Reply to Stojanowski et al, "Contesting the massacre at Nataruk".

Reply to Stojanowski et al, "Contesting the massacre at Nataruk".

In the accompanying Comment1, Stojanowski et al. challenge the evidence for inter-group conflict at Nataruk2. They make two arguments — first, that the lesions in three crania are due to soil compression; second, that there is a correlation between body position and age, reflecting different burial...

وصف كامل

التفاصيل البيبلوغرافية
المؤلفون الرئيسيون: Lahr, M, Rivera, F, Power, R, Mounier, A, Copsey, B, Crivellaro, F, Edung, J, Maillo Fernandez, J, Kiarie, C, Lawrence, J, Leakey, A, Mbua, E, Miller, H, Muigai, A, Mukhongo, D, Van Baelen, A, Wood, R, Schwenninger, J, Grün, R, Achyuthan, H, Wilshaw, A, Foley, R
التنسيق: Journal article
اللغة:English
منشور في: Nature Publishing Group 2016
الوصف
الملخص:In the accompanying Comment1, Stojanowski et al. challenge the evidence for inter-group conflict at Nataruk2. They make two arguments — first, that the lesions in three crania are due to soil compression; second, that there is a correlation between body position and age, reflecting different burial traditions. We believe that their interpretation is incorrect on both counts

مواد مشابهة