Jeffrey Schwartz is co-author of the book Extinct Humans,which is an okay book.
Posted on 10/30/2004 7:53:02 AM PDT by blam
Dispute over classification of new species of prehistoric 'human'
The World Today - Thursday, 28 October , 2004 12:22:00
Reporter: Alison Caldwell
ELEANOR HALL: The discovery of the dwarf humans or hobbits, as we just heard one the scientists calling them, has generated enormous interest and excitement among anthropologists around the world.
But not all of them agree with the Australian scientists that this is a new species of human.
Jeffrey Schwartz, who is Professor of Anthropology at the University of Pittsburgh in the Untied States, says while the discovery is extraordinary, the creature is more like an ape than a human.
Speaking to our reporter, Alison Caldwell, Professor Schwartz said the discovery highlights the need to reassess the classification system.
JEFFREY SCHWARTZ: There are a couple of problems in human evolutionary studies. One is the lack of definition of the genus homo. People just kept throwing things in it that didn't look primitive to them, in other words, couldn't be from the… weren't the older fossils that we know of, like Lucy or those things from Africa.
So the genus homo became a waste basket. And the more stuff you put in it that looks different, the more you can find similarities between new things that you find.
This specimen is so out of the ballpark, even with this very sloppy conglomeration that we call genus homo, that it would be foolhardy, I think, to stick it into the genus because you don't know where else to put it.
I think the specimen, on top of everything else, really should send a very strong signal to my colleagues and others that the human fossil record really needs to be analysed from the bottom up – start from square one, start thinking about what it means to be a hominid how to define a hominid, how to define the genus homo, and don't be afraid if the number of different species in genera that you might hypothesise comes out to be a whole lot more than we historically and traditionally thought it would be.
ALISON CALDWELL: So if it's not a hominid, if it's not a genus homo, then where would you put it? That's what you find difficult – where do we put it?
JEFFREY SCHWARTZ: Exactly. I mean, I am just so both pleased with this find that's been made, I'm so boggled by the array of unexpected combinations of skeletal and dental morphologies, some of which, like, even in the upper part of the large lower leg bone, the tibia, the two surfaces in Australopiths, like Lucy and other early hominids, as well as in us and other things that we call homo, should be both concave and at the same level, but they're not.
This is more like an ape where one side, the inner side, of your knee on the tibia is low and concave, and the other side is higher and at least flat.
Then you have the femur, which looks like a Australopith, the upper leg bone, you have the face that doesn't look like anything we know except below the eye socket is the most homo of the whole skeleton.
The back of the skull, the profile, hints at Homo erectus as we know it from Java, but it doesn't have the true features of that species. So, it's really an enigma. It's… I like puzzles. This is really going to keep me busy for years trying to figure this one out.
ELEANOR HALL: Anthropologist, Professor Jeffrey Schwartz from the University of Pittsburgh in the United States, speaking to Alison Caldwell.
Jeffrey Schwartz is co-author of the book Extinct Humans,which is an okay book.
Who really cares about all the unseccessful hominids? They are all gone.
A few Neanderthals are, NO DOUBT, still in the gene pool. That HAD to have happened, a mating of Neanderthal with homo sapiens....HAD to have happened.
We see those remnants today in the KERRY (John "Effing")/EDWARDS (Breck Girl-Senator Gone) campaign. I am POSITIVE that James Carville has some Neanderthal in him. He is just too...oh, never mind, you get my point.
At least none of the Y-chromosomes found in living men can be traced back to Neanderthal males, and none of the mitochondrial DNA goes back to Neanderthal women...whether there is still some way some Neanderthal genetic material could be present that hasn't been detected yet, I don't know enough about genetics to say.
Gray areas and disputes about bin-lumping are to be expected if, historically, there has existed a full spectrum of features evolving gradually, diversifying in a family tree of relatedness, and the bins are a human convention based upon the relatively few specimens known long ago. The new finds are often an awkward fit to the existing bins, seeming to straddle the boundaries.
"...whether there is still some way some Neanderthal genetic material could be present that hasn't been detected yet, I don't know enough about genetics to say..."
Well, ok. Pretty much in the same boat, but I did stay at a Holiday... No, to be series, I wanted to mention a Discovery Science show I saw about a year or so ago about primitive humans. The thrust of one argument was that there was no Neanderthal DNA found in any of us modern types. But: another, unrelated show, same channel (I think), was discussing the paucity of modern human DNA diversity, as in, way too much similarity for such a large and spread out population. In relating this to a paper submitted by a student (doctoral? masters candidate? I don't know, but it was in the field of vulcanism) espousing a theory that there had, at one point, been a mass die-off of modern humanity, about 15,000 years ago, possibly as a result of volcanic activity. So, maybe there WAS homo-sapiens-sapiens DNA mixed with Neanderthal DNA at one time, but the thinning of the herd has culled it out, at least in practical terms. Just a little food for thought.
Super -volcano Toba is reputed to have reduced the world-wide human population to 2,000, 75,000 years ago.
Tree-rings indicate there have been at least five catastrophic worldwide events that affected the human population over the last 10k years alone.
These catastrophic events are covered in the excellent book, Exodus To Arthur, by professor Mike Baillie.
And what makes it worse is that new, primary evidence like this keeps coming to light in areas of the world that were previously "off limits" for further exploration because of conclusions based on that human convention of long ago.
The new conventional wisdom is that we're all "out of Africa" so there's no point in looking for parallel or independent human evolution elsewhere. This despite huge areas of the globe like Siberia, China, Central Asia, Australia and places like Indonesia that remain relatively unexplored or catalogued anthropologically. It reminds me of a similar academic fiasco involving the word Clovis.
I guess I just don't understand this human need to reach Cosmic conslusions from fragmentary evidence. I know the roles that egos and academic budgets play in all of the posturing but science is no place for dogmatism. Unfortunately the public (and some "researchers") haven't learned the distinctions between theory and fact.
There's not much question that Africa is a starting point, given an evidence trail of early hominids there and the utter lack of anything comparable elsewhere. There's an active controversy over how many waves came out of Africa and when, and how much interbreeding if any happened between successive waves in any given non-African spot. There has been no effort to restrict research geographically.
The DNA evidence points to an African origin. Africa, as would be expected, is where mankind's genetic variability is the greatest. I've also heard this about the linguistic variability. As already mentioned, the bone men of paleontology are in solid agreement.
It's a long way from just guessing. The questions involve how many waves outbound, when, and how much interbreeding. THOSE are the questions.
No active effort, that is. It's the old: "Don't bother to dig any deeper; we've already reached the Clovis level" conventional wisdom.
We may indeed all be "out of Africa." I've followed research on the several waves of migration with interest. But there are also intriguing reasons to consider parallel human evolution elsewhere. Peking Man has never been explained to my personal satisfaction and I'm glad the Chinese are funding additional research at that site after the tragic loss of most of the original finds. If you haven't already, do a little Googling on Mungo Man.
My only essential point is it's important to prevent the working hypothesis from becoming rigid and dogmatic. As this Indonesian find has proven, there may be (I personally believe there certainly are) essential and fundamental pieces of the human origin puzzle as yet undiscovered. They should be considered independently and objectively and not necessarily forced to fit the African model. Maybe it's just me but this "out of Africa" stuff has always had a faint whiff of political correctness.
IOW, the idea doesn't bother you. You're just kicking and screaming against following the massive evidence for it because ...
I've followed research on the several waves of migration with interest. But there are also intriguing reasons to consider parallel human evolution elsewhere. Peking Man has never been explained to my personal satisfaction...
It's Homo erectus, the same species as Java Man and many other finds around the world, including Africa. Erectus is (that we know of now) the first really successful hominid to spread far out of Africa.
... and I'm glad the Chinese are funding additional research at that site after the tragic loss of most of the original finds.
We have lots of good drawings and photos of the original find. It's a Homo erectus site. Similar finds have been made in China since, whether or not the originals of the first batch ever turn up.
If you haven't already, do a little Googling on Mungo Man.
Australian H. sapiens sapiens, same species as us, with some primitive features including a controversial report of variant mtDNA. Originally dated to about 60K years ago, day before yesterday compared to erectus. New evidence says probably even younger, maybe 40K. What about it?
I was wrong or misinformed ona few points so I guess there's no argument: we all came out of Africa and there's no point in considering any possible new evidence or even looking for it. Case closed. Thanks for the lesson.
George W. Bush will win reelection by a margin of at least ten per cent
Please FREEPMAIL me if you want on, off, or alter the "Gods, Graves, Glyphs" PING list --
Archaeology/Anthropology/Ancient Cultures/Artifacts/Antiquities, etc.
The GGG Digest -- Gods, Graves, Glyphs (alpha order)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.