Twitter | Search | |
John Hawks
I'm a paleoanthropologist, exploring ancient sites and human genomes to uncover our origins. Follow along!
20,043
Tweets
263
Following
17,049
Followers
Tweets
John Hawks retweeted
AAPA 5h
For the first time ever, the AAPA will be live streaming one of our symposia THIS THURSDAY, March 28 from 8:00 am - 12:00 pm EDT. The symposium will be streamed at the link below!
Reply Retweet Like
John Hawks 8h
I am exhausted this morning looking at papers about fossil hominins that contain no pictures or images of fossil hominins. Writing about variation without picturing variation. The one I'm looking at now doesn't even present measurements of variation. Arggghh!
Reply Retweet Like
John Hawks retweeted
Dr Bendor Grosvenor 11h
Replying to @arthistorynews
Claiming copyright in photos of out-of-copyright paintings is how UK museums justify charging a fee every time you want to reproduce it. By removing the legal justification for that copyright, the new directive makes it almost impossible for museums to keep control of images.
Reply Retweet Like
John Hawks Mar 25
Replying to @Aus_RichAlex
The usual is to ignore entirely. "naledi" doesn't appear in the full text of the paper. I don't know what the answer is, obviously, but we cannot continue to assume that this is a modern-human-only continent, and the presence of other species is clearly relevant to dispersal!
Reply Retweet Like
John Hawks Mar 25
Replying to @dl8vko
Reply Retweet Like
John Hawks Mar 24
Replying to @TheLemurGuy
It takes detective work for a university to find the sources of things borrowed in the past, few do due diligence.
Reply Retweet Like
John Hawks Mar 24
Replying to @TomNorian
The art museum world actually has much of this stuff down in very helpful ways. But much comes from internalizing and adequately funding research in-house, and taking a piece-focused instead of question-focused approach.
Reply Retweet Like
John Hawks Mar 24
Replying to @johnhawks
Some might say, "Additional layers of oversight!" Please understand that some researchers START at the museum admin or even ministerial level to pave the way for permission to sample. Curators are sometimes effectively powerless.
Reply Retweet Like
John Hawks Mar 24
Replying to @yellow_bentines
Yeah, it's amazing there are still enough people in the referee pool to let this stuff go through on mtDNA alone.
Reply Retweet Like
John Hawks Mar 24
Who is going to tell these folks that a different species was living in southern Africa at the time they think modern humans started there? "A dispersal of Homo sapiens from southern to eastern Africa immediately preceded the out-of-Africa migration"
Reply Retweet Like
John Hawks Mar 24
Replying to @TomNorian
Sure, there is paperwork. But the kind of records that would be useful to later specialists often do not exist. What is the dose rate? What were the [null] results of analysis? The reagents used? Museums often can't even get back scans.
Reply Retweet Like
John Hawks Mar 24
Replying to @johnhawks
You'd think, well, then why do they keep giving samples to these people? Cut them off! But many of these are one-time transactions. That's the problem: Relatively few researchers build long-term relationships with institutions.
Reply Retweet Like
John Hawks Mar 24
A reader once asked me, "Don't museums have a book for each specimen where they keep track of what has been done to it?" The answer is, museums can't even get back reports from many scientists who destroy samples of material.
Reply Retweet Like
John Hawks Mar 24
“People sometimes go to museums, approach them, get the samples, and then disappear,” Cappellini says. “If the analysis is not as successful as suspected, people don’t even bother to write a basic report."
Reply Retweet Like
John Hawks Mar 24
"Testing the DNA in Museum Artifacts Can Unlock New Natural History, but Is it Worth the Potential Damage?"
Reply Retweet Like
John Hawks Mar 23
"We are not advocating a ban on P values, confidence intervals or other statistical measures — only that we should not treat them categorically. This includes dichotomization as statistically significant or not"
Reply Retweet Like
John Hawks Mar 22
Baking soda is mineral and its decaking agent is usually not organic. But baking powder is majority corn starch, and many people don't know the chemical difference. As silly as anti-GMO fears may be, I still think it's a reasonable choice to label in this way.
Reply Retweet Like
John Hawks retweeted
María MartinónTorres Mar 22
I will be there talking about fossils that "could be" Denisovans! Looking forward to it!
Reply Retweet Like
John Hawks retweeted
Kelsey Pugh Mar 22
Don’t ever forget that there are little creatures that look like this running around in South American forests
Reply Retweet Like
John Hawks Mar 22
"We failed to find evidence that humans have a delayed age at first reproduction relative to body mass or other covariates." Human life history in phylogenetic perspective.
Reply Retweet Like