There are several sites in different parts of the United States (8 or 10 IIRC) at which remains have discovered and tentatively dated far older than the conventional wisdom allows for.
In addition sites have been found along the Chilean coast which raise the possibility that humans arrived in North America via South America rather than Siberia.
It's been a while since I've looked into this; maybe it's time for another peek.
Actually we don't have tons of data. What we have is a couple of hundred pounds of data and tons of speculation.
Findings of ancient hominins generally consist of a handful of bones; sometimes all they find is a fragment of a skull.
The evidence is so scanty that it can support many theories, and each has adherents.
Remember that until the Leakeys excavated Olduvai Gorge, most scientists believed that humans evolved in Asia. Now most believe humans evolved in Africa. With the discovery of additional evidence the pendulum may swing back again.
One paleontologist working in Indonesia noted for National Geographic a while back that the evidence for African origins isn't conclusive, but many people think it is because the Leakeys (and their students) had very good PR.
It's selling "Risk Assessment", and the moral of the story is that if you don't hire expensive professional "Risk Assessors" you too could lose $20 million.
The rationale for a reference implentation of Linux was facilitating commercial adoption. The Linux Standard Base, under the influence of commercial interests, elected to specify a package management standard, and the standard adopted was RPM.
I suspected at the time (and I still do) that the reason for this decision was to ensure that Debian (the only major NON-COMMERCIAL distribution) would never become dominant -- it can never be LSB-compliant since it doesn't use RPM packaging.
I doubt that political parties get really big money from their mailing lists. Their mailing lists let them maintain the fiction that they're battling each other for the support of ordinary people.
Meanwhile in the back rooms buying and selling of politicians goes on the old-fashioned way -- face to face.
Slashdot Mirror
Nah, you're getting to be an old fart and a few tits don't excite you as they once did.
If I had mod points right now you'd get one.
I continue to be amazed at how much archaeologists and paleontologists believe they can "prove" with a couple of bones or bits of pottery.
(And I agree that the book is hilarious.)
That depends on when you thought humans got to North America:
n a.dig/
http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/science/11/17/caroli
There are several sites in different parts of the United States (8 or 10 IIRC) at which remains have discovered and tentatively dated far older than the conventional wisdom allows for.
In addition sites have been found along the Chilean coast which raise the possibility that humans arrived in North America via South America rather than Siberia.
It's been a while since I've looked into this; maybe it's time for another peek.
Actually we don't have tons of data. What we have is a couple of hundred pounds of data and tons of speculation.
Findings of ancient hominins generally consist of a handful of bones; sometimes all they find is a fragment of a skull.
The evidence is so scanty that it can support many theories, and each has adherents.
Remember that until the Leakeys excavated Olduvai Gorge, most scientists believed that humans evolved in Asia. Now most believe humans evolved in Africa. With the discovery of additional evidence the pendulum may swing back again.
One paleontologist working in Indonesia noted for National Geographic a while back that the evidence for African origins isn't conclusive, but many people think it is because the Leakeys (and their students) had very good PR.
It's here today because newspapers ran the story (perhaps not for the first time) today.
But it IS selling something.
It's selling "Risk Assessment", and the moral of the story is that if you don't hire expensive professional "Risk Assessors" you too could lose $20 million.
You think MS Windows is buggy? Look at the home-grown software your brain's running.
That's not a bug; it's a feature!
Hawash was charged on 29 April 2003.
Let's see, that was two months ago, and you're still peddling this nonsense?
That idea is unfortunately Dead On Arrival.
The rationale for a reference implentation of Linux was facilitating commercial adoption. The Linux Standard Base, under the influence of commercial interests, elected to specify a package management standard, and the standard adopted was RPM.
I suspected at the time (and I still do) that the reason for this decision was to ensure that Debian (the only major NON-COMMERCIAL distribution) would never become dominant -- it can never be LSB-compliant since it doesn't use RPM packaging.
1. Write the grant for the hardware only.
2. If you are forced to include software choose the cheapest version of Windows you can find.
3. Include no other closed-source software, or as little as you can specify to get the grant approved.
4. When you get the money, buy the stuff you said you would buy.
5. Build the computers. Leave the closed-source software in the box. Install Linux and open-source applications.
6. Don't announce your intentions ahead of time -- just do it.
Once you have the network up and running it will be hard to claim it doesn't work.
I doubt that political parties get really big money from their mailing lists. Their mailing lists let them maintain the fiction that they're battling each other for the support of ordinary people.
Meanwhile in the back rooms buying and selling of politicians goes on the old-fashioned way -- face to face.