Re: Introducing myself, and several questions

Quoting Sally Caves <scaves@...>:

> This or last week's.  I'd consult my copy, but my husband has spirited it
> off somewhere.
> Sal.
I finally managed to locate that article. It mentions both the possibility of
the LB1 skeleton belonging to a microcephalic dwarf H. sapiens, and of being an
erectus derivative. Nobody seems to think it's a sapiens-derived *species*, and
the microcephalic dwarf theory ought be pretty much sunk by the subsequent
finds of additional hobbitesque specimens.

The perhaps most intriguing idea is that it derives not from "classic" erectus,
but from something like the Dmanisi hominids (variously classified as Homo
habilis, H. georgicus, and H. erectus; it's the definition of a transitional
form). Body-size and, apparently, some morphological features are more like
those of the Dmanisi hominids than those of East Asian H. erectus, suggesting
that two Homo species may have lived simultaneously in Asia for over a million
years.

                                                        Andreas

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Andreas Johansson" <andjo@...>
> To: <CONLANG@...>
> Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2005 5:53 PM
> Subject: Re: Introducing myself, and several questions
>
>
> > Quoting Sally Caves <scaves@...>:
> >
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: "Andreas Johansson" <andjo@...>
> >>
> >> > I've not read the SciAm article, but it seems to be generally thought
> >> > that
> >> > floresiensis was an erectus offshoot, not a sapiens one.
> >> >
> >> >                                                    Andreas
> >>
> >> IIRC, the Scientific American article supports the idea that Floresiensis
> >> is
> >> from Sapiens, and shows dwarfism.  It exhibits the skull features.  Its
> >> main
> >> point is that island species tend to exhibit either gigantism or dwarfism
> >> for purposes of survival and they give examples with the dwarf elephant
> >> and
> >> the giant rat.  I'm not saying I believe it (back to doubt, again!) but
> >> this
> >> was the thrust of the essay.
> >
> > What issue is it? I should be able to check it out in the uni library
> > tomorrow.
> >
> >                                                   Andreas
> >
>