Posted on 07/22/2018 10:40:19 AM PDT by a fool in paradise
The severely elongated head of a preserved skeleton found in Peru's Atacama Desert in 2003 is so unusual that it initially prompted people to suggest that the diminutive body was that of an extraterrestrial.
Since then, DNA testing confirmed that the remains — which measure about 6 inches (15 centimeters) long — belonged to a human fetus that researchers named Ata. But the scientists who conducted that investigation and published their findings in March have recently come under fire for their methods.
...Their investigation, which did not include any Chilean researchers, may have sidestepped protocols that typically monitor the ethics of research conducted with human remains, as their publication omitted "a sufficient ethics statement or archaeological permit," Kristina Killgrove, co-author of the new study and an assistant professor of anthropology at the University of West Florida, wrote in an article for Forbes.
..Because the remains are thought to be just a few decades old, studying them raises ethical concerns that the March study did not adequately address, the scientists in the new study said. Furthermore, as DNA extraction can destroy some of the body's tissues, additional restrictions typically apply for such an examination. And it is unclear from the prior study that DNA sampling was required to begin with, the researchers said.
"Unfortunately, there was no scientific rationale to undertake genomic analyses of Ata, because the skeleton is normal," the authors wrote in the new study, adding that the whole-genome testing previously performed "was unnecessary and unethical."
"We caution DNA researchers about getting involved in cases that lack clear context and legality, or where the remains have resided in private collections," the study authors concluded.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Thanks for the update. So with the Caucasus signature as well as the unknowns..ther might be some of that good ol Denisovian runnning around the brain there.
It’s possible the soft fetal skull was deformed during delivery. Or it could have been deformed post-mortem by some aspect of the burial procedure, such as tight wrapping of the head.
When tradition has the authority of scripture what else can you say? Mary’s assumption isn’t exactly biblical, you know.
Give me teepee for my bunghole!
“When tradition has the authority of scripture what else can you say?”
Everyone is borne ignorant, but it takes both stupidity and malice to remain that way.
Catholics do not, and have never, believed that tradition has the authority of scripture.
I’m sure you’ve been told that before, and yet you continue to repeat it. Scripture tells us not to lie, but you don’t seem to mind spitting in God’s face on that one.
So Mary wasn’t assumed into heaven after all? It gets so confusing.
Don’t try to flip it around.
Things have happened that are not in scripture.
I don’t want to have this same, tired argument again. I mean, I wouldn’t discuss physics with a frog, so why would I discuss religion with you?
You can see that the bony plates of the skull overlap a lot. Perhaps the plates were pulled into that position by soft tissue as it dried and shrank. Perhaps it was compressed in its storage or burial.
It’s just a baby miscarried or born way too early to live. Let it have a proper burial and if no one remembers it but God, that will be enough.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.