Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Scientists Hope To Settle "Hobbit" Debate

Posted by kdawson on Mon Jan 29, 2007 11:45 PM
from the little-men dept.
Lord of the Rings Media Movies Science
Several readers wrote in with news of the debate around the identity of an ancient woman whose diminutive skeleton was found on the Indonesian island of Flores in 2004. Fox News reports that Australian scientists have discovered a subterranean chamber that may contain DNA proof that will settle the question of whether "the Hobbit," as the specimen is called, actually is a representative of a new branch of the human family, or not. The find's discoverers named the putative new race Homo floresiensis. Others in the anthropological field question this identification, arguing that the meter-tall Hobbit was a modern human who had something wrong with her. In a paper just published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, with one of the original discovery team as co-author, researchers say they have compared the Hobbit's skull to those of modern humans with various ailments such as microcephaly, and that the Hobbit is different.
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] More Evidence For Hobbit Sized Species 327 comments
GogglesPisano writes "CNN.com reports that scientists digging in a remote Indonesian cave have uncovered a jaw bone that they say adds more evidence that a tiny prehistoric Hobbit-like species once existed." From the article: "The discovery of a jaw bone, to be reported in Thursday's issue of the journal Nature, represents the ninth individual belonging to a group believed to have lived as recently as 12,000 years ago. The bones are in a wet cave on the island of Flores in the eastern limb of the Indonesian archipelago, near Australia."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Scientists Hope To Settle "Hobbit" Debate 50 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.

  • Trolls too... (Score:5, Funny)

    by racecarj (703239) on Monday January 29 2007, @11:51PM (#17809912)
    Another one of Tolkien's races has been discovered: Trolls, it seems, are native to the slashdot community.

  • Great but... (Score:4, Funny)

    by Frogbert (589961) <frogbert.gmail@com> on Monday January 29 2007, @11:53PM (#17809926)
    Now they will have to find what came between Homo Sapian and Homo Floresiensis. /ducks for cover.

  • hmmm (Score:5, Funny)

    by macadamia_harold (947445) on Monday January 29 2007, @11:59PM (#17809976) Homepage
    Others in the anthropological field question this identification, arguing that the meter-tall Hobbit was a modern human who had something wrong with her.

    Maybe she just hobbitually ate a poor diet.

  • Me being cynical (Score:4, Insightful)

    by UbuntuDupe (970646) * on Tuesday January 30 2007, @12:03AM (#17810012) Journal
    Others in the anthropological field question this identification, arguing that the meter-tall Hobbit was a modern human who had something wrong with her.

    Right -- they're the ones that don't get the publicity or funding. Come on, how boring is that -- that the meter-tall body was just an abnormal human? Wouldn't it be so much *cooler* if there were a whole race of these!

    • Re:Me being cynical (Score:4, Funny)

      by LordLucless (582312) on Tuesday January 30 2007, @01:28AM (#17810488)
      Come on, how boring is that -- that the meter-tall body was just an abnormal human? Wouldn't it be so much *cooler* if there were a whole race of these!

      Yeah, unfortunately science is decided based on empirical observation, not whose theory is cooler.

    • Re:Me being cynical (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday January 30 2007, @02:24AM (#17810804)
      Y'know, instead of snarking you might actually considering reading the articles, including the paper detailing the "hobbits". There are some very, very good reasons to think that this is a new form of human. For one, there are multiple specimens - not just one. For another, as detailed in the summary, the structures don't mimic other forms of dwarfism in modern humans. Island dwarfism has been observed in many different species - there really isn't any reason to think humans should be exempt from this.

      Most notably, a few of those arguing against it have tended to do so for religious, and not scientific reasons, which is always a huge warning sign that their opinions should be treated with caution.

      Skepticism is a good trait to have - but when you are irrationally skeptical to the available evidence, to the point of closemindedness than you are no better than somebody who is overly gullible.

      For a relatively balanced opinion on the debate surrounding LB1, you could go to wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homo_floresiensis). Perhaps after reading that, you could reserve the snark and unwarranted insult of the investigating scientists, and actually learn a little about how science is conducted.

  • Teh Effin Summary (Score:4, Informative)

    by $RANDOMLUSER (804576) on Tuesday January 30 2007, @12:03AM (#17810014)
    For whatever reason, the summary links to page two of the article. Page one is here [reuters.com]

  • Get with the answers already! (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Rodyland (947093) on Tuesday January 30 2007, @12:16AM (#17810082)
    I don't know about anyone else, but I've been waiting since the discovery was first announced for a definitive answer on this matter.

    If this represents a new species of human, and given how recently this species is shown to have lived, then whole textbooks on the subject will likely need rewriting. I find it quite exciting, and I'm not even an anthropologist.

    As an aside, I'm also quite interested to see what the bible-thumpers eventually come to make of all of this.

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by and ladders (986311)
      "As an aside, I'm also quite interested to see what the bible-thumpers eventually come to make of all of this." Bible thumpers will make of it what they make of every instance of evolution: God's hand at work. A 3 foot (or whatever it is) tall homonid isn't going to change their minds, given that there are many examples of evolution right in front of their eyes that they refuse to accept.
      • Bible thumpers will make of it what they make of every instance of evolution: God's hand at work.

        More like God's foot, Monty Python-style.

      • Re: Get with the answers already! (Score:4, Interesting)

        by Black Parrot (19622) on Tuesday January 30 2007, @01:11AM (#17810428)
        > "As an aside, I'm also quite interested to see what the bible-thumpers eventually come to make of all of this." Bible thumpers will make of it what they make of every instance of evolution: God's hand at work. A 3 foot (or whatever it is) tall homonid isn't going to change their minds, given that there are many examples of evolution right in front of their eyes that they refuse to accept.

        Actually, lots of them already dismiss Neanderthals and older species as humans with arthritus. Some make the blanket claim that the whole lineage represents just two species, cleanly divided into humans and apes.

        I was amused to hear an anthropologist offer the same argument against this specimen...

              • Punctuated Equilibrium (Score:5, Informative)

                by Kozar_The_Malignant (738483) on Tuesday January 30 2007, @11:04AM (#17814532)
                It sounds like you are talking about punctuated equilibrium or punctuated equilibria. The theory was developed by Niles Eldredge and Stephen Jay Gould. You wrote that:

                >"The idea is that basically, instead of species evolving slowly over time into new species, speciation can occur rapidly (on a geological time scale) and then the new species will remain relatively stable until the next quick burst of change."

                That is a good summary. Your other comments are rather off the mark, particularly the idea that there is no advantage to a "half-fin half-leg" and so on. Given that you don't have a background in biology, that's understandable. A good explaination of the theory is here [talkorigins.org] at the talk.origins newsgroup site. A less techinical one is here [wikipedia.org] at the Wikipedia site.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Hucko (998827)
        You do know that 'argument' can be slightly modified and the only true difference would be a few nouns and academic acceptance.

        I have heard it used so it is not that remote an idea...

        Evolutionists will make of it what they make of every instance of God's Hand at work: Evolution. A suddenly appearing, fully developed oganism isn't going to change their minds, given that there are many examples of God's Hand at work right in front of their eyes that they refuse to accept

        FTA "But the other strong possibility is that this is actually just a pathological modern human," Martin added."
        Shall we wait for further study?

      • There is line in the bible that says something like "There were midgets in the earth in those days" I am sure of it.

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by sorak (246725)

        "As an aside, I'm also quite interested to see what the bible-thumpers eventually come to make of all of this." Bible thumpers will make of it what they make of every instance of evolution: God's hand at work. A 3 foot (or whatever it is) tall homonid isn't going to change their minds, given that there are many examples of evolution right in front of their eyes that they refuse to accept.

        Well, one of the more the mainstream evangelical views (among people not yelling at each other on news networks) is tha

    • > I don't know about anyone else, but I've been waiting since the discovery was first announced for a definitive answer on this matter.

      Unless one side has just been sandbagging -- i.e., if there's actually good reason for the uncertainty -- it's doubtful that a single publication will provide a definitive answer.

    • Re:Get with the answers already! (Score:5, Informative)

      by edwardpickman (965122) on Tuesday January 30 2007, @02:02AM (#17810686)
      There really isn't much debate about it. There's dogma about only Homo Sapeins surviving past the Neaderthal extinction then the facts on the other side. The skull looks exactly like a Homo Erectus including the brain case. There are no Homo Sapein skulls no matter how diseased that match it. The brain case scans were the smoking gun. The only thing different from Homo Erectus is the size. She's well below the size range for an adult Erectus so there was a form of downsizing involved since it's unlikely she's an off shoot she's most likely a decendant of Homo Erectus. The fact all the other bones in the cave were of the same size and represent several indiviuals should put to rest it was a disease. I tend to doubt they had a leper colony for individuals with that disease. Her brain size is also proportionally small for an Erectus but the structures are all correct just smaller. It's probably a result of a poor diet that lead to the downsizing. There's resistence to changing the history of hominids but outside of dogma the test thus far have left little doubt the skeleton is not Homo Sapein and most likely a downsized Erectus.
      • Please stop posting. You are clouding a good, emotional debate with facts. Mind you, this is /. and we have no interest in facts, just emotional responses to TFA.
      • Then there is the strange behaviour of one Dr Jacob who commendered the bones on behalf of the Indonesian state, cut off access to them by other scientists (including the discoverers), published his own ideas, and refused to allow digging to continue.

        I understand the Indonesians want control over their own heritige and they are certainly entitled to it, but if it were not for this one man's apparent desire to dictate the conclusion we would have more data and less dogma.

        "The fact all the other bones i
  • Paul Verhoeven

    Kevin Smith

    George Lucas

    Allan Parker

    Steven Spielberg

    Ridley Scott

    Beorn(who?)

    or CowboyNeal?

  • Is it just me (Score:3, Interesting)

    by and ladders (986311) on Tuesday January 30 2007, @12:55AM (#17810328)
    or does anyone else find it striking that Foxnews.com has an "Evolution and Paleontology Center" (http://www.foxnews.com/science/evolution/). Certainly, W doesn't approve of this.
    • I knew it was Fox when they talked about "obtaining a CSI-style DNA profile of the three-foot-tall creatures..."

  • Hmm... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by SinGunner (911891) on Tuesday January 30 2007, @01:57AM (#17810652)
    Wouldn't it be interesting if we hadn't likely killed off all these competitors in prehistory and some were left around. What kind of rights would neanderthals get? Surely they wouldn't be treated like animals. And if they were still around, I think religion would be a very different thing.

    • Re:Hmm... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by MichaelSmith (789609) on Tuesday January 30 2007, @03:32AM (#17811114) Homepage Journal

      In relating to another species or race humans will do one of the following:

      1. Eradicate
      2. Domesticate/enslave

      Given that white people like me only started taking black people seriously about 50 years ago I can only assume that the neanderthals would be considered a sub-human slave species like cattle, dogs, etc.

      Perhaps we wiped them out because they were too smart to be enslaved with the technology of the time.

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by steelfood (895457)
        Eradication is a natural consequence of resource competition. The difference between other animals and humans/humanoids is that we are genetically coded to have a high ability to adapt. While most animals adapt on a timescale spanning multiple generations, we adapt to the changing environment within our lifetimes. Thus, we were able to out-adapt our competition, using up the resources they also need and thus eradicating them.

        Subjugation was what created society in the first place. Domestication of plants is

  • National Geographic settled this last year... (Score:4, Informative)

    by Mikenotmike (956042) on Tuesday January 30 2007, @02:07AM (#17810720)
    National Geographic had a whole hour long special on this subject that I watched about 4 or 5 months ago. As the article below states, there was MORE than one set of bones found, while the girl mentioned in today's articles was the only COMPLETE skeleton, there was several other partial bone sets recovered that were equally comparable in size. Also in the documentary they rebuilt the skull and sent it to several specialists, who confirmed that it was in fact not a case of microcephallis. So todays articles seem like old news, AND they're confusing everyone by not mentioning the other bone sets recovered on site. What I haven't seen anyone address is whether they could have been premordial dwarfs... but considering how few of those there are in the world, the likelyhood of several being found in the save small island seems rare, but not unpossible. ~Mentions multiple skeletons... http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/10/10 27_041027_homo_floresiensis.html [nationalgeographic.com] and the video description http://www3.nationalgeographic.com/channel/blog/20 05/03/explorer_hobbit.html [nationalgeographic.com]

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by Nurseferatu (946800)
      Actually one form of dwarfism is the result of a genetic mutation and can be inherited. This would make a family of small people a possibility, possibly shunned by the larger group and left on their own. But this would be pretty easy to distinguish due to the distinctive formation of bones that occurs as these children grow.

  • ...Australian scientists have discovered a subterranean chamber...

    Did it have a perfectly round door like a porthole, painted green, with a shiny brass knob in the exact middle?

  • New Species (Score:3, Informative)

    by Aneurysm (680045) on Tuesday January 30 2007, @03:40AM (#17811144)
    According to this [bbc.co.uk] news article from the BBC, it does appear to be a new species. This was posted yesterday and the study compares modern microencephalics skulls with the skulls found on Flores.

  • "Subterranean chamber" (Score:4, Funny)

    by The Fun Guy (21791) on Tuesday January 30 2007, @08:01AM (#17812354) Homepage Journal
    Ok, they knew as soon as they saw this subterranean chamber that it was a hobbit hole, because it wasn't a nasty, dirty, wet hole, filled with the ends of worms and an oozy smell, nor yet a dry, bare, sandy hole with nothing in it to sit down on or to eat.

    QED.
    • it's labeled as science if you can't tell from the title on the frontpage. i think the icons can be independently selected. thats how articles about MS/Linux/etc. can have their respective icons. and besides... HOBBITS!!!!

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by and ladders (986311)
      My question is why the hell is their an Einstein icon. He was a physicist for *@!$'s sake.

      Can't we get an icon of Dawkins? Or are we to assume that physics and biology are one in the same?

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.