Independent researchers who have seen the tools are generally supportive of Harmand's conclusions.[5][6] George Washington University anthropologist Alison Brooks said the tools "could not have been created by natural forces ... the dating evidence is fairly solid."[3] Rick Potts, head of the Human Origins Program at the Smithsonian Institution, said the tools represented a more primitive style than known human-made tools, but something more sophisticated than what modern chimpanzees do. "There's no doubt it's purposeful" toolmaking, he remarked.[5] Paleoanthropologist Zeresenay Alemseged, who was responsible for the earlier research suggesting Australopithecus had made tools, also backed Harmand's conclusions.[2]