Old 03-12-2008, 09:28 AM   #1
oldhippychick
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
more small hominids

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0310151958.htm

also, the taxonomy debate continues: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0305193157.htm

what do you all think, homo sapiens, or something else...?
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2008, 10:50 AM   #2
Rocketman the Sequel
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
I don't know. I' ll reserve opinion unti all the evidence is in--however--given what we do know so far?

Skull analysis? Questionable.

Wrist bone? Seems to suggest a different species-but without more information as to the nature of malnutrition on the development of said bones once again unsure.

One of the problems that I am seeing with this line of arguement is the reasoning behind the malnutrition and "cretinism." Yes island populations do seem to have greater instances of dwarfism--restricted food intake --promotes selction for smaller size--but even given that is it enough to create a vaiblwe population of dwarf sapiens? Given the ability of sapiens specifically to maximize food development or alternately to bloody move--why would we see this kind of selection? Smaller I buy. Dumber and feebler I don't.

Now I can accept perhaps a founder effect introducing and reinforcing an genetically recessive trait to the fore---but I just don't see a population of said microcephalics happening without more evidence as to how.

Even if it is sapiens--it still tells a very interstign story in terms of evolution.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2008, 11:17 AM   #3
Philboid Studge
Organ Donator
 
Philboid Studge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Beastly Muck
Posts: 13,136
I think Prof Oxnard (on the left) might be somewhat biased regarding the Hobbit theory.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~
La propriété, c'est le vol ...
Philboid Studge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-12-2008, 07:29 PM   #4
PhilOchsLives
Member
 
PhilOchsLives's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Charlotte, NC
Posts: 233
Quote:
Philboid Studge wrote View Post
I think Prof Oxnard (on the left) might be somewhat biased regarding the Hobbit theory.

LOL!

Revolution is not something fixed in ideology, nor is it something fashioned to a particular decade. It is a perpetual process imbedded in the human spirit--Abbie Hoffman.
PhilOchsLives is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-15-2008, 02:43 PM   #5
oldhippychick
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
From my favorite radio show (Fridays only), when I can find it:

http://www.sciencefriday.com/program/archives/200803142
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2008, 07:30 AM   #6
Knupfer
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Quote:
PhilOchsLives wrote View Post
LOL!
I don't blame him. If it's anything like the ape theory, then he has a reason to be embarrassed. This whole category is a science fiction area.
  Reply With Quote
Old 03-20-2008, 08:31 AM   #7
Facehammer
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Knupfer, I would argue that asserting the same thing over and over again while not providing the slightest shred of evidence is a surefire way to make yourself stupider. What say you?
  Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:28 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin - Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2000 - , Raving Atheists [dot] com frequency-supranational frequency-supranational