[colorado tanker]

I didn't realize there were serious questions about the first find. They're going to need to find more specimens before we'll get a good feel for what this is all about, i.e. if we really have a new species here, IMHO. It's sure interesting, though.

The article says the ultimate origin is Africa, but I wonder if that's just an assumption on the author's part.

[SunkenCiv]

The first find was allegedly vandalized and withheld by someone who claimed they were nothing to write home about, and it took a year or two I think it was to get the stuff back. Meanwhile, the fossils were condemned as dwarfed and microcephalic but otherwise normal modern humans. It was a circus. It reminded me of Virchow’s foolish and escalating phony claims about the Neandertal fossils:

http://uts.cc.utexas.edu/~bramblet/ant301/two.html

“Rudolph Virchow (1821-1902), professor of pathological anatomy at the University of Berlin and founder of the field of cellular pathology... believed that people of the Stone Age were identical in biology to modern humans and he attributed the different anatomy of the Neanderthal to a combination of severe rickets, repeated fractures, and severe arthritis. The Neanderthal specimen thus was relegated to controversy.”

His later version was to claim that the remains were those of a 18th century Cossack soldier who’d fled some defeat and hidden in that cave.

[Little Bill]

This whole "Out Of Africa" thingy is wearing on my mind, whats left of it. I have been reading about this for 50 years, a couple of years less than Blam, and even with DNA it still makes no sense.

The argument is Bones and Genetic Diversity. If you remember the Eoehippus, Prohippus, Hippus argument A does not always equal B. The same goes with Genetic Diversity if MCDNA is more or less static where would it be more diverse at the tip of the spear or the shaft.