Abstract 24
By Parvusvox
Title: On Picanthropus erectus: a Trasnsitional Form Between Man and the Apes
By: Eugene Dubois
Published by: The Royal Dublin Society. Volume VL. (Series II.) Williams and Norgate, London 1896.
The results of this effort became a null
hypothesis for those who were tracing the human family tree back to possible ancestors who/that were only slightly different than Humans. Darwin’s thoughts about writing on Humans -- I think I shall avoid the whole subject, as so surrounded with prejudices, though I fully admit that it is the highest and most interesting problem for the naturalist. So, he did not include this subject in his Origin Of the Species,Also the results were such for the tracing back to potential missing links between man and ape. A Null hypothesis can become regular hypothesis if it can''t be disproved.It is sort of like proving there that there is Yahweh because you can not prove that there is no Yahweh. So, to get the ball rolling in science the researchers often start with this null in their development of baseline data. Mr. Dubois, Mr. Dubois depicts a graph titled -- Figure 1, - Section of the bone strata in Trinil. He found what He would later call Picanthropus erectus close to the Solo River, also known as Bagawan River -- at the foot Kendeng. The river cut steep banks by its racing waters over the millennia. In the cross section graph of the high bank it shows the strata and location of bones and teeth of a great man-like mammal Mr. Dubois discovered. The rush to publish the findings came because The Neatherland Indian Government in Java released Mr. Dubois'' initial report prematurely to such extent that Europeans began speculating about it. Because Mr. Dubois thought the initial report was incomplete and because he thought the more or less
scientific European initial response to it he published his paper. But he made it sound like these events forced him to publish. --- Then he fast forwards to the later time when renowned zoologists and anatomists of America and Europe criticized Mr. Dubois claims of the find. Mr. Dubois thought this higher level criticism validated his assertion that the remains were of great importance. It may be first time any prominent scientists made any null, or any real hypotheses about links between man and apes. The paper is a good example of how a single scientist uses null hypothesis throughout their own career. Often they use the null against their own science. Mr. Dubois did the same thing --
Java Man - When this was "discovered" in 1891 by Dr. Eugene Dubois, two other skulls were found in the same formation and of the same age which were no different from skulls of modern Australian aborigines. Dubois formed Java man from a chimp-like skullcap, human thigh bone, and teeth, all found within 50 feet of each other and he simply put them together, assuming they were from the same man. Java man was later discredited by the finder himself, Dr. Eugene Dubois, as actually being a gibbon in 1938. Yet despite Dubois recanting, Java man was left in many textbooks. As we can see, many scientists who claim "scientific evidence" may simply be making guesses. Science leaves room for guessing when it is in the form of a Null Hypothesis. Recall that a null hypothesis is only a possible theory until it has been disproved by scientific means....
This is an important paper because someone had to do it back then and none of his peers seemed too willing plus the jury is still out on any linkage between ape and man.