Re: MOST IMPORTANT FOSSIL (A human skull as old as coal!)

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: Ed Conrad: "LUCY: ``Yes, we have no bananas!""
• Previous message: Susan S. Chin: "Re: Affirmative Action (Was: Anthroplogists, I need advice!)"
• Maybe in reply to: Ed Conrad: "MOST IMPORTANT FOSSIL (A human skull as old as coal!)"
• Next in thread: Bill Gill: "Re: MOST IMPORTANT FOSSIL (A human skull as old as coal!)"

And so far, no takers. Their silence speaks volumes. Actually, there is
plenty of precedent for scientific theories being surpressed and later
turning out to be true. One representative example (uh, can we say it is a
fact at this point, or is this in question too? :) that the earth is not the
center of the solar system. Oh wait, I guess that makes a different point.
That's one of the many examples of religious revisionists trying to rewrite
science to support their religious beliefs. I'm sure glad that doesn't
happen in today's modern world...

In article <rygb7PAepdgyEwHe@vinery.demon.co.uk>, Steve@vinery.demon.co.uk
says...
>
>In article <55nhn0$bo6@news2.cais.com>, Alan Weiner
><alweiner@presstar.com> writes
>>Pls support your premise with some facts. Name some discoveries that
>>were surpressed and later found to be valid.
>>
>This is an excellent request which will make most of the anti science
>brigade twitch. The problem is that scientists and non-scientists often
>publish 'theories' & 'results' which are criticised, mocked and
>occasionally attacked with vitriolic venom. And sometines the original

• Next message: Ed Conrad: "LUCY: ``Yes, we have no bananas!""
• Previous message: Susan S. Chin: "Re: Affirmative Action (Was: Anthroplogists, I need advice!)"
• Maybe in reply to: Ed Conrad: "MOST IMPORTANT FOSSIL (A human skull as old as coal!)"
• Next in thread: Bill Gill: "Re: MOST IMPORTANT FOSSIL (A human skull as old as coal!)"