Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

New Human Species Found In Philippines (bbc.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the family-tree dept.

Major Blud writes: A newly discovered extinct species of human has been found in the Philippines. It's been named Homo Luzonensis after the island of Luzon where it was found. Homo Erectus has long thought to have been the first member of our direct line to leave the African homeland -- around 1.9 million years ago. The physical features of Homo Luzonensis are a mixture of those found in very ancient human ancestors and in more recent people. This could mean primitive human relatives left Africa and made it all the way to South-East Asia, something not previously thought possible, since Luzon was only ever accessible by sea. The paper detailing the discovery has been published in the journal Nature.

31 of 77 comments (clear)

  1. They had trouble reproducing enough by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    So maybe name them Homo Sexual?

    1. Re: They had trouble reproducing enough by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Listen buddy, misusing the comments section is NOT COOL. Weirdo.

    2. Re: They had trouble reproducing enough by Humbubba · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Listen buddy, misusing the comments section is NOT COOL. Weirdo.

      The comments section here does seem to be broken. Where's that healthy discourse of those really genuine geeks that brought me here in the first place - and kept me quiet? Where are those funny, insightful, interesting, and informative comments? Even tongue-in-cheek, obsidian, and blithe remarks would be welcome - if they were cool.

      Does /. have an exclusive 'cool geek' mode that I'm not privy to?

      And finally, just because there is a predilection for subversion these days: Are there forces out there trying to bring /. down? Maybe all this trolling is really part of a conspiracy from a {bevy, collection, gang, swarm, herd, army, murder} of Cambridge Analytica types who's goal is to remold our minds in time for the next election. It could even be Antigonish, the deep, dark state 'that isn't there', trying to manipulate the huddled masses yearning to be geek.

    3. Re: They had trouble reproducing enough by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The tech discussion left for ars, Soylent, reddit.

      This is a troll board now, with some leftovers from the previous model.

    4. Re: They had trouble reproducing enough by janeil · · Score: 2

      I finally setting my comment thread to filter out most ACs, and set the threshold at just below +1, and it's a lot more like old /. For instance, this thread now has 12 posts with 40 hidden, so it's almost civil.

    5. Re: They had trouble reproducing enough by whitroth · · Score: 1

      Yeah, I noticed that too - the newest dozen or two posts were by what are apparently 16-yr-olds who think the Orange Cheetoh is a lib'rul.

      I doubt any of 'em knows where / is.

  2. Re:Out of Africa still a thing? by aussie_a · · Score: 2

    We definitely had descendants in Africa. We can trace large migrations out of Africa. Even the researchers suggest this species in the Mediterranean might have migrated back to Africa. Finally scientists are skeptical of this specimen as detailed in the article you linked.

  3. They were all dead by omnichad · · Score: 1

    Talk about burying the lede. They've been dead for thousands of years. An important detail.

    1. Re:They were all dead by White+Yeti · · Score: 1

      Yeah, that headline "new species discovered" had me for a moment. Did they find a new mutation in some lost jungle, like "new species of butterfly discovered"? How are these new humans different from us oldies? Oh, wait, it's just the headline... "extinct species".

  4. Only accessible by sea by jrumney · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Now, Luzon is only accessible by sea, but there are plenty of theories around about lower sea-levels creating a landbridge through Indonesia and on to mainland Asia during the last ice age. Have these theories been conclusively disproven now, or is the article trying too hard to be sensational by implying that our pre-historic relatives were capable of navigating the oceans, while the homo sapiens who surplanted them only gained that skill much later in their history?

    1. Re:Only accessible by sea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      There are even two features on the maps suggesting a possible former land bridge limiting the Sulu Sea. Then there is the possibility of the species retreating from it's previous home during the ice-age due to the pressure from our more direct ancestors.

    2. Re:Only accessible by sea by angel'o'sphere · · Score: 3, Informative

      It is actually more or less a fact that except for very few very small gaps Australia was connected via Indonesia with Asia. So no idea why they think Luzon was not included.

      https://www.iceagenow.com/Sea_...

      --
      Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
    3. Re:Only accessible by sea by turp182 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      It was probably a combination of luck and an attempt to navigate. Maybe a land bridge. But long distance water crossings by nature aren't uncommon.

      The Galapagos Islands have penguins (which don't fly) and other land creatures (awesome lizards). They didn't navigate, they arrived via luck and accident.

      The Galapagos are over 1,300KM from the coast of Ecuador.

      --
      BlameBillCosby.com
    4. Re:Only accessible by sea by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      The Galapagos Islands have penguins (which don't fly)

      But which do swim. In fact, they swim considerably better than humans.

      and other land creatures (awesome lizards).

      which can also swim - not just the Galapogean marine iguanas, but also their South American land-dwelling closest relatives.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    5. Re:Only accessible by sea by turp182 · · Score: 1

      While we were there the guide said that some species probably floated/swam but others were probably carried on pieces of wood or other floating debris (that they happened to get on at the right moment...).

      Wind moved most of the plant seeds, but probably also animals.

      The penguins are really out of place... One island over from are flocks of flamingos.

      Coolest place I've ever visited.

      --
      BlameBillCosby.com
    6. Re:Only accessible by sea by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      Have these theories been conclusively disproven now,

      No. Theories need to be backed by evidence to be accepted. Checking the evidence is hardly rocket science. You go online, you get a global bathymetry set, you learn how to plot it up, you look at the results. And then you get to the question of were there major landslips in the area before historical records? That is actually a fairly important question for the residents - for reasons obvious to anyone who is aware of the Anak Krakatau landslip and tsunami (and associated few dozen deaths) of a few weeks ago. (Or the Storegga Slide of about 8500 years ago which devastated the North Sea coastal populations, including the current Netherlands with a hard-to-estimate body count. Or the non-trivial hazard posed by sector collapse of some of the Canary Islands (tens of millions of people at risk) or parts of the Hawaii archipelago (similar tens of millions at risk). Unfortunately, that is the sort of question that is really hard to answer if the relevant data is buried under hundreds of metres of mud and sea. Welcome to geology - you don't get easy answers to hard questions.

      I've posted my bathymetry plots at https://wellsite-geologist.blo... . Have fun with them. If you want different answers, do your own study.

      or is the article trying too hard to be sensational by implying that our pre-historic relatives were capable of navigating the oceans,

      What is sensational about a claim like that? We (geologists, archaeologists) have been functionally certain for decades that early hominins, including hominins assigned to species other than Homo sapiens, could cross significant water bodies. The "out of sight of land" criterion has been a dead concern (#Insert Monty-Python-parrot-sketch.h) since the 1970s. We don't know precisely how they did it, but we've known that they did do it.

      while the homo sapiens who surplanted them only gained that skill much later in their history?

      I'm struggling to follow you. You have some evidence that at some point in time all hominins alive on the planet, both those who lived alongside coasts and those living far inland, forgot how to work wood well enough to construct sea-going craft. That is some damned big claim - are you really sure that you want to make it?

      Or ... is it more parsimonious to accept that at some point in the family tree of the several species of humans, the skills of working wood, cooperating, planning and navigation were learned, remained in use, and repeatedly our highly intelligent ancestors would meet bodies of water, learn (or remember) how to build watercraft to exploit the resources of those bodies, and then they cross. The crossing might be deliberate. Or it might be a storm event putting a boat load of "fishermen" onto the other side of a strait, at which point they re-stock and use whatever navigation techniques they have been using since their grandparents taught them ... and navigate home to say "There's land that way."

      You will note that most of the equipment I postulate is wooden. Wood's survival rate near sea level in the tropics isn't good. And the intensity of search for stone artefacts is not high. Don't forget the leather and sinew which were also available for binding two things together. That doesn't survive well either. During the stone age, far more wood was used than stone - a spear point for example might have been dug out of a dozen aurochs, but needed a new (wooden) shaft every time. And sinews and/ or resin glue to mount it to the haft.

      One thing is lost in this latter model. You (and I) can't point at the non-humans who did this and say "Ha ha, stupid ape men!" Because they weren't.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    7. Re:Only accessible by sea by RockDoctor · · Score: 1
      They're actually quite large gaps - in the order of 100km. But they were crossable. We know that because people crossed them.

      Some people crossed the gaps in the 17th century CE.

      Other people crossed them in the (approx) 650th century BCE.

      I know who I'm more impressed by.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    8. Re:Only accessible by sea by tomhath · · Score: 1

      It was probably a combination of luck and an attempt to navigate.

      Yup. "Luck" meaning they survived where (most likely) many others ended up as shark food.

    9. Re:Only accessible by sea by RespekMyAthorati · · Score: 1

      The "out of sight of land" criterion has been a dead concern (#Insert Monty-Python-parrot-sketch.h) since the 1970s. We don't know precisely how they did it, but we've known that they did do it.

      With thousands trying the journey every year over
      thousands of years, some were bound to make it even if 90% failed.

  5. Oh, at first I thought they meant Duterte by BeerMilkshake · · Score: 2

    a sub-human

  6. This will happen again and again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    That's what annoys me about a lot of educational books is that they state matter of factly "the earliest humans lived in..." and then the next edition they update it to the newest find and still state it matter of factly.

    No, we are going to find newer and newer and broader ranges of what evolved to us being modern humans.

    Another thing is that a lot of these finds sometimes show the paths they would have taken transposed on out current world map but they completely ignore a million years of continental drift and other such variables.

    1. Re:This will happen again and again by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      they completely ignore a million years of continental drift and other such variables.

      A million years at 5cm/year (a typical plate movement speed) is 50km. Over a million years, that doesn't make a huge difference.

      But if you move beyond children's books, you'll actually find that continental drift is taken into account in such studies. The topic is simplified for children's books. If you find that galling, stop reading books aimed for children and start to study the topic seriously.

      Oh, and when you're asked to give an opinion, think twice and say things like, "To the best of our knowledge at this time, Either Hamilton, Bottas or Vettel might be able to win the championship." Then resist people trying to hammer you into making a prediction, because you simply do not have the data.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  7. Re:Wait. If all humans came OUT OF AFRICA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    Trump was honored for his work as a successful real-estate developer in New York City and his German heritage, his award had nothing to do with race one way or the other. How ever he was sued(along with his father) for civil rights violations/racial discrimination. And his father was a known KKK member. He aligns himself with Nazis and the Alt-right, and you don't have to look very far to see he is a racist, as racist comments come out of his own mouth frequently enough.

  8. Re:Out of Africa still a thing? by ilguido · · Score: 2

    We definitely had descendants in Africa. We can trace large migrations out of Africa.

    That is not what Out of Africa comprises: Out of Africa means that modern humans developed exclusively or almost exclusively in Africa and then they get out of Africa, already in their modern form, to colonize the world. Instead, the main theories challenging that view have modern humans developing significantly (for example, interbreeding with other human species not found in Africa and so on) not in Africa or not just in Africa.

  9. Re:Out of Africa still a thing? by quenda · · Score: 4, Funny

    We definitely had descendants in Africa.

    Speak for yourself. I was well behaved on my vacation in Africa, not just because of the risk of AIDS.

  10. have they figured out ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The species of the president of the phillapines? He is not human

  11. I'm so disappointed by Musical_Joe · · Score: 2

    The headline seemed to suggest we actually met a completely new type of living, breathing human. When I found out that we're talking about an ancient species dead for millennia, I was really disappointed.

    Yes, I'm weird. I RTFA.

    1. Re:I'm so disappointed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Two years ago, a new living human species was discovered at the White House, with half a brain, half a dick and gigantic balls. Yet, most of the world was disappointed. You cannot satisfy everyone...

    2. Re:I'm so disappointed by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      That would be the press spokes-thing? Or has she been taken out back and "retired" this morning?

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
  12. watched a clip on H. naledi just yesterday by epine · · Score: 1

    TED: Juliet Brophy on Homo naledi — March 2018

    Pretty good, by the standards of 2018 TED. Many new questions, ultimately no new theories of any real depth, and mostly a lot of excited "more research needed".

  13. Re:I'm on a boat! I'm on a boat! by RockDoctor · · Score: 1
    60-odd thousand BCE, but yeah.

    Having the foresight to plan ahead with several days of food and water (water, particularly) is a more adult trait than childish, but your point that these people of many millennia ago had strong minds and plenty of intelligence is well made.

    --
    Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"