« A Republican Elephant with the Ganesha at the Tulsa Zoo
Main
Why? I Certainly Hope Kos is Wrong but I Don't Have a Better Answer »
June 15, 2005
The Homo floresiensis Story with a Bad Opening
I thought it was about time for a status update on Homo floresiensis and I must have been right because two were published today. A very good one is on Carl Zimmer's Loom and a disservice to science is in the Los Angeles Times (top front page column one no less). Zimmer builds his report on the Times article by skipping the first two paragraphs. If you want a very informative, concise, update the Loom is the place to go. Anyone who wants to get their update from the Times should skip the first two paragraphs also. Here's why.
If you want real heartburn try the first two paragraphs of the Times article, "A Bone to Pick in Indonesia" by Richard C. Paddock. And most readers only read the first two paragraphs.
To understand the issue one needs to look at the article's subtitle.
Discovery of remains in a cave that may be of a previously unknown species of tiny human has set off a full-sized row among scientists.
I call your attention to the words "a full-sized row among scientists" and particularly the word "scientists." Now read the first two paragraphs of Paddock's piece,
KAMPUNG TERAS, Indonesia — The bones in the limestone cave had been buried more than 12,000 years when the archeologists found them. The villagers say they belonged to sinners who drowned in the biblical Great Flood."The people in the cave were condemned by God years ago," said Stanislaus Barus, 60, his lips stained red from chewing betel nut. "They had lots of sins, according to the Old Testament. It rained for 40 days and 40 nights, and the condemned people took refuge in the cave."
For the record, the remainder of the Times article is quite good and the great flood is not mentioned again. My problem is that it is mentioned at all. It is true enough that some people on Flores Island see the Homo floresiensis remains as those of their ancestors. I have no doubt that some see the remains as those of lost souls from Noah's flood. If Paddock thought local villager, Stanislaus Barus' speculation on how the remains got into the cave were of interest he should have placed them well below the fold where, in context, they would do no harm.
To those who only read the first couple of paragraphs, and as I said that is the highest percentage of readers, the only reasonable conclusion was that the Biblical Flood somehow might have something to do with a scientific controversy. It is exactly this impression that needs to be negated rather than reinforced. I suppose the opening is an attempt to motivate a larger audience than might otherwise read such an article but the danger of leaving the wrong impression out weighs whatever good might come of it.
Posted by Duane Smith at June 15, 2005 1:22 PM | Read more on Paleoanthropology |
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.telecomtally.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/1215