The latest on the Hobbit

[Frank Harrist]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4994054.stm

Actually more of the same that others have said.

[Minimalist]

I just love scholarly pissing contests!

[FreeThinker]

Here is some more detailed info along the same lines. With some good pictures. Too cool, them hobbits is.

http://johnhawks.net/weblog/fossils/flo ... _2006.html

[Guest]

i read the article and feel it is closer to the truth than the original thesis pur forth about their evolutionary origins.

it is amazing to see how scientists who believe in evolution cannot agree with each other. sounds like they will never find the truth.

[Frank Harrist]

i read the article and feel it is closer to the truth than the original thesis pur forth about their evolutionary origins.

it is amazing to see how scientists who believe in evolution cannot agree with each other. sounds like they will never find the truth.

How many "christian" religions are there? Seems to work both ways, arch.

[Minimalist]

it is amazing to see how scientists who believe in evolution cannot agree with each other

The difference is that unlike bible-thumpers, scientist keep looking for the truth instead of falling back on superstition and magic!

[Guest]

[quote]How many "christian" religions are there? Seems to work both ways, arch.[/quot

i won't argue that point

[FreeThinker]

Here is some more info on the ongoing debate between the new hominid species camp and the diseased modern human camp. My money is still on the new species camp. Also, seems as if a book about the Flores remains is coming out soon. I look forwards to that very much. Anyways, here are the links:

http://www.cryptomundo.com/cryptozoo-ne ... ndsdebunk/

http://www.cryptomundo.com/cryptozoo-news/hobbitsbookx/

[Beagle]

[/quote]Indonesian government has placed a moratorium on further archaeological digs on Flores, the debate will continue with the materials in hand, from the nine Homo floresiensis individuals found thusfar. And even those fossils have already been mishandled by one proponent of the microcephaly theory. Teuku Jacob of the Gadjah Mada University in Yogyakarta, Java, not only allegedly destroyed some of the bone specimens, but he even glued one fractured bone together to mask the damage. Jacob reportedly also washed and dissolved the LB1 skull in acetone to make it impossible to extract any DNA for analysis, David Perlman, San Franscisro Chronicle Science Editor, discovered last year.

It is obvious this debate is deadly serious. As Peter Brown said: “Some people see exactly what they want to see.”


From Free Thinkers link.

Man, somebody needs to be thrown OUT of archaeology.

[Guest]

And yet another twist- http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/5021214.stm

[Frank Harrist]

And yet another twist- http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/5021214.stm

All moot if it was a microcephalic skull. They only found the one skull that was so small. They found bones from several individuals, but only the one skull. Correct me if I'm wrong, please.

[FreeThinker]

Frank Harrist wrote:

All moot if it was a microcephalic skull. They only found the one skull that was so small. They found bones from several individuals, but only the one skull. Correct me if I'm wrong, please.

You are not wrong Frank, so far only one cranium was found. Remains from nine individuals have been found covering a span of time dating many thousands of years. All the additional remains are fragmentary. Another jaw was found, however, and it too was very small and exhibited the same unusual charateristics as the jaw from the first remains published, the one with the nearly complete skull (LB1).

As you know the recent spate of media reports swirling areond the Flores remains have been fueled by a paper published in Science by Bob Martin and associates ("The Brain of LB1, Homo floresiensis") arguing that the Flores specimens were examples of microcephalic morphology. This was answered by Dean Falk and colleagues in an argument ("Response to Comment on "The Brain of LB1, Homo floresiensis"") also published in Science. To read both articles in full here is a link:

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/a ... /5776/999b

On a more general note one definative website on the Flores remains is this one put out by the team that did the dig itself. Some good pictures of the tools (for you RK) and links etc. I really recommend viewing the video (directly under the words MORE INFORMATION) as it gives a pretty good overview of the current status of the digs and research going on, as well as some of the problems. The link is:

http://www.uow.edu.au/science/eesc/geoq ... index.html#

Finally, another great hobbit resource is the Flores section of the John Hawks Anthropology Weblog. News is actively updated here as it comes out and examined in depth. A great site, the link here is:

http://johnhawks.net/weblog/fossils/flores/

BTW, my money is still firmly in the "New Human Species" camp. Great stuff, too cool! Enjoy!

[Guest]

Cheers. Lots of interesting stuff there.

[Minimalist]

Back in the news:

http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science/co ... OE=TECISVA

But "it's attribution to a new species, Homo floresiensis, is supported," they conclude, even if we don't quite know what they are.