Randman seems to find great credence in Cremo and Thompson and their heavy reliance on fossil finds of 100 or more years ago and the evaluation of the material at that time. Presumably this material was included in the large volume of Forbidden Archaeology by Cremo and Thompson.
Here is a review of that book by Colin Groves. Below is an extract which explains why Cremo and Thompson and consequentially randman have to rely on supposed anomolous human fossils found 100 or more years ago and cannot cite modern occurances:
quote:
The fossil and archaeological evidence for human and cultural evolution is not all of consistently high quality. In the nineteenth century, human remains and artefacts were usually found by accident and by amateurs; they would be dug up, removed from context, and presented with a flourish to the nearest "expert". Controlled excavation was not a widely practised are; photography of a find in situ was an unusual occurrence. The finds' stratigraphy was often vague in the extreme; those re-examining their significance in later times had to rely on the fading memories of untrained workmen who had been enlisted by the finder.
This state of affairs improved as archaeology and palaeontology developed, and contextual information came to be recognised as crucial. Today, accidental discoveries are rarities; usually specimens turn up because someone has an idea where to look, given the prevailing geology and landscape, and an excavation is mounted with all kinds of specialists - geomorphologists, geochemists, taphonomists, above all photographers - riding along to ensure that everything about the site and its contents is recorded.
Of course the fanatical anti-evolutionist is likely to bleat about ignorant scientists, duped scientists brainwashed by propaganda or conspiracies. Reality doesn't support those delusions.
™ Version 4.2
