You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
-Short Attention Span Theater-
'Hobbit' was a disabled caveman
2006-08-20
It was a great story for a while, tho.
THE remains of a fossilised stone age pygmy, hailed as a new species of human when it was found two years ago, probably belonged to a disabled but otherwise normal caveman, researchers have claimed. The discovery of the 18,000-year-old “homo floresiensis” on the Indonesian island of Flores was thought to be a major development in tracing human evolution when it was announced in 2004.

However, a new analysis of the 3ft skeleton, nicknamed the “hobbit”, along with other remains found at the site, has indicated they probably belonged to an early human suffering from microcephaly, a condition that causes an abnormally small head and other deformities. “The skeletal remains do not represent a new species, but some of the ancestors of modern human pygmies who live on the island today,” concludes a report in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, one of America’s most respected scientific institutions. “The individual exhibits a combination of characteristics that are not primitive but instead regional and not unique but found in other modern human populations.”
Posted by:lotp

#5  Is that Gary Coleman on the far right?
Posted by: Raj   2006-08-20 08:38  

#4  I dunno. Humans, hobbits, wosshisname in Iran, they all seem equally short to me.

BTW, the state of the debate before this particular paper is summarized over at the wikipedia entry on the subject, if anyone's interested.
Posted by: Abdominal Snowman   2006-08-20 00:41  

#3  Have they looked into the idea that it was one of Ahmadinahijab's not-so-distant relatives. :-)
Posted by: gorb   2006-08-20 00:37  

#2  Actually, Robin, I'd like to point out that the argument over these bones has been going on since their discovery. It's just that one side likes to declare that they've now proven their side beyond a shadow of a doubt.

They did that a couple years ago, when they temporarily "borrowed" the bones and washed them off in acetone before returning them, which precluded the use of genetic testing... wait another month, there will be more counterarguments against these.
Posted by: Phil   2006-08-20 00:33  

#1  Bilbo Baggins could not be reached for comment.
Posted by: Korora   2006-08-20 00:31  

00:00