Academic Bun Fight! Homo floresiensis Did NOT Have Down's Syndrome! Did so!

No, it did not!

Mandibular evidence supports Homo floresiensis as a distinct species

Authors:

Westaway et al

Abstract:

Henneberg et al. (1) and Eckhardt et al. (2) present another pathology-based alternative to the hypothesis that the “hobbit” fossils from Liang Bua, Indonesia, represent a distinct hominin species, Homo floresiensis. They contend that the Liang Bua specimens are the remains of small-bodied humans and that the noteworthy features of the most complete specimen, LB1, are a consequence of Down syndrome (DS). Here, we show that the available mandibular evidence does not support these claims.

Absence of chins in the two mandibles recovered at Liang Bua, LB1 and LB6, is a key issue (1, 3). That these specimens lack chins has been argued to preclude their attribution to Homo sapiens, because a chin is widely accepted to be a defining characteristic of our species (3). Henneberg et al. reject this argument on the grounds that a chin is often absent in living Australo-Melanesians. However, the evidence they present does not support their assertion regarding Australo-Melanesian mandibular morphology. One of two studies they cite has not been peer reviewed (the publication is just a conference abstract), whereas the other one has been severely criticized (4). Henneberg et al. also imply that a mandible from Roonka, Australia, supports their claim, but a CT scan of this specimen shows that it has a positive chin (Fig. 1). Thus, there is no reason to believe that living Australo-Melanesians often lack chins and therefore no reason to overturn Brown and Tomoko’s (3) assessment that the absence of chins in LB1 and LB6 precludes their attribution to H. sapiens.

Yes, it did!

Reply to Westaway et al.: Mandibular misrepresentations fail to support the invalid species Homo floresiensis

Authors:

Eckhardt et al

Abstract:

Flawed arguments (1) ignoring our foundational paper (2) and disparaging “another pathology-based alternative” fail to support an invalidly invented hominin species.

Homo floresiensis (Hf) fails scientifically, apart from the biomedical diagnosis of its abnormality (2). Endocranial volume of 380 mL, never duplicated, was greater than 13% too low by identical techniques used to measure 430 mL, ignored until matched by skeptics within 1% (3). Stature of 1.06 m, underestimated by greater than 17% to greater than 27% (2), corrects to within the range of living Rampasasa, affirmed independently (4). Abnormal LB1 craniofacial asymmetry, originally unreported, lacks taphonomic distortion as confirmed even by our critics (3). Given hundreds of disorders producing small brain and short stature and asymmetry (2), Hf is an invalid taxon independent of any particular diagnosis.