I don't see how that makes the study itself controversial. He was simply answering an unseen, possibly leading question from the person writing this story.
I don't see how that makes the study itself controversial. He was simply answering an unseen, possibly leading question from the person writing this story.
The author clearly misunderstands the statement she directly quotes. It's grotesque.
Here's a SMBC Comic that illustrates the conversation that will follow with that scientist: https://smbc-comics.com/comic/2009-08-30
> “[T]he extreme social brain hypothesis doesn’t claim other primates don’t form hierarchically increasing groupings,” Hill wrote in an email to Science. “It focuses on the size of the largest human groupings.” Humans recognize and remember details about more than 1000 individuals, he notes, whereas the “highest level groups in the gorillas are not even as big as large chimp communities.”