I just watched a show on the whole Hobbit controversy. It was, of course, pinky deep. There were some interesting arguments for an against the whole Hobbit is a different species. There were two that were opposed:
1. The Hobbit's brain is simply too small. It fits better with a microcephalic H sapiens individual in percentage wise than a derived, dwarf H erectus. The Hobbit has a brain of about 490 cc and erectus has a brain of about 700 cc (and change). When animals go dwarf, they typically lose about 15% of their brain size for half their vertical height (iirc). The Hobbit lost a lot more than that if its from erectus.
2. The technology that was exhibited by the Hobbit was far and away much better than any that the H erectus has ever been found with. In fact, it's a tool kit only ever been found with H sapiens. No other homind has this tool kit. Ever.
The answer to 1. is that they have muliple individuals over a prolonged period. That hurts. However, the comment that this is just plain wrong based on what we know of evolutionary biology and island dwarfism. There's either a chance this ia the first case where what we think we know, doesn't work. Or...
Has anyone considered this might be something more like a H habilis descedent?
As for the tech toolkit. Could they have traded or stolen them? Or at elast the rudiments?
1. The Hobbit's brain is simply too small. It fits better with a microcephalic H sapiens individual in percentage wise than a derived, dwarf H erectus. The Hobbit has a brain of about 490 cc and erectus has a brain of about 700 cc (and change). When animals go dwarf, they typically lose about 15% of their brain size for half their vertical height (iirc). The Hobbit lost a lot more than that if its from erectus.
2. The technology that was exhibited by the Hobbit was far and away much better than any that the H erectus has ever been found with. In fact, it's a tool kit only ever been found with H sapiens. No other homind has this tool kit. Ever.
The answer to 1. is that they have muliple individuals over a prolonged period. That hurts. However, the comment that this is just plain wrong based on what we know of evolutionary biology and island dwarfism. There's either a chance this ia the first case where what we think we know, doesn't work. Or...
Has anyone considered this might be something more like a H habilis descedent?
As for the tech toolkit. Could they have traded or stolen them? Or at elast the rudiments?
No comments:
Post a Comment