![]() |
Click To Enlarge |
Here we go again, more pseudo-scientific false biased hominid conclusions drawn via human skeletal remains found. Sigh...
![]() |
Obviously a human skeleton |
___________________________________________So some guy wrote me to call me "biased" for sharing such obvious conclusions and observations. So I "informed" him:
"If you consider their immediate declaration of THOSE bones to be "non-human" as "unbiased", then you do not know the meaning of the word biased. Or you are carrying a double standard against my viewpoint.
I'm no bible thumper or any of that, but I'm a REAL scientist, HARDCORE to the max and I can not stand partial data being turned into full conclusions. Especially when the obvious conclusion would be that they are some early nomadic human beings or something of that nature on first guess viewing the bones. This one is obvious.
And if you are looking for a non-biased conclusion, you really should contact National Geographic about this and tell them to stop jumping the gun on the "hominid" idea, since it is so farfetched in this case."
____________________________________________