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

51–60 of 111 posts

Re: New type of ancient human discovered in Israel

#51

Post by skinkestek »

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…

> and dominated by the great powers granted them 55% of the land for a Jewish stat

70% of the area that was proposed for the Jewish state was used to create what is today Jordan.

The rest is creative interpretations and framings to make one of the worlds smallest countries - and the only land where Jews can feel safe - to seem like a giant agressor.

Re: New type of ancient human discovered in Israel

#52

Post by sharikone »

Zenst wrote: post #30
tut-urut-utut wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Humour needs to be funny.

Agreed and a lighter humoristic approach would of been word-play and one example would be: Perhaps they should rename the Palaeolithic era too the Israeolithic era and bring it more in-line with current naming conventions.

Only that they are the same people who popularized the Paleolithic era name, while those who oppose it being called Israelolithic appropriated the older term

Re: New type of ancient human discovered in Israel

#53

Post by stormdennis »

skinkestek wrote: post #51
stormdennis wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> and dominated by the great powers granted them 55% of the land for a Jewish stat 70% of the area that was proposed for the Jewish state was used to create what is today Jordan. The rest is creative interpretations and framings to make one of the worlds smallest countries - and the only land where Jews can feel safe - to seem like a giant agressor.

>70% of the area that was proposed for the Jewish state was used to create what is today Jordan.

Do you have a reference for that?

Re: New type of ancient human discovered in Israel

#54

Post by nir »

stormdennis wrote: post #49
nir wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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) ha…

I guess having lived all my life in the Middle East means I'm "indoctrinated" and thus unable to understand the situation here as well as someone who lives in, say, Iowa and read a few posts on Reddit.

But Wikipedia is open to us all:

Previous to the Arab armies invasion of Israel, it was a civil war between Jews and Arabs, with no clear. Jews lost %1 of their entire population in the 1948 war. Ultimately, the area that ended up becoming Israel contains about %20 Arabs. In the area that ended up under Arab control, no Jews were left. Arab nations then moved to deport nearly all their Jewish citizens. So maybe read up on what Ethnic Cleansing means while you're at it.

Re: New type of ancient human discovered in Israel

#56

Post by lebuffon »

TimedToasts wrote: post #47
funcDropShadow wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

England

Not sure we can say that.

Recent history (from memory) Roman invasion 55 CE. Saxon invasion 400..500 ? Viking Invasions 900...ish Norman invasion 1066

All of these invaders made big changes to the country including place names, laws and language.

And there is the archeological record of pre-historic gene lines that are extinct in England as well.

Re: New type of ancient human discovered in Israel

#57

Post by InfiniteRand »

eloff wrote: post #42
Arnt wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

It's a new discovery in science, which means it will be about 10 years before we know if it's 90% correct or not. Probably need to wait a year to rule out simple measurement errors.

To some degree if a scientific discovery is news, it isn't firmly established, because if the entire field hasn't heard about it, it hasn't been properly vetted.

Re: New type of ancient human discovered in Israel

#58

Post by specialist »

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…

> How is it possible to indentify a new species...

I'd love that ELI5.

If it's just morphology and traits, given the amazing variety of people alive today, I wonder how many different species future archaeologists would identify.

I've seen the array of skulls at the natural history museum. Clear progression, sure. But when does one thing become another thing.

I know, I know, dividing lines are arbitrary. But I'd still like the ELI5 for how a professional knows homo sapiens vs neanderthal. Maybe a visual diff tool.

Re: New type of ancient human discovered in Israel

#59

Post by buran77 »

specialist wrote: post #58
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…

> How is it possible to indentify a new species... I'd love that ELI5. If it's just morphology and traits, given the amazing variety of people alive today, I wonder how many different species future archaeologists would identify. I've seen the array of skulls at the natural history museum. Clear progression, sure. But when does one thing become another thing. I know, I know, dividing lines are arbitrary. But I'd stil…

Some scientists also like to generate buzz because that's sometimes the only way to get financing. But having this apparently unique piece of evidence and calling it "one of the last survivors" of the new species (as opposed to one of the first, or squarely in the middle) gives away that for now it's just a flashy assumption.

Re: New type of ancient human discovered in Israel

#60

Post by stormdennis »

nir wrote: post #54
stormdennis wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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) ha…

I guess having lived all my life in the Middle East means I'm "indoctrinated" and thus unable to understand the situation here as well as someone who lives in, say, Iowa and read a few posts on Reddit. But Wikipedia is open to us all: Previous to the Arab armies invasion of Israel, it was a civil war between Jews and Arabs, with no clear. Jews lost %1 of their entire population in the 1948 war. Ultimately, the area t…

Jewish communities lived in what are now Arab countries for thousands of years. The fact that they either left or were forced out only after the zionist settler-colonisation of Palestine commenced does not seem to be related in your mind?
Post reply on HN