Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

WorldMag on homo Naledi claims


From World Magazine::

“With every bone in the body represented multiple times, it is already practically the best-known fossil member of our lineage,” said paleoanthropologist Lee Berger in a conference call with reporters. Berger, a University of Witwatersrand professor and National Geographic explorer-in-residence, led the effort to excavate and study the fossils.

But the discovery has already stirred up controversy among researchers, some of whom are unconvinced the fossils represent a new species of hominin—an evolutionary label that includes modern humans and their ancestors.

The definition of “species” is itself somewhat arbitrary. Christoph Zollikofer, an anthropologist at the University of Zurich, doesn’t believe the new fossils have enough “new and unique” features to justify calling them a new species.

“The fossil ensemble fits very well into what is already known as ‘early Homo erectus,’” he told me by email.

A bunch of people have differing opinions .

O’Leary for News’s private opinion: At least Naledi is real news. It sure beats that parallel universe running backwards in time. Or maybe the parallel universe was twisted sideways, and who would know?

See also: Homo Naledi not published in Nature


The Science Fictions series at your fingertips (human evolution)

Follow UD News at Twitter!

Hominid Hype and Homo naledi: A Unique "Species" of Unclear Evolutionary Importance Casey Luskin - September 20, 2015 Excerpt: Even Berger admits, "It doesn't look a lot like us." He also states: "There may be debate over the Homo designation" since "the species is quite different from anything else we have seen.",,, Schwartz himself wrote a scathing op-ed in Newsweek, "Why the Homo Naledi Discovery May Not Be Quite What it Seems." He argued that "Homo naledi" may in fact represent multiple species, and probably doesn't belong in Homo: http://www.evolutionnews.org/2015/09/hominid_hype_an099541.html bornagain77
quoted from http://www.worldmag.com/2015/09/scientists_dispute_new_species_discovery/page1 The scientists admit they don’t know the fossils’ age: The bones were not in a sediment layer that could be dated, and the researchers have not yet performed radiocarbon dating, which will damage the bones. Based on their interpretation of the evolutionary tree, they believe the fossils to be 2.5 million years old or more.
. Does the author of this story think "radiocarbon dating" can be used to date million-year-old bones?? . cantor
How hard can this be? What is the difference between humans and apes by way of bones? It must be head size and pelvic area, for women, as these are the present differences. Could this critter walk upright? Robert Byers
Lead scientist on Naledi discovery is on Nat Geo's payroll. Nat Geo has a Naledi Special TV program coming up btw. #1 most watched Nat Geo Special? http://tvbythenumbers.zap2it.com/2015/03/30/national-geographic-channels-killing-jesus-delivers-network-high-3-7-million-viewers/381863/ "Fair & Balanced" bit Nat Geo in the keester:) "But it was supposed to be a comedy show". Nope, Peter/Paul/John/James et al died for a Reason. ppolish

Leave a Reply