3 ms·
I used to read them in my youth, what is the controversy?
by Pet_Ant 3y ago
I used to read them in my youth, what is the controversy?
- jrflowers 3y agoThere are a number of concerned science enthusiasts that have pointed out that the archeological record has contracted the woke mind virus because clearly women never hunted
- next_xibalba 3y agoI think that’s an oversimplification (and an equally over-politicization) of that issue. Here is a good write up: https://whyevolutionistrue.com/2023/10/24/scientific-american-is-back-to-distorting-the-facts-to-buttress-its-ideology/ https://whyevolutionistrue.com/2023/10/24/scientific-america...
- jrflowers 3y agoI appreciate this link to the politically neutral blog post about how the author’s hopes were dashed by Scientific American buttressing “progressive” Left ideology and the moral proposition of the worth of women. I look forward to reading more discompassionate sober analyses of data that has no intent to persuade the readers on the Why Evolution Is True blog. I personally love it when discussions about archaeology unrelated to architecture use the word “buttress” six times in one ideologically neutral post. What we need more of in academic analysis of data is someone to ask the tough questions like “if archeologists see evidence of women hunting, isn’t that just buttressing feminism?”, “does feminism need buttressing?”, and “does this buttress Left ideology?”. There is not enough talk about what bones that are dug up buttress, and if they are sufficiently or excessively leftist.