The evidence is convergent. Multiple independent sources reach the same conclusion, the underlying mechanism is well-characterized, and even the field's most cautious voices treat it as worth doing.
if we go back and we actually look at fossilized remains we can look at stable isotope studies from Neanderthals and contemporary Homo sapiens even 770 thousand years ago what we see is that the amount of nitrogen in that collagen is so high that it's higher than other known carnivores at the time
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
this is one the things that I think was so interesting is this series of studies that came out looking at the isotopes in in the and earth all's and that the fact that that might give us some indication of of what these Neanderthals and what these early humans were eating
and the latest Malaysia study actually showed that they were both the hunters of vegan big animals concentrate a little more of the isotope then smaller any so you can actually find out if humans had higher level than can evolve in their environment the interpretive is humans a larger element right because larger animals there's more of the of the ice of the nitrogen isotope
and when they compare the amount of nitrogen in the collagen of a Neanderthal or Homo sapiens we had the same or more than these other needs than these hyenas more so we had surely more yeah so we were probably eating larger animals or we were on par with these known carnivorous animals at this time
the same goes for Neanderthal of coarsely the notion was that now that that was even more carnivore the humans then they modern humans