Publishing on human origins

[Lynn Raw]

This doesn't appear to be 'settled science' if you look at the following
....

"The vigorous debate on how different chimpanzees are from humans is fuelled
by new data in this week's Nature, as the International Chimpanzee
Chromosome 22 Consortium reports that 83% of chimpanzee chromosome 22
proteins are different from their human counterparts."

http://www.biomedcentral.com/news/20040527/01

Lynn Raw


----- Original Message -----
From: "John Grehan" <jgrehan at SCIENCEBUFF.ORG>
To: <>
Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2004 7:15 PM
Subject: Publishing on human origins


Here is the first of what may be many setbacks in attempting to bring
the orangutan issue to a wider audience. The journal Natural History
turned down an article because they found it very problematic that the
DNA sequencing data for the relationships between hominids and apes is
still open to question. Without a genetic argument to support a
human-orangutan connection they would not publish something that openly
challenged what they consider to be settled science.



So you can see, perhaps, the hegemony that genetic sequencing has over
human evolution and its consequence for stultifying discussion of
non-DNA sequence alternatives. I have no problem with any particular
science dominating the field, but when this adversely influences options
for alternatives to be published it's a troubling situation. I doubt
this is a healthy condition for science, but others may of course feel
otherwise (and please note that the editors did not find any fault with
the morphology, just the idea that morphology might call DNA sequence
data into question).



John Grehan


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.690 / Virus Database: 451 - Release Date: 22/05/2004