Discovery of ancient skull further proves that history is wrong!

The term "history" is such a nebulous term. As a historian, I know this better than 99.9% of the population who have not been trained in the art of historiography. To be blunt about it though, most people think of history as the story of our past. More specifically it has come to refer to the written history of our past as seen through the eyes of the historian who must take the available evidence and synthesize it into a cohesive story that fits with what we already know to be "true." The problem is that once we accept something as more or less true, we tend to reject an ideas that fly in the face of this so-called "history."

A recent story caught my attention and reminded me that history is basically, more or less, the fictional account created by historians based on their available evidence. Everything we actually believe about history is basically wrong though. A story released in The Independent in London reads "It has long been agreed that Africa was the sole cradle of human evolution. Then these bones were found in Georgia." Steve Connor, science editor for The Independent, has reported that the skull from an archeological site near the Georgian capital of Tbilisi seems to indicate that human civilization may have had more than one cradle. At the very least, the evidence suggests a long evolutionary interlude by ancient humans in Eurasia before returning to Africa just prior to the final migration out of Africa.

This is a great story because it shows clearly once again that even those breaking the news are unwilling to break with the old paradigm. Here we have evidence that humans may have been in different locations in the ancient past and that civilization may not have originated from one source, and yet, the story is reported as if there must be some connection between ancient humans in Africa and of those now found in Eurasia. Why can we not just accept the fact that perhaps these are completely unrelated? What if life were seeded by other beings in the universe long ago and in several places all over our planet? The reason the establishment cannot let go of their interpretive framework is because they have a vested interest in keeping the status quo, whether it be in the form of research funding, or whether it be disrupting to their belief systems. The insistence that this discovery must be connected to ancient African human life betrays the belief that there was a "man" (Adam) and a "woman" (Eve) who were the progenitors of the human race. What if there were many Adams and many Eves? Just a thought for now...more on this later...

Here is the link for the story reviewed above: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/a-skull-that-rewrites-the-history-of-man-1783861.html