[housetops]

All scholars of human prehistory eagerly await the next finds from Dmanisi, and in Chad. Perhaps they will help untangle some of the bushy branches of the human family tree to reveal the true ancestry of Homo sapiens.

Since every new finding of the past fifty years has claimed to “challenge theories of human origin,” what, exactly, are these scholars eagerly awaiting? These skull parts have proven useless for untangling “the bushy branches of the family tree,” but they are very effective in exposing the root-rot of evolvoid story-telling.

[gcruse]

 
Since every new finding of the past fifty years has claimed to “
challenge theories of human origin,” what, exactly, are these
scholars eagerly awaiting?

The more dots you get, the more likely you
are to make correct connections.

[billybudd]

The whole point of scientific investigation is to evolve human knowledge. We can never "know" everything exactly as it is but we can have a clearer and clearer image as we progress. For example, Newtonian physics provided a good model for physical phenomena. When Einstein revised it, Newtonian physics wasn't "wrong" per se, it was simply not complete. When Genesis was written, the theory of our origins was that humans were created from the soil of the earth. Darwin revised this to say that humans evolved from lower order animals, which in turn evolved from single-celled organisms, which came from the organic material of the soil of the earth. And there is still room for discovery in filling in the further details of the exact dates of particular changes, or the shape of the evolutionary tree, etc.