Publication Date:
2011-05-25
Description:
We critiqued the claim that bone surface marks on two ∼3.4 Ma fossils from Dikika (Ethiopia) are the earliest evidence of hominin butchery damage (1) by (i) providing a detailed argument showing site- and assemblage-level weaknesses for the claim and (ii) matching those marks morphologically to marks produced on modern bones by trampling in coarse-grained sedimentary substrates, similar to those of the Dikika site (2). The letter by McPherron et al. (3), responding to our critique, completely ignores these substantive issues and, instead, seeks to disqualify our assessment by arguing that we are unwilling to accept a paradigm shift. McPherron...
Keywords:
Letters
Print ISSN:
0027-8424
Electronic ISSN:
1091-6490
Topics:
Biology
,
Medicine
,
Natural Sciences in General
Permalink