3 ms·
This summary article may be biased, but note that the cited paper has been peer reviewed and was published in Nature: https://www.nature.com/articles/s42003-023
by JosephRedfern 3y ago
This summary article may be biased, but note that the cited paper has been peer reviewed and was published in Nature: https://www.nature.com/articles/s42003-023-05517-3 https://www.nature.com/articles/s42003-023-05517-3.
- consp 3y agoShouldn't that be the article reference then? Since that is both the source and not biased.
- happytiger 3y agoIt not a study. It’s a bunch of postulation and no data or experiment and based entirely on conjecture.
- simonh 3y agoAs is the idea that fire enabled us to boost our nutrition enabling brain growth. I have no problem with the paper in Nature, and no problem with PBN promoting it. I think they’re overreaching saying it was fermentation not fire. It may well have been both. Fire 2m years ago and fermentation more recently once we had containers to ferment things in.
- happytiger 3y agoWell I think it’s awesome to have the discussion and I certainly think the idea has merit… I just don’t think postulations should have the same weight as substantive research no matter how prestigious the journey it gets published in. That’s really the core of my point. You could very well be right on fire / ferment and whatnot. We have so very little substantive paleontological information to go off of.