Not A Hobbit After All?

[seer]

I found this quote from Dr. Robert B. Eckhardt interesting:

"My estimate is that 80 percent or so of paleoanthropologists want this new species to be real—so much so that they are willing to overlook glaring errors and inconsistencies in the studies and conclusions of the archaeologists who found the bones. This is not surprising, since LB1 was proclaimed to be our generation's critical test case of paleoanthropological theory. By disproving the validity of this new species, we have called a central dogma into question."

http://news.psu.edu/story/141620/200...bbit-continues

[Manwë Súlimo]

I'm shire they'll figure it out eventually.

[Sparko]

I'm shire they'll figure it out eventually.

Nah they will keep dragon it out.

[seer]

Bad puns guys!

[Sparko]

Bad puns guys!

Manwe, I think Seer is being a little short with us.

[Zymologist]

Manwe, I think Seer is being a little short with us.

Your belittling of this discovery is the height of arrogance.

[KingsGambit]

Science just keeps sauron to new heights of discovery.

[seer]

You guys need to take this act on the road! ; )

[Sparko]

The discovery of this ancient hobbit skull can't be stopped. It will continue to gain momentum no matter what anyone tries.











It is very hard to brake an old hobbit.

[Manwë Súlimo]

I can't wait until science proves the story of Noah's Arkenstone.

[klaus54]

I found this quote from Dr. Robert B. Eckhardt interesting:



http://news.psu.edu/story/141620/200...bbit-continues

From which of Noah's sons do you conjecture Flores Man to be descended?

K54

[Roy]

http://news.psu.edu/story/141620/200...bbit-continues

What "dogma" do you think he is referring to?

There's one comment in that article that strikes me as untrue:

According to Eckhardt and his colleagues, the 14,200-square-kilometer island would not have offered food resources sufficient "for sustaining in isolation an adequate effective population" of hominids that would have provided enough genetic diversity to allow for survival and adaptation over hundreds of thousands of years.

An adequate effective population for survival of a species is usually given as being about 1,000, with a total population of 2-3,000.

Given that the Easter Islanders - who were much bigger than the Flores Islanders - survived for centuries with a population of that size on an island of only 160 km² - about 1% of the size of Flores - I see no reason why an effective population could not have survived on Flores. Other examples of populations surviving for hundreds or thousands of years in similarly-sized islands include the Hawaiians, the Faroe Islanders and the Andaman Islanders.

Given that the population density of hunter-gatherer societies has been estimated at about 0.5 per km², Flores could have supported a population of more than 5,000 even without agriculture - which is plenty big enough to maintain an isolated subspecies.

Roy

P.S. I look forward to seeing Moria puns.

[seer]

What "dogma" do you think he is referring to?

There's one comment in that article that strikes me as untrue:An adequate effective population for survival of a species is usually given as being about 1,000, with a total population of 2-3,000.

Given that the Easter Islanders - who were much bigger than the Flores Islanders - survived for centuries with a population of that size on an island of only 160 km² - about 1% of the size of Flores - I see no reason why an effective population could not have survived on Flores. Other examples of populations surviving for hundreds or thousands of years in similarly-sized islands include the Hawaiians, the Faroe Islanders and the Andaman Islanders.

Given that the population density of hunter-gatherer societies has been estimated at about 0.5 per km², Flores could have supported a population of more than 5,000 even without agriculture - which is plenty big enough to maintain an isolated subspecies.

Roy

P.S. I look forward to seeing Moria puns.

So you know more about this subject than Eckhardt?

[seer]

From which of Noah's sons do you conjecture Flores Man to be descended?

K54

Not the point of the thread.

This was:

"My estimate is that 80 percent or so of paleoanthropologists want this new species to be real—so much so that they are willing to overlook glaring errors and inconsistencies in the studies and conclusions of the archaeologists who found the bones. This is not surprising, since LB1 was proclaimed to be our generation's critical test case of paleoanthropological theory. By disproving the validity of this new species, we have called a central dogma into question."

So some scientists are will to over look the facts to support their dogma.

[Roy]

So you know more about this subject than Eckhardt?

Apparently.

Roy