I get it. I led you to water, and I can't make you drink. Pride and projection are a hell of a drug.
I gave you a link to a half dozen or more scholarly articles where scientists call the competing theories of human origin the "out of Africa theory" and the other the "multiple-origin theory."
It's a hard thing to accept the fact that you're wrong.
So, apart from you, who calls this hypothesis a theory?
Quote please.
Look, it is perfectly fine to admit being wrong. It is however pathetic to spend so much time on deflecting from the topic at hand.
Did you read the study? Can you explain why this study proposes to be a theory?
I get it. I led you to water, and I can't make you drink. Pride and projection are a hell of a drug.
I gave you a link to a half dozen or more scholarly articles where scientists call the competing theories of human origin the "out of Africa theory" and the other the "multiple-origin theory."
It's a hard thing to accept the fact that you're wrong.
Ok, last question:
Where do the authors call this hypothesis a theory?
Ok, last question (since they call it neither).
Why are the authors of this one study the arbiters of what is a "theory" and what is a "hypothesis"?
I've forced you to retreat to a tiny corner, but your tenacity is admirable.
so, not even the authors claim that it is a theory.
that leaves nobody but yourself.
pretty lonely, isn't it?