Hobbit Is A New Species 388
Migraineman writes "Over the last year or so, archaeologists in Indonesia unearthed skulls and bones from eight proto-humanoids. Critics have claimed the meter-tall specimens were either pygmies or "aberrant individuals with a pathological condition" like microcephaly. A recent article in Science[subscription] rebuffs the critics, and claims that the specimens are actually a new species - Homo floresiensis. There's a summary article over at Nature."
What? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:What? (Score:5, Funny)
No no no, Troll isn't a moderation, it's the name of what killed him. Like in the obituaries: Mr. Jones -64 (heart attack)
Missing link? (Score:2, Funny)
The whole idea of a missing link (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:The whole idea of a missing link (Score:5, Insightful)
So in that way of dealing with things, even when you find the 'missing link' (which has already occurred), people start asking you about the missing link between that 'missing link' and humans. You find the missing link between the 'missing link' and humans, and you'll be asked for a new missing link. By seeking the fossil record to be a continuum, only an infinite number of missing links will satisfactory as a 'missing link'.
Re:The whole idea of a missing link (Score:2)
Re:The whole idea of a missing link (Score:5, Funny)
Re:True Islam (Score:3, Insightful)
No, Christianity is not the same, in fact it's the opposite. The Christian Bible teaches love, tolerance, acceptance ("turn the other cheek", "Love your neighbor", etc..) but Christians, over the centurys have twisted their faith to do bad things. Men can do evil things, and sometimes misguidedly blame Christianity, but the true faith is one of love, peace and charity.
Re:The whole idea of a missing link (Score:3, Insightful)
First of all, a missing-link is an intermittent species which can breed with both of the bridged species. It's not a "strawman" and is hardly and invention of creationists. A species capable of breeding with both (1) humans and (2) some breed of ape would
Re:The whole idea of a missing link (Score:3, Informative)
The theory of punctated equilibria was invented by paleontologists. The "short periods of fast evolution" they refer to often span hundreds of thousands of years. This is "short" when you're a paleontologist, but is perfectly compatible with "smooth" neo-Darwinian evolution by genetic mutations and recombination - it's just occuring faster due to new environmental / ecolog
Re:The whole idea of a missing link (Score:2)
Not really. The implicit assumption you are making is that these hybrid species were equally abundant and survived as long as the better-known species. But evolutionary theory leads us to expect that evolutionary change often occurs in small populations that are not widely distributed. So unle
Re:The whole idea of a missing link (Score:2)
What is a species? (Score:3, Interesting)
Close but no cigar.
First off the notion of what a species is, that I have read here, is not quite right. It's not as simple as "things tha
Re:The whole idea of a missing link (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:The whole idea of a missing link (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:The whole idea of a missing link (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:The whole idea of a missing link (Score:2)
Re:The whole idea of a missing link (Score:2, Insightful)
I don't hold the ancient peoples of any place in the world at fault for their beliefs on this matter. They merely came up with the best explanations that they could based on the evidence they had. It's the idea of Biblical literalism, which
Re:The whole idea of a missing link (Score:3, Informative)
I didn't mean to insult ancient Hebrews, but rather to point out that such inaccuracies indicate that - if nothing else - the religious texts were written by men. Even if you beleive they were religiously inspired, there are inaccuracies present which demand that you not interpret those texts literally.
Re:The whole idea of a missing link (Score:3, Insightful)
Why? When I tell my 8 year old why the sky is blue, I don't go into quantum theory to explain why shorter wavelengths are scattered more than longer wavelengths of light.
The writings in Daniel were designed to show God's blessings upon Israel, not get sidetracked in a discussion on celestial mechanics. Medieval monks may have debates on irrelevancies like how many angels can dance on the head o
Re:The whole idea of a missing link (Score:5, Insightful)
And even if Stalin and Hitler were Darwinists, and even if Darwin was a serial killing child rapist, can you explain where the actual argument against evolution is? This is nothing more than a classic logical fallacy, the hope being that if you invoke big bad dudes that somehow a scientific theory will collapse. It's nothing more than dishonest debating tactic, and rather reflects upon any claim that you or the guys at Answers to Genesis are really very Christian at all.
Oh, and evolutionary theory != atheism. Evolution, like all sciences, has nothing to say on the existence of god(s).
Re:The whole idea of a missing link (Score:3, Insightful)
Crab legs with strawberry marinate (Score:3, Insightful)
Wild strawberries are primarily for birds to eat and generally have a stronger and bitter taste compared to domesticated strawberries, their size is smaller concentrating the seeds on a smaller surface area. Only in the past 500 years or so have strawberries been domesticated to the way we now buy them in stores. Is this not an example of evolution? The plant has (been) adapted to prosper under different conditions.
I
Re:The whole idea of a missing link (Score:5, Informative)
It is available online and free here. [literature.org]
Re:The whole idea of a missing link (Score:2)
Re:The whole idea of a missing link (Score:3, Insightful)
The thing that makes these little guys amazing, if it all pans out, is the apparent preservation of advanced tool making and using abilities even as their brains became smaller. If this all stands up t
Re:The whole idea of a missing link (Score:2)
This is not nonsense. The difference is a few percent of the DNA sequence. That is tens of millions of 'bits'.
Theoretically, our closest living great ape species actually came from a common ancestor that was much closer to modern humans than to apes- chimpanzees are two mutations off from that common ancestor, modern humans are one. So maybe NOT one giant lea
Re:The whole idea of a missing link (Score:3, Funny)
Creatures with chimp-sized brains and rudimentary ability to use tools, surviving into the modern times? Presposterous.
Although, now that I think about it, this would explain a lot of posts on slashdot...
Re:The whole idea of a missing link (Score:5, Insightful)
So first of all, you already have your mind made up, and then second of all, you pull up an article and act as if it's some sort of counterargument.
This sort of relationship is precisely what evolutionary theory predicts. Bananas and humans are far more closely related than the truly ancient groups of life like bacteria. They have been around significantly longer than any multicellular organisms.
What you have invoked is nothing more than an argument from incredulity. Worse, you don't even seem to understand the basic tenets of the theory, so that what is in fact a key prediction of the theory verified by observation is translated by you, somehow, to be an argument against it.
There's nothing in evolutionary theory that is incompatible with this religious belief. Biblical literalism is not the sum and total of Christianity, and is itself a very young notion. Worse, it simply does not fit with the natural world we observe, and to insist upon a literal reading of Genesis makes the book look utterly absurd.
Evolution has been observed. The theory makes key predictions about what we'll find when we look into the genomes of different organisms. If these do not appear as predicted, then evolution will be overthrown. Unfortunately, for the Biblical literalist, the evidence keeps confirming the predictions.
Re:The whole idea of a missing link (Score:2)
Re:The whole idea of a missing link (Score:2)
The strongest early objection to evolution was similar: "God created all species, and he would not allow any to become extinct". As there was no proof of extinct species at the time, this was a pretty good line of reasoning.
Then, in 1858 the first dinosaur bones were found, and it soon became obvious that there were, in fact, quite a few extinct species with very litt
Consider reading Origin of Species (Score:2)
The evidence for evolution is really overwhelming.
Re:The whole idea of a missing link (Score:2, Informative)
Evolution is the change in allele frequencies in a given population over time. This isn't magical and has been observed. Perhaps what you really don't believe happens is speciation, not evolution.
While you might not wish to believe it, the fossil record supports that speciation occurs. The evidence for this goes back before Darwin, even, when archeologists were unable to explain findings in the fossil
Re:The whole idea of a missing link (Score:4, Informative)
You also may want to look into the major evidences for macroevolution http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section1.h tml [talkorigins.org]
Re:The whole idea of a missing link (Score:5, Informative)
Have you read the 29 Evidences for Macroevolution FAQ [talkorigins.org]? When you do, you'll see that evolution predicts the opposite of what you claim-- fossils that match no known species would be a point against evolution. Humans that shared no DNA with bananas, or more DNA with bananas than bats would be a killer hit against evolution. (Note that creationists sometimes say that particular genes are identical (or closer) in two very different species than in seemingly closer species. All of these claims have ended up being false.)
Humans have one less gene than chimps, but human gene 2 looks like exactly like chimp genes 2p and 2q fused together, nonfunctioning broken bits of telomeres right at the fuse point. And it isn't just the working genes- we share nearly all of our broken genes. Example from the FAQ:
"Prediction 2.3: Molecular vestigial characters Vestigial characters should also be found at the molecular level. Humans do not have the capability to synthesize ascorbic acid (otherwise known as Vitamin C), and the unfortunate consequence can be the nutritional deficiency called scurvy. However, the predicted ancestors of humans had this function (as do most other animals except primates and guinea pigs). Therefore, we predict that humans, other primates, and guinea pigs should carry evidence of this lost function as a molecular vestigial character (nota bene: this very prediction was explicitly made by Nishikimi and others and was the impetus for the research detailed below) Confirmation: Recently, the L-gulano--lactone oxidase gene, the gene required for Vitamin C synthesis, was found in humans and guinea pigs. It exists as a pseudogene, present but incapable of functioning... We now have the DNA sequences for this broken gene in chimpanzees, orangutans, and macaques. And, as predicted, the malfunctioning human and chimpanzee pseudogenes are the most similar, followed by the human and orangutan genes, followed by the human and macaque genes, precisely as predicted by evolutionary theory. Furthermore, all of these genes have accumulated mutations at the exact rate predicted (the background rate of mutation for neutral DNA regions like pseudogenes).
"There are several other examples of vestigial human genes, including multiple odorant receptor genes, the RT6 protein gene, the galactosyl transferase gene, and the tyrosinase-related gene (TYRL). [refs deleted]"
Evolution predicts a fundamental unity of life [talkorigins.org], that
Re:Missing link? (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Missing link? (Score:2)
Re:Missing link? (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Missing link? (Score:5, Informative)
if it shows sufficient differences from other species, it certainly does.
Re:Missing link? (Score:2)
You are aware, I trust, that more than specimen was found.
Homo floresiensis (Score:5, Funny)
Homo Bagginses? (Score:4, Funny)
Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Homo Bagginses? (Score:2)
it's just a tourist marketing gimmick (Score:5, Funny)
Re:it's just a tourist marketing gimmick (Score:2)
I for one... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:I for one... (Score:5, Funny)
Also at SciAm (Score:5, Informative)
Scientific American [sciam.com]
(I didn't have to subscribe, YMMV.)
Good summary articles by Zimmer and others (Score:5, Informative)
- A few ordinary pygmies and a microcephalic,
- An extraordinary group of Homo sapiens,
- Descendants of Indonesian Homo erectus, or
- Something completely different.
Carl concludes that these new results make 3 or 4 most likely, explaining why "explanations 3 and 4 seem to come out strongest at the moment. Either one would mean that the Hobbit represents an amazing experiment in hominid brain evolution. They suggest that some human-like features emerged in hominids that were separated from us by two or maybe three million years of evolution. Yet their brains were mosaics, sharing features with us and with other hominids, and also had features of their own. These strange brains, Dr. Morwood argues, allowed Hobbits to do things some pretty elaborate things, such as butcher dwarf elephants or make fires. It would be wonderful to know how these strange brains were wired together, but we have to be content with their shadows. But even shadows can sometimes reveal a lot."For anyone interested in Hominid species, here is a list and description of 20 main hominids [talkorigins.org], here are sample fossils for these species [talkorigins.org], and data on trends in brain sizes by species [talkorigins.org].
And to hit the pause button on any creationist "there are no missing links" arguments, take a close look at the comparison of hominid skulls [talkorigins.org], from the very useful 29 Evidences for Macroevolution FAQ [talkorigins.org] -- each evidence complete with examples, references, predictions, and falsifiability tests (the latter two necessary for a theory to be a scientific theory). A shaved and suited Homo erectus is *not* going to be mistaken for a modern Homo sapiens, not with that small brain and strange face (compare especially the forehead and canines, and that he actually uses his wisdom teeth. Ours are on the way out). But he'll obviously be human- upright, great walker, up to 6 feet tall, briefcase filled with stone tools and a fire-starter kit.
And because at least a few of these claims show up in Slashdot threads on biology, here is the Index of Creationist Claims [talkorigins.org] -- CC0 through CC150 covers human evolution -- and the arguments even creationists say to stop using [answersingenesis.org]. If your creationist argument is in the index, how about countering the evidence in the index instead of just making the claim?
catalog info (Score:4, Funny)
Common name: Tricksy Hobbitses
Little Man, Big Plans (Score:5, Funny)
MOD UP: +50 ABSOULTELY TRUE!!! (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Little Man, Big Plans (Score:2)
Because our genes are only a few percent different from apes, right? Isn't it at least possible that changes were introduced through genetic manipulation at some point?
This is not a new species (Score:3, Funny)
Re:This is not a new species (Score:5, Interesting)
Anthropologists discover "a missing link" (still living, unlike our hobbits), and that forces them to try to look into the question of whether they are human or not (do they have human rights?). It forces them to try defining what makes a human being. This involves a court case (which is what most of the book is about). Overall, it has little to do with SciFi, and a lot
with philosophy. Which is probably why the movie sucked.
Small Hominids (Score:4, Funny)
Bwahaha (Score:3, Funny)
Dammit get those pills and that straight jacket away from me!!!
Re:Bwahaha (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Artist's Rendering (Score:4, Funny)
For those interested (Score:3, Interesting)
thank you! (Score:4, Interesting)
They missed a golden opportunity... (Score:2)
Piltdown Man: If they say so, it must be true. (Score:2, Insightful)
Good luck actually CALLING them "Hobbits" (Score:2)
Seems like they changed this in 3rd edition though, Halflings now seem a lot more like Kender from Dragonlance.
Re:Good luck actually CALLING them "Hobbits" (Score:2)
Halflings are now all gay?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Good luck actually CALLING them "Hobbits" (Score:2)
Somebody alert the press (Score:4, Funny)
Charley Bucket was quoted as saying "I got tired of hearing the same songs sung day after day, so I got rid of them." Apparently Charley was still taking advice from his Grampa Joe [saynotogrampajoe.com] who is known as a very shady character.
Gandalf for President! (Score:2, Funny)
The definition of species (Score:2)
So, how do we decide that those little skeletons were a different species? Is it based on ``They were too ugly to ever get laid.'', or what?
That's a semi-serious question, actually. I can believe that the smilodon [prehistory.com] couldn't interbreed with the Bos Primigenius [prehistory.com], but how can we be sure those little hominids were not capable of interbreeding with
Re:The definition of species (Score:3, Informative)
Re:The definition of species (Score:2, Interesting)
Interbreeding isn't an issue: just think about dogs and wolves. Their offspring is still fertile. But in nature, wolves and dogs have sex not very often
Re:The definition of species (Score:3, Insightful)
Either this is an inadequate definition, or biologists really aren't all that interested in rigor. By this definition we ought to consider Canis chihuahuaensis and Canis lupocanishibernensis different species, but both Mexican Shorthairs and Irish Wolfhounds are Canis domestica even though the
Talked about Before (Score:2)
I have the book in storage at the moment so can't review the exact sequence and situation but as I recall the small being seen by several individuals was very similar to what was just described in this article.
Maybe someone with the book can review and post the circumstances in better detail than my memory.
Re:I'm sure... (Score:2, Offtopic)
Re:I'm sure... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:I'm sure... (Score:3, Informative)
Homo Hobitus? (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Bad Name (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Bad Name (Score:2, Funny)
But what, then, happened to all the elves?
And, I might add, so much for all that "Undying Lands" talk.
Ho ho ho (Score:5, Funny)
But what, then, happened to all the elves?
Continental drift. The undying lands ended up at the north pole.
Re:Ho ho ho (Score:2)
Re:Bad Name (Score:3, Funny)
Everyone knows Valinor was in New Zealand. Maybe when Mt Doom blew up, it spewed Smeagol's remains to Indonesia, and that's what thay found...
Re:Bad Name (Score:2)
Maybe she wants to take away too much for too little gain or maybe the thing she wants to take away is too important to us. Maybe it's not. But just highlighting that someone is willing to take something awa
Re:Bad Name (Score:5, Informative)
According to Tolkien, Minas Tirith was about at the latitude of Venice, and the Shire does correspond more or less to England. Don't trust the movies; they compressed the geography tremendously. (You'd never guess from the climactic scene that Barad-dur was supposed to be over 100 miles from the gates of Mordor now, would you?)
Re:Amazing timing... (Score:3, Insightful)
Sequel? (Score:3, Funny)
The One Ring was destroyed in Mount Doom, leaving the door open for a new cycle of books with a new ring forged in Mount Half-Life.
Re:Sequel? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Sequel? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Sequel? (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Better article (Score:2)
here [nationalgeographic.com]
Both of these are full articles with no crap about buy it now.
Re:archeology is... (Score:3, Informative)
No. Bones tell you a lot. You can see things such as internal bone structure and points of tendon attachments which tells you about musculature. Many bones reveal a lot of detail about the flesh that was around them. The skull shows detail of the brain organisation within it, and this is particularly relevant to this new species. Looking back over homi
Re:archeology is... (Score:4, Informative)
In the case of Flores Man, these remains weren't even fossilized yet, but the principle is the same.
It truly amazes me how people will pontificate so grandly on a subject which they so obviously hold so little understanding in. They really do not understand the methodologies and techniques that scientists employ.
Re:stop calling them hobbits! (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes, scientists are far too serious to give something such a frivolous name [uchospitals.edu].
Re:stop calling them hobbits! (Score:2)
Re:stop calling them hobbits! (Score:3, Insightful)
There are English units of measurements named "Jack" (3/4 pint) and "Jill" (1/4 pint). In computing, half a byte is a nibble. (A really bad pun.) Physics has "sausage instabilities". I won't comment on the fact that Americium is highly unstable. Maths has the "Butterfly Effect" and irrational numbers.
Science is cluttered with anthromorphic personi
Re:stop calling them hobbits! (Score:4, Interesting)
Rational and Irrational are not some play on words of "ratio", they are literally how the ancient Greek mathematicians saw such numbers, with respect to their mathematical religion. (The Cult of Pythagoras actually had the square root of two banned, because it was provably not a ratio.)
Re:Frodo Lives! (Score:2)