[Taxacom] floresiensis (the "Hobbit" hominids) in the news

John Grehan calabar.john at gmail.com
Fri Apr 21 22:35:29 CDT 2017


Thanks for the alert on floresiensis Ken. Even though I am no longer
actively looking at such issues as in the past I will take a look at their
paper. As palo-hominid studies are often more phenetic than cladistic (even
if dressed up in cladistic language) I won't hope for too much, but it
would be nice to be surprised.

The latest artists renditions of floresiensis still give them great hair
cuts (although a bit more work needed on the bangs)
https://phys.org/news/2017-04-indonesian-hobbits-revealed.html. No doubt
about it, the first hominid tool belonged to a barber. Spear and the wheel
obviously came much later :)

John Grehan

On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 7:10 PM, Kenneth Kinman <kinman at hotmail.com> wrote:

> Hi All,
>
>       The "hobbit" fossil humans are in the news again.  I haven't seen
> the new paper, but the author is quoted as saying that it seems to be a
> sister species of Homo habilis.  I assume that means H. habilis (sensu
> stricto), which I classify as a subspecies (Homo habilis habilis).  This
> would not surprise me, because I have argued for years that floresiensis is
> more primitive than either Homo erectus erectus (in Asia) or even Homo
> erectus ergaster (in Africa).  Therefore, my 2009 classification (see
> below) showed floresiensis as a possible sister to Homo erectus georgicus.
> But I don't know if the new paper even discusses H. e. georgicus.
>
>
>        Anyway, if the "hobbits" are sister to H. habilis habilis, it would
> actually be slightly more primitive than H. e. georgicus, and would move up
> in the classification into species Homo habilis (sensu lato).   I would
> then code them as 2A  H. h. habilis  and then  2B  H. h. floresiensis.  And
> together they would form the sister group of the clade  {{H. erectus + H.
> sapiens}} (as shown further below).
>
> ---------------Ken Kinman
>
>
> 2009 classification ( if garbled, see original posting at
> http://markmail.org/message/jdauv2vzzuebvbr2 ):
>
>
> 1 Homo habilis%
>
> 1 H. h. rudolfensis
>
> 2 H. h. habilis
>
> 3 {{H. erectus + H. sapiens}}
>
> _a_ Homo erectus%
>
> 1 H. e. georgicus
>
> ? H. e. floresiensis ("hobbit")
>
> 2 H. e. ergaster
>
> 3 H. e. erectus
>
> _a_ {{Homo sapiens}}
>
> _a_ Homo sapiens
>
> 1 H. s. antecessor
>
> B H. s. cepranensis
>
> 2 H. s. heidelbergensis
>
> _a_ H. s. neanderthalensis
>
> 3 H. s. rhodesiensis
>
> 4 H. s. idaltu
>
> 5 H. s. sapiens
>
> ----------------------------------------------
>
> 2017??:
>
>
> 1 Homo habilis%
>
> 1 H. h. rudolfensis
>
> 2A H. h. habilis
>
> 2B H. h. floresiensis
>
> 3 {{H. erectus + H. sapiens}}
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Taxacom Mailing List
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at:
> http://taxacom.markmail.org
>
>
> Nurturing Nuance while Assaulting Ambiguity for 30 Years, 1987-2017.
>


More information about the Taxacom mailing list