Marc Verha
Mon, Mar-24-08, 06:16
I'm reading J.Agusti & M.Anton 2002 "Mammoths, sabertooth &
hominids" Columbia UP NY, p.260 "The Mediterranean islands:
the last refuge". All large island mammals have dwarfed forms.
Why should Hf on Flores be an exception? Hf simply was a
dwarfed island relative of early Homo along the Indian Ocean
shores. I see nothing pathological in this species.
But, of course, an early Homo on an island is a pro-AAT
argument. It's difficult to say that it's a pro-savanna
arugment, but we never know what the Savanna Fantasts will
make of it...
--Marc
Op 24-03-2008 07:19, Algis Kuliukas <algis@kuliukas.com>
schreef:
On the recent paper: The Homo floresiensis cranium (LB1):
Size, scaling, and early Homo affinities AD Gordon, L Nevell &
B Wood 2008 ... LB1, which is shown by multivariate analysis
to differ significantly from that of modern humans, is similar
to that of Homo erectus sensu lato, and, to a lesser extent,
Homo habilis. Our results are consistent with hy- potheses
that suggest the Liang Bua specimens represent a diminutive
population closely related to either early H.erectus s.l. from
E.Africa and/or Dmanisi or to H.habilis ...
> --- In AA50@yahoogroups.com, Marc Verhaegen
> <m_verhaegen@...> wrote:
>
> Hi Marc,
>
> Thanks for that. I had briefly read it before but read it
> again to make sure I'd not missed anything.
>
> Yes, it's a good paper and it does make a good case that LB1
> appears to be most like early Homo (most like those from
> Dmanisi, but also very close to African finds too).
>
> However, there are a couple of problems:
>
> 1) Their data is pretty crude (although the presentation
> looks very impressive). It uses only a few second hand
> measurements as opposed to a propeer 3D digitized
> scanning. Someone should do a proper 3D digitizing of the
> LB1 skull and publish proper comparisons. I tried to do
> this with the innominate but, of course, it was so badly
> damaged after the excavation that is now impossible.
>
> 2) They did not include any pathological samples in their
> study at all. Their paper was before Obendorf's so one
> can forgive them for not considering cretins but I think
> until a proper study has been done including some
> pathological samples too, the most sensible position to
> be here is neutral. On this point they say that if LB1
> was pathological (they only considered microcephaly) then
> its pathology manifested itself anatomically in exactly
> the same was as do early Homo. Of course they considered
> this unlikely.
>
> But I wonder...
>
> I have uploaded Obendorf et al's 2008 paper (in AAT3/files)
> which I think makes an equally good case for cretinism.
>
> Anyway...
>
> I think the LB1 cretin idea provides a rather fascinating
> possibility: What if a migration to coastal habitats around
> 2.6 Ma caused sufficient change in diet, including of course
> far greater levels of Iodine consumption, that it lead to
> some basic changes in our metabolism. Crawford et al have
> made a pretty good case that this sort of dietary shift made
> encephalisation possible so what if part of that suit of
> traits included a kind of Iodine-switching which we
> recognise as normal in modern humans but actually is
> manifested as some kind of cretinism in earlier forms?
>
> Do you see what i mean? In this light, myxoedematous endemic
> (ME) cretins are a kind of 'throw back' to earlier hominid
> forms manifest simply due to an extreme lack of Iodine - a
> substance that the genus Homo had come to rely on in its
> diet due to coastal life?
>
> Now wouldn't this set the cat amongst the pidgeons? It could
> resolve the LB1 dilemma and at the same time provide a huge
> boost for waterside hypotheses.
>
> Anyone fancy co-authoring a paper on this with me?
>
> All the best
>
> Algis
hominids" Columbia UP NY, p.260 "The Mediterranean islands:
the last refuge". All large island mammals have dwarfed forms.
Why should Hf on Flores be an exception? Hf simply was a
dwarfed island relative of early Homo along the Indian Ocean
shores. I see nothing pathological in this species.
But, of course, an early Homo on an island is a pro-AAT
argument. It's difficult to say that it's a pro-savanna
arugment, but we never know what the Savanna Fantasts will
make of it...
--Marc
Op 24-03-2008 07:19, Algis Kuliukas <algis@kuliukas.com>
schreef:
On the recent paper: The Homo floresiensis cranium (LB1):
Size, scaling, and early Homo affinities AD Gordon, L Nevell &
B Wood 2008 ... LB1, which is shown by multivariate analysis
to differ significantly from that of modern humans, is similar
to that of Homo erectus sensu lato, and, to a lesser extent,
Homo habilis. Our results are consistent with hy- potheses
that suggest the Liang Bua specimens represent a diminutive
population closely related to either early H.erectus s.l. from
E.Africa and/or Dmanisi or to H.habilis ...
> --- In AA50@yahoogroups.com, Marc Verhaegen
> <m_verhaegen@...> wrote:
>
> Hi Marc,
>
> Thanks for that. I had briefly read it before but read it
> again to make sure I'd not missed anything.
>
> Yes, it's a good paper and it does make a good case that LB1
> appears to be most like early Homo (most like those from
> Dmanisi, but also very close to African finds too).
>
> However, there are a couple of problems:
>
> 1) Their data is pretty crude (although the presentation
> looks very impressive). It uses only a few second hand
> measurements as opposed to a propeer 3D digitized
> scanning. Someone should do a proper 3D digitizing of the
> LB1 skull and publish proper comparisons. I tried to do
> this with the innominate but, of course, it was so badly
> damaged after the excavation that is now impossible.
>
> 2) They did not include any pathological samples in their
> study at all. Their paper was before Obendorf's so one
> can forgive them for not considering cretins but I think
> until a proper study has been done including some
> pathological samples too, the most sensible position to
> be here is neutral. On this point they say that if LB1
> was pathological (they only considered microcephaly) then
> its pathology manifested itself anatomically in exactly
> the same was as do early Homo. Of course they considered
> this unlikely.
>
> But I wonder...
>
> I have uploaded Obendorf et al's 2008 paper (in AAT3/files)
> which I think makes an equally good case for cretinism.
>
> Anyway...
>
> I think the LB1 cretin idea provides a rather fascinating
> possibility: What if a migration to coastal habitats around
> 2.6 Ma caused sufficient change in diet, including of course
> far greater levels of Iodine consumption, that it lead to
> some basic changes in our metabolism. Crawford et al have
> made a pretty good case that this sort of dietary shift made
> encephalisation possible so what if part of that suit of
> traits included a kind of Iodine-switching which we
> recognise as normal in modern humans but actually is
> manifested as some kind of cretinism in earlier forms?
>
> Do you see what i mean? In this light, myxoedematous endemic
> (ME) cretins are a kind of 'throw back' to earlier hominid
> forms manifest simply due to an extreme lack of Iodine - a
> substance that the genus Homo had come to rely on in its
> diet due to coastal life?
>
> Now wouldn't this set the cat amongst the pidgeons? It could
> resolve the LB1 dilemma and at the same time provide a huge
> boost for waterside hypotheses.
>
> Anyone fancy co-authoring a paper on this with me?
>
> All the best
>
> Algis