"In scientific reasoning, a hypothesis is an assumption made before any research has been completed for the sake of testing. A theory on the other hand is a principle set to explain phenomena already supported by data. Theories will pull together experimental results to provide full explanations such as "The Big Bang Theory.""
So, it is a hypothesis. Note that the article OP posted even calls it that.
You have demonstrated that you are able to quote an online dictionary.
Are you able to show that this hypothesis is a theory, contradicting literally every scientists who agrees that it is a hypothesis? Contradicting the authors of the study?
If this status is confirmed by additional fossil evidence, Graecopithecus would be the oldest known hominin and the oldest known crown hominine, as the evidence for the gorillin status of Chororapithecus is much weaker than the hominin status of Graecopithecus [8]. More fossils are needed but at this point it seems likely that the Eastern Mediterranean needs to be considered as just as likely a place of hominine diversification and hominin origins as tropical Africa.
Now how the fuck is this a theory when the study itself acknowledges that more supporting evidence is required?
Educate yourself for fuck's sake. Do your own research.
"New"
That hypothesis has been around for a few years and so far it is just that - a hypothesis.
Wrong, it's a theory, not a hypothesis. The same as the out of Africa theory. A hypothesis is a falsifiable, and ideally testable, proposition.
Get your terminology correct.
You have no fucking idea what you are talking about.
no, it is a hypothesis. learn the difference. words have meaning.
Yes, words have meaning, words you're using wrongly.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/words-at-play/difference-between-hypothesis-and-theory-usage
"In scientific reasoning, a hypothesis is an assumption made before any research has been completed for the sake of testing. A theory on the other hand is a principle set to explain phenomena already supported by data. Theories will pull together experimental results to provide full explanations such as "The Big Bang Theory.""
Exactly.
So, it is a hypothesis. Note that the article OP posted even calls it that.
You have demonstrated that you are able to quote an online dictionary.
Are you able to show that this hypothesis is a theory, contradicting literally every scientists who agrees that it is a hypothesis? Contradicting the authors of the study?
Here is the actual study.
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0177127
This is the end paragraph:
Now how the fuck is this a theory when the study itself acknowledges that more supporting evidence is required?
Educate yourself for fuck's sake. Do your own research.
Its correct though.