View Full Version : New Human Species Discovered

Rat Faced
10-30-2004, 08:26 PM
The discovery of a skeleton of a woman barely one meter tall who hunted pygmy elephants and giant rats 18,000 years ago could rewrite the origins of humanity, scientists in Australia said Thursday.

The perfectly preserved skeleton, about as big as a modern 3-year-old and with a grapefruit-sized skull, was found in a cave on the Indonesian island of Flores, about 600 kilometers east of Bali.

The female, nicknamed the Flores Hobbit, has been identified as a completely new member of the human race in the latest edition of the journal Nature.

The skeleton of the 30-year-old woman was found by a team from Australia's University of New England and the Indonesian Center for Archaeology in Jakarta.

Source (http://www.technewsworld.com/story/Hobbit-Skeleton-Could-Rewrite-Prehistory-37736.html)

Now that they may have discovered the remains of Dwarfs... what other mythological/legendary creatures do you think may have existed in the past?

I have heard that the legend of the Unicorn comes from the Rhino.. any others?

Do you think this discovery will change any current theories?

Is anyone interested in our little cousins at all?

10-30-2004, 08:30 PM
Read a long article about this in the Glasgow Herald. Absolutely fascinating! Really brings evolution to life.....er.. if you believe in that sort of thing. :unsure:

10-30-2004, 08:52 PM
My favourite bit of news of the week, it does really make you think.

They found six other skeletons the same size, along with a Komodo dragon and a dwarf elephant in the same cave - pretty cool stuff.

10-30-2004, 10:24 PM
Do you think this discovery will change any current theories?
Not the evolutionnary one, at least.
A scientist quoted on cnn.com (http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/science/10/27/dwarf.cavewoman.ap/index.html) said nanism caused by environmental causes is quite common, but was never observed in a human-related species.

Another said she probably wasn't related to homo sapiens, though.

"I don't think anybody can pigeonhole this into the very simple-minded theories of what is human," anthropologist Jeffery Schwartz of the University of Pittsburgh. "There is no biological reason to call it Homo. We have to rethink what it is."

Now that they may have discovered the remains of Dwarfs
I'm still waiting for a scientist to find elven-bones, though. :online2lo

edit: damn, the geek smiley isn't working!

10-30-2004, 11:27 PM
The implications of a "higher-thinking" being that is not, in any way, related to humans, could rightfully send a lot of the religious world into a tailspin.

I've been discussing this discovery at home for a while. It really is far bigger news than most people seem to believe. Unfortunate how it was on the very last page of the paper. :(


10-31-2004, 12:25 AM
I had not even heard about it until i read this post.

It does shed a few light onto "Fantasy Creatures/Beings" though. As they say, "There is no smoke without fire" so fantasy had to come from somewhere...

There are many mythical creatures that i have always believed have existed, for instance dragons, maybe not the fire breathing kind, but certainly in the form of dinosaurs. So why not others. I'm sure there are some truths in the existance of other legends, but like chinese whispers have evolved more-so in our minds than in real evolutionary tracts.

It does however pose a new discussion on our evolution from primates...

Another riddle is the tiny brain of Homo floresiensis, which at 380 millimeters is smaller than a chimpanzee's.
If their brain was smaller than a chimpanzee's then whom did they evolve from??

10-31-2004, 09:36 AM
So does this meen all those "Big foot" stories may be true

10-31-2004, 10:41 AM
I've been following this story. I like the possibility that they may still exist within the Indonesian rain forest (not likely but still...).

I don't think the discovery will send religion "into a tailspin", however, but it would be interesting that if these "hobbits" still existed how we would treat them. Would we treat them as equals and thus extend to them full human rights or would they be put in a zoo?

10-31-2004, 01:22 PM
Given that not all humans are afforded equal rights I think it unlikely we would allow them to cousins.

If they have intelligence (and the stone tools would seem to suggest they do) then they would be very wise to steer well clear of us.

With regards religion, I think it would only be an issue for the non-cerebral variety. I can't see mainstream Churches getting too bent out of shape.

10-31-2004, 04:22 PM
I think the majority would accept them were they still in existance, however there would always be prejudice... I think that they would be classed alongside so many as a "Developing Race".

As for Bigfoot... I reckon it's true anyways... Some kind of primate perhaps?

10-31-2004, 07:28 PM
I think all species would do well to avoid me in general!!! lol

I guess that were they to reveal themselves to us, no doubt it would not take long for our "Superior" intellect, and technological advances to devise a way of unwillingly irradicate them!

Rat Faced
10-31-2004, 08:14 PM
We irradicate primitive tribes of our own species, so i guess they wouldnt last long :unsure:

11-01-2004, 05:57 AM
I was thinking mostly of the sects of Judeo-Christianity, specifically the area in which animals are determined not to possess souls, and thus are unable to enter the Kingdom of Heaven. This is, of course, assuming that these beings are not accepted as "human," in which case they would fall into the "animal" classification. From a more scientific standpoint, some anthropologists argue that the Flores Hobbit isn't even part of the Homo genus.

The problem would arise when determining what seperates animals from humans. These beings had fire, created tools, were capable of hunting large game and thinking abstractly, they had language and invented simple vehicles (eg bamboo rafts), as well as lived in communities.

Now, the churches would have to decide whether or not these beings had souls, and thus the capability to be saved. It would require a redefining of what "human" is, especially if it's decided that they aren't even Homo. I could see Genesis 1:26 being quoted a lot in the ensuing debate. Likely it would be more of an issue if they were still in open existence, which was more of the thought I had.


11-01-2004, 05:04 PM
However how can one devise a way to do something unwillingly :huh: Ooops... the correction should be...

I guess that were they to reveal themselves to us, no doubt it would not take long for our "Superior" intellect, and technological advances to devise a way to "unwillingly" irradicate them!

My apologies... :blushing:

peat moss
11-02-2004, 01:32 AM
Yes I read the story , fascinating . But why the headline Hobbit found ? Thats what I got with our rag of a local paper .

11-02-2004, 05:22 AM
She was nicknamed the "Flores Hobbit" by the people who found her.


11-02-2004, 07:12 AM
She was nicknamed the "Flores Hobbit" by the people who found her.


I guess that's from Lord of teh rings.

I bet the next found is called Medow Vader, if comes after the last Star War movie.

(and then probably G. Lugas makes a movie or 2, and games, and...)


11-02-2004, 10:27 AM
I always thought that Rat Faced was another species...the Newcastle Hobbit...

11-02-2004, 12:32 PM
Flores because of the area...Hobbit because...well...she's three feet tall. ;) I kind of like how Lucy got her name, though.