Metullus
Forum ¾-Wit Pro Tem
- Joined
- Feb 1, 2005
- Messages
- 5,260
From Wikipedia:Do not the specimens that result in the naming of Meganthropus indicate the existence of a large bipedal hominid? If I am wrong then I will retract my previous assertation. Regardless, 9+ ft and 800 - 1000lbs for a bipedal primate sounds extreme to me.
"Extreme claims
Meganthropus has been the target of numerous extreme claims, none of which are supported by peer-reviewed authors. Perhaps the most common claim is that Meganthropus was a giant, one unsourced claim put them at 9 feet (2.75 meters) tall and 750 to 1000 pounds (340 to 450 kilograms). No exact height has been published in a peer reviewed journal recently, and none give an indication of Meganthropus being substantially larger than H. erectus."
(Emphasis added)
Large? In the sense that we are a large hominid, yes. Eight feet and 800+ pounds, no.
Okay.Let's establish right away that we agree future additions to our genus are not unexpected.
Of course it is incomplete. I know of no paleoanthropologist that says otherwise. I certainly do not.IMO, the sum of the specimens on hand, the circumstances involved in the finding of each, and the nature of the fossil record itself paint a picture that is at best an incomplete picture of our history as a species.
It is, however, a not unreasonable hypothesis that HF represents a case of h. erectus undergoing island dwarfing on Flores and other islands in relative isolation. Time will tell.Again, it has by no means been established if HF's dwarfism occured on Flores or happened prior to their arrival.
I have always found the subject interesting, and I have never felt the need to drag BF into the mix to make it more interesting.Adding in what we call Meganthropus, this makes me very interested in Homo Erectus' history in SE Asia.
We have been able to find and identify animals that are physically smaller than BF, with smaller populations than are claimed for BF, in areas far less hospitable than those associated with BF, and in locals far less populated than those associated with BF. We cannot, however find BF. This is my point.Ask yourself, what were the circumstances involved in finding that antelope?Here's the crux- it's not "yet we CAN" rather "yet we HAVE." IMO, those are two very different things. Which then makes me reflect upon the circumstances of the finding and what that says about future findings of a great many things.
I always thought that was Krantz. Cuz' I mean, come on now...really.