/sci/ - Science & Math

>>12054178
Why else would someone travel to dangerous caves to draw stuff on walls? The art clearly has special significance. And animals only create art when they are trained by humans

>>8996282
>They show human feet where there aren't any in the fossil record.
so? it's possible for the footprints, but not the feet, to be preserved. in fact, if the humans were just passing through (not living and dying there) there's no reason to think we WOULD find them. don't hate on ichnofossils.

>I understand it's ambiguous.
No. You THINK it's ambiguous because you do NOT understand. This is the sort of unknowing ignorance that leads people astray, the inability to know what they do not know. There are many children who think that way. "I'm gonna design a video game; how hard can it be?" And then some of them learn to code and realize just how little they actually know, and how daunting the task really is. You know practically nothing, so you assume anything you don't know must be easy.

>So was this at one point.
from the BEGINNING the scientific community was skeptical of Piltdown Man. it didn't fool many experts.

>>8996321
>Why not look at all the slides I've posted for counter-views.
I did. Calling them "counter-views" is charitable. Do you realize that none of the claims in there are sourced? It's a mixture of meaningless trivia (what does the genetic origin of skin color have to do with anything? also there are 378 known loci, not 3), outright lies (many many transitional forms at various points along the hominid tree are known), and blatant fakes!
what fakes? the hilariously bad photoshop job in >>8996133, of course. There is exactly ONE representation of a human in the Lascaux cave paintings, and it is pic related!
Did you think nobody would notice? Embarrassing!

go ahead. explain why your little buddy felt the need to photoshop a much later picture into a Lascaux painting. you guys are incapable of telling the truth, huh?