'Hobbit' declared a new species

SLAM: debunk creationism, pseudoscience, and superstitions. Discuss logic and morality.

Moderator: Alyrium Denryle

Post Reply
User avatar
Rogue 9
Scrapping TIEs since 1997
Posts: 18670
Joined: 2003-11-12 01:10pm
Location: Classified
Contact:

'Hobbit' declared a new species

Post by Rogue 9 »

Frodo Sapiens?
Hobbit Declared a New Species as Debate Continues

Ker Than
LiveScience Staff Writer
LiveScience.com Mon Jan 29, 5:40 PM ET

New computerized casts of abnormally small Homo sapiens brains are reigniting the debate over the skeletal remains nicknamed "The Hobbit."

Ever since the 18,000-year-old remains of the three-foot-tall adult female hominid were unearthed in 2003 on the remote Indonesian island of Flores, scientists have argued whether the specimen was a human with an abnormally small head or represents a new species in the human family tree. The diminutive creature [image] had a brain approximately one-third the size of modern adult humans.

Some scientists named the specimen Homo floresiensis, a dwarfed offshoot of Homo erectus, a human ancestor that lived as far back as 1.8 million years ago.

Critics dismissed the remains as that of a human with a pathological condition called microcephalia, characterized by a small head, short stature and varying degrees of mental retardation.

A vote for "new species"

In the latest study, the evidence supports the claim of a new species. A team of scientists led by Dean Falk, a paleoneurologist at Florida State University, compared computer-generated three-dimensional reconstructions, called "endocasts," of brains from nine microcephalic modern humans with those of 10 normal modern-human brains [image].

"We asked, ‘Is there anything other than size of the brain that separates these two groups?'" Falk said.

According to the researchers, the answer is "yes." They found that two ratios, created using different skull measurements, could be used to accurately distinguish the normal humans from the microcephalics [image] nearly 100 percent of the time.

For example, dividing the distance from the front of the frontal lobe to the back of the occipital lobe of the brain by the front of the frontal lobe to the back of the cerebellum gives a ratio that reveals how much the cerebellum protrudes from the back of the brain.

"In microcephalics, the cerebellum tends to stick out farther back than in normal people," Falk told LiveScience. "We were able to quantify this with a ratio."

The other ratio quantified how wide the frontal lobes were for each skull and, according to the researchers, also could be used to distinguish normal humans from microcephalics.

Falk's team then applied this classification system to a virtual endocast of the skull of LB1. According to the researchers, LB1's features are closer to a normal human skull than to a microcephalic.

"We have answered the people who contend that the Hobbit is a microcephalic," Falk said.

As a control, the researchers also analyzed the skull of a human dwarf that, like LB1, also stood at about 3 feet tall. The technique correctly placed the dwarf skull in the same category as normal humans.

The team's findings are detailed in the Jan. 30 issue of the journal for the Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences.

Questions remain

While the new technique suggests LB1 was not a microcephalic, it does not rule out that it was not a Homo sapiens. As evidence of that, Falk points to what she says are several advanced features of LB1's brain that are unlike those of modern humans or any other known hominid species.

"What we have is a little tiny brain that has four features that you can see with your eyes that are advanced and distributed from front to middle to back," Falk said. "In other words, this thing appears to be globally rewired. Those are really advanced features. They're not like humans, they're not like anything."

Robert Martin, curator of Biological Anthropology at the Field Museum in Chicago, is not convinced by the new evidence.

One of his major criticisms has to do with the sample of microcephalic skulls the team used.

"They're being a bit naughty about this," Martin said in a telephone interview. "Four of the nine microcephalics were not adults."

Falk's team maintains their inclusion of young skulls is justified because microcephalics are generally believed to achieve maximum cranial capacity by around four years of age.

Martin, who criticized a similar comparison done by Falk's team in 2005 as flawed, again disagrees.

"What we're saying is LB1 was definitely an adult. If LB1 was a microcephalic, he was one with a mild condition who managed to survive into adulthood," he said. "So the proper comparison is with microcephalics with a mild condition who were adults."

"I don't have any problems with having new hominid species," Martin added. "I just don't think this is one of them."

Another expert in the field, Bernard Wood of George Washington University, spoke in favor of Falk's research.

"Dean Falk and her colleagues have injected some much needed scientific rigor into the debate about the brain of Homo floresiensis," Wood said. "The show that the microencephaly 'explanation' for its size and morphology is untenable. I hope we can now get down to the important task of trying to understand the biology of H. floresiensis without the distraction of non-existent pathology."
It's Rogue, not Rouge!

HAB | KotL | VRWC/ELC/CDA | TRotR | The Anti-Confederate | Sluggite | Gamer | Blogger | Staff Reporter | Student | Musician
User avatar
Bounty
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 10767
Joined: 2005-01-20 08:33am
Location: Belgium

Post by Bounty »

Well, this certainly puts the whole "humanity is special" idea into perspective, doesn't it? Another human species existing at the same time as Sapiens...
User avatar
Covenant
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4451
Joined: 2006-04-11 07:43am

Post by Covenant »

Bounty wrote:Well, this certainly puts the whole "humanity is special" idea into perspective, doesn't it? Another human species existing at the same time as Sapiens...
Well, besides things like Neanderthals? Those were Homo Sapiens that ran into them. And a few others... but I cannot recall offhand. I think it's interesting to keep adding neighbors in, and build up this idea that at any point until recently we really were bumping elbows on all sides with a variety of other species of human.
User avatar
Big Orange
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7105
Joined: 2006-04-22 05:15pm
Location: Britain

Post by Big Orange »

Covenant wrote: I think it's interesting to keep adding neighbors in, and build up this idea that at any point until recently we really were bumping elbows on all sides with a variety of other species of human.
Not human, more humanoid (if they're not exactly human by our exact definition).
User avatar
Rye
To Mega Therion
Posts: 12493
Joined: 2003-03-08 07:48am
Location: Uighur, please!

Post by Rye »

Big Orange wrote:
Covenant wrote: I think it's interesting to keep adding neighbors in, and build up this idea that at any point until recently we really were bumping elbows on all sides with a variety of other species of human.
Not human, more humanoid (if they're not exactly human by our exact definition).
They were human just like lions are cats.
EBC|Fucking Metal|Artist|Androgynous Sexfiend|Gozer Kvltist|
Listen to my music! http://www.soundclick.com/nihilanth
"America is, now, the most powerful and economically prosperous nation in the country." - Master of Ossus
User avatar
The Vortex Empire
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 1586
Joined: 2006-12-11 09:44pm
Location: Rhode Island

Post by The Vortex Empire »

I remember seeing a documentary on the Discovery Channel about these a while back, but it said that they were Homo Sapiens with a disease that caused them to be smaller than usual. Not Dwarfism, but I forget the exact name.
User avatar
The Vortex Empire
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 1586
Joined: 2006-12-11 09:44pm
Location: Rhode Island

Post by The Vortex Empire »

Wait, I skimmed through the article earlier, the documentery I saw said that most scientists were in agreement that it was microcephalic people.
User avatar
Surlethe
HATES GRADING
Posts: 12267
Joined: 2004-12-29 03:41pm

Post by Surlethe »

The Vortex Empire wrote:I remember seeing a documentary on the Discovery Channel about these a while back, but it said that they were Homo Sapiens with a disease that caused them to be smaller than usual. Not Dwarfism, but I forget the exact name.
The disease is called "microcephaly". If you'd read the article, you'd realize that the study the article's about cast doubt on the microcephalic explanation.
A Government founded upon justice, and recognizing the equal rights of all men; claiming higher authority for existence, or sanction for its laws, that nature, reason, and the regularly ascertained will of the people; steadily refusing to put its sword and purse in the service of any religious creed or family is a standing offense to most of the Governments of the world, and to some narrow and bigoted people among ourselves.
F. Douglass
User avatar
RedImperator
Roosevelt Republican
Posts: 16465
Joined: 2002-07-11 07:59pm
Location: Delaware
Contact:

Post by RedImperator »

Big Orange wrote:
Covenant wrote: I think it's interesting to keep adding neighbors in, and build up this idea that at any point until recently we really were bumping elbows on all sides with a variety of other species of human.
Not human, more humanoid (if they're not exactly human by our exact definition).
And what, precisely, is our exact definition of "human"?
Image
Any city gets what it admires, will pay for, and, ultimately, deserves…We want and deserve tin-can architecture in a tinhorn culture. And we will probably be judged not by the monuments we build but by those we have destroyed.--Ada Louise Huxtable, "Farewell to Penn Station", New York Times editorial, 30 October 1963
X-Ray Blues
User avatar
ArmorPierce
Rabid Monkey
Posts: 5904
Joined: 2002-07-04 09:54pm
Location: Born and raised in Brooklyn, unfornately presently in Jersey

Post by ArmorPierce »

The Vortex Empire wrote:I remember seeing a documentary on the Discovery Channel about these a while back, but it said that they were Homo Sapiens with a disease that caused them to be smaller than usual. Not Dwarfism, but I forget the exact name.
I recall what you are talking about but you are wrong. At the end of the documentary it was agreed that the evidence supported it not being microphalism since as I recall the found other skeletons.
Brotherhood of the Monkey @( !.! )@
To give anything less than your best is to sacrifice the gift. ~Steve Prefontaine
Aoccdrnig to rscheearch at an Elingsh uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is taht frist and lsat ltteer are in the rghit pclae. The rset can be a toatl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit a porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae we do not raed ervey lteter by it slef but the wrod as a wlohe.
User avatar
ArmorPierce
Rabid Monkey
Posts: 5904
Joined: 2002-07-04 09:54pm
Location: Born and raised in Brooklyn, unfornately presently in Jersey

Post by ArmorPierce »

Big Orange wrote:Not human, more humanoid (if they're not exactly human by our exact definition).
Considering that Homo erectus, the believed ancestor of these hobbits is a human species, it is fair to say that they are in fact human.
Brotherhood of the Monkey @( !.! )@
To give anything less than your best is to sacrifice the gift. ~Steve Prefontaine
Aoccdrnig to rscheearch at an Elingsh uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is taht frist and lsat ltteer are in the rghit pclae. The rset can be a toatl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit a porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae we do not raed ervey lteter by it slef but the wrod as a wlohe.
Post Reply