Schwartz's conclusion — that today's reality may be tomorrow's discarded truth, and that ideas which run counter to received wisdom should not be dismissed out of hand — is particularly welcome, and a refreshing sentiment from a participant in the current
debates about human evolution.
Not exact matches
«Our primary aim,» they write, «is to put questions
about human evolution into a testable, quantitative framework and to offer an objective means to sort out apparently unsolvable
debates about hominin phylogeny.»
The account of the players and theories in the field of
human evolution does highlight how much of the
debate involves mere name games, with lumpers and splitters arguing ad nauseam
about the same few specimens widely scattered through space and time.
From stem cell research to global warming,
human cloning,
evolution, and beyond, the science
debates are not exactly
about science, but come down to a dispute between liberals and conservatives
about the right way to think
about the future.
And while the origins of modern
human behavior have been widely
debated, there has been much less discussion
about the
evolution of modern
human anatomy.