Re: 'Hobbit' human 'is a new species'
- From: "John Roth" <JohnRoth1@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 30 Jan 2007 06:44:47 -0800
On Jan 30, 4:08 am, "Paul Crowley"
<slkwuoiutiuytciu...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/6311619.stm
Report of paper in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
Dean Falk, of Florida State University, and her colleagues say the remains are
those of a completely separate human species: Homo floresiensis.
But why do people say stupid things like:
". . . became small in stature to cope with the limited supply
of food on the island. . . . "
Have they never heard of Malthus? Food is ALWAYS
in short supply EVERYWHERE.
It's a basic law of nature.
"Island Dwarfism" as well as the converse is a standard topic of
evolutionary development. Look it up. It's been part of the Flores
debate since the beginning.
John Roth
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: 'Hobbit' human 'is a new species'
- From: Paul Crowley
- Re: 'Hobbit' human 'is a new species'
- References:
- 'Hobbit' human 'is a new species'
- From: Paul Crowley
- 'Hobbit' human 'is a new species'
- Prev by Date: 'Hobbit' human 'is a new species'
- Next by Date: Re: 'Hobbit' human 'is a new species'
- Previous by thread: 'Hobbit' human 'is a new species'
- Next by thread: Re: 'Hobbit' human 'is a new species'
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|