103
submitted 4 months ago by FlyingSquid@lemmy.world to c/world@lemmy.world

Just jaw-dropping to me.

Official announcement with more information: https://www.arch.cam.ac.uk/news/shanidar-z-film

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] prettybunnys@sh.itjust.works 24 points 4 months ago

Squid could you allow us a little outrage before you set us straight next time?

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 21 points 4 months ago

I'm sorry. Pretend I said nothing.

[-] mipadaitu@lemmy.world 6 points 4 months ago

It's cool stuff, BUT it's still an artists rendition. It's not fact.

Edutainment science is great, but when they pretend "This is what she looked like", it's bullshit. Then when someone comes back later and says "No, THIS is what she looked like" people get all confused and think science is dumb.

When you see interviews with the best science communicators, they always phrase it like "We used the best models we have, and we are confident that this is an accurate representation based on our current information" THAT would be a great sub-headline.

I just hate it when the news gets watered down to show an artists representation, no matter how good, as fact instead of probability.

[-] BertramDitore@lemmy.world 4 points 4 months ago

Fully agree. This edutainment disclaimer also applies when it comes to explanations of archaeological sites and the “daily life” of ancient populations. The stories the public hears are based on the best understanding of complex interpretations of ceramics, surface features, architecture, stratigraphy, etc. You could ask two equally talented archaeologists to interpret a site and get two equally convincing but completely different explanations. We just can’t know any of this for sure, it’s all filtered through the lens of the researcher, their methods, and their biases. And that’s okay. The best we can do is apply the most relevant and current methodology to interpret the evidence, be transparent about potential shortcomings, and be willing to change our conclusions if better evidence arises.

Lots of people are uncomfortable with “that’s just our best possible guess at the moment,” but that’s how interpretive social sciences work. Until we invent a time machine, educated guesses based on all the available evidence are the best we can do.

this post was submitted on 03 May 2024
103 points (91.9% liked)

World News

38563 readers
2387 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS