Top minds in 'Hobbit' debate gather at Stony Brook University

[Adsos Letter]

Source: Science Centric

As the debate rages on about whether Homo floresiensis - so called 'Hobbit' - fossils discovered on the Indonesian island of Flores in 2003 represent a separate human species, researchers currently in the process of describing and analysing the remains will all be in the same place at once to advance the discussion on Tuesday, 21 April, during the 7th Annual Human Evolution Symposium at Stony Brook University. Convened by Richard Leakey, the world renowned palaeoanthropologist who is a Professor of Anthropology at Stony Brook University, the public symposium, 'Hobbits in the Haystack: Homo floresiensis and Human Evolution,' is hosted by the Turkana Basin Institute at Stony Brook.

'During the Hobbit symposium, we will do our best to separate fact from myth on many of the controversial issues surrounding this prehistoric hominin which has gained international celebrity status,' said William Jungers, Distinguished Teaching Professor and Chair of the Department of Anatomical Sciences at Stony Brook.

Nicknamed 'Flo' and referred to as a 'Hobbit' due to its brain size (about a third of the size of modern humans) and small physical stature, the enigmatic Homo floresiensis has emerged as one of the most fascinating and perplexing twists to the story of human evolution in recent history. Dated to only 17,000 years ago, these 'hobbits' possessed a shocking number of primitive morphologies more reminiscent of earlier Homo erectus or even Australopithecus, than modern humans.

http://www.sciencecentric.com/news/article.php?q=09020750-top-minds-hobbit-debate-gather-at-stony-brook-university

------------------------------------------------------------

Another very controversial, ongoing debate. There is a great deal more about this on the net for those who don't mind doing the Google.

[Hoopla Phil]

1. Very interesting.

[Grey]

2. Cool, Thanks.

[crimsonblue]

3. why is this controversial?

Why is it controversial to have another sub-species of humans? It's biology and the natural progression of evolution. :shrug:

[Adsos Letter]

4. it is only controversial because there are a group of scientists...

arguing that this is not a member of the human species.

I'll see if I can find a link to the story...

[crimsonblue]

5. Check the DNA...

if it does not match the DNA of Homo sapiens to a predetermined percentage, then it's a new species. Otherwise, it is a sub-species of modern man. My money would be on it being a different species, because the phenotypical differences are distinct, but this could just be because of the evolution and natural selection that acted on the population (although, changes wrought by this would mean that it is a different species).