Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

New type of ancient human discovered in Israel

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 111 posts

Re: New type of ancient human discovered in Israel

#41

Post by yyyk »

stormdennis wrote: post #37
skinkestek wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is kind of very correct but also very misleading: Israel is partly bought, partly doled out by UN and partly won in war. Yes, many Arabs were displaced and with a course enough resolution there was an Arab within x kilometers everywhere in what has become Israel. Also at the same time even more Jews where chased out from the countries around. At no point did North American tribes drive out more Europeans (or any…

I don't know how it is misleading. In 1947, the Jews were 33% of the population and owned just 6% of the land of Palestine, yet a UN of only 46 countries and dominated by the great powers granted them 55% of the land for a Jewish state which zionist offensives quickly expanded to 80% of the land while ethnically cleansing the population. The zionists were the direct cause of the exodus of the worlds' oldest Jewish co…

>Anything non-factual in that?

Nearly all of it (either non factual or so tilted as to be non factual)?

> owned just 6% of the land of Palestine

Absurd criteria - what does wealth have to do with it? Splitting America by 'ownership' would give 100% to rich WASP. By the way, Most local land was owned by families not living in the country or was unowned desert.

>55% of the land for a Jewish state

The big difference being the Negev desert, because it was thought the new state would need somewhere to settle WW2 refugees. The Jewish state got much less of the useful fertile areas.

>The zionists were the direct cause of the exodus of the worlds' oldest Jewish communities in the other Arab lands both by their treatment of the Palestinians

Displacement was caused by the local states and its beginning predated the UN partition (1941 farhud, 1945 Tripolitania massacre, etc.).

> zionist offensives quickly expanded to 80% of the land while ethnically cleansing the population

You mean 'directly caused by the constant attacks by 7 states and the local Arab population', right? Just applying the same standards you apply, but without inverting chronology this time.

>by sowing panic in Jews in Iraq and elsewhere by planting bombs in synagogues

Based on 'confessions' accomplished by torture. The actual actions of the Iraqi government are oddly ignored.

Modern Iraqi history is littered with letting inconvenient populations be displaced (from Assyrians, to Iraqi Persians to Marsh Arabs to Kurds to Yazidis and yes, Jews) and always blaming it on someone else.

Re: New type of ancient human discovered in Israel

#42

Post by eloff »

Arnt wrote: post #15
kypro wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is it possible to indentify a new species from just a skull fragment and jawbone? Would there need to be multiple similar bones to rule out the possiblity of a genetic outlier? And even then it's not like there isn't fairly significant variance in bone structure between different populations of human today. Can we really say from two bits of bone that it's a different species? I have no knowledge of anthropology…

This isn't a criminal trial, with failsafe rules about doubt. There are very few generic outliers. They do exist, but at the same time, the chance that the next person you meet will be 2.40m tall is insignificant. The argument is stronger for the past, because generic outliers tend to have worse health than the average and have worse chances of reaching adulthood, so if you find a part of the skeleton of a single adu…

But the same logic applies. Instead of innocent until proven guilty it's "not a new species" until there's sufficient evidence to establish that.

I'm dubious that they have that evidence, especially given their further unsubstantiated claims that they're ancestors of the neanderthals. The linked article discussed 0 evidence for why it's a new species. Presumably there's a published paper that goes into details.

Re: New type of ancient human discovered in Israel

#44

Post by eloff »

kypro wrote: post #13
someperson wrote: post #5

We'll see if the inflation in ancient human species stands up to scrutiny. Here's a great TED Talk about dinosaur species being mistakenly identified because 'scientists have egos': https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQa11RMCeSI&t=102s (well worth a watch, it's a great story)

How is it possible to indentify a new species from just a skull fragment and jawbone? Would there need to be multiple similar bones to rule out the possiblity of a genetic outlier? And even then it's not like there isn't fairly significant variance in bone structure between different populations of human today. Can we really say from two bits of bone that it's a different species? I have no knowledge of anthropology…

The teeth and jaw are actually one of the most distinctive parts of a skeleton - so it's not totally crazy. The shape of the teeth and size of the jaw muscles could easily identify something as being not modern human. But the article gave 0 evidence for why they believe it to be a new species, so I'm not convinced either.

Re: New type of ancient human discovered in Israel

#45

Post by nir »

stormdennis wrote: post #28
flyinglizard wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which Indian tribe’s land have you built your high ground on?

I don't believe the US went in for a systematic renaming/demolition of places as Israel did. Balad Al-Sheikh has a history going back to the 16th century, Nesher to only 1924. Also I'm not American.

I realize discussing politics here is pointless, but this is just so comically ignorant I have to reply.

1. Israel won its independence after barely managing to fend off the joint armies of seven Arab nations who invaded the Jewish area following UN partition decision, openly declaring they intend to wipe all Jewish presence. Almost all nations, US included, predicted Arabs will succeed and decided to sit it out. Comparing this to the history of Europeans and Native Americans is simply ridiculous.

2. The name Nesher comes from a cement factory on whose grounds the cave was found. The name Ramle comes from the city founded by the Umayyad dynasty shortly after Islam conquered the land from the Roman Byzantine empire, which conquered it from the Hashmonites, who conquered it from the Hellenic Seleucids, who took it from the Persians, who beat the Babylonians, who took it from the Judeans, who conquered it from the Cannanites etc. After the Umayyad, Ramle was controlled by the Crusaders, then the Mamluks, then the Ottomans, then the British and now Israel. So declaring a specific 18-19th century village in the area as the original "Native" of the place rather than all others who lived there is - simply ridiculous as well.

As an Israeli, I have no animosity towards Arabs. But I really can't stand Western idiots who don't have a slight clue about the Mideast, or anything really outside their incredibly sheltered existance, and see the whole thing as some stupid Hollywood good vs bad conflict.

Re: New type of ancient human discovered in Israel

#46

Post by sharikone »

stormdennis wrote: post #9

Nesher largely occupies the site of the Palestinian village Balad Al-Sheikh which was depopulated in 1948. So Balad Al-Sheikh Ramla , maybe?

You are probably referring to a different Nesher, some 69 km from the site (the cement factory near Ramle).

This makes the flame down here ridiculous.

Re: New type of ancient human discovered in Israel

#47

Post by TimedToasts »

funcDropShadow wrote: post #38
stormdennis wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be accurate, Israel also entirely consists of that kind of land.

Do you know anotherland than Iceland, which does not consist of such land if you look carefully enough?

England

Re: New type of ancient human discovered in Israel

#48

Post by dsr_ »

Arnt wrote: post #15
kypro wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is it possible to indentify a new species from just a skull fragment and jawbone? Would there need to be multiple similar bones to rule out the possiblity of a genetic outlier? And even then it's not like there isn't fairly significant variance in bone structure between different populations of human today. Can we really say from two bits of bone that it's a different species? I have no knowledge of anthropology…

This isn't a criminal trial, with failsafe rules about doubt. There are very few generic outliers. They do exist, but at the same time, the chance that the next person you meet will be 2.40m tall is insignificant. The argument is stronger for the past, because generic outliers tend to have worse health than the average and have worse chances of reaching adulthood, so if you find a part of the skeleton of a single adu…

Humans being less than 1.2m tall is extremely common, and I will bet there was a significant period of your own life in which that criterion applied to you.

(edit: and you should not be surprised at the number of "new species" which are just juveniles of a known species.)

Re: New type of ancient human discovered in Israel

#49

Post by stormdennis »

nir wrote: post #45
stormdennis wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't believe the US went in for a systematic renaming/demolition of places as Israel did. Balad Al-Sheikh has a history going back to the 16th century, Nesher to only 1924. Also I'm not American.

I realize discussing politics here is pointless, but this is just so comically ignorant I have to reply. 1. Israel won its independence after barely managing to fend off the joint armies of seven Arab nations who invaded the Jewish area following UN partition decision, openly declaring they intend to wipe all Jewish presence. Almost all nations, US included, predicted Arabs will succeed and decided to sit it out. Com…

Unfortunately, as an Israeli, you were indoctrinated in both school and most likely, the IDF. The ethnic of cleansing of the Palestinians was already 50%. completed by the time any outside Arab forces arrived on the scene. The seven armies you speak of never numbered as many as the zionists/Israelis were able to put in the field. The only one that the zionists (who were British trained via the armed police forces) had reason to fear was the Jordanian Arab Legion (also British trained) hence the agreement to give control over what came to be called the West Bank to Jordan.

Re: New type of ancient human discovered in Israel

#50

Post by kingsuper20 »

someperson wrote: post #5

We'll see if the inflation in ancient human species stands up to scrutiny. Here's a great TED Talk about dinosaur species being mistakenly identified because 'scientists have egos': https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kQa11RMCeSI&t=102s (well worth a watch, it's a great story)

> We'll see if the inflation in ancient human species stands up to scrutiny.

Not in that business, but could it be simply that a new way of measuring taxonomy is needed? From the outside, it appears that the whole business inherits from a Victorian need for orderly tree structures.

Post reply on HN