Northern ireland mature chat room free - 14c carbon 14 for dating prehistoric findings
The first principle to remember is the nature of the science behind such interpretations of fossil evidence.It involves historical or origins science; the interpretation of unobservable, untestable history of the evidence, in this case bones.The subjective nature of this interpretation is admitted even by such well-known evolutionary paleoanthropologists as Darren Curnoe who said, “Nobody looks at a fossil with a completely open mind.
from which to understand and refute claims regarding an evolutionary view of human origins.
Professor Lee Berger from the University of Witwatersrand, palaeoanthropologist and leader of the team that researched the find at the so-called ‘Cradle of Humankind’ is a ‘celebrity’ scientist who knows well how to extract maximum publicity, something even the evolutionary sympathetic media acknowledge.
Journalists from around the world, businessmen, celebrities and politicians attended the official event at Maropeng.
Perhaps in an effort to guard against the type of ‘brushing off’ that his announcement of They reported the find to Berger who, due to the narrow entrance to the cave, advertised on Facebook for skinny scientists to go and investigate the finds.
He assembled a team of six women scientists who retrieved the remains during expeditions in 20.
About 1,500 bones belonging to at least 15 individual creatures have so far been retrieved.
It is believed that many more remains still lie in this remarkable chamber called Dinaledi (‘stars’ in the local Sesotho language).
The chamber was apparently previously undiscovered though other caves in the area have been the site of much exploration in the past, and the site of fossils such as Mrs Ples, Taung Child and more recently, .
So, you come to a fossil and you have an idea about the way you think human evolution worked, and the first thing you do is try and fit that fossil into your worldview.” So he and many other naturalistic scientists increasingly admit that it is the worldview that drives the interpretation of the evidence, not the other way around.