.), Emotion and its regulation in early development (pp. 25-40). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Chugani, H., & Phelps, M. (1986). Maturational changes in cerebral function in infants determined by 18FDG positron emission tomography. Science, 231, 840-843.

Colombo, J. (2001). The development of visual attention in infancy. Annual Review of Psychology, 52, 337-67.

de Haan, M., Belsky, J., Reid, V., Volein, A., & Johnson, M. H. (2004). Maternal personality and infants' neural and visual responsivity to facial expressions of emotion. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 45, 1209-1218.

Farroni, T., Menon, E., Rigato, S., & Johnson, M.H. (2007). The perception of facial expressions in newborns. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 4, 2-13.

Graham, F. K., & Clifton, R. K. (1966). Heart-rate change as a component of the orienting response. Psychological Bulletin, 65, 305-320.

Graham, F. K., & Jackson, J. C. (1970). Arousal systems and infant heart rate responses. Advances in Child Development and Behavior, 5, 59-117.

Grossmann, T., Johnson, M. H.,Vaish, A., Hughes,D., Quinque,D., Stoneking, M., et al. (2011). Genetic and neural dissociation of individual responses to emotional expressions in human infants. Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience, 1, 57-66.

Hoehl, S., & Striano, T. (2010). The development of emotional face and eye gaze processing. Developmental Science, 13, 813-825.

Hunnius, S., &Geuze,R.H.(2004).Gaze shifting in infancy: A longitudinal study using dynamic faces and abstract stimuli. Infant Behavior and Development, 2, 397-416.

Kagan, J., & Herschkowitz, N. (2005). A young mind in a growing brain. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Kannass, K.N.,Oakes,L.M.,& Shaddy,D.J. (2006). A longitudinal investigation of the development of attention and distractibility.Journal of Cognition and Development, 7, 381-409.

Kolassa,I.T.,&Miltner,W.H.(2006).Psychophysiological correlates of face processing in social phobia. Brain Research, 1118, 130-141.

Kotsoni, E., de Haan, M., & Johnson, M. H. (2001). Categorical perception of facial expressions by 7-month-old infants. Perception, 30, 1115-1125.

LaBarbera, J.D., Izard, C.E., Vietze, P.,&Parisi, S.A.(1976). Four- and six-month-old infants' visual responses to joy, anger, and neutral expressions. Child Development, 47, 535-538.

Lang, P. J., & Bradley, M. M. (2010). Emotion and the motivational brain. Biological Psychology, 84, 437-450.

Leppänen, J. M., Moulson, M. C., Vogel-Farley, V. K., & Nelson, C. A. (2007). An ERP study of emotional face processing in the adult and infant brain. Child Development, 78, 232-245.

Leppänen, J. M., & Nelson, C. A. (2009). Tuning the developing brain to social signals of emotions. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 10, 37-47.

Leppänen, J. M., & Nelson, C. A. (2012). Early development of fear processing. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 21, 200-204.

Leppänen, J. M., Peltola, M. J., Mäntymaa, M., Koivuluoma, M., Salminen, A., & Puura, K. (2010). Cardiac and behavioral evidence for emotional influences on attention in 7-month-old infants. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 34, 547-553.

Leppänen, J. M., Peltola, M.J., Puura, K., Mäntymaa, M., Mononen, N., & Lehtimä- ki, T. (2011). Serotonin and early cognitive development: Variation in the tryptophan hydroxylase 2 gene is associated with visual attention in 7-month-old infants. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 52,1144-1152.

LoBue, V., & DeLoache, J. S. (2010). Superior detection of threat-relevant stimuli in infancy. Developmental Science, 13, 221-228.

Malatesta, C. Z., & Haviland, J. M. (1982). Learning display rules: The socialization of emotion expression in infancy. Child Development, 53, 991-1003.

Matsuzawa, J., Matsui, M., Konishi, T., Noguchi, K., Gur, R. C., Bilker, W., et al. (2001). Age-related volumetric changes of brain gray and white matter in healthy infants and children, Cerebral Cortex, 11, 335-342.

Moriceau, S., Roth, T. L., & Sullivan, R. M. (2010). Rodent model of infant attachment learning and stress. Developmental Psychobiology, 52, 651-660.

Moriceau, S., & Sullivan, R. M. (2005). Neurobiology of infant attachment. Developmental Psychobiology, 47, 230-242.

Nakagawa, A.,& Sukigara,M. (2012).Difficulty in disengaging from threat and tempe- ramental negative affectivity in early life: A longitudinal study of infants aged 12 to 36 months. Behavioral and Brain Functions, 8, 40.

Nelson, C. A., & de Haan, M. (1996). Neural correlates of infants' visual responsive-ness to facial expressions of emotion. Developmental Psychobiology, 29, 577-595.

Nelson, C. A., & Dolgin, K. G. (1985). The generalized discrimination of facial expressions by seven-month-old infants. Child Development, 56, 58-61.

Peltola, M. J., Leppänen, J. M., & Hietanen, J. K. (2011). Enhanced cardiac and attentional responding to fearful faces in 7-month-old infants. Psychophysiology, 48, 1291-1298.

Peltola, M. J., Leppänen, J. M., Mäki, S., & Hietanen, J. K. (2009). Emergence of enhanced attention to fearful faces between 5 and 7 months of age. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience, 4, 134-142.

Peltola, M. J., Leppänen, J. M., Palokangas, T., & Hietanen, J. K. (2008). Fearful faces modulate looking duration and attention disengagement in 7-month-old infants. Developmental Science, 11, 60-68.

Peltola, M. J., Leppänen, J. M., Vogel-Farley, V. K., Hietanen, J. K., & Nelson, C. A. (2009). Fearful faces but not fearful eyes alone delay attention disengagement in 7-month-old infants. Emotion, 9, 560-565.

Reynolds, G. D., & Richards, J. E. (2007). Infant heart rate: A developmental psy-chophysiological perspective. In L. A. Schmidt, & S. J. Segalowitz (Eds.), Develop-mental psychophysiology: Theory, systems, and methods (pp. 173-212). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Richards, J. E., & Turner, E. D. (2001). Extended visual fixation and distractibility in children from six to twenty-four months of age. Child Development, 72, 963-972.

Ruff, H. A., & Rothbart, M. K. (1996). Attention in early development: Themes and variations. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Sameroff, A. J., Cashmore, T. J., & Dykes, A. C. (1973). Heart rate deceleration during visual fixation in human newborns. Developmental Psychology, 8, 117-119.

Vaish, A., Grossmann, T., & Woodward, A. (2008). Not all emotions are created equal: The negativity bias in social-emotional development. Psychological Bulletin, 134, 383-403.

Wilcox, B. M., & Clayton, F. L. (1968). Infant visual fixation on motion pictures of the human face. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 6, 22-32.

 

Author notes

This work was supported by the Kone Foundation (M.J.P.), the Academy of Finland (projects #131786, 130895, and 218284, M.J.P, J.K.H., J.M.L.) and the European Research Council (ERC Starting Grant # 283763, J.M.L).

(Pahimpia paskantakeita kaikki nuo...)

***

"Pelokkaisiin kasvoihin reagoimisen Keeni"...:

 

http://www.uta.fi/med/icl/results/index/Forssman%20et%20al%20-%20Regulatory%20variant%20in%20the%20TPH2.pdf

Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry *** (2013), pp **–**

Regulatory variant of the TPH2 gene and early life stress are associated with heightened attention to social signals of fear in infants

Linda Forssman, 1 , Mikko J. Peltola, 2,3,4, Santeri Yrttiaho, 1, Kaija Puura, 5, Nina Mononen, 6, Terho Lehtimäki,6 and Jukka M. Leppänen1

1 School of Medicine, University of Tampere, Tampere, Finland;

2 School of Social Sciences and Humanities, University of Tampere, Tampere, Finland;

3 Centre for Child and Family Studies, Leiden University, Leiden, Netherlands;

4 Leiden Institute for Brain and Cognition, Leiden University, Leiden, Netherlands;

5 Department of Child Psychiatry, Tampere University Hospital, Tampere, Finland;

6 Department of Clinical Chemistry, Fimlab Laboratories and School of Medicine, University of Tampere and Tampere University Hospital, Tampere, Finland

 

lauantai, 6. lokakuu 2018

Kolme tutkijaa kirjoitti uskomattomia hölynpöly­artikkeleita feministisiin julkaisuihin...

... ja sai osan niistä läpi – kysyimme suomalaistutkijoilta, mitä se kertoo feministisen tutkimuksen tasosta

https://www.hs.fi/elama/art-2000005852219.html

Artikkeleissa ei ainoastaan ollut päätä eikä häntää, vaan ne olivat poskettoman absurdeja ja törkeitä.

”Tässä näkyvät kaikki yliopistojen perusongelmat", kommentoi tutkija ja tiedetoimittaja Tuukka Tomperi.

James A. Lindsay, Helen Pluckrose ja Peter Boghossian aloittivat vuosi sitten projektin, jonka aikana he saivat julkaistua silkkaa hölynpölyä tieteellisissä julkaisuissa. (KUVA: Mike Nayna)

Helen Pluckrose, James A. Lindsay ja Peter Boghossian aloittivat vuosi sitten projek-tin, jonka aikana he kirjoittivat ja lähettivät kaksikymmentä artikkelia tarjolle varsinkin feministiseen tutkimukseen keskittyneisiin tieteellisiin aikakauslehtiin.

Siis sellaisiin kuiviin mutta arvostettuihin lehtiin, joihin kirjoittaminen on iso osa tutki-- joiden päivittäisestä leipätyöstä. Niiden lehtien kansien sisällä ovat syntyneet monet tälläkin hetkellä kuumana otsikoissa ja ihmisten mielissä kiehuvat ajatukset ja tavat katsella maailmaa: toksinen maskuliinisuus, valkoisen ihmisen etuoikeutettu asema, mikroaggressiot, miesten valta-asema naisiin nähden ja näiden harjoittama seksuaalinen väkivalta, queer-teoriat, ja niin edelleen.

Tässä projektissa vain joka ikinen julkaistavaksi tarjottu artikkeli oli tieteen kaapuun puettua hölynpölyä.

Projekti oli tarkoitushakuinen ja ilkeä, mutta sen voi helposti antaa anteeksi, sillä se oli myös ratkiriemukas. Siis sellainen, että kiihkeimmänkin tasa-arvotutkijan oli varmasti vaikea lukea sen löydöksiä nauramatta ääneen.

Artikkeleissa ei ainoastaan ollut päätä eikä häntää, vaan ne olivat poskettoman absurdeja ja törkeitä.

Kirjoittajien – kaikki joko tutkijoita tai muuten akatemiassa työskenteleviä ihmisiä it-sekin – juonena oli kirjoittaa tyypillisestä feministiseltä tutkimukselta vaikuttava artik-keli, johon he sisällyttivät hillittömiä väitteitä, älyvapaita päätelmiä tai epäinhimillistä-viä ja julmia suosituksia, kuitenkin niin että artikkelin sisältämät aivopierut peiteltiin sopivan muodikkailla sukupuolentutkimuksen ilmaisuilla ja etsiskelemällä alan kirjallisuudesta edes joten kuten sopivat sitaatit lähdeviitteiksi.

Sitten he odottivat ja katsoivat, menevätkö tekstit arvostetuissa tiedejulkaisuissa läpi.

Periaatteessa yhdenkään ei olisi pitänyt ylittää julkaisukynnystä, sillä sisältö on … no, melkoista.

Koirapuistoja käsittelevässä artikkelissa väitettiin, että koirien keskinäinen nylkyttä-minen koirakentällä on osoitus koirien ”raiskauskulttuurista” ja että myös miehiä voisi kouluttaa kuten koiria jotta miesten taipumus seksuaaliseen väkivaltaan voitaisiin kitkeä pois. Artikkelissa oli myös mainintoja siitä, kuinka koirien omistajat ”olettavat” koiriensa sukupuolen ja väite, että tutkija oli käsikopelolla tarkastanut koirapuistossa käyneiden koirien sukuelimet.

Toisessa artikkelissa paheksuttiin heteromiesten yleisesti kokemaa vastenmielisyyt-tä harrastaa masturbaatiota anaalisesti ja ehdotettiin dildon laittamista takapuoleen keinona taistella ”homohysteriaa”, ”transhysteriaa” ja transfobiaa vastaan.

He kirjoittivat uusiksi luvun Hitlerin Taisteluni -kirjasta, mutta vaihtoivat natsien käyttämien termien tilalle feministisen tutkimuksen käyttämiä termejä.

Edelleen yhdessä käsiteltiin sitä, että mies syyllistyy seksuaaliseen väkivaltaan, jos ajattelee naista masturboidessaan.

Kehopositiivisuutta käsittelevässä artikkelissa he ehdottivat, että sairaalloinen liho-minen on kehonrakennusta siinä missä punttisalilla käyminenkin ja että itse asiassa lihominen olisi oivallinen kehonrakennuksen tapainen urheilulaji.

He ehdottivat feministisen tai kriittisen pedagogian artikkelissaan, että kouluissa val-koisten miesoppilaiden tulisi istua lattialla (kevyissä) kahleissa ilman puheoikeutta.

Eräässä artikkelissa he pitivät esimerkiksi ”feminististä tulkitsevaa tanssia” perinteis-tä tiedettä parempana tapana tutkia tähtiä ja maailmankaikkeutta, sillä tähän asti astronomiaa ovat tutkineet valkoiset kolonialistista perinnettä edustavat miehet.

Ja niin edelleen, kahdenkymmenen täysin absurdin artikkelin verran.

Ikään kuin tulevaa sosiaalisen median raivoa ennakoiden, eräässä artikkelissa pyrit-tiin osoittamaan, että minkäänlainen – satiirinenkaan – kritiikki feminististä tutkimusta kohtaan on automaattisesti väärin ja sortoa.

Kirjoitettuja artikkeleita hämmentävämpää on tietysti se, että niistä seitsemän päätyi julkaistavaksi asti, osa jopa julkaisuissa joita pidetään ympäri maapalloa varsin kovatasoisina alallaan.

Esimerkiksi julkaisu Gender,Place and Culture,joka on varsin arvostettu julkaisu alal- laan, nosti koirien raiskauskulttuuria käsittelevän artikkelin yhdeksi 25-vuotisjuhla-numeroidensa pääartikkeleista. Vertaisarvioinnin mukaan se oli ”upea artikkeli”.

Miesten anaalista masturbaatiota homo- ja transfobian hoitona käsitellyt artikkeli sai samanlaista suitsutusta Sex & Culture -lehdessä: ”Tämä artikkeli on uskomattoman rikas ja jännittävä lisä seksuaalisuuden ja kulttuurin tutkimukseen, varsinkin siinä missä risteävät maskuliinisuuden ja anaalisuuden käsitteet.”

Myös jonkinlaista ajatuspoliisivaltiota kannattavaa artikkelia, jonka mukaan feministi-sen tutkimuksen käsittely ironisesti tai satiirisesti olisi epäeettistä, kuvailtiin Hypatia-lehden vertaisarvioinnin mukaan erinomaiseksi ja sitä pidettiin oivallisena lisänä fe-ministiseen filosofiaan. Samoin Affilia-lehdessä julkaistiin feministisillä muotisanoilla pippuroitu Mein Kampf ja liikalihavuutta kehonrakennuksena käsitellyt artikkeli Fat Studiesissa.

Toisaalta valtaosa artikkeleista hylättiin heti tai niihin vaadittiin merkittäviä korjauksia ja julkaisu jäi limboon.

Naisen ajatteleminen masturboidessa seksuaalisena väkivaltana ei mennyt läpi So-ciological theory -lehdessä,feministisen tanssin keinoin tehtävä tähtitiede palautettiin korjauksia varten Women’s Studies International Forumissa.

Myös intersektionaalisen feminismin perspektiivistä tehty pedagogia, jossa valkoiset miehet joutuivat siis istumaan kouluissa lattialla kahleissa palautettiin kirjoittajalle korjauksia varten, mutta hylkäyksen syynä eivät olleet lattialla istuminen tai kahleet.

Kaiken kaikkiaan vain seitsemän kahdestakymmenestä artikkelista hyväksyttiin julkaistavaksi, ja näistä kolme lehdissä, jotka ovat tieteellisesti huippuja.

Mutta mitä tämä huijaus sitten sai aikaan?

On ilmiselvää, että kirjoittajat tähtäsivät tilanteeseen, jossa mahdollisimman us-komaton pajunköysi menisi läpi,mutta siten että itse pajunköysi olisi laajemman yleisön mielestä poskettoman hauskaa. Siten projekti saisi internetissä valtaisasti huomiota.

Se onnistui.

Areo-nimisessä verkkolehdessä julkaistussa jutussa kirjoittajat nimittivät huijauksen kohteena olevia tutkimusaloja ”kaunatutkimukseksi” (grievance studies), joten ei varmaankaan ole väärin olettaa että heidän lähtökohtainen asenteensa feminististä nykytutkimusta kohtaan olisi erityisen positiivinen.



Screenshot_2018-10-06%20Nyt%20fi%20Kolme

https://youtu.be/kVk9a5Jcd1k

Kirjoittajat itse sanovat projektia esittelevällä videolla olevansa itsekin vasemmisto-laisia tutkijoita, ja perustelevat Areo-lehdessä huijausta halulla puhdistaa sinänsä tarpeelliset tieteenalat hölynpölystä, politikoinnista ja kaikenlaisesta humpuukista:

”Jotain on mennyt pieleen yliopistoissa – varsinkin joillain humanististisilla tutkimus-aloilla. Lähinnä yhteiskunnallisten kaunojen oikominen on tullut tutkimuksessa totuu-den selvittämistä tärkeämmäksi,ellei täysin hallitsevaksi,ja tutkijat painostavat opis-kelijoita, muuta henkilökuntaa ja muita laitoksia omaksumaan heidän maailman-kuvansa. Tämä maailmankuva ei ole tieteellinen eikä se ole tarkka.”

”Toivomme että tämä (hankkeemme) antaa ihmisille – varsinkin niille, jotka uskovat liberalismiin, kehitykseen, avoimeen tiedonhankintaan ja sosiaaliseen oikeudenmu-kaisuuteen – selkeän syyn katsoa akateemisesta ja aktivistisesta vasemmistosta tu-levaa identiteettipolitiikka­hulluutta ja sanoa: ei,en lähde tähän mukaan, eivätkä nämä ihmiset edusta minua.”

Huijausartikkeleiden ujuttaminen akateemisiin journaaleihin ei ole ryhmän omaa keksintöä. Kuuluisin esimerkki on fysiikan professori Alan Sokalin sosiaalitieteiden julkaisu Social Textiin vuonna 1996 kirjoittama hölynpölyartikkeli, jossa hän käyttäen postmodernin tutkimuksen omaksumaa sanastoa ja lähteitä todisteli esimerkiksi että painovoima on sosiaalinen konstruktio eli ihmisten omissa päissään keksimä ilmiö.

Huijausartikkeleita on onnistuttu saamaan myös luonnontieteellisiin julkaisuihin, kuuluisimpana esimerkkinä Discover-lehden bloggaajan kirjoittama biologian alan artikkeli, jossa solun mitokondrioiden tilalla väitettiin olevan Star Warsin midi-chloridianeja, pieniä eliöitä jotka antavat jediritareille voimansa.

Tämän uusimman huijauksen tekijöiden antamista lausunnoista on helppo päätellä, että tekijöiden tarkoituksena on vaikuttaa varsinkin Yhdysvalloissa ja varsinkin amerikkalaisten yliopistojen kampuksilla kuumeisina lyöviin kulttuurisotien laineisiin.

Kulttuurisodilla tarkoitetaan hyvin karkeasti ottaen sitä kehitystä, jossa vastakkain ovat yhteiskunnallisista rakenteista johtuvan sorron, etuoikeuden ja valta-asetelmien varaan rakennettu feministinen tapa ajatella maailmaa ja perinteisempi tai konserva-tiivisempi maailmankuva, jossa yksilön oma vastuu itsestään korostuu.

Tämä kahden maailmankatsomuksen kohtaaminen on nähtävissä Suomessakin esimerkiksi medioiden otsikoissa, ja se aiheuttaa lähes loputtomalta tuntuvaa riitelyä sosiaalisessa mediassa.

Yhdysvalloissa kulttuurisota on kuitenkin huomattavasti tulehtuneempaa kuin muualla.

Esimerkiksi tässä videossa yliopisto-opiskelijat itkevät, karjuvat ja vaativat biologian professori Brett Weinsteinin eroa,koska tämä on heidän mielestään syyllistynyt rasis- miin vastustamalla opettajien sähköpostilistalla yliopistolle suunniteltua päivää, jolloin valkoihoisilta oppilailta kiellettäisiin pääsy luennoille.

https://youtu.be/LTnDpoQLNaY

Tavallaan tehdyn huijauksen vaikutukset siis ulottuvat myös yliopistojen ulkopuolelle, sillä niin ulottuu feministinen ajattelukin.

Soitimme kahdelle aiheeseen perehtyneelle suomalaistutkijalle ja kysyimme, mitä ajatuksia huijausprojekti heissä herättää.

 

Anu Koivunen. (KUVA: Akseli Valmunen / HS)

Tampereen yliopiston suku­puolen­tutkimuksen professori Anu Koivunen korostaa,että on perehtynyt aiheesta kirjoitettuun Areo-lehden artikkeliin ja siitä käytyyn sosiaali-sen median keskusteluun. Tutkijakolmikon tieteellisiin julkaisuihin tarjoamia huijaus-artikkeleja hän ei ole sen sijaan lukenut yksityiskohtaisesti.

Koivunen on huolissaan erityisesti kahdesta hänelle tutusta julkaisusta: Hypatia ja Gender, Place, and Culture -nimisistä tieteellisistä lehdestä. Molemmat ovat julkais-seet yhden tutkijakolmikon tarjoaman huijausartikkelin, vaikka esimerkiksi suomalai-nen tieteellisiä julkaisuja arvioiva Julkaisufoorumi määrittelee ne johtavan tason tieteellisiksi julkaisuiksi.

”Heillä on tapahtunut ihan selkeä virhe siinä, miten tällaiset tekstit ovat päässeet heidän prosesseissaan läpi”, Koivunen sanoo.

Julkaisufoorumi tunnistaa yhtä lukuun ottamatta myös muut huijausartikkelit julkais-seet lehdet. Sex Roles -lehti määritellään sen luokittelussa johtavan tason julkaisuk-si. Sexuality & Culture, Affilia ja Journal of Poetry Therapy ovat puolestaan perusta-son julkaisuja. Ainoastaan Fat Studies on huijausartikkelin hyväksyneistä lehdistä sellainen, jota ei ole luokiteltu ollenkaan.

”On pakko sanoa,että suurin osa sukupuolen tutkimuksesta julkaistaan niin sanotuis- sa yleisjournaaleissa, ei siis erityisesti sukupuolen tutkimukseen keskittyneissä julkaisuissa”, Koivunen sanoo.

Se ei vähennä silti sitä Koivusen tunnetta, mikä hänelle nousi ensimmäisen kerran aiheesta lukiessa.

”Ensimmäinen ajatus oli, että hyvänen aika sentään. Millaisia teesejä ja minkälaisia projekteja on päässyt läpi tieteellisissä julkaisuissa. Samanaikaisesti heräsi kuiten-kin ajatus siitä, että tätähän tutkijat ovat yrittäneet sanoa jo pitkään. Vertaisarviointi ei ole millään tavalla aukoton menetelmä.”

Miten tällaisten huijausartikkeleiden hyväksyminen voi sitten olla mahdollista?

Koivusen mukaan vertaisarvioinnissa on prosessina paljon ongelmia. Osittain se liit-tyy siihen, että tieteellinen julkaisu on iso bisnes julkaisijoille,mutta julkaisujen toimit- tajille ja julkaisujen arvioijille se on harrastustoimintaa, josta ei makseta korvausta. Julkaisut siis tuottavat rahaa, mutta niitä toimitetaan ja niiden tieteellisiä arvioidaan muiden töiden ohessa. Tämä ongelma on läsnä kaikkien alojen tieteellisissä julkaisuissa.

”Ei pitäisi olla mahdollista, että tieteellisissä julkaisuissa pääsee läpi artikkeleita, jot-ka eivät täytä kriteereitä, mutta käytäntö näyttää olevan toinen. Yksi ongelma on se, että vertaisarviointipyynnöt kasaantuvat tietyille asiantuntijoille.”

 

 

Tuukka Tomperi.

Saman ongelman nostaa esille Tampereen yliopistolla työs­kentelevä kasvatus­tieteiden ja filosofian tutkija ja tiede­toimittaja Tuukka Tomperi, joka on perehtynyt tällä viikolla huijausprojektiin ja siinä kirjoitettuihin artikkeleihin.

”Tässä näkyvät kaikki yliopistojen perusongelmat. Tulosten mittaaminen ja kilpailu paineistavat, ja julkaisuja halutaan kiireellisesti ulos. Kaikilla on kauhea kiire ja vä-hemmän aikaa perehtyä aiheisiin. Silloin laatu alkaa madaltua, ja tyydytään tarkasta-maan, näyttäähän joku suurin piirtein pätevältä ja hyvältä.Saattaa käydä näin. Tähän pitäisi puuttua. Pitäisi saada pitkäjänteisempää tutkimusta, rauhallisia prosesseja. Enemmän aikaa, vähemmän hektisyyttä”, Tomperi sanoo.

Huijausartikkelien onnistumisesta kertovan jutun jälkeen erityisesti sukupuolentutki-muksen merkitys ja oleellisuus on noussut jälleen kovan arvostelun kohteeksi.

”Tällä projektilla on haluttu osoittaa, että tieteellisiä artikkeleita arvioivien tutkijoiden omat moraalis-poliittiset vakaumukset vaikuttavat siihen, millaisia tutkimuksia hyväk-sytään. Tämä ei ole tämän projektin perusteella koko totuus, mutta tähän huoleen pitää suhtautua silti vakavasti”, Tomperi sanoo.

Onko todella niin,että esimerkiksi sukupuolentutkimuksessa voi mennä läpi minkälai- sia tahansa räväköitä tutkimusaiheita ja jopa täysin käsittämättömältä tuntuvia tulok-sia – kunhan ne miellyttävät arvioijaa? Onko sukupuolentutkimus alana eristynyt niin omaksi osastokseen, että siellä ei pystytä ymmärtämään tai selittämään tutkimuksen merkitystä laajalle yleisölle?

Koivusen mukaan tämä on hyvä kysymys – ja koko tutkimuksen tekemisen perusajatus.

”Tutkimustulosten ja tutkimustapojen pitää olla aina perusteltuja. Pitää pystyä esittä-mään, miksi tällaista tutkimusta on tehty ja miten näihin tutkimustuloksiin on päädytty. Nämä vaatimukset eivät ole kohtuuttomia. En missään nimessä halua puolustella huonoa tutkimusta”, Koivunen sanoo.

Koivunen sanoo, ettei tunnista sukupuolentutkimuksessa ”gettoutumista”,jota artikke- lissa yritetään tuoda esille. Hänen mukaansa esimerkiksi Suomessa kaikissa suku-puolentutkimusta tekevissä yliopistoissa tutkimusaiheet, -menetelmät ja -tulokset ovat hyvin tiukan kriittisen arvioinnin kohteena.

Tähän vaikuttaa myös se, että Suomessa sukupuolentutkimuksen kentällä toimivat tutkijat ovat Koivusen mukaan harvoja poikkeuksia lukuun ottamatta väitelleet jollain muulla tieteen alalla esimerkiksi sosiaali- tai kulttuurialan tieteissä, mikä lisää keskustelua eri tieteenalojen välillä.

Kansainvälisestikään sukupuolentutkimus ei Koivusen mukaan ole eristäytynyt omaksi yksikökseen, joka ei pysty itseensä kohdistuvaan kritiikkiin.

”En usko, että tällaisten huijausartikkelien hyväksyminen missään tapauksessa kuvaa tieteenalan valtavirtaa.”

Tomperi sen sijaan korostaa Suomen poikkeusta esimerkiksi angloamerikkalaisiin maihin verrattuna.

”Esimerkiksi Yhdysvalloissa ihmistieteissäkin on hakeuduttu hyvin kapeisiin tieteelli- sin porukoihin,joissa voi syntyä keskinäisen kehumisen kulttuuri ja idea siitä, että jul- kaistaan tutkimuksia,jotka vaikuttavat hyvältä. Suomen pienessä mutta laadukkaassa tiedeyhteisössä on se hyvä puoli, että samanlaista nurkkakuntaisuutta ei pysty synty-mään. Täällä joutuu aina perustelemaan tutkimustaan sellaisille kollegoille, jotka eivät jaa ollenkaan samoja lähtökohtia”, Tomperi sanoo.

Miten huolissaan projektista ja sen osittaisesta onnistumisesta pitää olla? Osoittaako se sukupuolentutkimuksen merkityksettömäksi?

”Tämän testin takana on tietenkin ajatus, että räväköillä kysymyksenasetteluilla ja oi-keilla termeillä voi olla mahdollista saada nimenomaan näissä tieteenaloissa julkais-tuksi epäpäteviä artikkeleita, mutta oma käsitykseni on päinvastainen. Humanistinen tutkimus rakentuu nimenomaan syvälle tiedolla ja tarkalle tulkinnalle”, Koivunen sanoo.

Koivusen mukaan ongelma ei ole keskittynyt vain sukupuolentutkimukseen tai humanistisille aloille.

”Ajattelen, että on surullista, että huonoa tutkimusta julkaistaan. En silti näe, että se koskisi erityisesti vain sukupuolentutkimusta.”

Eikä Koivunen tunnista Areo-lehden artikkelissakin esille nostettua ajatusta siitä, että sukupuolentutkimus olisi kaunatutkimusta, jossa yritetään osoittaa toisten olevan väärässä tai toimivan väärin.

”Sukupuolentutkimuksen rooli on ollut kritisoida tiettyjä valtarooleja, jotka jäävät muuten näkymättömiin. Tällaiset tutkimuksen virrat ovat minulle paljon tutumpia kuin vääryyden osoittaminen.”

Tomperi sanoo, että vertaisarvioinnissa menee kaikilla aloilla läpi asioita, mikä ei osoittaudu kestäväksi.

”Tässä keskustelussa unohtuu se,että vertaisarviointi on vasta ensimmäinen taso tie- teellisessä keskustelussa. Julkaistu artikkeli ei ole totuus, vaan vasta sisäinen kriitti-nen keskustelu osoittaa sen merkittävyyden.Esimerkiksi lääketieteellisessä tutkimuk- sessa vertaisarvioinnissa on hyväksytty paljon sellaista, mikä osoittautuu tieteenalan sisäisessä tonkimisessa perusteettomaksi”, Tomperi sanoo.

”Pitää myös muistaa suhteellisuudentaju. Tässä keskitytään tieteenaloihin, joiden ra-hoitus on varsin vähäistä. rahaa liikkuu valtavasti yritysmaailman ja tutkimuksen har-maalla rajalla, jonne esimerkiksi suuri osa lääketutkimuksesta sijoittuu. Tutkimus voi olla kaupallisten intressien motivoimaa, ja tutkimustuloksia saatetaan jopa salata."

Samoin Tomperi huomauttaa, että erityisesti teoreettisessa tutkimuksessa - mihin muun muassa Taisteluni-muunnelma kuuluu – on vallinnut pitkään periaate siitä, että tieteellisen keskustelun herättämiseksi ja uusien teorioiden syntymiseksi on haluttu hyväksyä arvovaltaisiinkin julkaisuihin myös hyvin villejä ideoita sisältäviä kirjoituksia.

”Rajana on pidetty sitä, mitä on pidetty tieteenalan sisäisessä keskustelussa järkevänä ja mitä liiallisena.”

Sekä Koivunen että Tomperi pitävät hyvänä sitä, että projekti herättää paljon alan sisäistä keskustelua.

Koivusen mukaan on mahdollista, että keskustelussa keskitytään tieteellisten mene-telmien arviointiin ja tutkimusaiheiden tarkempaan perusteluun. Tätä hän pitää erittäin hyödyllisenä esimerkiksi sukupuolentutkimukselle itselleen.

Toisaalta Koivunen ja Tomperi sanovat olevan huolissaan siitä,että tulosten pikainen selailu tarjoaa helpon mahdollisuuden leimata koko sukupuolentutkimus epätieteelliseksi ja turhaksi.

”Jos keskustelu jää halvan kritiikin tasolle, siitä ei ole paljon hyötyä”, Koivunen sanoo.

”Kritiikki on aiheellista,ja sitä ei pidä torjua mustamaalauksena,vaan aiheesta on syy- tä käydä lehtien ja niiden taustatiedeyhteisöjen piirissä vakavaa keskustelua. Samal-la pitäisi olla todella tarkkana siinä, ettei yleistetä ja leimata tavalla, joka on täysin suhteeton. Pelkään pahoin, että kummassakin tapauksessa voi kallistua väärään suuntaan”, Tomperi sanoo. "

 

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/10/new-sokal-hoax/572212