Re: Hobbits not a separate speciies after all

Perplexed in Peoria <jimmenegay@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

"J. J. Lodder" <nospam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:1hkhf4p.oz90su1
gkuipyN@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Pithecanthropus Erectus <tuibguy@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

As an example of the self-correcting nature of scientific discovery, the
discovery of the "hobbits" on Flores turned out to be not such a
historic find after all. Upon further review, the hobbits are "us"
after all.

It reminds me of the whole hullabaloo over Nebraska Man and Piltdown
man. The popular press jump on a discovery as a significant finding
that shakes the foundation of what we thought to be the lineage of our
ancestors, and then when real scientists are given the chance to finally
test the data, we discover that, while fascinating, the bones reveal
little new after all. And they don't shake our foundations as much as
we thought they would.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/story/0,,1855406,00.html?gusrc=rss&feed=
18

Btw - when will the editorial staff and National Geographic learn to run
things by peer review before putting their stories out?

Sure, one peer reviewed article
establishes universal and eternal truths.
It escaped your notice that the original articles
were in peer revieuwed journals too?

Note that papers in PNAS (to say nothing of summaries in
The Guardian) are not exactly peer-reviewed publications either.
At least not if your definition of peer-review precludes the
authors from choosing the reviewer. PNAS labels all papers
as "advertisements" under US law.

Members have a right to publish there.

IIRC they had some trouble with Linus Pauling
over his publications on his vitamin C propaganda,

Jan

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Hobbits not a separate speciies after all
    ... Upon further review, the hobbits are "us" ... The popular press jump on a discovery as a significant finding ... of the authors of the dissenting paper. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Hobbits not a separate speciies after all
    ... Upon further review, the hobbits are "us" ... The popular press jump on a discovery as a significant finding ... Evolution Research Blog: ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Hobbits not a separate speciies after all
    ... Upon further review, the hobbits are "us" ... The popular press jump on a discovery as a significant finding ... that shakes the foundation of what we thought to be the lineage of our ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Hobbits not a separate speciies after all
    ... Upon further review, the hobbits are "us" ... The popular press jump on a discovery as a significant finding ... that shakes the foundation of what we thought to be the lineage of our ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Hobbits not a separate speciies after all
    ... Upon further review, the hobbits are "us" ... The popular press jump on a discovery as a significant finding ... So how exactly did this paper get through peer review? ...
    (talk.origins)