Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Modern human remains found in Flores man cave


From Ewen Callaway at Nature:

A pair of 46,000-year-old human teeth has been discovered in Liang Bua, a cave on the Indonesian island of Flores that was once home to the 1-metre-tall ‘hobbit’ species Homo floresiensis. The teeth are slightly younger than the known hobbit remains, which strengthens the case that humans were responsible for the species’ demise.More.

One would not wish to be a crown prosecutor arguing a case on so slender a basis.

But so often, it is all they have really got.

See also: The Little Lady of Flores spoke from the grave. But said what, exactly?

Follow UD News at Twitter!

As to "Flores Man"
'Hobbit' Was an Iodine-Deficient Human, Not Another Species, - September 2010 Excerpt: The University of Western Australia's Emeritus Professor Charles Oxnard and his colleagues, in a paper in PLoS ONE have reconfirmed, on the post-cranial skeleton, their original finding on the skull that Homo floresiensis in fact bears the hallmarks of humans -- Homo sapiens -- affected by hypothyroid cretinism. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/09/100928025514.htm Hobbits Were Brain Diseased Modern Humans - August 2011 Excerpt: A new paper compared skulls of H. floresiensis with those of modern humans, Homo erectus, and humans with microcephaly. The result favors the interpretation that the Hobbits most likely were diseased modern humans. http://crev.info/content/110808-hobbits_were_brain_diseased_modern_humans Flores bones show features of Down syndrome, not a new 'hobbit' human - Aug 04, 2014 Excerpt: In October 2004, excavation of fragmentary skeletal remains from the island of Flores in Indonesia yielded what was called "the most important find in human evolution for 100 years." Its discoverers dubbed the find Homo floresiensis, a name suggesting a previously unknown species of human. Now detailed reanalysis by an international team of researchers including Robert B. Eckhardt, professor of developmental genetics and evolution at Penn State, Maciej Henneberg, professor of anatomy and pathology at the University of Adelaide, and Kenneth Hsü, a Chinese geologist and paleoclimatologist, suggests that the single specimen on which the new designation depends, known as LB1, does not represent a new species. Instead, it is the skeleton of a developmentally abnormal human and, according to the researchers, contains important features most consistent with a diagnosis of Down syndrome. http://phys.org/news/2014-08-flores-bones-features-syndrome-hobbit.html The Little Lady of Flores Spoke from the Grave. But Said What, Exactly? - Denyse O'Leary - June 23, 2014 Excerpt: By March 2008, the scene had changed again. New Scientist told us, "Researchers have uncovered bones that could drive another nail into the Homo floresiensis coffin." The magazine's nail-and-coffin metaphor is a signal: Doubt is now fashionable, not forbidden. Why? Apparently, diminutive humans had "overrun" a nearby island as recently as 1400 years ago -- "but despite their size these people clearly belonged to our species." http://www.evolutionnews.org/2014/06/the_little_lady087051.html What Questions About Evolution Come Down to Is, "Who ARE We?" - Denyse O'Leary - August 18, 2014 Excerpt: ,,, "Flores Man" is an example. Supposedly, a new diminutive species of humans (discovered in 2004) arose, flourished, and died out from earlier than 18,000 years ago,,, The latest article I'm aware of charges that "Homo floresiensis" is an invalid species classification, and the principal skeleton may have been of a woman who suffered from a genetic disorder, Down syndrome. It hardly sounds like settled science to an observer.,,, http://www.evolutionnews.org/2014/08/what_questions089051.html
I'm guessing it's someone from Gondor or maybe a Corsair of Umbar. ppolish
of related interest:
Neanderthals were stereotyped as savages for a century — all because of one French scientist - Sep 20, 2016 Excerpt: Ever since that scientific description was published in 1911, we humans have told the story of Neanderthals in a way that makes us look good: We were smarter, less savage, better equipped to inherit the Earth than the Neanderthal.,,, The dominant narrative about Neanderthals is based on the work of a French paleoanthropologist, Marcellin Boule. Boule is one of the premier paleoanthropologists at the beginning of the 20th century.,,, ,,, all the different characteristics he could have emphasized, he emphasized the primitive. His conclusion is that this Neanderthal is going to walk with a kind of hunched posture. He's going to have really divergent big toes, which is considered a more primitive characteristic. We look at it today and say, "Geez, that was really biased.",,, Later, in the middle to second half of the 20th century, scientists and anthropologists begin to go back and look at Boule's original material. They’re starting to reexamine Neanderthals and look at their culture and look at their sophisticated tool use.,,, We now say, "Oh, look, they have culture. They bury their dead. They can start fires. We're interbreeding. They're more human than we first thought." There was a great publication a couple of months ago that points out Neanderthals carried fire starters. That's fascinating, right? I think that what happens is we keep saying they're more like us. It's a very additive thing. We keep adding all these characteristics. They're not so different from us,,, http://www.vox.com/2016/9/20/12968814/neanderthals-savages-stereotype-boule

Leave a Reply