4 ms·

From Vilified to Vindicated: The Story of Jacques Cinq-Mars

22 points by hownottowrite 10y ago

dmix 10y ago
While I'm sympathetic to Cinq-Mars and the amount of time it took to become vindicated, I don't find much fault in the original scientists who demanded more evidence than was available. It seems he only had the one bone with indication of human butchery. It wasn't until decades later that another scientist was able to review hundreds of bones and found 15 other examples. This must be considered in context. Someone claiming that humans were in North America ten thousand years earlier must automatically bring skepticism. Were there many charlatans at the time, or in history, making similar claims that were proven false? The only question was why it took so long for enough resources to be invested in fully researching the cave? How much was it the fault of lack of funding?
- mannykannot 10y ago
  > I don't find much fault in the original scientists who demanded more evidence than was available. As the article makes clear, it was not just one site or one researcher. >Were there many charlatans at the time, or in history, making similar claims that were proven false? No, that's a conspiracy theory of your own making. >The only question was why it took so long for enough resources to be invested in fully researching the cave? How much was it the fault of lack of funding? I guess you did not see the connection between the hostility of the nominal experts and the lack of funding?
  - dmix 10y ago
    Asking if a common occurrence in science had also previously happened in this field is "a conspiracy theory of my own making"? No, it's actually an important question to ask when something doesn't get the funding and research it needed. "Build it and they will come" nonsense doesn't need a conspiracy against it either. Just indifference from people who have heard many unfulfilled big claims from other people. These scenarios where big discoveries are left in funding purgatory have happened many times in the past. And these things never happen in isolation but in a fast moving field of research. I'm merely asking for greater context. Not sure why that brought out such hostility.
Nomentatus 10y ago
My grandfather, a pioneering (unpaid) archeologist in Alberta during the 1930's was one of the thoroughly silenced voices. He had plenty of evidence of pre-Clovis points, but the priesthood of science had already decided the matter.

22 points by hownottowrite 10y ago

dmix 10y ago

While I'm sympathetic to Cinq-Mars and the amount of time it took to become vindicated, I don't find much fault in the original scientists who demanded more evidence than was available. It seems he only had the one bone with indication of human butchery. It wasn't until decades later that another scientist was able to review hundreds of bones and found 15 other examples. This must be considered in context. Someone claiming that humans were in North America ten thousand years earlier must automatically bring skepticism. Were there many charlatans at the time, or in history, making similar claims that were proven false? The only question was why it took so long for enough resources to be invested in fully researching the cave? How much was it the fault of lack of funding?

mannykannot 10y ago
> I don't find much fault in the original scientists who demanded more evidence than was available. As the article makes clear, it was not just one site or one researcher. >Were there many charlatans at the time, or in history, making similar claims that were proven false? No, that's a conspiracy theory of your own making. >The only question was why it took so long for enough resources to be invested in fully researching the cave? How much was it the fault of lack of funding? I guess you did not see the connection between the hostility of the nominal experts and the lack of funding?
- dmix 10y ago
  Asking if a common occurrence in science had also previously happened in this field is "a conspiracy theory of my own making"? No, it's actually an important question to ask when something doesn't get the funding and research it needed. "Build it and they will come" nonsense doesn't need a conspiracy against it either. Just indifference from people who have heard many unfulfilled big claims from other people. These scenarios where big discoveries are left in funding purgatory have happened many times in the past. And these things never happen in isolation but in a fast moving field of research. I'm merely asking for greater context. Not sure why that brought out such hostility.

Nomentatus 10y ago

My grandfather, a pioneering (unpaid) archeologist in Alberta during the 1930's was one of the thoroughly silenced voices. He had plenty of evidence of pre-Clovis points, but the priesthood of science had already decided the matter.