That is the question asked by a recemt paper in Folia Primatologica. I don’t have access but Discovery News has the story. Apparently, the researchers analyzed the capitates of a number of hominoids and hominins. According to Discovery News: (more…)
Creationists frequently like to dismiss fossils by saying they are only fragments, with the implicit idea being that nothing can be learned from them. Yet, this is frequently not the case and the idea derives from a lack of knowledge of skeletal anatomy. So what can one learn from a fragment? Since the White et al paper published in Nature dealt with skeletal fragments let’s look at that and see what we can learn. In particular let’s look at the femur and the intermediate phalanx (which is complete, but interesting none the less).
Pardon me while I wipe the drool off my chin…
As John Lynch and Kelly Hale have mentioned, there has been a new discovery of Au. anamensis fossils that greatly clarifies the relationships between Ardipithicus ramidus, Au. anamensis and Au. afarensis. In addition to clarifying the relationships between the above, the paper also has some other interesting things to say about hominid (here refers to the human clade subsequent to divergence from our common ancestor with chimpanzees) evolution.