New skull makes scientists rethink evolution of early humans.
What does this mean for YEC? What about TE?
What does this mean for YEC? What about TE?
However, I'm sure one faction who values ideology over reality will proclaim it the absolute proof of what they espouse while the polar opposite faction will claim it a hoax. And the misquotations will be rampant!
New skull makes scientists rethink evolution of early humans.
What does this mean for YEC? What about TE?
Why does it say that earlier evolution theory was completely wrong? This find changes one quite speculative interpretation of a small part of the history of one of the millions of species on the planet. It's mildly interesting because we happen to be that species, but it says nothing at all about the overall soundness of evolutionary biology.To me, it says that evolution theory before Apr 2014 is completely wrong, as when the theory is used to date the homo erectus, it is wrong.
Why does it say that earlier evolution theory was completely wrong? This find changes one quite speculative interpretation of a small part of the history of one of the millions of species on the planet. It's mildly interesting because we happen to be that species, but it says nothing at all about the overall soundness of evolutionary biology.
No other science has corrected minor errors in one tiny part of its domain? That's just nuts. Just what kind of expertise do you have in science?It is considered completely wrong because no other science ever failed this way.
To the extent that I can extract a meaning from this sentence, it's false.Your common ancestry becomes trash this way, as it if falsified completely that the whole home erectus stuff is now not any reflection of any lineage.
No, dating has nothing at all to do with what we're talking about here. The dating is just fine.The main problem is that the dating methods are not accurate in front of the so called "not so good skulls".
No one is suggesting that the previous skulls are "not good" -- that's something you just made up. They're debating whether a set of skulls -- all good -- some from a single species or from several closely related species. Not really surprising, since that's a very hard thing to tell just from looking at skeletons.If your current skull is "good" while all your previous skulls are "not good". Then your whole theory which based heavily on skulls/fossils should be considered as a complete failure.
To me, it says that evolution theory before Apr 2014 is completely wrong, as when the theory is used to date the homo erectus, it is wrong.
Some years later, they will declare the same to say that evolution before year 202X is completely wrong as the theory is falsified by yet another sample of home erectus skull.
When would this being put to a stop to have the final conclusion that the "evolution theory is correct". This takes forever until 1 million years later when the last piece of skull on earth is finally dug up by humans. Scientists by then can thus say that, "the evolution theory must be correct now because there's no more skulls can be dug up to falsify it, hooray, hooray!"