Sensational Science, Archaic Hominin Genetics, and Amplified Inductive Risk by Joyce C. Havstad, Associate Professor, Clinical and Translational Science Institute / Department of Philosophy / Office of Research Integrity and Compliance, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah;
[email protected]; ORCID iD 0000-0003-1923-7860 Abstract. More than a decade of exacting scientific research involving paleontological fragments and ancient DNA has lately produced a series of pronouncements about a purportedly novel population of archaic hominins dubbed “the Denisova.” The science involved in these matters is both technically stunning and, socially, at times a bit reckless. Here I discuss the responsibilities which scientists incur when they make inductively risky pronouncements about the different relative contributions by Denisovans to genomes of members of apparent sub-populations of current humans (i.e., the so-called “races”). This science is sensational: it is science which empirically speculates, to the public delight’s and entertainment, about scintillating topics such as when humans evolved, where we came from, and who else we were having sex with during our early hominin history. An initial characterization of sensational science emerges from my discussion of the case, as well as diagnosis of an interactive phenomenon termed “amplified inductive risk.” Keywords: ancient DNA; ethics; genetics; human evolutionary history; inductive risk; paleoanthropology; paleontology. 1. Introduction Much science is staid, but some is sensational. By science that is “sensational,” I mean science that is fascinating not just to scientists themselves, but also to the wider public— and fascinating in a somewhat titillating way. Budding field ecologists might be entranced by the possibility of parasitic nematodes forming the lowest tier of a tripartite terrestrial trophic cascade that works its way up through root-dwelling ghost moth caterpillars to control of coastal lupine populations (e.g., Preisser 2003).