So /his/, I have some questions and opinions I'd like to share to get a discussion started. First of all, was H. floresiensis a modern human with island dwarfism, or was it a separate species altogether? Did H. sapiens coexist on the island of Flores with them?
I'm of the opinion that they were a distinct species, because of the different structure of the cranium. Their brains must have been very different from ours. I'm also of the opinion that they lived in direct contact with modern humans. The legend of the Ebu Gogo could be compared to the idea that Trolls were actually Neanderthals that were morphed into folklore.
>inb4 paleoanthropology is /sci/
I think the theory that they were an island dwarf form of Homo erectus seems most likely.
They survived till ~17,000 years ago, and humans were in Australia long before this, so i'd assume there was contact between them and modern humans.
I find it interesting that even though their brain size is more comparable to Australopithecus they have a more advanced style of tools.
Not OP, but it's because there are multiple theory's of the origin of this species, who know's, maybe they'll dig up another example with extractable DNA, they're certainly young enough for it to be an option, but i'm pretty sure the conditions around this area don't often lead to preservation of fossils.
Here's a microcephalic human skull with a cast of the hobbit skull.
Interesting link, thanks anon
>When first discovered, it was suggested that H. floresiensis was possibly descended from Javanese H. erectus. However, more detailed analysis of skeletal remains has uncovered traits more archaic than Asian H. erectus and more similar to australopithecines, H. habilis or the hominins from Dmanisi in Georgia (classified as Homo ergaster or Homo georgicus). Most scientists that accept H. floresiensis as a legitimate species now think its ancestor may have come from an early African dispersal by a primitive Homo species similar in appearance to H. habilis or the Dmanisi hominins. This means that it shared a common ancestor with Asian H. erectus but was not descended from it. Cladistic analysis supports the lack of a close relationship with H. erectus.
>Unfortunately, no transitional forms, or the actual remains of H. erectus itself, have been found in Flores. However, stone tools that may have been made by H. erectus (or a similar species) were discovered on Flores. These date to 840,000 years ago, so indicate that a hominin species was probably living on the island at that time.
>Stone tools discovered on the island of Sulawesi, Indonesia, date back to at least 118,000 years – suggesting that an archaic human species first colonized the island many millennia before our own species arrived. Exactly who they were, though, remains a mystery. The findings are published in Nature this week.
>About a million years ago, a group of hominins (that’s us and our extinct ancestors) settled on the Indonesian island of Flores. Then, about 50,000 years ago, Homo sapiens crossed to Sahul, the landmass that consists of Australia and Papua. Between Sahul and continental Asia lies a vast zone of islands, the largest and oldest among them being Sulawesi. It’s thought to play an important role in both of these dispersal events. Previous studies on rock art in limestone caves revealed that modern humans were living on Sulawesi at least 45,000 years ago.
This is from your link
>But the old ages suggest that the toolmakers were either an archaic lineage of humans or – more controversially – some of earliest modern humans to reach Southeast Asia and perhaps the ancestors of the first people to arrive in Australia.
It's more likely to have been Homo erectus. For some reason (I guess simplification) a lot of people seem to group erectus, ergastor and heidelbergensis under the term archaic human species.
>A wishy washy article that has no study that backs her claim
It's obviously not the be all and end all, but it certainly plays an important role.
Just so we're clear, were talking about the relationship between brain size and intelligence in general?
Because for this particular example, the other early human species with this brain size had the earliest form of tools, and no fire. While floresiensis with the same brain size had a much more advance method of making tools and has evidence of the use of fire (both of these are first observed long after and members of the Homo genus had this small a brain size.
Which suggests that the structures of the brain (while diminished in size in the case of the hobbit) still have vastly superior function than you would expect if brain size was anywhere close to being and 'important factor'.
Humans, and our ancestors and chimps are all on the upper edge of the brain to body ratio. pic related
>the idea that Trolls were actually Neanderthals
Neanderthals are still there.
Very few of them, because melonheads tried to kill them using their sap servants but when neanderthals could kill 200 armed saps with bare hands you know that some of them could hide well.
>refuses to acknowledge scientific theories like geophysics and cosmology
>criticized by his own people for using terrible arguments
Come on anon, evolution's real but so is creation.
>i'm pretty sure the conditions around this area don't often lead to preservation of fossils.
iirc when they found the floriensis fossils they were barely solid and needed some crazy archeomagic to get them to an extractable state without damage.