The Sound Of Settled Science

19 Replies to “The Sound Of Settled Science”

1. A ten million year-old tooth in no way affects “Out of Africa.” Our evolution over the last million years or so occurred in Africa, and the population of Eurasia less than 100,000 years ago was done by Africans. That part of science is pretty settled.
   It should be noted, however, that scientists are publicity hogs and say and do the most outrageous things just to get ink. The whole science project wallows in self promotion and prestige ranking. It’s really quite embarrassing.

2. You do say “pretty settled” so that does stay away from the non-science phrase of “settled”.
   To support that sliver of doubt:
   https://m.phys.org/news/2017-08-fossil-footprints-theories-human-evolution.html
   “This discovery challenges the established narrative of early human evolution head-on and is likely to generate a lot of debate. Whether the human origins research community will accept fossil footprints as conclusive evidence of the presence of hominins in the Miocene of Crete remains to be seen,” says Per Ahlberg.

3. I could be wrong, but I think the entire out of Africa theory was created out of about three fossils. It might be right, but it also might be totally wrong. The ten million year old tooth, might not be a tooth or it might not be ten million years old. If it is a tooth, and it is ten million years old, and it did belong to a protohuman it throws the out of Africa theory totally out the window. How would you explain it if it’s true?
   I personally believe that humans probably developed in multiple places. The chances of a human or protohuman dying, and becoming a fossil, and then that fossil being dug up by someone are vanishingly small, so making up an all encompassing theory of the origins of mankind from about three fossils is a bit of a shot in the dark.

4. Actually, the entire African migration theory has really been established, and now pretty much proven, by testing the DNA of humans worldwide, not fossil records. It now seems undeniable that the world was primarily populated by 3 or 4 major migrations out of Africa. No doubt there is much more to discover, but the science so far appears rock solid.
   Ha, I consider this good news as it proves there is nothing aboriginal about our aboriginals. They are migrants from another continent, just like the rest of us!

5. But at the end of 2016, we decided to finish the excavation and just in the last second, if you will, these two teeth came to light.
   That’s a pretty big red flag.

6. What no artist rendering of the supposed creature showing distinct human and distinct ape like features? Is someone asleep at the switch. A few years ago they found a chunk of fossilized bone and in short order had a complete creature for the breathlessly naive to see. Maybe they don’t want this evidence since is destroys their belief.

7. I can claim to be African-Canadian? Yahoo, I am no longer racist.

8. The one who states his case first seems right, until the other comes and examines him.
   Proverbs 18:17 ESV

9. Because the fossil record is totally dependent upon where you find fossils I have always wondered how scientists cope with the fact that Europe and much of North America have been scraped to bedrock several times by ice ages over the last few million years.
   It seems rather coincidental that most of the fossils are found in Africa (unaffected by ice ages) and that humans are descended from African ancestors.
   Add the fact that you lose almost all your “original” DNA in about 6 generations and that most of us can’t trace our ancestry back more than 5-10 generations which leads me to discount much of human ancestry claims.
   Plus the fact that a black friend of mine once made the claim (after seeing me dance) that I had single-handedly destroyed the out-of-Africa theory by a simple demonstration.

10. “I can claim to be African-Canadian? Yahoo, I am no longer racist.”
    I have heard of Eastern European Jews with names like Shimon Peres claiming Spanish ancestry to get into good schools with scholarships. Ferdinand and Isabella, while booting the Muslims out of Spain also gave Jews the boot. Most Eastern European Jews have some Spanish ancestry.

11. Everytime I see a story like that where someone digs up artifacts, it reminds me of my bro (God keep his soul) and I when we were playing in the dirt as kids back in the 50’s. We had a new Tonka truck and a dozer, and my Dad walked by on his way to the field to get back on the tractor. He asked me: ”What are you guys mining today??” I answered, ”Gold.”
    Laughingly he said, ”You’re in for a surprise. When I was a kid, that’s where the outhouse used to be.”
    We moved our excavating operation elsewhere.

12. bob, bullshit about covers your post. There are areas, Indonesia and China, were discoveries have been made that challenge the out of Africa orthodoxy. None of the discoveries, and subsequent “theories” can be taken as “settled”.
    Steve, there is so much DNA that the loss of some is inconsequential, my X does the DNA thing for family tracing and DNA can point back a lot farther than a few generations.

13. “…DNA can point back a lot farther than a few generations.”
    Unless the experts are wrong about that. But I suppose they aren’t wrong because the science of DNA is settled, isn’t it?

14. Unless the experts are wrong about that. But I suppose they aren’t wrong because the science of DNA is settled, isn’t it?
    Much of what is now understood about DNA came after it became possible to sequence the human genome.
    For example, a number of years ago, researchers examined the DNA of Ötzi, as the so-called “iceman” was nicknamed. They determined that his descendants (or, perhaps, those of his closest relatives) were now throughout much of Europe as they had genetic material identical to or closely matching what he had.

15. Perhaps you can explain how scientists can tell you obtained that DNA 60,000 years ago (out-of-Africa) and not 14,000 years ago (in the Mediterranean from an African descendant). Because I find it very puzzling, knowing we acquire 50% new genetic composition with every procreation. 60,000 years represents approximately 3,000 generations. Carbon dating can go back about 10 half lives and has a similar problem (but in the reverse direction – losing 50% rather than gaining).

16. So then … you are claiming this is the “scientific” equivalent to the “religious” discovery of the Shroud of Turin? A fraud? Or at best, an interesting relic, with no relevance whatsoever … hmmmm. Seems as though ALL Orthodoxies are resistant to change.

17. “”Out-Of-Africa” was a result of political correctness, not professional scientific work. During the culture wars of the 1960’s this was a backdoor approach to giving ethnic minorities credibility by asserting they were our ancestors and we are simply paler versions of them.
    The evidence says this is simply impossible. Always was, always will be. Outside of popular consensus there was never much evidence to support the idea.”
    http://vault-co.blogspot.ca/2010/07/out-of-africa-theory-is-rubbish.html

18. Where humans ca me from does what for the average person in slap out oklahoma?

19. A clear minded question like that deserves some kind of answer. Here’s my attempt.
    Probably means less than knowing we live in an inter glacial period and means a little bit more than knowing why the sky is blue.