Today’s New Reason To Believe

Posted by Fazale ‘Fuz’ Rana, Ph.D.

New research confirms affinity between H. floresiensis and H. erectus

For the last few weeks I have discussed the controversy surrounding Homo floresiensis. (Go here and here to read the past articles.) At times, it seems like anthropologists are all over the place when it comes to determining the identity of this diminutive creature. New research, however, indicates that anthropologists were headed in the right direction all along when they interpreted this creature to be a hominid with close connections to Homo erectus.

The confusion began in the fall of 2004. Australian and Indonesian paleoanthropologists shocked scientists with the publication of evidence for hobbit-sized hominids that coexisted for a time with modern humans. Fossils recovered on the Flores Island of Indonesia indicate that these hominids stood just over three feet tall with a chimpanzee-like brain size (380 cm3). Their cranial and facial features bear resemblance to Homo erectus and their post-cranial skeleton combines characteristics of the australopithecines (like “Lucy”) and H. erectus. The paleoanthropologists who recovered these remains classified them as a new species, Homo floresiensis.

Of the fossils recovered, the most remarkable specimen was a nearly complete skeleton of a female that dates to about 18,000 years in age. Other fossil and archeological evidence indicates that H. floresiensisexisted on Flores Island from about 95,000 to 12,000 years ago, when they became extinct. It appears that H. floresiensis coexisted with modern humans. Still, paleoanthropologists are not sure if the hominids had any actual contact with human beings.

Archeological evidence and animal remains indicate that H. floresiensis hunted and scavenged the dwarf elephants on the island, as well as rats, fish, snakes, frogs, birds, and tortoises.

Due to the coexistence of H. floresiensis with modern humans and their remarkable behavior—given their small brains—a minority of paleoanthropologists argue that these creatures are microcephalic human beings. Others have suggested that these creatures were insular dwarfs and cretins.

These interpretations of H. floresiensis have been met with skepticism by many paleoanthropologists. Since the discovery of the initial H. floresiensis remains, paleoanthropologists have recovered fossils from twelve other individuals, all of which display identical characteristics to the original find. Even though H. floresiensis used tools and hunted, their behavior was still crude when compared to modern humans. Like H. erectus, they used tools reminiscent of the Acheulean industry. Based on these findings, H. floresiensis behaved in nonhuman ways.

Brain shape studies and additional characterization of skeletal features distinguish H. floresiensis from microcephalic humans and confirm its status as a distinct hominid. New work adds support to this interpretation. A team from George Washington University performed multivariate analysis on the external physical features of the H. floresiensis skull, correcting for size difference effects. They concluded that the shape of this hominid’s skull differs significantly from the shape of modern human skulls. Based on skull shape, H. floresiensis appears to relate most closely with H. erectus, and to a lesser degree with H. habilis.

The weight of evidence points anthropologists away from any interpretation that regards H. floresiensis as a diseased or dwarfed modern human and sends them towards the erectines.

How does H. floresiensis fit into RTB’s human origins model? The easiest way to accommodate these creatures would be as diseased or dwarfed humans. But even as hominids, they still find a place in RTB’s creation model.

RTB’s biblical creation model views the hominids as animals created by God. Accordingly, these extraordinary creatures walked erect and possessed some level of intelligence, which allowed these animals to cobble crude tools and even adopt some level of “culture.” The RTB model maintains that the hominids were not spiritual beings made in God’s image, but reserves that status exclusively for modern humans.

The RTB model predicts biological similarities will exist among the hominids and modern humans to varying degrees. But, because the hominids were not created in God’s image, they would be expected to be distinct from modern humans in their cognitive capacity, behavior, “technology,” and “culture.”

Accordingly, H. floresiensis stands distinct from modern humans, not only in anatomy, but in behavior. Remarkable creatures in their own right, but nonetheless creatures that lacked the image of God.