Categories
- Art (356)
- Other (3,632)
- Philosophy (2,814)
- Psychology (4,018)
- Society (1,010)
Recent Questions
- Why did everyone start to hate the Russians if the U.S. did the same thing in Afghanistan, Iraq?
- What needs to be corrected in the management of Russia first?
- Why did Blaise Pascal become a religious man at the end of his life?
- How do I know if a guy likes you?
- When they say "one generation", how many do they mean?
And you can counter the question: why did you not like the criticism of anthropogenesis? It is quite scientific and sane, and it is quite enough. All with quotes and links, all verifiable. A very good example of scientific reasoning.
Savelyev is one of the authors “well-known in narrow circles”. Therefore, I doubt that there is a more complete analysis of his scientific research on the web. I do not recommend contacting suspicious and little-known sources for the authorship of amateurs – it is unlikely that the information presented there was checked by competent specialists (the abundance of references to literary sources does not guarantee that they were actually used when writing the text).
Unfortunately, for example, I have never met anything more harsh in terms of criticism.
Sergey Savelyev is basically a real scientist and an authority in his field, and his field is mostly limited to anatomy, morphology (of the nervous system and not only).
His view of evolution, both the microevolution of our species or genus “humans” and macroevolution (I'm talking about his concept of brain development in evolution, including the formation of the blood-brain barrier) is largely or completely wrong.