Slashdot Mirror


More Evidence For Hobbit Sized Species

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."

35 of 327 comments (clear)

  1. Or it could be a dwarf by RailGunner · · Score: 4, Informative
    From TFA: A vocal scientific minority insists the Hobbit specimens do not represent a new species at all. They believe the specimens are nothing more than the bones of modern humans that suffered from microencephaly, a broadly defined genetic disorder that results in small brain size and other defects.

    And, at least two groups of opponents have submitted their own studies to other leading scientific journals refuting the Flores work.

    "This paper doesn't clinch it. I feel strongly that people are glossing over the problems with this interpretation," said Robert Martin, a biological anthropologist and provost of the Field Museum of Natural History in Chicago.

    1. Re:Or it could be a dwarf by RailGunner · · Score: 3, Informative
      So, what do these naysayers think would constitute speciation?

      How about the inability to sexually reproduce with the original species? A human with microencephaly can still sexually reproduce with another human that does not have this disorder.

      However, to call it a new species seems extremely short sighted.

    2. Re:Or it could be a dwarf by the+phantom · · Score: 5, Informative

      Traditionally? Speciation occurs when the decendant* line can no longer interbreed with the ancestor* line to produce viable offspring. Sickle cell anemia could be considered an inherited genetic disorder that is possibly a response to Malaria, yet the large populations of Africans that tend to have either full or partial expression of the trait are not a genetically distinct population -- they are still capable of reproducing with other Africans, Europeans, Asians, American Indians, or any other human population.

      Defining species from fossils and bones can be a bit trickier -- can you prove that this population is (a) represented by these bones, (b) genetically distinct, and (c) incapable of creating viable offspring with any other 'human' population.

      I would also like to note that there are a great variety of human populations. In Africa alone, there are groups that tend to be quite short and robust, and groups that tend to be quite tall and gracile. In a fossil record, they might bee seen as distinct species, yet we know that they can have children together. Just one of the hazards of fossils, I suppose.

      * ancestor and decendant, are, of course, relative

    3. Re:Or it could be a dwarf by IthnkImParanoid · · Score: 4, Funny
      ancestor and decendant, are, of course, relative
      You've been waiting to use that for a while, haven't you?
      --
      It's nothing but crumpled porno and Ayn Rand.
    4. Re:Or it could be a dwarf by blamanj · · Score: 3, Informative

      Yes. The skeptics are publishing, too. More here.

  2. All makes sense by powerpuffgirls · · Score: 4, Funny

    Wow! Eastern limb of the Indonesian archipelago, near Australia, which is close to New Zealand, which is where LOTR was shot.

    1. Re:All makes sense by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      which starred Ian MacKellen who was also in X-Men with Donna Goodhand, who was in Cavedweller with... Kevin Bacon.

  3. isn't it obvious to you all? by circletimessquare · · Score: 4, Funny

    the jawbone was placed there by satan to test your faith

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    1. Re:isn't it obvious to you all? by RedNovember · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Speaking of which...

      What is the religious answer to this? Do they contend that these were a failed first protoype of later man? Someone give me an argument to go on...

      --
      "MY APOCALYPTIC TENOR HAS NOT BEEN DISPELLED!" - T-Rex, qwantz.com
    2. Re:isn't it obvious to you all? by Rude+Turnip · · Score: 3, Funny

      They were placed there through the grace of His Noodly Appendage to test our faith, duh!

    3. Re:isn't it obvious to you all? by Goody · · Score: 3, Funny

      What is the religious answer to this? Do they contend that these were a failed first protoype of later man? Someone give me an argument to go on...

      While we're asking religious questions, what is the religous answer to why my truck is burning more oil these days?

      --
      Tired of being "punished" by the Slashdot $rtbl since 2002. I'm now over at http://soylentnews.org/ .
    4. Re:isn't it obvious to you all? by aussie_a · · Score: 3, Funny

      Stupidity is a sin. Incompetence is a sin. Come to think of it, being a woman is a sin.You repeat yourself.

  4. They should check New Zealand by complexmath · · Score: 4, Funny

    I hear Peter Jackson found a whole town of them there.

  5. Or it could be a chromosome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Or a G-nome.

  6. Re:Ever think.... by Namronorman · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Bone structures change over time, especially from child to adult. I think they would have been able to tell easily if it were. The main controversy here that I see from the article is that some people believe that the bones found have been that of a person who suffered from microencephaly or dwarfism.

    --
    $fortune
    Tomorrow has been canceled due to lack of interest.
  7. Maybe it was all of the cave graffiti that says by Gadgetfreak · · Score: 4, Funny

    Frodo Lived!

    --
    "No fair, you changed the outcome by measuring it!" - Professor Hubert J. Farnsworth
  8. Golem vs Gollum by ReverendLoki · · Score: 3, Funny

    First thing a a golem would say, of course, is nothing. Golems can't speak, according to folklore. Sure would have made it more difficult for Andy Sirkis to get an award...

    --
    09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
  9. Re:What about modern "Small Folk" by the+phantom · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Not knowing the data that well, midgets and dwarfs seem to make up only a very small proportion of the population. If you sampled 100 people, what is the chance that you will get one diminutive person, let alone 20? The more skeletons they find that are similarly proportioned, the less likely it is that they represent statistical outliers, and the more likely it is that they represent the norm. Given the number of skeletons that have been found, I find the argument that they are statistical outliers to be unconvincing (though still possible, I suppose). A more likely explanation is that the small skeletons represent a significantly different population, whether it be an isolated group of Homo erectus, or an offshoot of the Home erectus line.

  10. Re:Ever think.... by geeber · · Score: 5, Funny

    It could have just been a young kid? I'm sure the hobbit idea is much more interesting though...

    I am sure that idea never occured to the scientists doing the digging. You should write to them and let them know your brilliant theory. That would save everyone involved a lot of time.

  11. Orcs & Trolls????? by big-giant-head · · Score: 3, Insightful

    When they the jaw bones of some Orcs and Trolls THEN I'LL BE IMPRESSED!

    --

    So Long and Thanks for all the Fish.
  12. Actually... by michaelzhao · · Score: 3, Interesting

    There is a pygmy like species in parts of Asia and Africa. Although they are off the species Homo Sapien, they are much shorter because they do not have a growth spurt. Scientists are really interested in them because they wonder what genes cause growth and if they can be influenced. I went to a bio conference in Atlanta with my AP Biology class to listen to one. Extremely interesting. Linkage here

    ahref=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pygmyrel=url2ht ml-16837http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pygmy>

  13. Or it could be the Smurfs by ackthpt · · Score: 3, Funny
    From TFA: A vocal scientific minority insists the Hobbit specimens do not represent a new species at all. They believe the specimens are nothing more than the bones of modern humans that suffered from microencephaly, a broadly defined genetic disorder that results in small brain size and other defects.

    Seems from the news that Smurf Village has been bombed and will feature in a UNICEF ad in Belgium next week.

    it was probably done by president gargamel...

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
  14. Re:The AP article actually mentions Hobbits??!? by Buran · · Score: 3, Informative

    That's because the scientists did, too.

  15. Mini elephants by boldtbanan · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Part of the controversy is due to the fact that there are other 'small' animal bones which have been found on the island, such as miniature elephants. In conjunction with the finds or other mini-species, the 'hobbit' people becomes a more likely conclusion than if you only consider the 'hobbit' bones by themselves. Not only that but on other islands in the archipelago, they have found bones of apparently human-related giants who were much larger than people today. Only the hobbit-folk get any press though.

  16. Synchronicities abound by Ungulate · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Funny, I was just reading about floresiensis last night. I was greatly intrigued by the fact that the islanders' oral history includes stories about monkey-like men that closely fit the description of floresiensis man. They maintain that they were still around after the Dutch arrived in the 16th century, until about 300 years ago when they got fed up with their hijinks and set out to kill them all. Apparently there were still sightings up until the 19th century.

    The most likely explanation seems to be that a population of h. erectus found itself on the island and, through island dwarfing, ended up at their diminutive height. I find the thought of sub-human hominids suriving until that recently both creepy and fascinating. More reading at wikipedia

  17. Re:Ever think.... by dogbreathcanada · · Score: 3, Funny

    Brilliant! I'm going to offer you an honorary Doctorate in Archeology from the University of Dumbasses.

  18. Re:Ever think.... by commodoresloat · · Score: 4, Funny

    Definitely do that. The scientists will likely be intrigued by your ideas and want to subscribe to your newsletter.

  19. Re:What about modern "Small Folk" by ImaLamer · · Score: 3, Interesting

    If you sampled 100 people, what is the chance that you will get one diminutive person, let alone 20?

    Depends on where you do the sampling. In Finland or an Amish country and it could be higher (Cartilage-hair hypoplasia) because these groups don't date outside of their groups enough (genetic shift) to make these "rare" exceptions rare anymore.

    If you had a group that lived alone you could get a "tribe" of little people, but they would still be human.

  20. Re:Small people = hobbit? by MightyMartian · · Score: 3, Interesting

    What's so insightful about this post. This guy isn't even aware that stature isn't the chief fascination with these remains, and then ends the post with some slanted bit against National Geographic. I wasn't aware that ignorance was a rewardable activity. Maybe I'll get modded +50 insightful if I say that God actually has twelve penises and practices fellatio on storm gutters.

    --
    The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
  21. Just as He as taught us. by hotspotbloc · · Score: 4, Funny
    The Flying Spaghetti Monster created the universe, starting with a mountain, trees and a midgit. This is clear proof the He was the basis of all intelligence and I demand His teachings be taught in all Kansas public schools.

    Don't get me started about the pirates ...

    --
    "I hate to advocate drugs, alcohol, violence or insanity but they've always worked for me" - HST
  22. Idiots! by Roadkills-R-Us · · Score: 3, Funny

    They found it in a *wet cave*...

    It *shrunk*.

  23. Re:How do they know how old it is? Carbon dating? by moz25 · · Score: 3, Informative

    Here are some interesting links that tell more about how carbon dating works. The link you posted is just creationist talk and not even the best of its kind. You need to know more about the intrinsics of the method before you can judge the scientific merit.

    science.howstuffworks.com/carbon-14.htm

    230nsc1.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/nuclear/cardat.html

    www.c14dating.com/int.html

  24. Legend of these people in Tonga by dhammabum · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I lived in Tonga for a couple of years in the 70's and there was a tale of very small people that were living in Tonga at the time the Polynesians arrived, at least on one island. They said these people were found on 'Ata Island (the southernmost island in the group). The new Tongans apparently gave them food initially, then for whatever reason decided to kill them off and blocked them in a cave. This is quite a similar story to that told on Flores Is. where the current discoveries have been made.

    The interesting bit is that this island is uninhabited as South American slavers came in the mid-1800s and captured all the males off the island. The King then had the women and children rescued and declared the island off limits. When I was there we tried to go to the island for a scientific survey but King Tupou Fa refused. The place is only visited by occasional fishermen.


    --
    I am not a robot. I am a unicorn.
  25. I wonder... by foreverdisillusioned · · Score: 3, Informative

    Could there be any possibility of finding any preserved DNA after 12,000 years (not very long, geologically speaking)? I wish this had happened in a colder climate, where there was some possibility of preservation by ice. I think it would be a singularly awesome occurance, perhaps a turning point for modern society, if a scientist took a cell from an extinct but SENTIENT primate species and cloned it, either with a gorilla or human mother.

    Call me cruel or evil if you must, but if I was a scientist presented with that opportunity, I would do it in a heartbeat. The moral, religious, and political rammifications would be tremendous... another creature besides ourselves capable of lucid communication, capable of abstract thought and rational logic. Likely less intelligent (on average) than Homo Sapiens and possibly possessing other differing desires and abilities, but unquestionably emotional and intelligent. How the hell would mainstream Christianity react? I would think that "mainstream" would have to be redefined, as many people would cling to old notions of humanity being special, unique, and alone while just as many would be unable to treat another intelligent being as a mere animal.

    Of course, the exact level of intelligence would be very important. Just how intelligent are they, as compared to us? As compared to chimps? What if they possess roughly same communication skills and intelligence as a chimp or gorilla, yet they look like us, have the same facial expressions as us, and possess the vocal cords necessary to form words? Gorillas and chimps are quite intelligent, and capable of significant levels of communication via sign language. I'm willing to bet that the major reason why they haven't been granted any legal rights is because they seem so unhuman. Give them a human looking body and the power of speech, and suddenly the situation for many people will not seem so cut and dry. Lord knows where our morality would go from there--maybe given a hundred years, those "freaks" over at PETA will get their wish and the entire animal kingdom will have rights, perhaps based on intelligence. I'm not saying I necessarily support such an idea, but it's mind-blowing to consider.

    Perhaps it's fascinating for me specifically because for the last 4 years I've worked extensively with the (moderately) mentally handicapped. It's very interesting to watch how they're treated by parents, doctors, coworkers, and fellow clients. In many respects they are given a high degree of self-determination, yet there are always more subtle attempts to change them into what we want them to be. The aspect I have the most problem with is prescribing medication for the sole purpose of surpressing libido. Ok, if the client is attacking women and fondling them that's one thing, but if wacking off too much and getting caught staring at women's chests and cutting out pictures of underwear models or even, heaven forbid, having consentual sexual relations with one another is a disease, I suspect that many of us here at /. have been "infected" at one time or another. But for these people, anti-depressants such as Prozac and Zoloft are prescribed for the SOLE purpose of supressing sexual desire. Oh sure, that's not what it's officially for, but staff openly talk about the real goal of putting a client on that med. The "depression" doesn't really exist until the client gets too horny for our director's taste, and the doctor mysteriously does NOT prescribe one of the many antidepressants out that have a lower impact on sexual function. And of course, no one is ever prescribed the antidepressant Wellbutrin, which has been shown to increase sexual desire and pleasure (as I can personally attest to) and would be otherwise appropriate for many of our more lethargic clients.

    I guess what I'm saying is that if we were forced to deal with a less intelligent and more primal version of ourselves, we would be forced to confront our more animalistic urges in a saner and more consistan

  26. Re:Folklore, legends and truth by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Almost all civilizations also have oral or written records of dragons. Interestingly enough, their behaviour is usually very different, but their look is described in a very similar way. But factual origin? hardly...

    Perhaps dragons (and giants, and dwarves) are just parts of the collective subconsciousness, archetypes so old, they are shared shared by the entire humanity.