In ancient times, people with special reverence worshiped the totem of the clan, as a rule, a zoomorphic deity, who was endowed with special strength and authority. The well-being of the clan-tribe, success in hunting, harvest, the birth of children, and victory in the war with neighbors depended on his favor. In order to appease the totem deity, ritual festivals with songs and dances were organized. Before the statue of the deity, a festively decorated victim was killed (often it was a human sacrifice), its corpse was dismembered and a special dish was prepared from it. After which the participants in the action, who tasted the food, were taken over by someone else's spirit, as they believed - the spirit of the totem. People's reason was fading away and animal feelings - bright and unbridled - took its place. Echoes of this ritual can still be found today.

In Thailand, Buddhist monasteries hold an annual festival. It is timed to coincide with the next initiation rite. The ritual symbolizes the cult death of the youths initiated into the sacrament and their subsequent rebirth to a new life. Before initiation, a tattoo depicting some cult animal is applied to the bodies of young people. During the ritual, drums are beaten uncontrollably, sacred chants are chanted, calling on the animal spirit to descend and fill the souls of the adherents. The consciousness of young people is dulled. And at some point it begins to seem to them that the images of animals on their bodies come to life, and they themselves turn into animals. This temporary insanity is reflected in the behavior of the initiates - they exhibit the habits of animals. However, as soon as the ritual comes to an end, the priests, with the help of special mantras and blessed water, “transform” the newly-minted “animals” back into people.

Similar rituals are common throughout Southeast Asia. Thus, in Kalimantan, a group of several people, during a village festival, saddle up wooden horses and begin to dance to the rhythmic beats of drums and the ringing of caracals. Gradually, the dancers begin to feel that their bodies are merging with the wooden horses and forming a single whole with them. In the heat of the dance, they become so connected with the imaginary body of the horse that they begin to neigh and snore after the horse and happily absorb the hay offered by the audience.

There are other variants of animal dance. During one of them, dancers transform into foxes. They, like real foxes, chase the released chicken on all fours and playfully take it from each other. In the end, they tear it to shreds and consume the raw meat along with the bones without any harm to themselves. Moreover, there was no case of any of them choking.

Adherents of the secret African society "Anioto", banned by the Congolese authorities, are more bloodthirsty. They imitate the leopard, and in its worst manifestations. They are not interested in the leopard's sleepy daytime pastime, but only in night hunting. They are not attracted to the usual prey of the spotted predator, and even domestic animals leave them indifferent. They hunt people like man-eating leopards. Throwing a spotted cloak over their shoulders, tying a real leopard's tail behind them and armed with iron claws imitating the paw of the beast, they set off on their terrible hunt. Having drunk a special magical drink consisting of the blood of his previous victims, the leopard man seems to lose his mind and become a predator. Like a leopard, he stalks his prey for a long time before deciding to attack. His attack is fast and effective. When attacking, the leopard man acts like a real predator - he strives to gnaw through the jugular vein. During these bloody rituals, a person is possessed by the spirit of the beast, which he worships and for the sake of which he commits such terrible atrocities.

Adherents of the secret “crocodile society” act in a similar way. They dress in the skin of a crocodile and lie in wait for their victims near the water, where crocodiles are found. To say that adherents imitate the habits of this predatory reptile is to say nothing. They are possessed by the spirit of a crocodile. Furiously and greedily they pounce on their victims, literally tearing them to pieces. After the bloody massacre, the crocodile people become frantically delighted. They dance on the shore or waist-deep in water, holding the torn out heart of the victim in their mouths. They are guided by the same animal spirit that moves the arms and legs of the dancers falling into a trance.

People are not hunted by crazy loners who are not aware of their own actions; on the contrary, adherents of secret societies are adherents of ancient magical rituals, reinterpreted in a modern way. They perform a human sacrifice, which, sometimes, the whole village knows about. Even the parents of the victim may know about it, who themselves send their children, having heard the cries of pseudo-leopards and the growls of pseudo-crocodiles, to the forest to collect roots and mushrooms and to the river for water. And in this case, the usefulness of the ritual is obvious to them, on which the prosperity of all village residents and their own well-being depends. Parental feelings are either suppressed or completely absent.

In this regard, one can recall the “sacred” madness of the bacchantes and satyrs, who reveled in the blood of torn wild animals and carried away crowds of men and women, removing from them the shackles of a measured life. And also the frantic dancing of the servants of the cult of the goddess Cybele - the Corybantes and Curetes, who, in complete oblivion of themselves and in insane delight, inflicted bloody wounds on each other and castrated themselves. According to legend, wild lions and leopards took part in their crazy “games,” and they themselves could turn into animals. Some of them fell victim to a fatal mistake. They were torn to pieces by their comrades, who mistook them for animals. However, perhaps it is not so much the ability to transform into animals that is to blame for this, but rather the excessive consumption of wine. After all, it is well known that heavy libation “switches off” the mind and extremely sharpens the senses. In such a state, it is quite possible to mistake the imaginary for the real.

In folklore, a werewolf occupies a special place, that is, a person who, of his own free will or involuntarily, turns into an animal. Medieval chronicles contain especially many references to werewolves. They claim that the transformation into a beast is preceded by an irresistible desire to behave, for example, like a wolf, to lie on a stinking heap, to click his teeth, to run away into the forest. Then the werewolf's mind becomes clouded. A person becomes stuffy in the house, he strives to escape into space. A slight chill appears, turning into fever, severe thirst. Shoes and clothes get in the way, causing them to fall off. Then the man gets down on all fours, and instead of human speech, sounds similar to an animal roar come out of his throat. At the same time, the werewolf begins to feel like a wolf. He is possessed by wolfish desires and thoughts and the thirst for blood inherent in wolves... He attacks the first person he meets and kills him with unimaginable cruelty. Having satisfied his bloodthirstiness, the werewolf falls exhausted to the ground and falls asleep. He woke up in the morning... a man who sometimes remembered nothing about his nightly misadventures.

History has preserved many references to the bloody crimes of werewolves. A unique case of lycanthropy that occurred in France in the mid-19th century was told by two judges, members of the magistrate, who got lost in the forest of the Gironde. While preparing to spend the night in the forest, the judges saw a man wandering through the forest. He was not himself. They recognized him. It was an elderly local peasant. Coming out into the clearing, the old man suddenly raised his head and let out a long, drawn-out howl. An answering howl was heard from somewhere, then another and another. A few minutes later, wolves began to enter the clearing. The old man stood and calmly waited for their approach. Suddenly the largest of the wolves, probably the leader, rushed at the man’s feet and began to roll around like a dog. He crawled towards him on his stomach and squealed, clearly showing his subordinate position. Gradually, the man was surrounded by other wolves, who behaved extremely servilely. It was clear that they perceived the old man not as a person, but as a leader wolf. After prolonged expressions of wild joy on both sides at this meeting, the wolf-man and the real wolves headed into the depths of the forest... This incident shows that a person, being a werewolf, does not necessarily lose his human form during an attack of lycanthropy. In this case, his body is taken over by a wolf spirit and the presence of this spirit is significant for real wolves.

Myanmar is home to a small Tibetan people - the Tamans. According to local beliefs, tamans have a unique ability to transform into animals. They especially love to take the form of tigers and do this in whole families at once. If someone sees a tigress with a tiger cub not far from their home, they may decide that this mother and child have gone for a night walk. If a tiger attacks a person, the residents of nearby villages first try to find out whether this is the work of the Tamans.

It happens that a wave of brutality rolls over a person against his will. His mind becomes clouded and he temporarily, or even forever, becomes a hostage to the animal spirit that has taken his soul captive. The Tlingit living in the northern regions of Alaska believe that hunters lost in the forest are sometimes attacked by Kushtakas - otters. They send the hunter into madness and an irresistible desire to become an otter. Superstitious horror grips local residents when they find a traveler’s torn clothes, shoes and weapons in the forest. They are not looking for the hunter himself or his bones, believing that he turned into an otter and became a werewolf. In addition, some claim that hunters who have turned into were-otters themselves visit where they used to live, stealing babies from people. They, squealing desperately, grab the child with their front paws and, hugging him to themselves, run away on their two hind legs, like people. They are also not looking for such a child, since the only thing they can find is an abandoned piece of cloth in which the baby was wrapped.

One hunter from the Tlingit tribe named Silva got carried away in pursuit of a deer and did not notice how he ended up in the possession of were-otters. He suddenly heard male and female voices, which seemed very pleasant and inviting to him. They called him by name and invited him to join their company. Then the otter people themselves appeared from behind the trees and began to approach him on their hind legs, like people. Silva suddenly passionately wanted to join this procession. The bodies of otters, their charming faces, shiny fur, and slender legs seemed simply delightful to him. He wanted at all costs to have the same beautiful body. But then he remembered his young wife, and he had the courage not to give in to temptation. He covered his ears with his hands and, headlong, without making out the road, rushed to run, leaving his ammunition in the forest. He no longer went hunting...

What causes shock to modern Westerners is sometimes perceived by people who find themselves on the outskirts of civilization as the norm. So in Peru there are still tribes of cannibals who regularly diversify their diet with residents of neighboring villages, and no one considers them serial killers; on the contrary, they are all known as brave warriors. The carcasses of enemies are butchered and prepared according to all the rules of local cuisine. This is not at all a collective insanity, but part of a ritual, illuminated for centuries, during which human sacrifices are made to the spirit of the ancestral totem. At the same time, during the murder and bloody meal, incomparable rage and power, accompanied by euphoria, descends on the clergy and parishioners.

From time immemorial, Dayaks from the island of Kalimantan have been cutting off people’s heads to experience “strong feelings.” They consider this something of a national pastime. How strong the power of tradition has become known only recently. In 1997 and 2001 The Dayaks - the descendants of the "headhunters" - staged another bloody massacre, then thousands of people died. Under the lenses of Western journalists, they cut off heads, washed themselves with blood, tore out quivering hearts from their chests, ate them... and felt, by their own admission, how unprecedented strength filled their bodies and souls.

In New Guinea, there is still a tradition when the groom gives the bride's parents the head of an old man who was kidnapped in a neighboring village. His body is eaten in the warm company of relatives, after which an agreement on marriage is concluded. This bloody ritual is still dedicated to the powerful spirit of the ancestors. However, under pressure from the authorities, residents began to resort to substitute sacrifice, when a pig is used instead of a person. And in the African Bantu tribe they still imitate crocodiles, which are especially revered there. Human meat is kept under water so that it rots a little and acquires a specific taste...

However, in a different context, in a different socio-historical environment, the same actions are perceived differently and not so enthusiastically. Perhaps that is why cannibalism in Western countries, deprived of its “historical” roots, is the work of individuals. In 1924, in Germany, tormented by famine, the case of the “Hanoverian butchers” was heard in the city of Hanover. Two accomplices, Fritz Haarmann and Hans Grans, killed twenty-eight young people. They had a well-oiled conveyor belt: bodies were dismembered and sold to butchers, clothing was sold on the black market, and inedible body parts were thrown into the river.

In the United States, Jeffrey Dahmer, a murderer and cannibal, is still remembered with respect and fear. He committed seventeen murders from 1978 to 1991. When police agents raided his apartment, they were amazed: four heads were in the refrigerator, and seven more had been boiled and turned into bare skulls. There were jars everywhere with various body parts, which the killer could preserve in the same way as housewives canned cucumbers and tomatoes.

Now in the USA the name Ed Gein is once again coming into fashion, and this despite the fact that dozens of films have been made about his “exploits” - the most famous is “Silence of the Lambs”. When the police raided Gein’s farm in 1957, some of them had a hysterical fit. Masks made from skin flayed from female faces. There were skull crafts all around, and one of them was used as a soup bowl. Pinned to the curtains were wrinkled human lips. When the policeman, whose legs gave way from what he saw, felt for a chair to sit down, he was surprised to find that this chair, like all the other chairs in the house, was covered with capes made of leather. Among the material evidence was a belt with 17 female nipples and a box with 6 amputated and salted vaginas. Ed was a great craftsman. He sewed himself an apron from various parts of the human body, made bracelets, cut a pair of long stockings, made a lampshade for a table lamp and a fashionable leather vest. Gein brightened up his leisure time like this: he turned on music and started dancing, hanging various parts of women’s bodies on himself. His favorite book was a collection of stories about the crimes of the Nazis and stories about cannibals of the South Seas - he borrowed some from there, and made up some of his own. Ed Gein's home and farm were razed to the ground. However, this did not help. This place is visited by hundreds of thousands of tourists. At their service is the tourist complex “U Gein”, kiosks where those interested can buy books about the rapist, as well as plastic dummies of his “immortal works” made from human bodies. Some idolize the villain and treat him as a prophet of the new world. However, it is not entirely clear, if such a world comes, what will it be like for an ordinary person to live in it?

According to Freud and his followers, sexuality and other instinctive human needs are suppressed by rational behavior from early childhood. In maniacs, they temporarily escape the control of the mind, and the mind begins to act as a stepdaughter. As a result, murderers, sadists and rapists shamelessly, sometimes scrupulously and prudently, carry out everything that their unbridled thirst for pleasure pushes them to do. Maniacs who cannot and do not want to restrain their animal nature become its slaves in the full sense.

Chilling details of the crimes of maniacs quite often end up on the pages of newspapers. Their description shocks ordinary people. Drinking blood from a fallen victim, tearing out pieces of meat with teeth, cannibalism, cruel and senseless murders, rape. All this is not uncommon in our enlightened age. Sometimes maniacs are difficult to catch, since their actions do not have human logic. They are subject to either spontaneous or regular attacks of animal feeling.

Often a serial killer, like a cat and a mouse, plays with his victims. And just like a cat comes into wild, inhuman delight from this. Led by an alien spirit, he strives to keep his victim longer in the borderline state between life and death. So the Vitebsk maniac Mikhasevich, when he strangled a man, felt how he was filled with the energy of death. This made him drunk and in a state of euphoria. It seemed to him at that moment that the very soul of the victim was moving into him. Chikatilo, torturing the children, flew into such a frenzy that their personal belongings were torn into small pieces, thick tree branches were broken off for tens of meters around, and the force of the knife blows exceeded all imaginable limits. Rapists and murderers possessed by an animal spirit commit crimes that not only cannot be understood from the point of view of human morality, but are also beyond the power of an ordinary person to carry out.

According to terrifying statistics, 60% of future serial killers Animals are killed and tortured as children. So, for 10 years, Russian psychiatrists observed a boy who crucified hedgehogs, kittens, puppies and at the same time masturbated. He did not hide from doctors and parents that, observing the suffering of animals, he imagined people in their place. Further more - the boy began to go to the cemetery. He liked to watch women being buried. Then he began to tear up graves at night, opened the coffins and caressed the deceased, performing sexual acts with them, while cutting off the women’s breasts and eating them. He admitted to the doctors that he would like to kill women himself... The boy grew up, entered a prestigious institute - the doctors calmed down - the patient “compensated”. A few years later he was caught. Now he is 25 years old and has 3 murders and 17 attempted murders...

The rapist and murderer Dzhumagaliev preyed on women. And I prepared for this ahead of time as a solemn event. At the same time, he loved animals very much. He thought a lot about their defenselessness and was indignant at the poor attitude towards them. There was a period in his life when he went to the mountains and lived in caves for a long time, “to be closer to nature.” Having committed seven murders, Dzhumagaliev believed that he had become an extraordinary person. While under investigation, he regretted that he could not go to the mountains and write an instructive scientific work about his life. He also failed to melt the fat of one of his victims and smear it on the grave of his grandfather, whom the maniac greatly revered. While awaiting his execution, he told investigators that he was waiting with interest for his own death in order to “catch the impulse of the transition from life to death and understand the meaning of life”...

Probably, the soul of such people from birth is periodically taken over by an animal spirit, making them an obedient weapon of murder. Maniacs, like werewolves, are sometimes unable to cope with the inhuman thirst for blood that engulfs their being. Trying to find at least some rational explanation for such actions, one can assume that the souls of such people came from another, animal world, and they continue to live according to animal, and not human, laws. In fact, it is not easy for a soul that has moved from a tiger body to a human one to cope with its former habits and instincts. Probably, not only predators, but also the souls of herbivores incarnate among people, but, having a gentle disposition, they do not encroach on the lives of others and are known only as narrow-minded and stupid people. Another explanation for these impossible actions can be given. The souls of maniacs in a past life lived among people who regularly performed human sacrifices. The emotions they experienced were etched into their souls so strongly that they “remembered” them in this life. Unable and unwilling to give up strong feelings, the maniacs came up with their own ritual and staged human sacrifices in their own way...

Oddly enough, the most bloodthirsty animals sometimes show amazing condescension towards a human child. Occasionally it happens that for various reasons a small child ends up in the forest and, deprived of the care of his parents, does not die, but is taken in by wild animals. Such rare cases are called the “Mowgli phenomenon.” Back in 1344, in a forest in the German county of Hesse, hunters found a boy in a wolf's den. As it turned out, the child was taken to the wolves at the age of three. The predators took the baby out, taught him to run quickly on all fours and hunt with them. In 1669, hunters tracked down a family of bears in Lithuania. Imagine their surprise when they found two boys next to them. One of them was caught. The foundling was named Joseph. The boy ran away several times into the forest, where he ate tree bark, berries, wild apples and honey. One day people saw a bear come up to the baby and affectionately lick his face. It is also known about two savage girls, seven and one and a half years old, from East India, who were fed and adopted by wolves. This incident occurred in 1920. And in 1925, in the Indian province of Assam, a female leopard dragged a two-year-old boy from a village, whom she raised as her cub. Before this, the female’s kitten died and there was milk left, which is probably why she did not eat the baby. Three years later, the boy was returned to his parents, and the female was killed by hunters. However, the baby never became human. Throughout his short life (after his return to people he lived for several years) he was the bearer of the consciousness of a leopard. The boy ran quickly on all fours, tried to bite anyone who approached him, and ate only raw meat.

In Turkmenistan in 1957, a boy was caught in the sands near Tashauz, who spent five years in a wolf pack. They named him Juma. At the age of ten, Juma said his name for the first time. He was subsequently taught a vocabulary of several hundred words. When they asked him whether he felt good among people, he answered that he felt better among the wolves... In 1973, on the island. A child raised by monkeys was captured in Sri Lanka. His behavior was in stark contrast to human behavior. And in 1985, near Lake Tanganyika, in Africa, a boy who lived with baboons, deftly jumping among the branches, was caught in nets placed to catch monkeys. When they tried to accustom him to human life, it failed. He took off his clothes and did not want to spend the night in the house. In the end, a compromise solution was reached. The baby was allowed to sleep on a tree in the yard, where with great dexterity, without anyone’s help, he built a nest from branches. In 1991, in Uganda, Milli Sebba went into the forest to get firewood and saw a little boy among a troop of monkeys. The peasant was able to catch him and brought him to the village. The baby's entire skin was covered in scars and scratches. By negligence, he fed the foundling hot food, and he was sick for three days after that. One of the local residents recognized the boy as John Sesebyana. His father killed his mother and disappeared, and three-year-old John, frightened, ran into the forest. The boy did not want to give up his monkey habits. He approached people with a waddle and always from the side, as monkeys usually do, while he held his hands so that his palms were visible. Smiling, he involuntarily parted his lips, and, having made friends among people, he greeted them every time with strong hugs.

Children raised by animals have a lot in common. They move quickly, often on all fours, and nimbly climb trees. They have excellent vision, hearing and smell. They are not susceptible to pain and temperature changes. "Mowgli" often took coals from fires and took potatoes out of boiling water. But in such cases, what is most striking is not this, but how quickly the child adopts the mentality of the animal that raised him, and how quickly he forgets the language of human communication. The child’s psyche is extremely plastic, and the child readily accepts new conditions of the “game”, even if they are completely inhuman. However, having returned to people, the child does not lend itself well to reverse transformation - from an animal to a human. It seems that animal inclinations are more rooted in his soul than human ones. It is possible that through new adoptive parents, half-brothers and sisters - animals, an animal spirit penetrates his soul.

A child raised among monkeys has a monkey character, among wolves a wolf character, and among cats a cat character, and this character remains for life.

It is surprising that cases of species degeneration can occur not only in the wild, but also among people, with whom, however, children do not have close contact. In one of the caves near the Chilean city of Talcahuano, police discovered a ten-year-old boy who lived there with fifteen stray dogs. He escaped from the shelter and found shelter with four-legged friends... At night, a pack of dogs, led by the city's Mowgli, made their way onto the city streets and inspected garbage bags in search of food. In appearance and habits, the boy was suitable for the role of the leader of a dog pack.

Not long ago, Russian newspapers wrote about 10-year-old Mowgli Sasha from Kursk. He was raised in a pack of dogs, and was raised by a dog named Veselukha. To detain Kursk Mowgli, an entire police detachment was involved. Four people barely managed to catch the biting and scratching boy, who was desperately resisting and barking. At the psychiatric clinic where he was taken, he was diagnosed with mental retardation. Doctors began raising the child, trying to wean him from biting and saying the word “mom” for the first time in his life...

Another case. In the village of Goritsy, Ivanovo region, a drinking mother kept her son in the attic for four years. Cats became his family. When the boy was transported to an orphanage, he scratched and hissed like a cat. In the boarding school, he ran on all fours and slept on the floor, curled up. Not recognizing the spoon, he ate, grabbing food with his mouth right from the floor where he had thrown it. He couldn’t talk and his teachers had to teach him to be human.

According to psychologists, some parents lack the “blood instinct” for their children. They do not have even a shadow of compassion for their children. Many of them wish them death or see them as an obstacle to their business. They do not dare to kill children, but they often create situations that are life-threatening for their offspring. Others simply don't care about their children, and they breathe a sigh of relief when dogs or cats take on their upbringing.

Children who have been in close contact with animals develop along a different path. It can be assumed that in this case reason and speech, whose functions are concentrated in the left hemisphere, do not develop. They do not have a dominant left logical hemisphere and further mental development proceeds like that of animals, in which, one might say, both hemispheres are right. As a result, the child’s consciousness, never fully formed, turns off. As practice shows, it is extremely difficult to return Mowgli to society. Most likely, these children will remain carriers of the animal mentality that they adopted from their adoptive animal mothers. This is their main difference from their literary prototype. The animal spirit does not tolerate competitors...

Still, it must be said that animals are not always overwhelmed with warm feelings for human cubs. There are many more examples of a different attitude, when animals kill children. Usually, maternal feelings for a child appear when the animals already have their own small cubs.

To what has been said, we can add that sometimes the female transfers her parental instinct to other animals, which replace her own. Let us give some examples of such cases. In Berlin, a yard dog once brought into the house an egg from which a chicken was about to hatch. When the chicken began to hatch, the dog began to lick the egg, trying to soften the shell. Then she carefully carried the chicken into the sun so that it could dry. The foster child relentlessly followed his foster mother, and she responded to him with rare reciprocity, fed and protected him. One cat took five chickens under her protection. She carefully tried to warm and feed them and constantly licked them. The tame eagle hatched four chicken eggs. She fed the chickens with mouse and rat meat, and they were not at all afraid of their foster mother. After the death of a female ferret, a zoologist was left with three cubs. Without thinking twice, he placed them under the turkey. The adoptive mother took the upbringing of her adopted children with all responsibility. She, spreading her wings, warmed the ferrets in her nest, and spent a long time picking through their fur with her beak, as if she was cleaning feathers. There is an amazing case of how a bear spent the whole summer taking a cow lost in a swamp to graze. In Bulgaria, local residents witnessed how a small boar took root in a family of wolves. He grew up with the wolf cubs, and when they grew up, he began to go hunting with them...

Children who grew up outside society and whose family is wild animals cannot speak, but they are well versed in the forest and consider it their home. They are not susceptible to cold or heat and, according to eyewitnesses, are perfectly adapted to wild life. Their body is covered with fur. Without human consciousness, they are nevertheless in constant contact with the animal world, since they themselves are an integral part of it. But they fail to communicate with people. The Swedish taxonomist of living things, Carl Linnaeus, wrote about them: “They hide in caves during the day... they see clearly at night, they steal from people everything they come across.”

According to ancient authors, savages often stole children and women. The Vedas mention tribes of wild people, the Rakshasas, who are hostile to humans. Thus, the ancient Indian epic “Ramayana” tells how the divine King Rama frees his wife Sita, who was kidnapped and taken to the island of Lanka by the leader of the Rakshasas, Ravana.

In the time of Pliny, brutalized people did not arouse much interest among contemporaries, since they were a common occurrence. Pliny, Herodotus and Ovid wrote about entire tribes of fauns who lived in the dense forests of Scythia. The following lines can be found in Plutarch: “Near the city of Apollonia, in a grove dedicated to nymphs, a sleeping satyr was captured. He was brought to Sulla and was asked by all sorts of interpreters - who is he? However, he uttered in a rough voice something like the bleating of a sheep. Why did Sulla experience great disgust and ordered him to be removed immediately as an ugly phenomenon... The satyr was shown to the Roman aristocracy, where he showed a great attraction to ladies. The fair sex caused such a reaction in him that he often had to be restrained.”

Russian writer Ivan Turgenev talked about his meeting with a wild forest inhabitant. She was inflamed with feelings for the great writer when he was swimming naked in the river, and tried to catch up with him. At the sight of such an image, he, without making out the way, took to his heels in what his mother gave birth to. And this is her story. The illegitimate and unbaptized girl was kept underground until she was five years old, and then ran away into the forest, where she became wild and grew up.

And even today, reports from Malaysia periodically come of encounters with groups of hairy creatures. So recently, a hairy woman and two men scared a Chinese woman to death by suddenly appearing behind her. The woman, somewhat reminiscent of a monkey, showed a kind of smile when she saw the man, revealing rather impressive fangs, and made croaking sounds. The hairy men stood modestly at a distance, probably so as not to frighten the stranger. However, instead of being happy that she saw a creature unknown to science, the girl screamed heart-rendingly and rushed headlong home, never finding out what the wild people wanted from her.

The artist Alexander Burtsev, who went to sketch in the taiga in 1980, was attacked by a female Bigfoot. She examined the contents of the sketchbook, squeezed paints out of tubes, and sniffed them. But most of all she was attracted to the artist himself, in whom she saw a potential lover... However, such a connection seemed unnatural to Burtsev, and he, improving the moment, ran away, leaving his sketchbook for the female as a gift.

A similar situation arose in 1924 in North America. Lumberjack Albert Ostsman was sleeping in his sleeping bag near Vancouver when he was suddenly grabbed by a bigfoot, thrown on his back like a sack of potatoes, and carried to his lair for three hours. At dawn, the lumberjack realized that he had become a prisoner of the Beatfoot family. It consisted of a male, a female and their cubs. The lumberjack was given relative freedom, but someone was constantly watching over him. Finally, Ostsman realized that he had been kidnapped specifically to make the female cub the husband. The lumberjack decided to run away. He slipped the head of the family snuff into his food and, while he ran to the river to rinse his mouth, disappeared.

According to the local population, in Kashmir, in the Narang region, wild people living in caves called vanmanas still steal young girls who are forced into cohabitation. There were cases when the village community and family refused to accept a raped girl, considering her spoiled, and she had no choice but to return to her hairy captor. According to local belief, women who involuntarily cohabited with vanmanas gave birth to children. They joined the ranks of wild people and from birth they got used to living in the fields of nature, without having a permanent home.

According to M. Bykova, who dealt with the problem of Bigfoot, she was familiar with a man from Abkhazia who had sexual intercourse with Maysa for several months. A wild woman lived in a corn field in the summer and autumn, and her suitor visited her there. It is quite possible that after this strange affair the savage gave birth to a child.

At the end of the 19th century in Abkhazia, in the forest near Mount Zaadan, a female almasty was caught and tamed. She did menial work in the house, pulling off the owner's boots. She could not speak, but she understood orders and carried them out conscientiously. Her body was well built and men found her attractive. She had large breasts, a thick butt and muscular legs and arms, and a large head of black hair stood on her head. The dark skin was covered with red fur. The latter circumstance somewhat repelled men from her, as did her face with large cheekbones and protruding jaws, which had a ferocious expression. But some people even liked it. Zana (as the savage was called) repeatedly became pregnant by different men and gave birth without any help from people. Immediately after giving birth, she went to the stream and washed the newborn in a mountain stream that contained ice-cold water. But the mestizos could not withstand the ice bath and died. Later, people began to take away her newborns and began to feed them themselves. Four children survived. Two girls and two boys grew into full-fledged people who could speak, write and communicate like their fellow villagers. However, there was some strangeness in their character and appearance, indicating that their mother was a savage. So the youngest son Khvin (died in 1964), according to the testimony of his fellow villagers, was a very strong, but quarrelsome and pugnacious person. In clashes with neighbors, he lost his right arm. All children had offspring who settled throughout Abkhazia. Professor B. Porshnev found many of Zana's descendants.

The fact that people freely interbreed with Bigfoot and produce viable offspring suggests that savages, despite their increased hairiness, unusual appearance, strength, unsociability and ability to live in the forest, are not far from humans. Undoubtedly, they belong to the same biological species as us. The chance of getting a child from them as a result of sexual intercourse is as great as after sexual intercourse between a white and black person. In addition, Bigfoot people do not use birth control pills... In this regard, it would be quite justified to consider Bigfoot people to be a special biological race of Homo sapiens (Homo sapiens). However, the fact of the matter is that, freely interbreeding with Homo sapiens, Bigfoot is Homo sapiens...

Many ancient authors reported about man-beasts that live in the wild places of the planet. So Pliny wrote at the beginning of our era: “On the island of Tanproban (Ceylon) there are tribes that cohabit with wild animals, and as a result, wild creatures are obtained - half-beasts, half-humans, covered with hair, like the first.” This statement of Pliny does not look so incredible, especially after it became known about the free crossing of Bigfoot and sapiens.

By the way, in history there have been numerous attempts to obtain hybrids of different animals and humans. However, they did not give encouraging results. Russian professor Ilya Ivanov wrote about the possibility of crossing between anthropoids and humans in the 20s of the 20th century. In 1927, on instructions from the Soviet government, he went to French Guinea (Africa), where he artificially inseminated native women with chimpanzee sperm without their consent. Experiments were also carried out with short people - pygmies (height no more than 140 cm). Pygmies were used because it was believed that they were closest to the great apes and were more likely to become pregnant with them and give birth to viable offspring. Judging by the reports sent by the professor to the authorities, these experiments did not produce positive results. The experiments were continued in the later Sukhumi Monkey Reserve. They were carried out until 1932, before the arrest of Ivanov and the employees of his laboratory by the OGPU. That same year they were shot, and all scientific documentation was confiscated.

Since it has not yet been possible to obtain a hybrid of a human and an animal, the documented facts of hybridization between a female Almasty, named Zana, and men belonging to the clan-tribe of modern humans are of great value to us. Why not assume that even earlier, before our era, “real men” - adherents of “free love” did not deny themselves the pleasure of spending the night in the arms of a hairy lady, a representative of the glorious tribe of snow people? The fruit of this love could well have been born and raised on a par with the hairy cubs of Almasty.

In 1989, in the very center of Russia, in the Saratov region on the territory of the collective farm named after. Kirov, for six months, many people observed the appearance of a family of wild people, overgrown with wool, consisting of two adults and one child. Who these hairy people were - mestizos or Bigfoot itself - remains unclear. In the same 1989, guards of the Progress fruit farm in the Rivne district, Saratov region managed to catch a hairy man when he was stealing the state farm apples. A sickening smell of stale urine and sweat emanated from him, but, overcoming disgust, the guards nevertheless stuffed the prisoner into the trunk of the Zhiguli, and the next morning they took him to the police. But they flatly refused to accept the unsanitary monster and advised him to take it... to the zoo. While they were deciding what to do with the hairy thief, he took advantage of the confusion and ran away...

Everyone who met Bigfoot was most struck by his inhuman animal gaze. Being flesh and blood a man, he is not one... Something happens to wild people. They lose not so much their human appearance as the spark of intelligence that distinguishes a real person. A lot of random encounters with the so-called Bigfoot have been described. Researchers tried to somehow determine its place in the taxonomy of living things. Some scientists, for example, Professor B. Porshnev, believed that he was a relict hominid, namely, a Neanderthal who has survived to this day. (According to the official version, Neanderthals died out about 30,000 years ago.) However, the question arises: where did Neanderthals come from, for example, in the center of Russia, in a fairly crowded place, where everything is walked and crossed? In addition, recently researchers from Zurich, having compared the skulls of Neanderthal and Sapiens children, came to the conclusion that they developed differently and are not relatives. And scientists from the University of Munich, having compared the DNA of Neanderthals and the DNA of modern humans, found that these two are completely different species.

And if so, crossing between them was impossible. Thus, it was proven that Bigfoot, who freely interbreeds with modern humans, is not a relict hominid. We have to accept that it is degenerate. Its population is most likely increasing due to feral tourists who have switched to grazing... But seriously speaking, yetis are the descendants of those who, succumbing to the animal spirit, lost their minds and went to seek happiness in the world of wild nature.

Thus, modern homeless people living in cardboard boxes in landfills also have the opportunity to become the founders of a new tribe of Bigfoot people. Perhaps their abandoned children will no longer be as dependent on society as abandoned parents. They, led by the animal spirit, will adapt to new living conditions in their own special way and adapt well to wild existence. And maybe in a hundred, or maybe in a thousand years, a new species of animals will appear on Earth, unlike their ancestors - humans.

Swift's famous novel "Gulliver in the Land of the Lilliputians" tells about an amazing country, each inhabitant of which is no bigger than a chicken. But could the country of Lilliput really exist?

It is not at all news that dwarfs and midgets live among people. If the former developed disproportionately and have a normal body, but small limbs, then the latter are quite proportionally built. Mexican Lucia Zarate went down in history as the smallest woman on the planet. She was elegant and beautiful, and when naked she resembled a beautifully crafted porcelain figurine. The petite beauty often performed on the table in front of wealthy clients, showing them strip shows at home. Her height was only 50 cm.

In addition, tribes of short people live on our planet. As you know, the Negrilli pygmies live in the jungles of Central Africa. They walk fearlessly through the forest with their tiny bow and poisoned arrows. Even the leopard, which often attacks tall Bantu, is afraid of them and avoids them. Having met a predator in the forest, the pygmies shout to him, waving their bows, “Get out of the way, grandfather!” and the ferocious cat, oddly enough, leaves. Among African tribes, pygmies are famous as the best elephant hunters. Pygmies feel great among the virgin forest and are not at all hampered by their small height - about 140 cm.

Residents of Mozambique talk about their meetings with representatives of another short people - the Agowe dwarfs. These people are smaller than pygmies and much more like monkeys. They have long arms and slightly extended jaws, but they walk upright, like all people. Scientists are skeptical about the existence of a population of dwarfs unknown to science, believing that conversations about them correspond to the genre of stories about Bigfoot people. However, as evidenced by paleo-finds, populations of little people are not fiction at all.

At the end of the 19th century, in Schweizgebirge, near Schaffhaus in Switzerland, anthropologists discovered tiny skeletons belonging to Stone Age pygmies. Immediately after this, Scandinavian legends about dwarfs and gnomes became the subject of closer study. Here is more recent information on the same topic. This time, news of sensational finds came from another area of ​​the globe.

An interesting article appeared in one of the latest issues of Nature magazine in 2004. In a limestone cave near the town of Lian Bua on the Indonesian island of Flores, anthropologists from an Anglo-Australian expedition discovered the skulls and bones of very small creatures, about a meter tall, with long arms and a head the size of a grapefruit. The smallest skeleton (just over 90 cm) belonged to a miniature woman. His ulna turned out to be half the size of a similar bone in modern humans. The size of the skull is only 380 cubic centimeters. It is approximately equal to the volume of the chimpanzee brain (350 cm 3) and smaller than the brain of a gorilla (400–600 cm 3). The remains found are about 18,000 years old. This means that dwarfs lived at the same time as modern humans. Despite the fact that the babies have large teeth and slightly protruded jaws, they were undoubtedly people and not monkeys. This is also evidenced by their straight posture, pelvis and hips, which ensure upright posture. Anthropologists rightfully consider their discovery a sensation. Before this, the scientific world was quite skeptical about claims that there were populations of miniature people under a meter. Meanwhile, such statements arose quite often in the past and, oddly enough, continue to appear today.

The famous French anthropologist Quatrefage de Bras wrote in 1887: “There are black people in the middle of India, who are called pygmies, they speak the same language as the Indians, but are very small in stature. The tallest do not exceed two cubits, and most are half as tall. Their hair is long, reaching to their knees. They are snub-nosed and ugly." This description could well correspond to real miniature people, if not for the very low height, even for pygmies, which the French indicates - from 75 cm to one meter.

There are still Veddoid tribes living in India, they seem to fit the description of the Frenchman. They have a small height (1 meter 50 cm), an elongated skull, and long curly hair. Men are adorned with a small tuft of facial hair. The brow ridges protrude significantly forward, and under the eyebrows, upturned at the bridge of the nose, black eyes sparkle. It’s as if you can read a frozen expression of surprise on their faces. They are dark and dark. Their body has almost no hair, except in those places where hair is present in all representatives of sapiens. Vedas are very timid and afraid of strangers. And it’s clear why. Over the past few thousand years, the Vedas have been attacked many times by other more developed peoples. In 1500 BC. e. India was invaded by the warlike black Dravidians, followed by the Aryan invasion. In the Middle Ages, the hordes of Genghis Khan and Tamerlane, Babur and Akbar invaded here. Eventually, the Vedas were expelled from their lands. But every cloud has a silver lining: from their enslavers they learned to use spears and arrows with metal tips. However, this acquisition did not greatly improve their life. The Vedas live in separate families in caves made on a quick fix huts made of leaves. If in the old days these people inhabited a significant part of Hindustan, today they live only in remote places and are known to the local population under the names “people of the mountains” and “people of the hills”. The Vedas were also preserved in the mountain forests in eastern Ceylon. On Mallak they lead a miserable lifestyle, constantly wandering in the jungles of the peninsula. A very small number of Veddoids live in Indonesia, on the islands of Sumatra and Sulawesi. There is evidence that they once lived in New Guinea. It is here, in the immediate vicinity of their residence, that the remains of tiny people, whose height does not exceed a meter, have been discovered today. However, the Vedas are half a meter taller and on their faces there is a much greater reflection of civilization than on the skulls of the fossil pygmies from the island of Flores. Therefore, the Vedas are unlikely to be relatives of the short ones, whose mortal remains were recently brought into the light of day.

Another candidate for kinship with prehistoric dwarfs lives today in Papua New Guinea. They are a small people called Tapiros. It was opened only in 1910. Anthropologists call this nationality, together with others close to it, Negritos. The Spaniards, who first came to the region in 1521, saw the small black and chocolate people and called them “little negroes,” which means Negritos. Their hair is short and smooth, the rest of their body is practically devoid of hair. The jaws of black midgets are slightly pushed forward, and the flat foot is slightly turned inward. These features slightly bring the “little blacks” closer to anthropoids, marked by flat feet and significantly protruded jaws, but not enough to look for relatives of the Negritos among the great apes. Although some unfriendly Malay tribes call the “little blacks” orangutans, which translates to “man of the forests,” it is unlikely that these little people have anything to do with the great ape, the orangutan. The Malay word "orangutan" is common throughout the region and is sometimes used to describe both humans and monkeys. The Negritos of Mallaki suffered more than others from the oppression of the Malays. They were the ones who were sold into slavery. The victims of the slave trade, like monkeys, hid from the Malays in the crowns of tall trees and moved from tree to tree with the help of ropes woven from vines.

Negritos wander through the jungle completely naked, they do not stop anywhere for long periods of time, they eat roots, fish, and sun-dried monkey meat. During bad weather, temporary shelters are built for their branches and palm leaves. The population living on the Andaman Islands did not know fire until recently and did not make any attempts to acquire it from the more civilized tribes living next to them.

Anthropologists believe that Negritos previously populated all of Southeast Asia. 15,000 years ago, Australia connected with Asia, forming a vast land isthmus, and the level of the world's oceans was 150 meters lower than today. This conclusion was reached by Japanese scientists who studied coral reefs near Australia from the Shikai underwater laboratory. They discovered corals at a depth of 150 meters that require sunlight to function. According to geological data, 13,500 years ago, the level of the world's seas rose sharply and the land isthmus connecting Australia with China turned into many scattered islands. On these islands, scattered populations of Negritos, the oldest inhabitants of these places, have been preserved.

Negritos do not know how to swim and still do not know how to make boats, although they have lived surrounded by the ocean for thousands of years. When there is an urgent need to overcome a water obstacle, they tie together several logs and embark on a dangerous journey. They lie down on the raft and row with their arms and legs, as vacationers reclining on an air mattress usually do.

The Negritos could be descendants of the dwarfs from Flores, but the remains of the very first Negritos discovered in the neighborhood are also of considerable age. Some of them fell into the ground about 20,000 years ago. Most likely, the “little blacks” and the Lilliputians from the island of Flores were neighbors. In addition, the height of Negritos fluctuates around 140 cm. And this is too much for the newly acquired little people, whose height was about a meter.

There are other contenders whose kinship with the ancient inhabitants of Flores can be proven. These are the Nittaevo, a dwarf people who inhabited the mountainous regions of Ceylon. Their height was from 90 to 120 cm. They had a stocky figure, long and strong arms. Legends attribute to them bloodthirstiness and cannibalism. The Nittaevo lived for thousands of years side by side with the Vedas, who speak very unflatteringly about their dwarf neighbors. The little people also treated the Vedas very hostilely. The dwarfs, of course, were powerless against bows and spears, but as soon as the Vedda settled down to rest under a tree in the midday heat, the damned dwarfs immediately appeared and instantly tore the Vedda’s stomach and ate out his entrails. The day came when the Veddas’ patience ran out, and at the end of the 18th century, they staged a raid, drove all their bloodthirsty neighbors, including women and children, into a large cave, filled it with stones and lit a giant fire at the entrance, which burned for three days. Nittaevo, locked in a cave, suffocated from the smoke. Thus, according to legends and according to historians, the existence of the shortest people on Earth, who had every chance of surviving to our time, ended. Whether the Nittaevo were descendants of the ancient inhabitants of Flores will be shown by further research.

To the above, we can add that the head of the excavations, Australian anthropologist Peter Brown, dubbed the species of ancient fossil people a hobbit, one of the characters of the writer Tolkien. It may very well be that the Lilliputian hobbits, finding themselves isolated on the island after the rising waters of the Great Flood cut off their escape routes, began to degenerate. One of the signs of their degeneration was their short stature.

Modern tribes of short people are almost completely devoid of hair on their bodies, in addition, their figures and faces largely resemble children. This may indicate that childish traits are preserved in them at the level of the entire population, in contrast to Lilliputians, when individual underdevelopment occurs. Stunting as common feature characteristic of a particular nationality, could appear as a result of growth retardation. Indeed, pygmies do not have the teenage growth spurt that is noted in other people. It’s as if they don’t grow up to it and remain children for the rest of their lives... Whether this is good or bad is hard to say. However, it is worth remembering that short stature was noted among the oldest inhabitants of Africa - Australopithecus. They are considered the ancestors of humans. These small creatures were about 120 cm high. Of course, their long arms, short legs, protruding jaws, large teeth, and small brain volume (380–600 cm 3) bring them closer to monkeys. But they were undoubtedly upright, unlike the apes. It may be recalled that the recently acquired dwarfs from the island of Flores have a brain volume of 380 cm 3. It turns out that miniature people who lived only 18,000 years ago and are contemporaries of modern humans are significantly behind in the number of cubes from the fossil australopithecines, who lived several million years ago and were supposedly their ancestors. What the hell! One can almost certainly say that if anthropologists had found the Flores Lilliputians in Africa, and if the bones had been a respectable age of several million years, they would have immediately been declared the newly discovered ancestors of people (the missing link) from which man descended. But the age of their habitat is too late (18,000 years), similarity to humans and distance from Africa, which most scientists consider the “cradle” of sapiens, does not allow us to see our ancestors in the Indonesian shorties. We have to admit that they are degenerates (not aliens?) In this regard, the main question arises: can Australopithecines themselves be considered the ancestors of people, maybe they are the same degenerates as the short people from the island of Flores? Then another, already sacramental question arises: where are the true ancestors of people? The question remains open, as in the time of Charles Darwin...

In the fairy-tale world, giants occupy a special place. It is difficult to find a people who do not have traditions steeped in hoary antiquity, where we are talking about giant people. Among the Slavs, the Russian epic giant heroes Ilya Muromets, Dobrynya Nikitich, Alyosha Popovich are the defenders of the Russian land. One European fairy tale talks about the daughter of a giant who, seeing a peasant plowing a field, was so delighted with his new toy that she grabbed him along with the plow and the ox and brought him home in an apron. The mother scolded her frivolous daughter and ordered her to take it all back to where she got it from. She knew that people, despite their small stature, could cause a lot of harm to giants. Giants usually lived their own lives away from people and tried not to interfere in human affairs. In European folklore, giants are represented as pagans who do not want to accept the teachings of Christ. In the era of the Dark Middle Ages, giants live in impenetrable thickets and occasionally steal people in order to diversify their lunch with human meat.

There was a lot of debate and writing about giants in ancient times. Josephus, based on eyewitness reports, describes the appearance of the giants as follows: “Their bodies were huge, and their faces were so different from ordinary human faces that it was surprising to see them, and scary to hear them speak.” The Greek scientist Pausanias reported that a coffin with a human skeleton was found at the bottom of the Sront River in Syria. His height was 5.5 meters. The “father of history” Herodotus also described several finds of giant skeletons. So, a blacksmith from Tegea was digging a well in his yard and came across the skeleton of a giant, whose height was 2.3 meters. In another place, the skeleton of a giant 3.5 meters tall was discovered. The inhabitants of Sparta agreed that this was the skeleton of the legendary hero Orestes and carried it with them on a special chariot on military campaigns, as a talisman that bestowed good luck. To the Arab traveler Ibn Fadlan (9th century AD), the subjects of the Khazar king showed the skeleton of the “Volga hero” who was hanged by decree of the king. The skeleton was six meters high! During the conquest of America, the Spaniards discovered a giant human skeleton in one of the Mayan temples. The find amazed them so much that military leader Cortes ordered the skeleton to be delivered to the Pope on a special ship. Then the church believed that the first man Adam was a giant.

The Spaniards hoped that the church authorities would provide a qualified answer to the question: was Adam’s skeleton found in America? However, in 1577, another giant skeleton (4.5 meters) of a man was discovered in one of the caves in Switzerland - a contender for the honorary title of first man. Science began to study it. The find was transported to the University of Lucerne. The famous Basel physician Felix Plater restored and assembled the skeleton, after which it was put on public display in the city museum. According to some sources, this skeleton stood in the museum until the middle of the 19th century. Our compatriot writer Turgenev even allegedly saw him. At the end of the 19th century, the skeleton disappeared somewhere and was never found. Opponents of Darwinism believe that this was a planned action. The giant's skeleton was removed out of sight so that it would not interfere with the construction of evolutionary constructions of the origin of man from apes. However, some scientists tried to crown evolutionism and the views of the ancients that our ancestors were giants.

The Dutch anthropologist G. von Koenigswald in 1935, in one of the pharmacies in Hong Kong, where they sold various antiquities, acquired a human lower molar, which was 6 times larger than that of modern people. (Fossil teeth, called “dragon teeth” by the Chinese, were ground into powder and taken as medicine. Probably, more than one giant was eaten in this way. If it were not for the fashion for ground giants healing ailments, science would have advanced much further in understanding who in fact, there were our predecessors.) In 1941, an anthropologist was lucky enough to unearth a fossil human jaw on the island of Java, which was twice the size of a modern human jaw. Koenigswald called its owner a meganthropus - a giant man. Later, fragments of jaws and teeth of giant people were found. Fossil bones of people, unfortunately, are poorly preserved in the fossil state. Therefore, if you are lucky enough to find their mortal remains, then most often these are teeth or jaws - the most durable parts of the skeleton. According to these incomplete and scattered finds, it was possible to establish that giant people lived in South Asia about a million years ago. According to the reconstruction carried out by V.P. Yakimov (director of the Institute of Anthropology of Moscow State University), the height of the meganthropus was 5 meters, and it weighed half a ton. You can imagine how the earth shook as this giant ran... However, later scientists, probably afraid of who they gave birth to, significantly reduced the growth of the fossil giant to 3 meters and lost extra pounds on him. They proceeded from the fact that large jaws and huge teeth are not a reason to consider their owner a giant. Some australopithecines also had large teeth, but their growth was within normal limits.

It should be noted that although meganthropes are considered human, they were distinguished from modern man by the primitiveness of their bodily organization. It is quite possible that these giants did not disdain cannibalism and were generally aggressive towards their smaller neighbors. Therefore, it is not surprising that people tried to stay away from them. Man lived for a long time next to meganthropes, and it is quite possible that the echo of this sad cohabitation was preserved as numerous legends about giants.

It may turn out that the meganthropes who lived in Southern China, on the islands of Indonesia and in India are known to us as numerous folklore characters. In the Indian epic heritage, these are rakshasas - demon people. They are rivals of people and prevent them from carrying out sacrifices. Always hungry and hungry, they steal sacrificial animals from them. In the Vedas they are described as furry, long-armed, cannibalistic giants, with huge bellies, sunken and bloody mouths. According to the legend set out in the Ramayana, Rama is transported to the island of Lanka in order to rescue his wife Sita, who was kidnapped by the Rakshasas under the leadership of Ravana, from prison.

It should be noted that giants lived in the same places where skeletons of dwarfs are found - Indonesia and mainland South Asia. According to the latest scientific data, 15,000 years ago, a vast continent stretched between the Pacific and Indian oceans, connecting Australia, New Zealand and South Asia into a single whole. Many islands in the Indian Ocean, including the island of Ceylon, the prototype of Lanka from the Ramayana, formed a single whole with Hindustan. 13,500 years ago, the level of the world's seas suddenly rose, and numerous islands appeared in place of the vast land mass. (Scientists see the cause of this phenomenon in the displacement of the Earth’s poles.) Many populations of dwarfs and giants, if they did not die during the global cataclysm, then found themselves isolated, cut off by water barriers.

It is very interesting in this regard that many scriptures, including the Bible, describe giants who died from the Flood. So the Koran says that when Noah began to build the ark, the giants who were “highest than the very tall palm trees"They laughed at him. They said: “The flood will not harm us. We're too tall. Our feet are so big that we can block rivers with them.” Babylonian sacred texts also claim that the giants died during the flood. But one of them still managed to escape. Noah took him with him. He placed the giant in a special compartment of the ark and gave him food through a barred window. From this it can be understood that placing the giant among the other inhabitants of the ark was unsafe.

Many scientists note that the area of ​​distribution of Meganthropus could be much wider and not limited only to South Asia. This is how the famous anthropologist Louis S. W. Leakey discovered the skull of a giant child in East Africa. Other scientists, analyzing the flora accompanying Megantrope, note its presence in other places, for example, in the south of Siberia. In their opinion, the remains of giant people should also be looked for there.

Nowadays, from the jungles of the godforsaken islands of Indonesia, Micronesia, and Oceania, reports are coming about hairy giants that were noticed by local residents. Occasionally similar messages come from our Siberia. Who knows, maybe the notorious Bigfoot - a giant covered in hair - is the meganthrope who has survived to this day?

Few people know that the basis for the acclaimed film “King Kong” and numerous books about the giant ape was the theory of the German anthropologist F. Weidenreich. Back in 1938, inspired by Koenigswald’s findings, he spoke at the International Congress of Anthropologists in Copenhagen with a sensational message. He believed that the ancestors of humans were giant apes - Gigantopithecus.

Huge teeth and jaws have also been preserved from these fossil primates; not a single bone has yet been found. But the jaws and teeth are very large. The indigenous ones are 6 times larger than those of humans and 2 times larger than those of gorilla. Scientists, after much debate, agreed that the height of the huge monkeys was supposedly three meters (it is better to underestimate than exaggerate). According to their calculations, Gigantopithecus was taller and more than a two-meter gorilla, and weighed, presumably, about 350 kg, but this was not the only thing that distinguished it from the apes. Its mandibles, when viewed from the side, are shaped like a horseshoe (U-shaped), like those of humans, while in anthropoids the shape of the lower jaw approaches an acute angle (V-shaped). In Gigantopithecus, the fangs do not extend beyond the line of the dentition, just like you and me, but great apes, extinct and modern, have fangs that are inserted into the space between the teeth of the lower and upper jaws. Gigantopithecus, like humans, has a thick layer of enamel on its teeth, unlike anthropoids. Thus, the giant ape turned out to be closer to man than the gorilla, chimpanzee, orangutan and other forms that have disappeared from the face of the Earth.

According to Weidenreich, Gigantopithecus, and someone else, was the ancestor of man. The scientist believed that giant apes arose in India (the oldest jaw of Gigantopithecus, 5 million years old, was discovered in northern India, in the Siwalik Hills region), then they evolved into Meganthropus and settled throughout South Asia. The further path of ascent along the tree of evolution, according to Weidenreich, looks no less exciting. The giant people split into four branches. One large group descended to the south along the land isthmus that at that time connected Asia with Australia. As the historical campaign progressed, it evolved and turned into Pithecanthropus. (His remains were found on the island of Java.) She did not stop there, and went down the land bridge to the south - to Australia, where she turned into Australians. Another group moved north and in Northern China turned into Sinanthropus (Chinese man). All Mongoloids and Indians descend from him. Another group descended to Africa, in accordance with the specifics of the habitat there, it was transformed into the so-called Rhodesian man (a representative of this type was extracted from the earth by anthropologists in Rhodesia.) The Bushmen descended from him. But the most successful group of meganthropes went to the fertile Western Asia. And I was right. She managed to turn into paleoanthropes - Neanderthals. It is from them that white people come - Caucasians. Thus, according to the scientist, the ancestors of people were giants, who, along with their gigantic growth, parted with their bestial past. Well, it turns out that the main motto of human evolution is - keep your head down, be smaller?

It seems to us that the transformation had a different vector. The ancient people, who existed on Earth long before the appearance of modern man, were giants. Little remains of their mortal remains, and anthropologists have little chance of obtaining the giant's giant shin bone. According to ancient Greek myths, the giants thought too much of themselves and encroached on the power of the gods. The result was a battle known as the Gigantomachy. The giants were destroyed. It may very well be that a geological catastrophe - the Great Flood - was a good way to remove the rebellious tribe of giants from the forefront of history. One thing is clear, before disappearing into the whirlpool of history, the giants were greatly degraded - they lost all human dignity, grew hair and turned into a real scarecrow, with which the first people (sapiens) who appeared on Earth began to scare their children. Meganthropic giants and Gigantopithecus King Kongs are not the best examples to follow...

It was found in the valley of the Neanderthal River, in Germany, near Düsseldorf in 1856 during excavation work. His skull was rough and even ugly, and the workers, not experienced in the intricacies of paleontology, decided that they had found a cave bear. But a local teacher, whom they turned to for help, assured everyone that the unfortunate man was a man. This unusual man was named after the place where he was found - a Neanderthal.

Many scientists of that time refused to believe that a human ancestor had been found - the Neanderthal was so unattractive and even ugly. At the base of the unusually low, receding forehead, there were huge eyebrows - bone ridges. The walls of the skull were thick. The skull was stretched back and flattened at the top; there was a massive ridge in its back. The frontal lobes were clearly underdeveloped. It is these parts of the brain that are responsible for the social behavior of the individual... Later, it was possible to establish that the behavior of the Neanderthal was antisocial...

Scientists noticed dents on the lid of the massive skull, which were healed during life. “We fought often...” they decided. At a meeting dedicated to the discovery, Darwin’s comrade-in-arms Henry Huxley stated that even the aborigines of Australia (the most primitive, from an anatomist’s point of view, type of “homo sapiens”) cannot be compared with the troglodyte from Neanderthal, the latter is so ape-like! Another famous evolutionist, Alfred Wallace, was even more succinct: “Savage!” French anthropologist Pruner-Bey opined: “The remains of an ancient Celt have been found, and not just any Celt, but an idiot from birth... the unusual curvature of the hip means that the Celt walked with a stoop and his legs bent strongly at the knees.” Anatomist August Franz Meyer addressed the respected meeting with the following words: “Gentlemen, the burial of a Mongoloid Cossack has been found! Exactly half a century ago in 1814, a Russian army marched through the Rhine valley under the command of General Chernyshev. Old people remember how fierce battles took place there with the troops of Napoleon Bonaparte. I see with my own eyes how a seriously wounded Cossack crawls into the grotto. After he died, his corpse was covered with clay... As for the crooked hip, this is the hip of a rider who rarely gets off his horse...” Rudolf Virchow summed up the discussion: “Not an ancestor was found, but a degenerate. His skeletal features are associated with degeneration from syphilis and alcoholism.”

Later, the remains of other Neanderthals were discovered and it became clear that the degenerate had companions. This greatly annoyed many scientists. Now it was not so easy to get rid of the uninvited ancestors... The faces of the Neanderthals were long, tall with a swollen upper jaw, large teeth, and worn incisors. Everyone was struck by the lack of a chin, such as a person has. Until then, scientists had encountered such a defect only in anthropoid monkeys... It was decided that the absence of a chin protrusion, as well as an excessively heavy jaw, is evidence that Neanderthals did not have articulate speech. They probably went “numb” after they got to Europe...

The shape of the hand indicated that Neanderthals lacked a variety of finger movements. They were more adapted to power grip than the fingers of modern people. Neanderthals would hardly be able to write something good with charcoal on the wall of a cave (bad is also unlikely). In 1924, in the Crimea, in the Kiik-Koba grotto, people were found who had not a hand at all, but a paw. The thumb was so weakly opposed to the rest, and the nail phalanges were so prohibitively wide that scientists agreed that the Kiik-Kobin did not take the object in his hand, but raked it with his entire hand, squeezing it as if with pincers. Any masterly images of humans and animals that are known among the Cro-Magnons, and about which lovers of paleoart enthusiastically speak, were not found among the Neanderthals. Neanderthals were more concerned with their rough lifestyle. They made simple stone scrapers, points, and staples. All the tools are devoid of handles - they are simply processed stones, unlike the Cro-Magnon tools, where a handle - a stick or bone - was attached to the stone blade. Some scientists believe that the hands of Neanderthals were poorly sharpened, and they were not able to hold a tool with a handle.

Neanderthals lived in small groups, probably hostile to each other. This is evidenced by the fact that there were often two sites next door, with different tools and different hunting techniques. Clans guarded their secrets. If one clan specialized in hunting deer, the other specialized in hunting cave bears. Archaeologists have not identified cultural continuity between members of different sites. A moralist could say: “This is what ruined them - man, first of all, is a social being...” and would probably be right.

The predecessors of sapiens were characterized by cannibalism. Neanderthals lacked the development of the superior frontal lobe, which controls emotions and aggression. The remains of 20 Neanderthals were found at the site in Krapina. Their skulls were broken into small pieces, the long bones of the arms and legs were split lengthwise to extract the “tasty” bone marrow. Some of the bones were charred. Probably the meat was fried in a fire... Some scientists, inclined to wax poetic about the life of the Neanderthals, called the place of discovery the “Battle of Krapina.” About 70,000 years ago in Europe, Africa, Asia, Indonesia, almost everywhere where paleoanthropes lived, such “battles” were fought. Sometimes the head was separated from the body and buried separately, surrounded by a ring of bones and animal horns. Many skulls have the foramen magnum broken to allow the brain to be removed. Some researchers see in this the beginnings of ritual...

Indeed, similar rituals can be observed, for example, among the New Guinea tribes. The head of the murdered person is separated and the foramen magnum is widened in order to get to the brain, which is eaten by those present. This ritual is performed at the birth of a child. It is believed that, having tasted human brains, the aborigines will become wiser and will be able to raise a worthy replacement for themselves... As anthropologists testify, the indigenous inhabitants of New Guinea and Australia (where similar rituals are practiced) also have slightly underdeveloped upper frontal lobes. Probably feeding on other people's brains interferes with the growth of your own...

The ancestors of modern humans often encountered Neanderthals. Most likely, such meetings did not end well. At the sites of late Neanderthals, along with other “game”, crushed bones of Cro-Magnons are found... However, the appearance of sapiens in Europe has a beneficial effect on savages; Cro-Magnons are used not only as a culinary delight. Apparently, Neanderthals borrowed some cults from them. In one of the caves of the Swiss Alps at an altitude of 2400 m, a chest made of stones with the skulls of cave bears was found. Several more skulls were placed in the niches of the walls. A similar stone “chest” containing bear skulls was found in the south of France. This entire farm belonged to Neanderthals.

It should be noted that the rituals associated with the bear are very ancient. Hunting peoples living from Lapland to Siberia and northern North America believed that the bear was the first man. He was seen as a mediator between people and the world of spirits. The Ainu in northern Japan caught a bear cub and treated it as an honored guest for a whole year, considering it their patron. Women considered it an honor to give their baby the breast. However, a year later they sacrificed the bear cub, drank its blood, ate its meat. It was believed that the spirit of the victim would return to the forest and tell the other bears how well the people had treated him. This will make the hunt successful...

As follows from paleoanthropology data, the life of the late “classical” Neanderthals, who had long-term contact with Cro-Magnons, is changing for the better. They have burials of the dead. In the La Chapelle-aux-Saints cave, the burial of a Neanderthal man was found, on whose chest a bison foot was placed. In some burials, men and women were in crouched positions. Probably, this body position (fetal position) was borrowed from the Cro-Magnons, who believed that this helped the deceased to be born again in the womb.

Only the newcomer Cro-Magnons, who appeared in Europe about 40 thousand years ago, have a religious tradition in full. Neanderthals began burying their dead about 40 thousand years ago - that is, after they encountered the cultural expansion of sapiens. (In this case, there are some parallels with the Christian rituals of the Aborigines, related to the Homo sapiens species, borrowed from European missionaries.)

Other facts also speak about cultural borrowing. It is known that Neanderthals did not use necklaces made of teeth, pendants, or engraved objects before the appearance of Cro-Magnons. However, after the appearance of sapiens, these products suddenly appear at paleoanthropic sites. For example, at a Neanderthal site near the town of Arcy-sur-Cure (modern France), a bone ring, an animal tooth with an ornament, and animal claws with drilled holes were found. These decorations are attributes of religious magic and special significance for the paleanthropic aborigines they could not have it. But the natives could easily do this by appropriating someone else’s property and eating the owner.

The fact that Neanderthals were not our ancestors has been suspected for a long time - since the time of their discovery. There was a period when most scientists, quite politically correct, believed that thanks to work and a collective way of life, these savages “reforged” into modern people. And today, finally, most scientists have returned to the previous point of view that Neanderthals were a dead-end branch and had nothing to do with our ancestors. Which, of course, is more like the truth...

In 1997, Svante Paabo from the University of Munich analyzed the DNA of Neanderthals and modern humans and found that the ancestors of both were not even related. Researchers from the University of Zurich, Christoph Zollikofer and Maricia Ponce de Leon, compared the skulls of two-year-old Neanderthals and Cro-Magnons and found that these skulls were formed differently. In particular, the structure of the inner ear differs significantly between them. Scientists have concluded that Neanderthals and Cro-Magnons are two different species. And if so, then crossing between them is impossible. As a result of sexual contacts, non-viable offspring were born. These and other scientists did not leave the Neanderthals a single chance. Thus, according to new data, wild people, in whom they wanted to see our ancestors for so long, were faced with the expansion of sapiens, unable to withstand the pressure, retreated, and about 35 thousand years ago died out, without leaving offspring and without even adding a particle of their blood into our family...

However, after the Neanderthals left the stage of history, in later cultural layers, scientists found the remains of European inhabitants with some Neanderthaloid features. Doesn’t this mean that some “reasonable” people have gone down the path of savagery and degradation, trodden by their unreasonable predecessors... A bad example is contagious.

Some scientists believe that the unusual appearance of the European Neanderthal was formed under the influence of cold. He lived in close proximity to the glacier. The lack of iodine that Neanderthals experienced led to a heavier skeleton, underdevelopment and cretinism. O. Gilburd analyzed the behavior of the peoples of the Far North and Siberia - the Khanty, Mansi, Nenets, Selkup. They developed some Neanderthaloid features. In addition, behavior reminiscent of symptoms of schizophrenia is noted - this is the absence of gestures, facial expressions, and sluggish gait. The researcher believes that the same behavior was observed among “classical” Neanderthals, who, unlike modern people, were unable to adapt to cold stress conditions and died out like mammoths...

It often happens that archaeologists and anthropologists are looking for one thing, but find something completely different. In the case of the search for a “transitional link” between man and ape, it was different. The German biologist Ernst Haeckel, a like-minded person of Darwin, in the midst of debates about who is the ancestor of man, described in detail what a “transitional link” should look like. He named this as yet unfound creature Pithecanthropus alalus (“Pitekos” - monkey; “anthropos” - man, “alalus” - dumb. All together: dumb ape-man.) Inspired by Haeckel’s “prophecy”, the young doctor E. Dubois refused teaching career for the sake of a dream - to find the ancestor of humans and the descendant of monkeys. To make it easier to imagine whose mortal remains were to be sought, the young man commissioned the artist to paint a portrait of Pithecanthropus. The portrait of the ape-man was a success. From the half-monkey, half-human face looked soulful eyes, wordlessly calling out: “Find me!”

Haeckel believed that the closest thing to man among all anthropoids is the gibbon. And therefore he believed that the “transitional link” should be sought not in Africa, as Darwin believed, but in Southeast Asia, where gibbons live. That’s where the young enthusiast Dubois went, to the island of Sumatra in the kingdom of the gibbons, in order to find and reveal to the scientific world the mortal remains of Pithecanthropus.

Haeckel's reasoning had its own logic. The scientist believed that the gibbon embryo is most similar to humans among anthropoids. This, in his opinion, indicated that they had a common ancestor. By the way, there is one more feature that brings gibbons closer to humans. These virtuoso aerialists are the only non-human mammals capable of singing with a clear voice. Concerts take place in the mornings. The leader male begins. Then the choir of group members joins the solo part. The singing is so melodious that tourists specially come to the kingdom of gibbons to hear the monkeys perform in concert. It should be noted that tourists do not go to La Scala, but to the jungle... Probably, the purpose of choral singing is to consolidate the group, to make the monkeys aware of their unity. At the same time, not only the listeners - people, but also the performers themselves - the gibbons - are delighted with their songs... They get a boost of energy for the whole day.

The famous pathologist R. Virchow, in defiance of Darwin, suggested that the homeland of people was the now sunken Lemuria. He believed that the islands of Southeast Asia were fragments of a once sunken continent. He also approved of Du Bois's idea of ​​visiting Sumatra.

Having secured the support of such influential people in the scientific world of that time, the young researcher, without hesitation, set off on his journey. However, in Sumatra, Dubois encountered an unexpected obstacle. Local residents refused to show the way and accompany the explorer to the caves, where, in their opinion, evil spirits lived. Meanwhile, it was in the caves that there was the greatest likelihood of finding Pithecanthropus. Then Desbois decided to look for the “ape-man” in Java, where many skeletal remains of animals were scattered along the river beds. And luck smiled on the enthusiast. In 1891 he found what he was looking for. In the valley of the Solo River, near the village of Trinil, Debois discovered a human tooth. The scientist himself was inclined to consider his find a monkey tooth, but with some human characteristics. A year later, Desbois continued excavations in the same place and found a skull cap and a femur. The thick cranial bone, darkened with time, resembled the skull of a gibbon, but at the same time it was twice as large.

Regarding the sensational discovery in Java, the outstanding English anthropologist Elliot Grafton Smith said the following: “Amazing things happen! Du Bois actually found the fossil that the scientific imagination had predicted.” But the world almost lost its newfound ancestor. Du Bois, returning to Europe, accidentally left his briefcase with bones in the Parisian restaurant where he had lunch. However, when he returned to the restaurant in the evening, he saw his briefcase in the same place where he left it.

In 1896, Du Bois published a book in which he described his findings. On the copy given to Haeckel, the researcher inscribed: “To the inventor of Pithecanthropus from its discoverer.” However, the scientific world was in no hurry to see in the bones brought to Europe the remains of an ape-man, and, moreover, an ancestor of people. Serious passions flared up about this. So Virchow, having studied the structure of the bones, spoke very categorically: the fragment of the skull cap belongs to a giant gibbon, and the femur belongs to a human. Anthropologist Keys believed that Dubois brought the remains of a degenerate, who, moreover, was hit on the head as a child, since the skull was too flat. During the International Zoological Congress, held in the Netherlands in 1895, bones brought from Indonesia were at the center of the discussion. Each of the venerable scientists who came to the congress from all over the world considered it their duty to examine the find and hold the heavy skull cap in their hands. Probably, this dark red head bone was destined by fate itself to become a symbol of revolutionary changes in science. The authoritative meeting never came to a consensus. It came down to voting. But it was also not possible to overcome differences by voting.

Later, Du Bois, disoriented by the scientists' opinions, began to believe that he had discovered a chimpanzee that walked like a man. But the volume of the skull of this creature was much larger than that of apes. Based on this, he renamed Pithecanthropus "chimpanzee erectus". At the same time, he was not at all embarrassed by the fact that chimpanzees are found in Africa...

Meanwhile, the controversy about the amazing find did not subside, and science fiction writers intervened in it. So Herbert Wells argued that the researcher found the bones of neither a human nor a chimpanzee. Pithecanthropus, in his opinion, was a monkey that walked on two legs and had an upright human posture. The science fiction writer believed that in prehistoric times bipedal monkeys with huge heads walked around the world. The church intervened in the dispute. Father John Lightrun of Cambridge accurately calculated that the Creator created man at 9 o'clock in the morning on October 23, 4004 BC. What kind of ancient ape-people, in this case, would it be generally appropriate to talk about... It was proposed to simply forget about the find. Dubois, unable to withstand the criticism that came at him from all sides, finally hid the bones in a safe and for almost a quarter of a century did not allow anyone to examine them. And at the end of his life, he unexpectedly agreed with his many opponents and began to believe that the Java bones belonged to a giant gibbon.

This find was destined to become a bone of contention between those who were sure that man was created by the Creator and those who believed that he was descended from a monkey. The find was subjected to such serious criticism also because scientists and society of that time could not come to terms with the idea that the characteristics of man and ape were combined in one creature. A sloping forehead, a low cranial vault, flattened parietal bones and a powerful supraorbital ridge - all this can be found in apes. But the volume of the skull in chimpanzees is from 350 cubic meters. cm, and gorillas have from 400 to 600 cc. cm is less than that of the smaller Pithecanthropus. Its head holds 900 cc. cm and approaches the volume of the modern human brain. The femur reveals its owner as an upright creature close to modern man. Researchers of the past did not want to believe that in front of them were the remains of a man with the head of a monkey...

Meanwhile, if we accept that degeneration begins from the head, then the first negative changes must be looked for inside, and then outside the head. “Switching off” those areas of the brain that are responsible for social and rational behavior contributes to their dysfunction. As a result, the shape of the brain changes and the volume of the brain decreases. This leads to morphological changes in the head, and then in the body as a whole.

Degradation managed to change the skull of Pithecanthropus, giving it monkey-like features. The brain has shrunk. (For comparison: the lower limit of brain capacity in modern people is 1000 cubic cm.) However, the skeleton of this creature remained human, it has not undergone such significant changes. From these positions, Pithecanthropus appears to us as a bipedal degenerate in its purest form...

This assumption is also confirmed by the fact that the “Pithecanthropus mute,” as E. Haeckel originally called this creature, has an imprint of the cerebral cortex, Broca’s area, on the inner surface of the skull. This zone is used to judge the presence of speech. A cast of the cranial cavity showed that the structure of this zone is almost the same as that of a human, but not the same as that of a monkey. What happens: the degenerate, although he had a monkey’s head, but if he met a scientist, he could tell about himself how he came to live like this? It turns out - no! Judging by the later finds of Pithecanthropus, they had a heavy, huge jaw without a chin, which indicates their lack of articulate speech. In addition, Pithecanthropus had a high larynx, like that of a baby. Pithecanthropus was only able to babble something incomprehensible... And he inherited Broca's area from his more talkative ancestors - people with normal heads.

Our ancestors include Sinanthropus (Chinese man), who lived in China. The first skull of Sinanthropus was carved from a block of limestone in 1929 in the huge Zhoukoudian (Dragon Bone Hill) cave, located near Beijing. Later, 13 more skulls and the remains of about forty individuals were discovered there. Wendenreich carefully examined the heads of the Chinese man and found marks on them from blows with sharp objects. Having killed their victims, the killers separated the heads from the torso. Then they broke off the edges of the occipital foramen in order to get to the brain, which they probably ate with pleasure. This, according to the scientist, was indisputable evidence of cannibalism.

Later, scientists found that Sinanthropus lived in groups of 30 people and, during periods of lack of food, organized safaris for their neighbors. The apotheosis of hunting was a feast on the mountain... The brain was especially valued. For the sake of such a delicacy, synanthropes separated the head from the body and brought it to the cave. (Many heads were found in the cave, but few skeleton parts.) The anthropologist Breuil was the first to notice that the edges of the skull caps were polished from long use. He suggested that Sinanthropus not only ate the brain, but also used skulls as dishes and bowls for storing water... Similarly, the inhabitants of the Andaman Islands use the skulls and bones of their deceased ancestors in the form of household utensils. Don't let the good things go to waste... Parts of skulls, for example, the lower jaw, are sometimes hung on a rope and worn like a necklace. Regarding Sinanthropus, it is unknown whether they decorated themselves with a necklace of skulls or not. If they were decorated, it would significantly increase their status in the eyes of scientists. This would already be considered a sign of intelligence and creativity...

The skulls of Sinanthropus turned out to be close to the Pithecanthropus of Java. Pithecanthropus has a skull volume of 900 cubic meters. cm, and synanthropes have about 1000 cubic meters. cm. Both have narrow-browed heads, with a sloping forehead and a flattened nape. These “people” had large teeth, the fangs slightly protruding beyond the edge of the dentition, which is generally characteristic of monkeys. On some skulls, especially in Pithecanthropus, there are spaces (diastemas) between the canines and incisors so that when the jaws close, fangs from the opposing dentition can enter (a clearly simian feature). The jaws are strongly pushed forward, like those of animals. However, the dental arch had a U-shape like a human's. Very large supraorbital ridges resemble those of gorillas. The presence of ridges on the skull, to which powerful chewing muscles are attached, also makes them similar to gorillas. Thus, Pithecanthropus and Sinanthropus have quite a few features that are also found in apes. Accordingly, these features distance them from modern man. Nevertheless, scientists continue to consider Pithecanthropus and Sinanthropus to be the ancestors of humans. And it's strange. The more ancient Australopithecines, from which sapiens supposedly descended, despite their small stature, look more human. At least, their concave “faces” do not bear such a strong imprint of monkey features; they did not have such large fangs and brow ridges. How could it happen that the ancestors (Australopithecus) look more human than their descendants (Sinanthropus and Pithecanthropus), despite the fact that both are considered the ancestors of modern humans. Evolutionists are modestly silent about this...

Everything falls into place if we begin to consider Sinanthropus and Pithecanthropus (today they are combined into a single species, Homo erectus) from other involutionary positions. Then we understand that both African australopithecus and Asian erectus are different species of degenerates, not related to each other. They independently and at different times budded from the human trunk and quietly, calmly degraded, indulging in their favorite pastime - eating their own kind. This happened after the degenerates received residence permits in certain isolated areas of the world. Australopithecines lived in the shrouds of Africa from 4.5 to 1 million years ago; Sinanthropus lived in mainland South Asia from 1.7–500 million years ago; in island Southeast Asia, which was still dry land at that time, from 1 ,8 to 100 million years - Pithecanthropus. (Scientists have found that the late Pithecanthropus lived in Java quite recently - 30 thousand years ago, i.e. at a time when modern man was already thriving in Europe.)

The appearance of degenerates developed in a very unique way, depending on social conditions and habitat, taking into account local characteristics and the way of life they led. Different groups of these humanoid creatures differed from each other in terms of morphology, place and time of settlement, and to arrange them in one ascending row - from the more primitive to the more advanced - is not an easy, and, in general, a meaningless task...

In 1994, an analysis of two Pithecanthropus skeletons from the island of Java was carried out. It turned out that the Javanese were one and a half times older than previously thought. One lived 1.6, the other 1.8 million years ago. Even African erecti, which are supposedly the ancestors of Asian hominids, do not have such a decent age. It turns out that both the Javanese and the Africans migrated to the places of their permanent deployment from some other places... Perhaps they came from Lemuria, which once sank in the waters of the ocean. At least their homeland is not Africa!

As for Sinanthropus, in the Zhoukoudian cave, along with their mortal remains, stone tools and traces of fire were found - thick layers of ash with charred pieces of wood. It turns out that synanthropes, despite their half-monkey, half-human faces and passion for cannibalism, knew how to use fire. Not all scientists were ready to accept this. After all, we are accustomed to believe that the merit of producing and using fire is an achievement of Homo sapiens. But, no - two-legged ape-like people were not averse to letting their neighbor have a barbecue or stewing it in a prehistoric oven consisting of hot stones - after all, they don’t still eat raw meat and carrion...

To this it should be added that not only bipeds are capable of using fire, but also quadrupeds, and not only in prehistoric times, but also today. For scientists this was a complete surprise. Thus, the Japanese researcher M. Kawai reports the use of fire by a flock of Japanese macaques in a national park on the island of Honshu. In the cold winter of 1962, macaques first began to warm themselves around fires built by visitors. They liked it, and since then the macaques have spent their winters by the fire. They stretch out their arms and legs towards the fire, clearly enjoying the warmth, i.e. they act like people who want to warm their chilled fingers. Some monkeys have even learned to put twigs on the fire... The only thing that macaques do not know how to do is make fire. If the fire goes out, they cannot relight it. (Perhaps this is precisely why they differ from fossil ape-people, who knew how to not only maintain, but also make fire.) Similar cases were observed more than once in Germany. At the Bielefeld Zoo, baboons sat around fires in which attendants burned dead wood and pruned branches. Often, inspired by the warmth, they started fussing around the fire. These cases indicate that we still know very little about “our little brothers” - both four-legged and two-legged...

Captain Hichens, while hunting lions in the forests of Mozambique, noticed two small brown creatures emerging from the thicket. Their height was not much more than a meter. The short ones walked upright, like people, their bodies were covered with reddish fur. A local hunter accompanying Hichens explained to the stunned captain that these were Agogwe - small hairy men living in the jungle. Local residents tell all sorts of things about them. For example, if you leave bottles of beer and food on the plantation, the dwarfs will weed the beds, hoping that next time people will bring them new gifts.

Some educated local people believe that Agogwe are australopithecines that have survived to this day. Perhaps, in fact, not all the small fossil inhabitants of the savannah died out, but some of them have survived to our time, having adapted to forest life. Scientists would give a lot just to get their hands on a living Lilliputian. Then science would have a unique chance to figure out whether Australopithecus is, after all, a human ancestor or not. However, it may turn out that in order to figure this out, it is not necessary to catch someone...

In 1922, a new anatomy teacher, Raymond Dart, arrived at the University of Johannesburg in South Africa. He was so passionate about finding human ancestors that he soon infected students and even their parents with his desire. Inspired by Darth, they began to look for fossilized skulls wherever possible. Soon such enthusiasm was crowned with success and the petrified skull of a baby ancient primate with a full set of milk teeth fell into Dart’s hands. Dart affectionately called the find: “baby from Taung.” “This is the transitional link from ape to man!” - the scientist exclaimed and notified the scientific world about the discovery. According to science, the “baby” was dubbed Australopithecus (southern monkey). However, the scientific world, which at that time was enthusiastically following the search for a “transitional link” in Southeast Asia, in the Gobi Desert, did not pay attention to the new contender for the high title of human ancestor. And the English anatomist A. Keess, and even worse, called “baby” a baby monkey. And only when the search in the Gobi Desert did not give the result that they had hoped for, the learned men turned their favorable glances towards the hitherto unknown African.

Since that distant time, thousands of remains of australopithecines have been found that lived in South, East and even Central Africa. The scientific world was struck by the Australopithecus boom, which, however, has recently died down somewhat. Many have become accustomed to the idea that fossil short people were our ancestors. Others lost faith in them and suggested that australopithecines were not ancestors, but dead ends of evolution...

“Southern monkeys” were small in stature - males reached one and a half meters, females - a little more than a meter. They had a small brain: on average - 413 cubic meters. cm, about the same as in apes. The face had sharply protruding large jaws with large teeth. But Australopithecines did not have huge fangs, like those of a gorilla or chimpanzee. Massive forms had a raised bony ridge on the crown of their head; during life, it probably resembled a mohawk hairstyle.

The most remarkable feature of the "southern monkeys" was that they walked on two legs. The scientists grabbed the straightened legs of the australopithecus with both hands. Agree, an upright monkey is much more suitable for the role of a human ancestor than a quadruped. Researchers appreciated the legs of australopithecines and called them the ancestors of humans. After this, many scientists began to colorfully describe how Australopithecines came out of the forest, stood on their hind legs in order to see if a predator was hiding in the tall grass of the shroud. Like, the vertical position of the body immediately increased their visibility... However, one can object to this: if it was necessary to increase the visibility, then wouldn’t it be easier to climb a tree? Most large predators climb trees poorly, much worse than monkeys. Why was it necessary to descend from the trees and go out into the shroud, where there are plenty of predators? In addition, upright walking is extremely unprofitable in terms of energy consumption, and it does not allow one to achieve the speeds that are possible with four-legged running. A large predatory animal could catch up with a small Australopithecus and easily deal with it...

However, the fact remains that Australopithecines were shroud dwellers. In this regard, it can be assumed that the ancestors of the “southern monkeys” constantly lived in open spaces, and not in the forest. This is confirmed by the relatively small hands of Australopithecines, which were not properly adapted to grasping branches. They are unlike the long, strong hook arms of chimpanzees that climb trees with ease. The Australopithecus hand is similar to the human hand, but differs markedly from the hand of arboreal apes.

As for the legs, straight long legs are good for upright walking, but for tree climbing they are a hindrance. From this we can conclude that neither the Australopithecines themselves nor their ancestors ever lived in the forest... The question arises: where did the Australopithecines come from then?

Australopithecus lived in Africa and other places 4.5–1 million years ago. It should be noted that the appearance of Australopithecus coincides with global climate change. About 5 million years ago, a cooling began, which subsequently led to the appearance of glaciers in the north of Eurasia and America, as well as in Antarctica. This was the reason for the mass migration of various animals, possibly including Pliocene humans (5.5–1.6 million years ago) to warmer areas - to Africa and South Asia. Thus, the African fauna was represented in the North up to 5 million years ago. In Africa itself it was so hot and deserted that it was hardly suitable for life. This is confirmed by paleontological data. The remains of fossil thermophilic fauna have been found in the North, but are absent in Africa itself. Once upon a time, hippos, elephants, camels, rhinoceroses, bulls, horses, tigers, lions, monkeys, ostriches, etc. lived beyond the Arctic Circle, i.e., those animals that we can see on the African continent. Most likely, wild people who hunted animals migrated south after large animals. Hundreds of thousands of years spent in wanderings and wildness could not but affect their appearance - some of them turned into two-legged runts who hunted and gathered...

Here we clearly begin to understand that the ancestors of the “southern monkeys” were people similar to us. They, like us, walked on their own two feet. They probably used tools and led a herd lifestyle. Probably, the upright degenerates were located in a large group in the savannah, which did not allow predators to make frequent attacks on them. They used the natural terrain as cover. For example, most of the remains of South African australopithecines were found in caves. In addition, a life full of dangers allowed them to retain some human qualities. For defense and attack, as well as in their simple life, Australopithecus widely used a variety of tools: stones, bones, sticks. A huge number of such tools were found along with their fossilized bones. Impactors made from beaten pebbles were discovered near the remains of East African australopithecines. Some scientists suggest that the creator of the “pebble culture” was Australopithecus.

The discoverer of Australopithecus, Raymond Dart, suggested that the teeth of large animals were used as saws and scrapers, long bones as clubs, horns as daggers, and shoulder blades as shovels. Dart called this use of animal carcasses "osseous-dental-horn culture." Ashes were discovered in one of the caves, and its ancient inhabitant was given the honorary title of Australopithecus Prometheus. Some scientists admit that this upright primate owned fire... Near the “southern monkey” the remains of zebras, wild boars, giraffes, rhinoceroses, hippopotamuses, monkeys and even saber-toothed tigers were found. All these animals were killed using large bones and stones. It is quite possible that upright primates successfully used collective hunting. Australopithecines could have inherited all this from their intelligent ancestors - humans... What the “southern apes” could not inherit from intelligent people was cannibalism. Dart noticed that 50 of the skulls bore traces of blows to the head on the left side, that is, inflicted with the right hand. Based on the nature of the damage, the researcher concluded that long antelope bones were used as a club. Dents and breaks correspond to the heads of these bones...

Australopithecines did not venture into the forest for obvious reasons. An enemy can easily lurk in dense vegetation, no matter who he is - a predator or a four-armed competitor. All the advantages of collective hunting in the open disappear in the forest. Australopithecus, due to its “human” morphology, did not know how to deftly climb a tree in case of danger. In addition, the forests were already occupied by apes, who budded from the human trunk much earlier than the australopithecines. During the time that anthropoids spent in the forest, they perfectly adapted to the arboreal lifestyle. They settled into the forest so well that, as we see, they still live there. Australopithecus, which appeared in Africa about 4.5 million years ago, became extinct about one million years ago. While retaining some human traits in their behavior and appearance, the “southern apes” were unable to adapt to wild existence as well as the apes did.

Australopithecines had one feature that suggests their human origin. The early “southern apes” looked more advanced and closer to humans than the later ones, who lived from 2.5 to 1 million years ago. Thus, the supermassive Australopithecus boises, despite its decent growth, had features of degeneration. Massive skull bones, huge teeth, a powerful lower jaw and a small brain indicate the involution of this species. The same can be said about the massive Australopithecus robustus. As one of the researchers wrote: “...in late australopithecines, the tendency to strengthen the masticatory apparatus noticeably prevailed over the tendency to further enlarge the brain.” This is already strange. If we follow the evolutionary doctrine: the closer in time to a person, the more a creature, other in its ancestors, should resemble a person. It, on the contrary, becomes more and more unlike him, its features become more and more bestial... However, for “ugly” appearance researchers have excluded massive forms from candidates for human ancestors - there is no need to disgrace the human race!

Thus, Australopithecus shows us that degenerates of the human race do not always strive to climb trees. Many of them continue to walk on two legs and do not regret it at all. And as can be seen from the example of the massive Australopithecus; bipedal gait is not at all an obstacle to their further degradation...

Evolutionists began to “develop” australopithecines for one simple reason. Upright walking and the lack of adaptations for an arboreal lifestyle bring these primates closer to humans. In the “southern apes” it was tempting to see human ancestors, and these ancestors were seen in them... But are australopithecus actually our ancestors? In our opinion, the presence of human traits in them suggests that degradation may not be accompanied by the acquisition of adaptation to an arboreal lifestyle, which we observe in apes. Most likely, Australopithecines retained their bipedality only because they did not have worthy competitors in Africa, for example, a wild man, from whom they could only escape by climbing a tree... It is quite possible that in the Pliocene time people lived in some other parts Ecumene, and Africa was a reserve of unafraid bipedal degenerates, whose name is Australopithecus.

Australopithecines were neither the first nor the last degenerates of the human race. Recently, a bipedal midget was found that lived on the Indonesian island of Flores about 18 thousand years ago. He had much less brain than Australopithecus, only 350 cubic meters. see, and he wasn’t exactly tall - a meter with a cap. He lived at the same time as sapiens, but climbed into the darkness as a cockroach, where he grew smaller, lost brain cubes and did it in a similar way, like his ancient predecessor from Africa...

At one time, the domestic psychologist A. A. Ukhtomsky proposed the theory of attitude. He wrote: “If you want to be a commander for events, you need to master the dominants. The established dominant (“attitude”) owns us. It is clear that the one who knows how to own it - in us, will own us...” According to the research conducted, the experimental subjects perceived only what they were initially tuned in to. A kind of confirmation of this theory is another theory - evolution. For decades, thousands of scientists have consciously and unconsciously (but mostly unconsciously) interpreted facts and conducted research in accordance with the ruling evolutionary paradigm. The theory of evolution was the social attitude that determined further scientific research and its results. If the results or new facts did not fit into the evolutionary doctrine, they were rejected. However, in last years Too many facts have accumulated that contradict evolutionism. On the other hand, the weakening of ideological pressure allowed many to doubt the correctness of the ruling paradigm. All this allows us to take a completely different look at the origin of life and the appearance of man on Earth... It may not be long before the day when the origin of man will be interpreted differently.

For many decades now, anthropologists have faced great difficulties when building the human family tree. These difficulties lie in the fact that the so-called ancestors of humans have a very varied set of morphological features, which make it difficult to build from these “ancestors” a beautiful, smooth and consistent picture of the ascent from monkeys to humans.

Controversies await anthropologists at every turn, starting with apes. Thus, in orangutans and gorillas, the skull is equipped with powerful jaws with large fangs; on their heads there are huge brow ridges and ridges, to which the chewing muscles are attached. The next stage of “humanization” - Australopithecines - has relatively small fangs. As a rule, they hardly extend beyond the edge of the teeth. The next stage of “humanization” - the Javan Pithecanthropus is characterized by the massiveness and primitiveness of the skull, despite its large volume, and quite impressive fangs. The next stage, Heidelberg man, has a very peculiar combination of primitive and modern features. For example, one of the representatives of this stage, a fossil hominid found in Rhodesia, has such huge brow ridges that the famous anthropologist M. M. Gerasimov even compared him to a gorilla on this basis (1955). With all this, the “Rhodesian” skull is equal in volume to the skull of a modern person.

With regard to the Neanderthal, it can be said that many anthropologists have already ceased to consider him the stage through which modern man passed in his development. And all because the Neanderthal, despite his huge volume of the brain skull, looks, frankly, like a monkey... Massive australopithecines have long been considered a dead end of evolution, unlike the Neanderthal. Their extremely primitive skulls with huge jaws and a bony crest on the head do not allow even the most zealous evolutionists to classify these bipedal monkeys as human ancestors.

Thus, we see that if a person really went through the stages of evolution, then his fangs either increased or decreased, the brow ridges almost disappeared, then acquired resemblance to monkeys, the brain and facial skull constantly changed their parameters, and so on. I must admit that this is a rather strange evolution. Most likely, another couple of decades will pass, anthropologists will dig up a couple of dozen more bone remains of a human “ancestor” from the ground, and the evolutionary doctrine of anthropogenesis will completely fall apart, because it is impossible to connect the incompatible...

In fact, anthropoids, Australopithecus, Pithecanthropus, Sinanthropus, Heidelberg man, Neanderthals and many other degenerates unknown to us, trace their origins to anatomically modern humans. They budded off from the trunk of humanity independently of each other at different times, degraded, and acquired those peculiar features that now surprise anthropologists who have dug up their mortal remains. All these “ancestors” are not closely related to each other, and even more so could not have descended from each other. Connecting the incompatible is a thankless and pointless task...

However, it must be said that not all anthropologists indulge themselves in the illusion of Darwinism; there have been other scientists in the history of science. So, even Plato wrote two and a half millennia ago that populations of some people become hostages of their stupidity and ignorance and turn into animals. Not only ancient, but also modern scientists, for example, Johann Ranke (1897) and J. Kohlman (1906), believed that the common ancestor of humans and apes had a taller skull with a rounded shape, in contrast to the low skulls of modern anthropoids. As proof of this, Kolman cited the fact that a newborn monkey is more similar to an adult human than to an adult monkey. Another scientist Otto Kleinschmidt developed the doctrine of circles of biological forms, of the eternity of the type of modern man.

Many domestic scientists confirmed the truth that the brain of mammals was not simpler, but even more complex in their ancestors. Thus, paleoneurologist Kochetkova V.I. wrote: “... for many modern mammals you can find a phylogenetic, more ancient and outwardly different form, which already had the same type of brain: for horses - this is the Miocene hipparion, for antelopes - the Miocene eotragus, for deer - Miocene dreamotherium, for tarsiers - Eocene tetonius... The Miocene proconsul had a brain type similar to the brain type of apes..." The famous Soviet paleontologist Yu. A. Orlov wrote: "The brain of the fossil marten (perunium) has three grooves and four convolutions, which makes it similar on the bear's brain. Modern martens have only two furrows and three convolutions. In addition, the temporal and occipital lobes of the perunium were larger, which gave the animal a resemblance to a bear not only in the structure of the skull, but also in the type of brain... If we arrange the members of the marten family from weasel to wolverine according to the increasing complexity of the brain, then the final member of this series will be the brain perunium... Contrary to the prevailing opinion that progress in development nervous system contributes to the prosperity of the species, paleoneurologists have established another truth that is now beyond doubt - many species with a developed brain died out earlier than forms with a primitive brain" (1947–1968).

In a wide variety of specialized mammals: proboscis, rodents, odd-toed, even-toed, edentates, carnivores, the brain has a common type of structure with circular grooves and convolutions. Unlike the brain of primates, it is smaller in size, the cerebral hemispheres are less developed, but the olfactory brain is well developed, which primates do not have. It can be assumed that the reduction of the cerebral hemispheres and the development of the olfactory brain allowed primates to transform into lower mammals and successfully master new ecological niches...

Lemurs and tarsiers have a special type of brain. The relatively large hemispheres are devoid of grooves and convolutions. From the standpoint of evolutionary doctrine, this looks strange - more primitive animals already have grooves and convolutions, like anthropoids and humans. Meanwhile, everything falls into place when we put forward the assumption that various mammals, including lemurs and tarsiers, had anthropomorphic ancestors, and they involuted in a special way, independently of each other, over a long time. And paleontological data somehow confirms this. The “conspicuous” lemur, which became extinct in the Pleistocene, had a complex of primate-type grooves and convolutions...

Many famous scientists believed that anthropoids were not the ancestors of humans. For example, the famous American paleontologist G. F. Osborne believed that apes with short crooked legs and long arms adapted to grasping branches were not the ancestors of humans. The ancestor of man was a tertiary man, whom Osborne called the eoanthropus (man of the dawn). Traveling in the Gobi Desert, Osborne came to the conclusion about the eternity of the human type and about the ancestral home of humanity in the territory of present-day Mongolia and Tibet. It is curious in this regard that the paleontologist considered Pithecanthropus to be degenerates, remnants of ancient humanity, displaced by perfect people to the periphery - the islands of Indonesia and Oceania. Another famous scientist F.W. Jones put forward the assumption back in 1916 that man is related not to anthropoids, but to tarsiers. Jones pointed out similarities between tarsiers and humans. Tarsiers have a large brain, long legs and short arms; tarsiers move in an upright position, like a person. Georgy Miller and V.V. Bunak also believed that anthropoids were not the ancestors of humans. The foot of anthropoids, unlike humans, is a prehensile organ and is equipped with an opposable big toe. During human fetal development thumb the foot does not show any signs of opposition. In addition, the adult human foot is not like the foot of apes. The big toe, along with the others, is encircled by a common transverse metatarsal ligament, which is a big difference from the chimpanzee foot, in which this ligament encircles only four toes. Based on this, scientists believed that our ancestors never lived in trees.

In many arboreal monkeys, the hand is highly specialized for grasping branches, so that the fingers grow together, and the thumb is greatly reduced in size. It is not possible to derive a human ancestor from these monkeys. Moreover, for example, in the Abyssinian gverets and the black coata the thumb atrophies and disappears, and in the common potto the index finger atrophies. This shows that the thumb, which is so necessary for a person to perform various subtle manipulations with objects, becomes unnecessary and even interferes with climbing trees. It was not the ancestors of people who climbed the trees, but their descendants!

It is known that apes have large fangs and powerful jaws that protrude strongly forward. Australopithecines, which evolutionists believe are descendants of arboreal anthropoids, have small fangs. The English anthropologist Cliford Jolly, trying to explain the hypothetical reduction of the jaw apparatus and the disappearance of large fangs in australopithecines, believed that they switched to feeding on plant seeds. The fangs prevented the australopithecines from chewing food and became smaller. Engels's labor theory is well known that the monkey turned into a man due to the fact that it stood on two legs, its forelimbs were freed, with the help of which it began to make tools and developed its hand and brain. In addition, the monkey began to eat meat, which also contributed to its humanization. Many Soviet scientists at one time especially emphasized that the first people learned to soften meat over fire, as a result of which their jaws shrank.

However, all these hypotheses look today, at least, unconvincing. Baboons often feed on plant seeds in a shroud and do not turn into humans because of this; their fangs and teeth do not shrink. From paleontological data it follows that australopithecines could not systematically use tools. To do this, they clearly did not have enough brains (the brain volume of australopithecines was on average 500 cubic cm, which does not exceed the brain volume of apes.) Why did their fangs shrink? It is unlikely that a skilled person, or even an upright person, fried meat over a fire and did it not just once in a while, but constantly, so that their jaws became so noticeably smaller...

In our opinion, anthropologists underestimate the functions of the chewing apparatus of great apes and the so-called ancestors of humans. The use of tools does not at all replace the universal weapon that is always with you - powerful jaws and teeth. And in fact, Australopithecines did not constantly carry tools with them, like swords tied on their belts...

We believe that the strengthening of the masticatory apparatus among the descendants of degenerating human beings is associated with the desire to bite. Due to the increased load of the masticatory apparatus, the lower jaw in wild people moved forward and was pulled out like forceps. Moving the jaws forward increased their grasping function. To create a powerful lever for biting, the processes of the lower jaw increased. At the same time, the crown of the teeth, molars and fangs increased, which turned into a formidable weapon. In degenerates, the chin protrusion has disappeared due to the disappearance of the need for verbal communication. And really, what can we talk about when all our thoughts are occupied with degradation and the fight against our own kind? The size of the bone ridge, which was barely noticeable in modern humans, increased.

Various ridges and roughnesses appeared on the brain skull, to which powerful chewing and neck muscles were attached. The volume of the cranium decreased following the reduction in brain volume. The skull stretched lengthwise and ceased to be round.

If in modern humans the chewing muscles are attached to the temporal bone, then in male gorillas and orangutans it is attached to the temporal, parietal bones and to powerful longitudinal, transverse, occipital crests that reach 5 cm. At the same time, the neck needs more powerful muscles. Anthropoids develop a nuchal ligament and long spinous processes of the cervical spine, which hold the head in an upright position. Thus, anthropoids become permanent owners of the most powerful weapon - the chewing apparatus, which they always resort to at the slightest provocation in order to protect themselves or assert their superiority.

And indeed, if we follow the logic of evolutionism, it seems rather strange that the differences between males and females are gradually erased as the “ancestors” ascend to man. After all, modern man has enough aggression to constantly start fights with his neighbor (in the literal and figurative sense of the word), the history of wars is proof of this. The weapons that people use still need to be obtained somewhere, but jaws and their own fists are much better suited for intra-group showdowns. Therefore, it is difficult to imagine that the aggressiveness of our “ancestors” was less than ours, and they went so far as to reduce their fangs and teeth to such an extent that they can only be used by women and children when they want to defend themselves.

Most likely, it was the other way around: men, filled with rage, defended themselves, their property, their wives and their children (at the same time they were losing their minds). In the end, they grew fangs that would make a leopard jealous...

The most pronounced tendency to strengthen the masticatory apparatus among modern monkeys is in baboons. Ridges and ridges appear on their skull, bones thicken, with the simultaneous formation of a noticeable relief on the wall of the skull for the attachment of masticatory and other muscles. The fossilized Gorgopithecus large, a relative of baboons, generally looked like a fiend from hell - with huge down-curved fangs and a flattened skull.

Probably, the skull of the original man - the ancestor of the degenerates known as paleoanthropes and archanthropes - was round. Among the Neanderthals, it was greatly extended in length, and its arch was asleep. This happened due to the reduction of the parietal center of the brain, which is responsible for subtle movements of the hand, for series and cycles of movements, for stereotypical mastery of tool skills. A clear confirmation of this is the hand of a classical Neanderthal, which amazes researchers with its rudeness and underdevelopment. G. A. Bonch-Osmolovsky provides data on the similarity of the Kiik-Koba Neanderthal with the human fetus. Other scientists believe that the Neanderthal could not touch the tips of the other fingers with his thumb, and his hand was more capable of a forceful grip than the hand of a modern person.

In addition, the parietal region of the brain serves to generalize visual and vestibular signals, with its help accurate orientation in space, control over the actions of other people and oral speech. This area is also associated with memory retention and repetition of a series of words, phrases and entire sentences. It is likely that paleoanthropes, to one degree or another, lost all these important mental functions. What is especially striking is that they have lost, to some extent, specific memory. Perhaps this was due to the collapse of the previous civilization. Individuals, finding themselves outside the civilizational field, lost the ability to use the cumulative experience of humanity in their individual activities and found themselves cut off from the cultural heritage of their ancestors. Parents could not teach their children everything that the collapsed civilization possessed, and the children grew up ignorant...

The inferior parietal region of the brain is associated with the production of labor actions and manipulation of the hand. Probably, Neanderthals, along with their memory, lost the ability to work systematically, and this happened already at the conditional paleoanthropic stage. (F. Engels was greatly mistaken in believing that labor made a man out of a monkey.)

The sloping forehead of the Neanderthal was formed as a result of underdevelopment of the frontal lobe, which is responsible for inhibition and suppression of emotional reactions. In modern humans, the frontal lobe houses the representation of the centers of speech and abstract thinking. Probably, the disappearance of both in paleoanthropes led to a reduction in these areas of the brain and the appearance of a “forehead running back.” One must think that the aggressiveness of ancient people, in comparison with their ancestors - more advanced people (whose remains may not have been found yet) increased many times. And paleoanthropologists find numerous evidence of this - these are traces of cannibalism...

Pithecanthropus, according to some data (an imprint on the skull cap found by E. Dubois), also had a motor speech center - Broca's area. This part of the brain controls the muscles of the face, tongue, jaws and pharynx, i.e. all speech-producing organs. However, another important area of ​​the brain - the Wernicke center - is present only in Homo sapiens, and is absent in degenerates. This center is responsible for understanding speech. Thus, all primitive people who still had the ability to babble something, like the babbling of a child, have already lost the ability to understand what was said. From that moment on, speech began to be perceived by them mainly not as a carrier of information, but as an expresser of emotions.

Among modern apes, the sounds they exchange usually serve to convey emotions. However, scientists have discovered a brain fold in modern chimpanzees that corresponds to Broca's area. It is probably a rudiment and was inherited by the monkeys from their more talkative ancestors.

Reduction of the cerebral cortex was associated with the abolition of rational control over behavior. As a result, the limbic system, which manages the emotional and hormonal activity of a living being, took a dominant position. Control over the mechanisms of aggression, eating behavior, sense of danger and sexual activity passed to reflexes and instincts. These morphological changes significantly reduced the animal's potential for correct perception, and most importantly, for understanding the objective situation. From these positions, one can consider an animal as a person who has lost his mind and adapted to life without it. The French psychologist M. Pieron (1958) noted that there is a big difference between animals, even the highest level (chimpanzees) and humans. It is due to the fact that the thinking of the former is limited to a specific situation; the animal cannot and does not want to free itself from a reflexive response to certain stimuli. Probably, among other things, the abstract idea of ​​God allows a person to rise above the physical world. On our own behalf, we can add that the loss of this idea may be the beginning of the chain of troubles into which the degenerates who turned into monkeys found themselves.

Evolutionists talk a lot about the evolutionary tree of life that gave birth to man. In fact, there is no evolutionary tree. God, having created a perfect biological organism - the human body, already predetermined the degeneration of this organism and its return to its original point. If during uterine development the human body unfolds, in accordance with God’s plan, to its adult state, then during a long involutionary process, sometimes lasting millions of years, it curls up and returns to its original position... Thus, the process of involution is the opposite of the process of creation of a perfect organism . In this regard, chordates, supposedly standing at the beginning of the evolution of vertebrates, appear not as the ancestors of cyclostomes, fish, amphibians, reptiles, birds and mammals, but as the last degenerates in this series. Anton Dorn wrote about this in 1875: “The so-called ascidian larva is a degenerated fish, if you like, a degenerated cyclostome... The most important point in this far-reaching process of degeneration is that the ascidians no longer attach themselves to the fish in order to feed on their bodies , like hagfish and lampreys. Instead, they attach themselves to rocks, plants and ships.” Dorn considered the lancelet, which evolutionists place at the base of the tree of vertebrates, to be a similar degenerate. “The lancelet lives in the sand, through the movement of the cilia it forms a stream of water in front of its mouth protruding from the sand, which brings it diatoms, larvae, ciliates... In these antennae, we recognize nothing more than the slightly modified antennae and tentacles of cyclostomes and fish, which we had previously considered the gills of annelids to be the last remnants...” No matter how regrettable and murderous it was for the pride of evolutionists, we are forced to report that the human biological body is capable of turning into a lancelet and a primitive tunicate... However, we think that this does not in the least detract from the status man as a rational being created by God.

The concept of “werewolf” is familiar to almost all nations. For a modern person, this word is associated with another “horror movie” and is the embodiment of something magical.

For a huge number of years, official science tried to classify werewolves as pure fiction, but it turned out that this was impossible. After all, the fact remains: stories about strange creatures collected in different parts of our planet coincide in a completely inexplicable way. The similarity in appearance, character, behavior, and habits of werewolves in the legends of different peoples cannot be a mere coincidence.

Legends say that a “shifter” is a person who, within a few moments, can turn into a beast, and then, after some time, return to his usual appearance. Werewolves are phenomenally strong, practically invulnerable (they can only be dealt with with the help of silver or obsidian) and obsessed with murder.

Transformation ordinary person the monster often occurs uncontrollably during the full moon. What real, in the end, did modern specialists find in the nightmarish fictions of ancient and medieval authors?’

Legends about werewolves, one might say, are a ubiquitous and very ancient phenomenon. They are present in almost all cultures. European peoples believed that such unique abilities were possessed by sorcerers who, for their needs, took on the image of a wolf. Werewolves were also the name given to ordinary people who were turned into wolves by magic spells.

It is interesting that similar beliefs also existed on other continents, only in Africa there is a leopard instead of a wolf, in India there is a tiger, and in South America- jaguar. In Greece, however, they also believed that people could only turn into wolves.

One of the legends even talks about a special island that was located in Arcadia, in the middle of a remote swamp. A special group of human wolves allegedly lived on it, which could be joined by anyone who had undergone an initiation ceremony. The inhabitants of Hellas even considered epileptic seizures to be one of the manifestations of lycanthropy.

There are especially many legends about people who can turn into wolves in Bavaria. True, these stories are so closely intertwined with stories about vampires, and the appearance of both versions of the “evil spirits” are so similar (both have long teeth and claws) that it is sometimes very difficult to separate a werewolf from a ghoul.

However, “changelings,” according to the Bavarians, have very narrow pupils, and these creatures often peer intently into the faces of ordinary people. In addition, in northern Germany for some reason there was a belief that saying the word “wolf” in December provokes a werewolf attack on people.

The Danes were unshakably confident that a werewolf could be recognized based on the shape of the eyebrows. And the Irish believed that werewolfism was something akin to a disease and could therefore affect entire families.

Creatures with anomalous abilities in Ireland were described specifically. For example, the most famous legend about the werewolf from Meath says that the “changeling” invited... a priest into his house. The padre had to take care of his owner's sick wolf wife.

Over time, the concept of “werewolf” has narrowed. This is how they began to call a person who can turn into a wolf. Why this particular beast? If you carefully analyze the old legends, a certain pattern will become clear: stories about the atrocities of mysterious creatures appeared at a time when wolves, having multiplied, began to pose a real threat to human life.

In the Middle Ages, there was a belief that you could become a werewolf at the will of a sorcerer or witch. Naturally, there was no shortage of “recipes” on how to get rid of this scourge. Residents of Central and Eastern Europe were especially zealous. Here, in the 15th-17th centuries, a real cruel “witch hunt” unfolded.

The unfortunate people suspected of witchcraft were brutally tortured and then burned at the stake, drowned, wheeled or hanged. At the same time, the werewolves “kept company” with another exposed witch. As they say, “all this would be funny if it weren’t so sad”: according to official documents, in the 16th century the French parliament passed a law on the extermination of “shifters.”

As a result, from 1520 to 1630, more than 30,000 people were killed in the country on charges of witchcraft and werewolf...

Even after three centuries, the fear of “wolf people” has not disappeared. French peasants from remote areas of the country were afraid to leave their houses at night: they feared an attack by Loup-Garou (the French name for a werewolf). By the way, the inhabitants of Brittany and Normandy still believe that a person can become a wolf.

Perhaps such a strong belief will not seem surprising if you leaf through ancient documents. In 1521, a traveler passing through the French border town of Poligny was attacked by a wolf. Fighting off the maddened beast, the man inflicted several wounds on the predator with a sword.

The wolf began to retreat to the lair. The traveler who was pursuing him came to the hut of a certain Michael Verdung at the very moment when his wife was bandaging the wounds inflicted by a sword on the owner of the house. Werdung was arrested on charges of werewolf and taken to the city. Naturally, under torture, the detainee could not remain silent for long.

He admitted that he rubbed his body with a special ointment, with the help of which he turned into a beast, and then hunted people. The cannibal was burned at the stake after the trial.

Somewhat later, in Auvergne, the case of a female werewolf was considered (the husband of the “she-wolf” reported her to the authorities), who had several human lives to her name. During one of her “hunts,” the “changeling” lost her hand; the severed limb was presented to the court as evidence. After torture and confession to committing a number of crimes, the woman was burned. There is a fair amount of similar evidence.

In Eastern Europe, Germany and France, it has long been believed that a werewolf can simply change his skin, turning it inside out with the side supposedly covered with thick fur. In order to return to human form, the monster only needs to perform the same operation again. Because of this superstition, thousands of people were literally cut into pieces by “truth seekers” who tried to turn their skin “fur out.”

In Slavic mythology, the werewolf was called vovkulak (wolf-lak, volkolak). He had a specific character; here there was clearly a mixture of folklore features and elements of Christian demonology. Among the Slavs, unlike the peoples of Europe, in ancient times the werewolf was a character... positive.

Our ancestors considered the fact of “throwing” into an animal an absolutely normal phenomenon; Moreover, such practices, according to the ancients, were quite common on Slavic territory. In any case, Herodotus, without much surprise, stated the fact that the tribe of Neuroi (apparently living on the territory of modern Belarus) annually changes its appearance for several days, turning into a large pack of wolves.

And if we recall the heroic epic of our ancestors, then in it main character Quite often he was a werewolf and was described as a creature of divine origin. Moreover, the “range” of possibilities for such heroes was surprisingly wide.

At the most critical moment, heroes could turn into a tour, a bear, a wolf or a lynx to help cope with the superior forces of the enemy; into an ermine or a marten - to get into the enemy’s camp, find out secrets or cause mischief in someone else’s warehouse and damage weapons; in the falcon - to survey the surroundings and quickly get to the right place.

However, with the adoption of Christianity as the official state religion, everything changed radically. The former deities received the status of demons; Naturally, heroes and “changeling” helpers with extraordinary abilities either urgently “lost” their unusual qualities or turned into monsters, a collision with which threatens a person with agony and death.

True, despite this, stories about werewolves, who from time to time change their human form into wolf or bear skin, did not lose their popularity and continued to occupy a prominent place in folklore.

One of the varieties of legends about werewolves are stories about children who were raised in a wolf pack and therefore adopted all the habits and habits of wild animals. Unfortunately, such stories are created on a very real basis.

One of the earliest described cases of wolves feeding babies is the story of Romulus and Remus. And in the 14th century in Hesse, in the forests near the city, a strange creature appeared. When the “beast” was caught in 1344, it turned out that it was an eight-year-old boy, completely wild and behaving completely like a wolf.

Around the same years, another Mowgli was found in the forests of Bavaria. Unfortunately, the circumstances for this foundling were almost hopeless: the boy was already more than 12 years old, and he spent at least 10 of them in the wolf’s den.

Feral children are not like the cute Mowgli from the cartoon. They are covered with scars, sores, do not care about their hygiene, growl and bite.

“Wild” people were found in different countries, but the largest number of them were discovered in India. From 1843 to 1933, 16 wolf children (of both sexes), several baby panthers, leopards, monkeys and even an antelope boy were captured here.

It is difficult to say why animals take some “human cubs” under their protection and raise them as their own offspring. However, those Mowgli who survived in the jungle adapted perfectly to wild life (even their teeth changed!), clearly repeated the habits of their adoptive parents and practically lost their human appearance.

Forcibly torn away from the life that had already become familiar, they quickly died in the human world... The wolf boy Dina became unique in this sense: he “lasted” among people for 20 years and during this time, with great difficulty, learned to stand upright, dress, use utensils and understand those around you.

Of course, feral children cannot be considered werewolves in any way. However, the existence of such “demi-humans” influenced the formation of legends about terrible “changelings”. After all, Mowgli’s appearance is indeed scary for an ordinary person: the “savages” are dirty, covered with scratches and sores, with tangled hair. long hair, with broken teeth; his mouth is stained with blood from eating raw meat.

Their nails are long, sharp and strong, so they resemble the claws of a predator.

Mowgli takes on poses characteristic of animals, copying the behavior of the other members of “their” flock, uttering absolutely animalistic growls and howls, and are also particularly ferocious.

Parapsychologists have been talking about the fact that real werewolves do exist for a long time. Naturally, representatives official science We categorically disagreed with this statement. For centuries, all attempts to logically explain the phenomenon of “shifters” in enlightened circles were considered outright nonsense.

However, certain circumstances forced specialists to pay more attention to the “fairytale” problem. Relatively recently, people started talking about the fact that all stories about werewolves may be based on a rather rare disease - lycanthropy.

This misfortune was named after the king of Arcadia Lykaon, mentioned in Greek mythology. Legend says that this ruler was distinguished by utter cruelty, made human sacrifices to the gods and even tried to “treat” Zeus, who came to visit him, with the body of a just slaughtered child.

For all the atrocities, the gods turned Lycaon into a wolf. At the same time, the king retained some signs of his natural appearance, understood everything that was happening to him and even tried to speak.

So, doctors have dubbed lycanthropy a special form of insanity, in which the patient begins to believe that he has turned into an animal (most often a wolf). In addition, it turned out that even in ancient times they knew about this phenomenon.

IN Ancient Greece This disease was called “wolf madness.” And Marcellus Sidst in 125 BC. e. described a person affected by lycanthropy, pointing out that the victim of the disease is overcome by madness, which is accompanied not only by wolf ferocity, but also by attacks of truly brutal hunger.

Finally, modern aesculapians paid attention to the evidence of their ancient colleagues, as well as to the amazing “survivability” and widespread prevalence of stories about werewolves.

In 1963, a paper entitled “On Porphyria and the Etiology of Werewolves” was submitted to the Royal Society of Medicine. Its author, Dr. Lee Illis from Hampshire, during his research, processed a huge amount of documentary evidence and chronicles, as well as about 80 cases of similar diseases described and studied by certified doctors.

As a result, he presented a number of arguments to explain the outbreaks of lycanthropy in Europe and other parts of the world at different times. According to the doctor, all appearances of werewolves have a reliable medical basis.

Lee Illis stated: “I believe that the so-called werewolves of the past, at least in most cases, suffered from congenital porphyria. The proof of this lies in the correspondence between the symptoms of this rare disease and the description of werewolves in the many testimonies that have come down to us.

The author of the work indicated that porphyria is a consequence of a rare type of genetic disorder. They, in particular, lead to the fact that the unfortunate victim of the disease begins to develop a special skin sensitivity to light (especially sunlight).

This phenomenon is called vesicular erythema and leads to the fact that the patient begins to become covered with inflamed spots under the influence of light. Usually, skin lesions are accompanied by excruciating pain, as a result of which people not only lose their human appearance, but also lose their minds.

Moreover, the matter does not end with skin irritation. Inflammations quickly turn into deep ulcers, which then spread to cartilage and bones. The patient's eyelids, nose, ears and fingers are gradually destroyed. Sometimes the skin of a victim of a rebellion of the hormonal system becomes dark stained, and the teeth become red or red-brown due to porphyrin deposited in the enamel. As a result, the patient, of course, does not turn into a wolf, but becomes a creature very far from a person in his physical and mental understanding.

In general, the condition of porphyria sufferers, as described from a medical point of view by Dr. Illis in his original work, exactly corresponds to that of a werewolf. Judge for yourself: the patient prefers to leave the house at night - daylight causes him unbearable pain; mental manifestations of the disease gradually intensify, moving from mild hysteria to manic-depressive psychosis; inflammation on exposed parts of the body and face resemble abrasions and bites typical of a “changeling”. The unfortunate man's beard is long and neglected - due to acute inflammation of the skin, it is not cut or shaved, and the distorted features of the patient's face sometimes resemble a terrible mask.

All these classic signs of the legendary werewolf were attested by many medieval judges.

The doctor points out that porphyria has several varieties. All of them are based on gene “failures” and arise as a result of metabolic disorders.

But the type of disease (congenital porphyria) that led to the birth of the myth about werewolves is, fortunately, extremely rare.

However, Illis not only did not exclude the possibility of heredity, but in some cases called it natural. After all, the development of porphyria is influenced by both genetic abnormalities and the climate characteristics of each area, foods and methods of nutrition.

This seems to explain the fact that in Western Europe“Wolf madness” was such a frequent occurrence and sometimes covered entire villages (especially many such cases were recorded in Sweden and Switzerland). But in Ceylon they had never heard of such a disease. Legends about werewolves are also not recorded here.

Nowadays, attacks by lycanthropes on people also occur. True, not often. Since 1990, 46 people have died from porphyria in Brazil, Spain and the UK. According to the United States, in their country there are about a thousand people suffering from this rare and terrible genetic disease.

Lee Illis's discovery marked the beginning of research into a problem that humanity has faced since ancient times. Moreover, the English doctor’s version did not clarify all the issues related to werewolf. In particular, all sources mentioned that the “changeling” could, at the right moment (most often, after a few hours), regain its human appearance.

Illis wrote that “reverse transformation” is theoretically possible, but... unlikely. The scientist also failed to explain why werewolves are so affected by the rapid growth of the moon.

By the way, in those rare cases when the appearance of a “shifter” is not associated with the full moon, it is observed in special places described as “black earth”, “black rocks”, “black stones” (where minerals or rock dark, almost black). Why? Medicine cannot yet answer this question. So the mystery of the wolf man has not been fully solved to this day...

The 21st century is, of course, the century of information technology. A. Malraux said that this age will either be mystical, or it will not exist at all. We are waiting.

Be that as it may, ten years after entering the new millennium, the end of the world has not come, aliens have not landed on earth, Jews have not converted to Christianity. People, however, have become more attached to technology, they depend on the car like air, they have become slaves to technology, without which they would die within a few hours.

One of the fundamental phenomena of this era was the revolution of television and cinema. And the largest pseudo-philosophical revolution, after the communist one, happened in Hollywood with its branches - Chinese, Indian, no less funny.

The California visual industry has revolutionized the fundamental ideals of humanity. Unfortunately, children now want to become like not Christ, but Brad Pitt or Harry Potter. Indonesian girls tell tourists their name is Angelina. Russians, like Buridan's donkey, are agonizingly choosing, according to polls, between Vladimir Putin and Bruce Willis. The British want to be like Becks (not beer, but David Beckham). What can we say about the Romanians: our models are either illiterate multimillionaires, or midgets with Porsches, or media scavengers - creators of somnambulistic parties, or drugged football players. Unfortunately, the media pandemic is spreading monstrously, but almost no one is sounding the alarm. Civil society is fearful and confused, Christian communities are closed in their self-sufficiency, the intelligentsia is more occupied with strikes and bread than with shaping the people of tomorrow.

But let's return to Hollywood. This subculture of a planetary scale, generating billions of dollars and destroying souls, offers a set of the following social rules: extermination of enemies with weapons; the destruction of everyone who thinks differently than you; polarization of society like a gang (friends and enemies, good and bad); deviant sexuality promoted as law; violence, stupidly legitimized; victory at any cost; easy happy ending; unearned enrichment; clever fraud; drug as a substitute for reality; subverting tradition for marketing to thrive; triumphant doctrine of American superiority.

All this, popularized in a subtle or crude way in the films mentioned above, are genuine scourges for institutions that reproduce life: the people, the school, the family, the Church. But one of the, I would say, prophetic symptoms of the future, which has an amazing fatal quality, is the principle of the transformation of man into an animal.

Man is created in the image of God and must become god by grace. God became Man so that man could become God—the Gospel and the Church Ecumenical Councils affirm. Man must become life, goodness, love, holiness, purity, light and, of course, personally immortal. This is Christianity. The religion of eternal life, the light of sacrificial love, the joy of the Cross, the taste of heaven and the experience of the Resurrection of Christ in the life of everyone.

The Hollywood civilization cannot rise to these life ideals. Therefore she denies their existence. In contrast, it actively and unswervingly preaches the transformation of man into an animal. How? By idealizing values ​​or animal strength that a person should strive for. There is a movie called Spider-Man that makes all the kids go crazy. Agility, the ability to jump from one building to another, the viscous and viscous web that he produces - everything makes Spider-Man an ideal for children, as well as for adults who are stupefied by the sight of pixels.

As a child, I saw the film “The Man from Atlantis,” where the hero had fingers fused together, like amphibians, so he swam at great speed. All the children were fascinated by this creature. Then, later, I saw Cougar Man. I don’t remember anything except that he jumped like a puma, killed everything that moved, and nothing else.

The dangerous thing is that man turns into a beast with every unconscious but persistent idealization of the predatory traits of these animals. For no one, of course, has seen a film about a bunny man or a roe deer man. Only in cartoons. Refinement, sweetness, fragility, purity or tenderness do not find a place in the thematic lists of mainstream films. On the contrary, rage, strength, speed, killer instinct, bloodthirstiness, dexterity in killing - all this turns a person into a predator, and everyone else into a victim. This is a vulgarized version of the anti-Christian and absurdist philosophy of J.-P. Sartre: “L"enfer c"est les autres" (“Hell is another”).

Powerless to fulfill his calling to become like God, man tragically plunges into animal world. One song without a melody, which thundered with all its might a few years ago, called: “You and me, baby, ain’t nothing but mammals, / So let’s do it like they do on the discovery channel” - “You and me, baby, nothing but mammals, so let's do it like they do it on the Discovery Channel, come on..."

So a person little by little turns into a ghoul, a vampire, a wolf (“The Wolf”), flying animals (“Superman”), a tiger, or everything that narrow specialists from Hollywood consider to symbolize strength, dexterity, piercing vision, insatiability, instinct. Thus, the culture of films of this kind reveals itself as a culture of death, legalized sin and absolute evil, justified in the name of the nation, civilization, the common good, etc.

Darwin could not convince 95 out of 100 people living on earth that man descended from apes. The differences between them are obvious even in people who are least endowed with human traits. And the media subculture turns a person into an animal, developing animal impulses and instincts in him, cultivating bestial traits in him and pressing him deep into the earth, or, better said, “into the underworld of the earth.”

What are people called werewolves who transform at will? and got the best answer

Answer from Lilith[guru]
Animagus is the art of transforming into an animal. A wizard who can transform himself (his body) into an animal
The ability to transform into an animal is not innate, but develops as you study this type of magic. Transformation does not require the use of a magic wand. The skill is complex and dangerous. Due to the difficulty of studying it, there were only seven official animagus in the twentieth century - Minerva McGonagall and 6 other wizards whose names are not directly mentioned in the Harry Potter books.
The type of animal that an animagus can transform into is called an animagus form. Each animagus can only have one animagus form. Apparently, it is determined by the personal qualities of the wizard during the period of learning animagus.
The animagus form bears the same physical defects as the wizard's original body. For example, if a wizard has a scar on his body, it will also be present on his animagus form. The same applies to glasses - in animagus form, the glasses appear as distinctive markings around the eyes. The animagus' clothing is lost during the transformation, and is restored upon his return to a human body. It is unknown where the clothing is located during the existence of the animagus in the animal's body. It often (but not always) happens that the same wizard’s animagus form and Patronus coincide (that is, they are the same animal), in which case these animals have the same appearance features, the same special features.
As a rule, an animagus transformation is done for a while, after which the wizard returns to his human form. A second, more difficult option is also possible, when the wizard transforms his body for an indefinite period. Then the reverse transformation will be complicated by the animal body.
There is a spell with which it is possible to turn back into a human with the help of other persons. Sometimes this transformation is carried out against the will of the animagus himself. The spell is safe for normal animals. When this spell is in effect, a blue-white flash is visible, the animagus in the form of an animal hovers in the air, falls to the ground; a second flash, then the reverse transformation occurs, as if in slow motion.
Every animagus is required to register with the Ministry of Magic. Registration is required due to the dangers associated with casting the transformation spell. His name, animagus form and special features must be entered into a special register in order for him to be recognized. The register is publicly available. The punishment for evading registration is unknown, but it can be assumed that it is severe (Rita Skeeter stopped writing articles for a year so that Hermione would not give her away).
The difference between transfiguration and animagus is that a transfigured wizard loses human thinking abilities and gains the intelligence and thinking of an animal, while an animagus is able to continue to think like a human.
Simultaneously with the preservation of human thinking, the animagus gains the ability to communicate with ordinary animals. This is clear from the necessity of normal existence in animagus form, but the extent of possession of such an ability is unknown. It is known that Sirius Black, in the form of a large black dog, could communicate on a minimal level with Crookshanks, Hermione Granger's cat. The exact form of communication is unknown.
Unlike a werewolf (for example, Remus Lupin), turning oneself into an animal is controlled by the will of the animagus, and does not affect the character and psyche of the individual; a werewolf in his animal form has a different mentality and character, and does not remember who he was before the transformation.
As is clear from the text, the dog was Sirius Black

Alexander Belov

© Belov A. I., 2012

© Drawings. Belov A.I., 2012

© Design. LLC "Svet", 2015

Let's start with the most important thing: evolutionists in their reasoning - who came from whom as a result of evolution - do not see a qualitative difference between people and monkeys. Many evolutionists are not afraid to talk about this out loud and even flaunt it. According to these daredevils, who challenge generally accepted morality and take the position of direct biologization, man is a monkey. Shaved, washed, but still a monkey. So, an ardent supporter of such a term. neurologist, Doctor of Biological Sciences, Professor Savelyev S.V. directly identifies human society with a herd of baboons. Interested citizens can easily view all his scathing sentiments on this matter on the Internet.

In fact, these “dared souls” from the evolutionist camp are only shocking the public. The vast majority of evolutionists really do not see any qualitative differences between humans and apes. In their opinion, these differences are only quantitative and relate to morphology. The entire doctrine of evolutionism is based primarily on bodily differences different types animals and humans, whom they also classify as animals. Not a word about the phenomenon of thinking. As evidence of evolution, the so-called E. Haeckel triad is usually cited, based on bodily (material) embryonic, paleontological and comparative anatomical differences.

Evidence of evolution according to E. Haeckel (triple parallelism method):

Paleontological evidence of the Earth's past;

Embryonic similarity of organisms from fish to humans;

Comparative anatomical parallels in the structure of the skeleton and organs of the body.

They believe that a person has a larger brain and cleaner ears; Even a person allegedly has a tail, but it is small, rudimentary, this is the tailbone. In their opinion, man only camouflages his bestial inclinations with culture and ethics, as well as morality.

This approach was undoubtedly started by the “great” Charles Darwin, who, at the conclusion of his book The Descent of Man and Sexual Selection, wrote:

“I tried to the best of my ability to prove my theory, and, as it seems to me, we must admit that man with all his noble qualities, sympathy ..., with his divine mind, which comprehended movement and structure solar system, - in a word, with all his high abilities, - still bears in his physical structure the indelible stamp of low origin.

Note that the phrase “divine mind” along with “low origin” looks like a mockery. Darwin writes there about morality, religious feeling and love, that these are animal instincts and nothing more. Thus, Darwin acts as the developer and author of the animal view of man. Man is driven by survival instincts and the desire to leave offspring. Everything is like animals. Darwin gives direct instructions on what people should do next:

“For man there must be open competition, and law and custom must not prevent the most able from having decisive success in life and leaving the greatest number of descendants” (pp. 374–375, “The Descent of Man and Sexual Selection,” Book 2, M.: "Terra Book Club, 2009).

Thus, according to Darwin, open competition should not be limited by laws and customs. Just think about these words: Darwin invites people to consciously stand on the same level as animals! In the conditions of the existence of Darwinism as the ruling ideology, such maxims are a guide to action for those in power. IN modern world It is enough to look at the behavior of Western countries towards Russia to be convinced of this. Western countries act like a herd of baboons, tearing apart a stranger from another camp.

Modern scientific apologists for Darwin also remain fully in line with this approach. They talk about quantitative differences between apes and humans, but say practically nothing about qualitative differences. Example: a monkey has hair, but humans have almost no hair. A monkey has large fangs; humans have small fangs. The monkey's brain is relatively small. A person has more. It turns out that this is why a person is smart and a monkey is stupid? In fact, although brain mass affects thinking, it is not to the extent that evolutionists think. The catastrophic loss of the ability to think causes further reduction in brain volume.

From our involutionary scientific bell tower we can see something different. (Involution is qualitative changes opposite to the vector of evolution. For the first time, Plato spoke about the involution (degradation) of people in his work “Timaeus”. According to Plato, four kinds of animals descended from ancient people: land mammals, birds, reptiles and waterfowl).

There are qualitative differences between apes and humans. Humans have a desire to acquire knowledge, but monkeys do not have such a desire. They have a pronounced desire to master something material: food, territory, achieve a dominant position in the herd, etc. Knowledge as such is of no value to monkeys. Monkeys do not accumulate knowledge like humans do in reserve and do not experience the delight of learning new things. For them this is not the main strategy of life. For them, the goal is material existence, and not spiritual knowledge of the world and themselves. Thus, the desire for knowledge is a spiritual goal that distinguishes man from all other animals, and not just monkeys.

In accordance with this important conclusion about the existence of qualitative differences between humans and animals, we can construct our own theory of involution.

In this theory, there will be at least three subjects, and not two, as with evolutionists - humans and monkeys.

Evolutionists, starting with Darwin, have thrown out the third component, characteristic of religion. It is in religion that God exists; in earlier religious systems there are gods. It is God or gods who have perfect knowledge - omniscience. Man lost this perfect knowledge as a result of the Fall. This loss was characterized by his desire to gain omniscience back. It is with this that I associate the characteristic human desire for knowledge. A person may deny himself food and comfort, but at the same time strives for knowledge. We have examples of such behavior among outstanding people. Of course, there are lazy people who are not interested in anything. But even they find something interesting for themselves that could expand their horizons. Without knowledge, life is gray and boring. And this is a common feature of people.

Based on the above, it can be assumed that the ancestors of people were God or gods with superknowledge. I call them space people as opposed to earthly people. These people from Space knew absolutely everything and were, oddly enough, deprived of the ability to learn new things. This ability, or rather the need (to learn new things), appeared in a person as a result of a spiritual fall. The ancient wisdom is true, everything new is well forgotten old. In this sense, earthly people, for example, our contemporaries, do not create new knowledge, but recall what was lost from the arsenal of omniscience that their ancestors had.