Zum Seitenende Übersicht Artikel Home & Impressum
First the link to this week's complete list as HTML and as PDF.
Calabrese rightly continues to stress the harm done – both in economic and human terms – by extremely overstating the effect of very small radiation doses. That said his doubtful claims here do neither himself nor anybody else any good. As his first claim he
“corrects” a rounded and approximate factor of 200 000 to 199 999. Seriously? In his second point he completely ignores that disregarding the dose rate and looking at the received dose alone was the whole point of Muller & Mott-Smith. It was meant to be an extreme worst-case estimate leaving no room for buts and niggles. That's just what it achieved and what Calabrese’s more correct numbers could not have done.
O’Connell et al. is another example of a well-designed study not yielding any results but being published anyway. Everything the authors are able to tell us was already known from written sources. There archaeozoological and isotopic results, while not contradicting the previous expectations, do not tell us anything tangible whatsoever. There are no discernible diachronic changes at all, at least none larger than expected from chance variation in small samples.
If Kuzawa & Blair were correct, we'd expect to find tubby children among the intellectually less stimulated ones and vice versa. This relationship does not seem to be upheld by observation.
Reading Magnani and the rest of the discussion we can now calmly put the Cerutti Mastodon (Holen, list of 2017-04-29) to rest. Extraordinary claims require more than a few splinters.
In their admixture analysis Feldman et al. could only find what they were looking for – in this case a Mesolithic European contribution they chose to call Greek. Looking at their figure 2a, the population those early Philistines cluster most closely with are the West Anatolians, confirming Zangger’s Luwian hypothesis (list of 2019-02-01).
Zum Anfang Übersicht Artikel Home & Impressum