The debate amongst anthropologists as to whether the “hobbit” skeletons found on an Indonesian island constitute evidence of a separate human-like species, or are just a few deformed individuals, has been given a big boost recently by some articles in Nature. The basic argument is that the “hobbits” had legs that were more chimp-like than human, allowing them to walk upright but not run as well as we do. As is the way of things, those on one side of the debate are hailing this as absolute proof that the question is settled, while those on the other side are busy raising doubts.
2 thoughts on ““Hobbit” Debate Rumbles On”
Comments are closed.
I really wonder if no one had come up with the ‘Hobbit’ tag this would be getting as much attention as it is.
And of course I find myself thinking of another set of skeletons found in the Neander Valley….
I’m actually surprised this doesn’t get more play, rather than less. The new papers really are bringing people off the fence and into the new-species-not-deformed-individuals camp, with the debate now between the idea that they were a dwarfed form of homo erectus and the possibility that they might actually be descendants of homo habilis from a line that has previously never been seen outside Africa. Either way they represent a very alien form of hominin — much further removed from us than neanderthals — that was around just 10,000 years ago and change. It’s one of those discoveries no one would really have predicted, and kind of makes you want to turn those islands upside down for more samples.