Posted on 12/16/2005 11:03:02 AM PST by blam
May 2006 bump.
|
|||
Gods |
Just updating the GGG info, not sending a general distribution. |
||
· Discover · Nat Geographic · Texas AM Anthro News · Yahoo Anthro & Archaeo · Google · · The Archaeology Channel · Excerpt, or Link only? · cgk's list of ping lists · |
· join list or digest · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post a topic · subscribe · |
|||
Antiquity Journal & archive Archaeologica Archaeology Archaeology Channel BAR Bronze Age Forum Discovery Dogpile Eurekalert LiveScience Mirabilis.ca Nat Geographic PhysOrg Science Daily Science News Texas AM Yahoo Excerpt, or Link only? |
|
||
· Science topic · science keyword · Books/Literature topic · pages keyword · |
For this to be true, those women could not have had any female anywhere in their ancestry who had a sister who continued the female line.
This is ridiculous reasoning for the head of human origins at the Natural History Museum in London, a staunch advocate of the Out-of-Africa model had a completely different interpretation of the findings. He's just talking his book.
We found a whole new species of human in Siberia last year, we have the DNA.
'Species' is an extremely flexible term that can be essentially meaningless. All they really have is "a sequence which is similar in some ways to humans, but still quite distinct".
It is that leap from "a sequence which is similar in some ways to humans, but still quite distinct" to "a new species" that is the problem. Most people can't see that.
Exactly my point.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.