Sasquatch "Nest" Question

[hiflier]

44 minutes ago, Huntster said:

Science has now claimed to have identified the dna of four human species thus far:

Homo Sapien

Homo Neanderthalensis

Homo Denisovan

Homo Heidelbergensis

 

https://abcnews.go.com/Health/pit-bones-yields-oldest-human-dna/story?id=21093890

 

 

Remarkably, a fifth human species (Homo Floresiensis), younger than all the rest except Sapiens, has not yet been identified through dna analysis (coincidence?).

 

Question:

 

How did pithecene dna differ from homo dna? Is it possible that it didn't?

 

We need a expert in primate evolutionary genetics here ASAP

 

[MIB]

15 hours ago, hiflier said:

 

We need a expert in primate evolutionary genetics here ASAP

 

 

But only one.   If we have two, they will disagree and we'll be right back where we are today without a clear view of "truth."   (They seem a lot like weather forecasters in that sense.)

 

[hiflier]

How true that is, MIB. Would one even show up though? Really doubt it. But we've worked out some of the truth without one coming here, so that's something at least?

 

Edited May 26 by hiflier

[Huntster]

15 minutes ago, MIB said:

........(They seem a lot like weather forecasters in that sense.)

 

True, but that's understandable.

 

But if you predict sunshine, and it rains, isn't it best to admit that conditions didn't go as you'd thought and it actually rained instead of forever saying that it didn't rain, or that it shouldn't have rained?

 

Or, worse yet, predict that it will now rain forever unless social attitudes and economic activity changes?

 

Paleoanthropological theories from the earlier 20th Century should be flexible enough to meld with new technology like dna discoveries. Old Guard defenses can damage future understanding.