Leaderboard

Sorry parn, but this is misinformation. You do not know what the hypothesis is, nor do you have any of the sequences to support your contention. If the editor of nature read the abstract and handed it back, then He/she could have simply made a recomendation on the hypothesis if that was the issue. Obviously if it is believed that the samples are from bigfoot then the fix is to say " these samples provided by bigfoot hunters are not modern human or any other extant great ape, but are closest related for these reasons". It would be testable and falsifiable within the field of phylogenetics. I'm sure the Denisova paper probably used this hypothesis since they had far from a complete specimen as well. The smell is your imagination.

I'm sure it does. However, if you'll notice in the background, there is a sunset. How many times have you seen a full moon in the west just after sunset?