Let me give you a taste of my concerns.
I'm a Khunian (Thomas Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions)in reference to Theories of Evolution, and have long felt that the theory of Evolution was overdue for reformulation. Simple statistical models for behavioral (organisms), environmental (plants), and genetic (dna) evolution are too simple, and don't predict changes very well. Of special interest are transformations that change the identity of organisms vs. those that maintain an underlying identity while appearing to transform. Once a human child is born, growth transforms while visibly preserving identity. A caterpillar, on the other hand, transforms into a butterfly, with underlying identity disguised. A reformed theory of evolution would do a much better job of describing transformational processes of all types.
This is an underlying issue when one wishes to discern a human transformational history. What is the transformational history that generates a modern human from a hominin? One of the reasons that we can't easily answer that is that we haven't articulated the process clearly enough in terms of an underlying theory. As evidence accumulates, making the ancestry more and more diverse, we really don't have any independent model to measure the transformations against.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 19-Jun-17 18:22 by drrayeye.