First the link to this week’s complete list as HTML and as PDF.
If, as Couzin-Frankel seems to imply, feminists want to insist on untried pharmaceuticals with unknown risks and yet to be found side effects being tested on women, preferable pregnant, so be it, just don’t blame me for the outcomes. But feminists really ought to decide which it is to be: Are women so different, that trans-sex inferences are even less secure than trans-species ones, or are they so indistinguishably identical, that each and every slight difference in career choices has to be culturally imposed by suppressive male chauvinists? Picking and choosing as it comes has become totally ridiculous and you can’t expect to be taken seriously as long as you continue this way.
While on the one hand pre-Clovis Americans are confirmed ever more (Gibbons), the transatlantic Gravettien-hypothesis is dead as a dodo (Chatters et al.). So what is the correct answer?
Domestication of dogs (see also Shipman from last week’s list) is still a controversial subject with methodological pitfalls as elucidated by Boudadi-Maligne.
With Galeta et al. spending a whole article on stating the obvious (see list of 2013-11-15), sex determination of hand stencils in cave art can now finally be put to rest. Quite apart from that, Snow had never made any reasonable connection between hand stencils and the true artists in the first place.