Homo floresiensis commonly known as the hobbit, due to their height, is an extinct species of the genus homo. Fossils of this species were discovered in 2003 by a group of Australian researchers on an adventure to a cave called Liang Bua located on Indonesian island of Flores. It is said that the species lived as recently as 13,000 years ago, meaning they were around during the same time as modern humans. Knowing that Homo floresiensis had been living during that period of time made a controversial issue regarding their position in the human evolutionary tree.
Some scientists say the species could have either been a late surviving early homo species or modern individuals with disorder growth. From what scientists have obtained such as skulls
…show more content…
However, I would discard this probability because the chance of this disease affecting a whole group of species is insane. In the other hand, we humans are known to be very intelligent, therefore it is reasonable to believe that we have been evolving for millions of years and this has been proven by many researchers. Some scientists believe that as environment on earth evolved, so did humans. A significant human body part that has evolved has been the brain. The brain has evolved simultaneously with the environment; the size of the brain corresponds with the environment, growing just enough to survive. Our brain has approximately tripled the size in the past seven million years which explains why the homo floresiensis did not have the same size brain as modern …show more content…
It seemed like hobbits used these tools as a source of survival and hunted down animals such as: komodo dragons, small elephants, and big rodents. However, these stone tools were too sophisticated for a small brain creature to make (“Homo floresiensis: The Hobbit”) or even believe to be the creation of Homo erectus. Some scientists say it may be the work of Homo sapiens and that both species did encounter each other. This, however, has not been proven because it is said that modern humans arrived in the island of Flores about eleven thousand years ago. What if homo floresiensis did create these tools? Sounds a little crazy and unbelievable because how could’ve a previous species in the human evolutionary tree make a more sophisticated tool than its evolution? Well what if Homo erectus did not evolve from homo floresiensis and instead it was the other way around. We could say that this idea also sounds crazy, but the truth is that this is a pocket full of
Over the last few hundred years, more and more has been added to the world’s fossil collection, fossils from all over the world. New theories have been created and old theories have almost been proven about the evolution of man. For example, we have proof that different species of man existed with certain types of DNA sequences and instincts, some we may not have anymore, or some that other species did not have back then. Even though it is subjected to much debate, one of the most widely accepted theories however, is that Homo sapiens interbred with the slightly more primitive species of man, the Neanderthal.
The evolution of man is constantly in question. While we are reasonably sure that modern humans and primates are both related to the same common ancestor, there is constant debate over what initially caused the two species to split into early hominids and apes. According to some, our longest and most popular theory on the division of man and ape is profoundly wrong. However, those same individuals usually offer an equally controversial theory as a substitute, one that is almost impossible to scientifically test or prove. Both the Savanna Theory and the Aquatic Ape Theory offer solutions to how and why humans evolved into bipedal toolmakers. But with enough questioning, each loses its accountability to rhetorical science.
Did Jane Goodall’s research find the evidence about chimp’s tool making? Is the human the only species able to make the tool? How do you correlate this with human culture?
Shuker, K. 2001. The Hidden Powers of Animals: Uncovering the Secrets of Nature. London, England: Marshall Editions Ltd. p. 128.
There is evidence to suggest that Homo neanderthalensis and Homo sapiens had coexisted for approximately 35-40,000 years, (Fagan 2010) from around 60,000 years ago to 25,000 years ago when they finally went extinct (Gibbon 2001). Anthropologists are still uncertain what the cause of their extinction was. This paper will analyze three main theories of Neanderthal extinction. The first theory is the competition theory, which claims that the Homo sapiens and Neanderthals had to compete for resources, ultimately leading to their demise. The second theory I will discuss is the climate change theory, which claims that Homo sapiens lived while Neanderthals died because they were better adapted to the climate. The last theory I will discuss is the possible “extinction through absorption” theory which claims the Neanderthal interbred with the Homo sapiens and became one species. In this paper I will also be comparing the technologies, and diets of both species. In addition, I will look at the anatomic relation between the Neanderthals and Homo sapiens, how their body shape and size differed, and if this gave any advantage to one side or the other. My thesis for this paper will state that Homo sapiens and Homo neanderthalensis had co-existed but the disappearance of the Neanderthal in Eurasia is due to the appearance of the more culturally advanced and genetically superior Homo sapiens and the failure of the Neanderthal to adapt in an evolving climate.
The species A. afarensis is one of the better known australopithecines, with regards to the number of samples attributed to the species. From speculations about their close relatives, the gorilla and chimpanzee, A. afarensis’ probable social structure can be presumed. The species was named by Johanson and Taieb in 1973. This discovery of a skeleton lead to a heated debate over the validity of the species. The species eventually was accepted by most researchers as a new species of australopithecine and a likely candidate for a human ancestor.
My own opinion on this issue is that from the evidence at hand, there is no way to know for sure whether or not the Neanderthals were our species. From the skeletal evidence, it is clear that they were anatomically different from modern humans, and we know that this is because of geographic isolation. We also know that they have been found in the same locations, and it appears at the same time. If they were truly part of our species, then there would have been blending of the two types in these places. Trying to determine this from fossilized bones from a tiny percent of the population, limited DNA, and imperfect dating methods is impossible. Even if anthropologists think they are sure of either viewpoint, there may be evidence out there that will prove them wrong. So at this point in time, I think both scenarios are equally possible.
Bindon, Jim 2004 Fossil Hominids. ANT 270 Notes. http://www.as.ua.edu/ant/bindon/ant270/lectures/ hominids1.pdf Delson, Eric 1981
Heyerdahl countered every scientists’ belief by supplying them with his substantial evidence and by eventually setting out to sea himself. He argued that Polynesians had originated from Peru, and not Asia. With a strong trust in the numerous connections found between the Polynesians and the ancient Inca tribes, Heyerdahl set out to sea astonishing the world with his daring adventure over the Pacific Ocean in a simple raft. Not only was this journey a significant scientific feat, but it also proved that scientists had underestimated the use of a simple balsa wood raft by ancient people. The Kon-Tiki proved the previously believed theory wrong, which raises the question--what other beliefs could be challenged?
The first group of primates was the Ardipithecus group. They were the earliest humans closely related to other primates. The Ardipithecus group evolved in Africa and took the first step upright on two feet. Sahelanthropus tchadensis was the first human species to ever walk the earth. They were the building block of more complex species to come. There were many species that started the human race such as the Orrorin tugenensis. This species was nicknamed the Millenium Man and live 5.8-6.2 million years a...
afarensis led to what would later be a split in the species. Where one species led to the genus Paranthropus and another led to a later Australopithecus that later evolved into early Homo. Of course that is just conjecture, it is however known that Paranthropus was a later dead end of hominin evolution. Paranthropus translates to “beside humans,” due to them sharing many characteristic with Australopithecus and some even classify them among the Australopithecus, sometimes adding the prefix of “robust.” The reason for the term robust is because they had strong, robust back teeth, jaws, and face relative to other hominins. The Paranthropus line went extinct around 1.4 million years ago.
...e. "A Hypothesis to Explain the Role of Meat-Eating in Human Evolution." Www.cnr.berkely.edu. 4 Feb. 2001. Web. .
Science and religion are substantially two different aspects, yet it depends on the individual to choose to believe in what seems more logical to that individual. The significance of this study is to show the evidence that humans have evolved from primates by the use of other researchers’s collection of evidence and data with
The evidence for human evolution begins with the australopithecines. All the australopithecines were bipedal and therefore possible hominines. In details of their teeth, jaws, and brain size, however, they modify enough among themselves to be divided into five species: Australopithecus anamensis, A. afarensis, A. africanus, A. robustus, and A. boisei. Genus Homo are also divided in five different spices: Homo erectus, H. habilis, H. sapiens, and H. sapiens sapiens.
Throughout the long winding road that is human evolution; many species have helped shape who we are today. There was the early Australopithecus africanus which began to walk bipedally-upright with two feet and the Homo habilis which drastically developed the construction of handmade tools. But there is one species who is to be credited for the most critical advancements in human evolution; Homo erectus. Not only did Homo erectus advance us the most biologically, but also the most geographically.