Very unconvincing, because of so many assumptions that are never justified.
Frex:
In a society where warfare is rampant and violence may be the only means of survival, people surely would have learned to make better weapons than the ones that Lipo and Hunt found.
Really? Says who? That's just an assumption- who knows what factors influence the development of better technology?
On the subject of those artifacts so far considered as spear points, I imagine that if something was used to dig and turn the earth instead of killing people a) there would be evidence of its use on the tool itself and b) there would not be any evidence of its use as a weapon in the remains of people on the island.
So where's that analysis? The article doesn't mention it. Was it done by the authors?
Unfortunately in the article we're just left with "Surely" this and "Surely" that. It's not convincing at all.
1 comment
[ 2.9 ms ] story [ 17.3 ms ] threadFrex:
In a society where warfare is rampant and violence may be the only means of survival, people surely would have learned to make better weapons than the ones that Lipo and Hunt found.
Really? Says who? That's just an assumption- who knows what factors influence the development of better technology?
On the subject of those artifacts so far considered as spear points, I imagine that if something was used to dig and turn the earth instead of killing people a) there would be evidence of its use on the tool itself and b) there would not be any evidence of its use as a weapon in the remains of people on the island.
So where's that analysis? The article doesn't mention it. Was it done by the authors?
Unfortunately in the article we're just left with "Surely" this and "Surely" that. It's not convincing at all.