Hobbit Is A New Species

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."

Comments

What?

[CypherXero]

Frodo died???

Re:What?

[servognome]

OMG, how is parent troll????
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)

Homo floresiensis

[Jensaarai]

Homo Florescent lights?

Also at SciAm

[anocelot]

Also available at Scientific American for your reading pleasure...

Scientific American

(I didn't have to subscribe, YMMV.)

Little Man, Big Plans

[MrAsstastic]

I truly believe these little people are the early prototype of ancient time traveling alien/human hybrid race. These people are the result of an extra-terrestial alien race mating with primates. The aliens have left but they will be back to check on our progress.

The whole idea of a missing link

[Cadallin]

The whole idea of a missing link is a sham. It's a straw man put up by creationists. Because of the way evolution works you won't ever find a completely smooth transition from one form to another, you observe a puntuated equilibrium in the fossil record.

Re:The whole idea of a missing link

[MightyMartian]

The problem I have with evolution theory (besides the fact that I believe in a literal Bible) is that scientists are quick to say that we evolved from primordial soup or apes or whatever it is nowadays but what you don't hear is how humans share 60% of their DNA with bananas [makingthem...rld.org.uk].

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.

It takes more faith to believe in what man thinks he knows versus having faith in the One Creator

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

[geekotourist]

Did you notice that the same article points out how humans share 98% of their DNA with chimps?

Have you read the 29 Evidences for Macroevolution FAQ? 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, that

"According to the theory of common descent, modern living organisms, with all their incredible differences, are the progeny of one single species in the distant past. In spite of the extensive variation of form and function among organisms, several fundamental criteria characterize all life... (1) replication, (2) heritability (3) catalysis, and (4) energy utilization (metabolism). At a very minimum, these four functions are required to generate a physical historical process that can be described by a phylogenetic tree. If every living species descended from an original species that had these four obligate functions, then all living species today should necessarily have these functions (a somewhat trivial conclusion).

Most importantly, however, all modern species should have inherited the structures that perform these functions. Thus, a basic prediction of the genealogical relatedness of all life, combined with the constraint of gradualism, is that organisms should be very similar in the particular mechanisms and structures that execute these four basic life processes...

[Falsifiability of this theory] Based solely on the theory of common descent and the genetics of known organisms, we strongly predict that we will never find any modern species from known phyla on this Earth with a foreign, non-nuclei

Ho ho ho

[tepples]

But what, then, happened to all the elves?

Continental drift. The undying lands ended up at the north pole.

Re:Homo Bagginses?

[DrEldarion]

From what I hear, one researcher found something, but another killed him and then ran off with it.