|
Science Over the EdgeA Roundup of Strange Science for the MonthApplet credit: Ed Hobbs
March 2003 |
|
In the News:
Construction of the church began in the 4th century AD. After much of the main structure of the church was built, an earthquake struck and builders were forced to abandon much of the structure and seal it off. Next the builders managed to complete a beautiful large floor mosaic, however not long after it was finished the site was flooded and the mosaic was abandoned - buried under a layer of sediment. A second earthquake hit the site just as the builders were fitting out the church with decorative sculpture. The site was then abandoned except for pottery manufacturing. This ended, though, when a landslide hit. Only the pouch was left, which, because of poppy seeds and part of a pipe found there, appears to have been used as an opium den.
|
|
What's New at the Museum:
|
|
Ask the Curator:
The idea of a "missing link" first appeared right after Darwin published his Origin of the Species which laid out the theory of evolution. The idea was that there was a chain of evolution with the apes at one end, modern man at the other, and intermediate forms in between. Science was looking for fossils of a creature that was "half-man and half-ape" that was never found. It was the "missing-link" in that chain. Today many scientists do not like using the term "missing-link" as it suggests that evolution is a progressive straight line from simple life to more complex forms. They picture evolution as a tree with simpler forms of life at the bottom and more evolved forms at the tips of the branches. In this version both apes and man are at the tip of branches with a common ancestor at the root. Many branches on this tree, like Neanderthal man, have died out. While in this picture there are intermediate forms between man and the common ancestor, there are no direct connections between man and modern apes, and therefore no "missing link." Many people have suggested that "Bigfoot" is the "missing link." However, if Bigfoot actually exists he would probably be another tip of a branch on the tree, just like apes or man.
The land down under has a number of creatures on the edge of legend, but reported by people and unproven to science. Here are just a few: The counterpart of Bigfoot in Australia is a Yowie. Yowie supporters list up to 10,000 sightings of this ape-like creature since about 1790. As in the case of Bigfoot, evidence proving Yowie's existence remains elusive and most scientists are skeptical that the creature is real. Another Australian cryptozoological riddle is Megalania prisca a lizard some twenty feet in length and weighing 1000 pounds. Megalania supposedly went extinct some 20,000 years ago, but occasional reports from the outback raise the possibly a few still might be prowling around. Finally there is the case of the Tasmanian Tiger. The Tiger, actually it was more like a wolf, was hunted into extinction over 60 years ago. Still, there are occasional sightings suggesting that a few might still lurk in the wild, but as with the creatures above, there is no proof.
|
| In History:
|
|
In the Sky:
|
|
Observed:
The mummy was seven inches tall in it's seated position, and it was assumed that the person stood between 14 and 16 inches tall in life. The claims by so called "experts" that the mummy is a mummified fetus suffering from a rare birth defect are only supportable if all the contradictory evidence is ignored. The mummy had a full set of teeth, along with elongated canines. Infants do not have teeth, let alone elongated canines. The mummy had both head and pubic hair. Infants do not have pubic hair. Epiphyseal lines are present on the bones of fetuses, infants, children, and early adolescents. Epiphyseal lines disappear after adolescence. There were no epiphyseal lines in the x-rays of the mummy. The skeletal structure further indicated an age of about 60 years. The nose is very large and Inca-like. No human infants from any ethnic background has a large Inca-like nose. The assumption that the mummy was an infant suffering from a rare disease was based on the clear indication that the top of the head had been crushed and flattened. This was assumed to show that the head was full of fluid instead of a brain and was squashed during birth. Why not simply a mechanism of death? Are adult humans immune from a crushed head? How about a tiny human between 14 and 16 inches tall? Why would an entire cave be devoted to one mummy, as the prospectors had claimed, it is was an infant that supposedly died during birth? Any assumption that the mummy was an infant is totally nonsense compared with the evidence as a whole that the mummy itself showed. Also, the skeletal structure was very different in regards to it's eye sockets and wrists. They were much larger, proportion wise, than compared to a human skeleton. This is good reason to suspect that the mummy may actually be a member of a race of little people for two reasons; A, human deformities are not known to have multiple deformities, such as dwarfism AND canine teeth AND enlarged eye sockets AND enlarged wrists; B, the enlarged eye sockets and wrists are indicative of adaptive features, which meant their was a lineage and therefore a whole race. ... I doubt very much that the mummy is sitting in an attic unknown to anyone. Grave robbing is still big business because there are plenty of millionaires who will buy priceless artifacts on the black-market. Someone made a lot of money selling that mummy to a private collector. No one gets any money leaving it in an attic.
|
|
On the Tube: Currently we are only able to give accurate times and dates for these programs in the United States. Check local listings in other locations.
|
|
LGM: Science over the Edge ArchivesLGM Archive 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003. Copyright Lee Krystek 2003. All Rights Reserved. |