Nature News mentions a new study on Homo floresiensis that concludes that the fossil is that of a microcephalic modern human. The study is actually published in PNAS (and if someone could send me a copy I would appreciate it – my email is in the about tab). Continue reading
The Journal of Human Evolution is going to have a special issue devoted to Homo floresiensis and word is leaking out on one of the articles in it. The Australian has the best article so far. I say that because it inspired a Homer Simpson like D’OH moment on my part. Here is why: Continue reading
Since 2004 the taxonomic status of Homo floresiensis has been one of the more hotly contested issues in paleoanthropology. I have 34 articles on the subject and there are some that I haven’t acquired yet. The Journal of Human Evolution has four more papers on Homo floresiensis. One discusses the Liang Bua faunal sequence, a record that spans 95,000 years, and fills in the paleoenvironmental context of the finds. Two other papers describe the postcranial anatomy of all the Liang Bua homins. The fourth paper which looks at the LB1 cranium is, by far, the most interesting.
PhysOrg.com mentions that there is a new study out on Homo floresiensis. The new study takes an interesting approach:
Using 3D modeling methods, McNulty and his fellow researchers compared the cranial features of this real-life “hobbit” to those of a simulated fossil human (of similar stature) to determine whether or not such a species was distinct from modern humans.
A New Human: The Startling Discovery and Strange Story of the “Hobbits” of Flores, Indonesia by Mike Morwood and Penny van Oosterzee is scheduled to come out in May, 2007. Through the miracle of internet blogging I have a review copy.
Like Carl Zimmer, I think I have come down with a case of Homo floresiensisitis. The more I hear about it the more puzzled I become. Let’s start at the beggining of my current befuddlement with the issue. Some of you may remember This post of Carl’s, about Gert van den Bergh’s theory that the hobbit was quadrupedal. The argument was based on the amount of humeral torsion present on the fossil. What is humeral torsion you ask?