There’s a lot of domain terminology that’s fairly opaque to non-specialists. Anyone care to take a stab at summarizing the revelation for us lay-people?
Humans and Neanderthals were neighbours for longer than previously thought. Also, we’re maybe back to humans making more tools.
…the discovery of more of its remnants alongside human fossils points to Homo sapiens inhabiting central Germany at the same time.
“It turns out that stone artefacts that were thought to be produced by Neanderthals were in fact part of the early Homo sapiens tool kit,” says Jean-Jacques Hublin, a professor in palaeoanthropology at Collège de France.
“This fundamentally changes our previous knowledge about this time period: Homo sapiens reached northwestern Europe long before Neanderthal disappearance in southwestern Europe.”
Is there more?
Oh. “Fundamentally changes” for paleontologists, not for your typical person. Got it.
Basically they revisited a former excavation site and found new evidence, tools and human fossils, that suggests Homo Sapiens arrived a fair bit earlier in the region than previously assumed, extending the time Homo Sapiens and Neanderthals lived there simultaneously. They also found tools that were previously, due to their age, attributed to the Neanderthals and could now be identified as part of the Homo Sapiens toolkit. All in all it rewrites part of our species history during that time, especially its migration into europe.
Just means that their ignorant and vague theories of the past are now shaken up, leading to new, even more ignorant and vague theories of the past. None if it has any relevance to modern life at all.
Just a self-sustaining cash-grab. You could get rid of the entire discipline and the effect on current events would be zero.
Not sure if you forgot the /s
The back story of humanity is very interesting, and informative. It gives us explanations for how and why we live the way we do today. It shows the basis of our morals and attitudes, and shows us patterns we can learn from.
Dismissing an entire field of study is like kids who hate learning trigonometry or algebra at school because they don’t think they’ll ever use it.
Not what I said at all. Knowing about the basis of our attitudes doesn’t change them. Hence, getting rid of the discipline would change nothing.
Of course, it’s interesting. Ancient humans are fascinating. So are pyramids. Finding out how they were built would change nothing though. Egyptology is in the same ballpark. Interesting, yes.
Fundamentally changing? Not at all. We could find out that it was ancient aliens, and it wouldn’t change a single thing today. Another discipline that could just vanish, and nothing would change for anyone except the people currently involved with them. Deep space sciences is another field.
There are many deeply interesting and fascinating fields of research and science that are completely irrelevant. At least in any practical sense.
You could reduce a lot of the shit we do to effect irrelevance. However, things don’t have to have a profound impact on our lives to be worthwhile endeavours. I love rocket league, a lot of people don’t. A lot of jobs boil down to *meaningless busy work", but some jobs are absolutely essential. Some events have a big influence on limited fields of study, but that doesn’t mean those events can’t impact the wider world. If we discovered aliens once existed on Mars a million years ago it would arguably be irrelevant to our daily lives. But the impact on the world would be earth shattering.
If we only did things that were relevant to the lives of MOST people the world would be a very dull place.
Tl;Dr - you have no soul.
What you are saying sounds romantic and all. I’d love to hear a single instance of any such example of earth-shattering discoveries that actually changed something in our daily lives.
I actually don’t believe that ancient Mars aliens would change a single thing. The big players want to go there in hopes of finding weapons. After not finding them, we’ll stop going there. No bases or colonies. We could have been on the moon, but there’s no profit to be made. So we aren’t.
I have no soul. That’s great. That’s why I ditched my work as a developer to work in a hospital to help people reduce their suffering. I thought for a long time that progress and science will save humanity. It has the potential. But romanticizing potential won’t save anyone. Most menial jobs create suffering elsewhere, all to elevate one’s personal status. Fantastic.
I am now convinced that it will be done by actually helping humans, saving the world, that is. Not having a soul feels great.
And I don’t even have to degrade others to make a point. So enjoy your hobbies, enjoy your life. And continue to accept suffering and pain while seeking answers in the past, or by playing online games from the safety of your couch. That’s fine. Just be aware that you do.
Morals are made up things, so are ethics and standards. It keeps most people from killing each other, at least. I’m texting and chatting online. Also, a waste of time and effort. We all need some distractions.
We could also use some more dullness and focus. At least until we don’t have a billion people starving for food and water, half a billion waging war, and two billion facing obesity and metabolic disease resulting from not so dull lives. But that’s my standard. That’s just the ones that are immediately suffering. Right now.
If soul is responsible for all that ignorant bliss and suffering, you can keep it. But feel free to enjoy it. I can’t. But that’s just me.
You might be confusing soul and ego though.
You seem to be making my point for me. Human Endeavours don’t need to make a difference, and the difference they do make doesn’t have to affect everyone. In fact if the work makes one person happy, then it is worthwhile.
Sounds like you have taken on a life that means something. My own job is full of bullshit that really doesn’t need to exist, but I give it meaning by mentoring those I lead to drive good changes, and reduce the bullshit. It is a small thing but it is how I make a difference.
deleted by creator
Link to the nature paper is in the article
