# Homo Florensis (Hobbit) controversy **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [January 25, 2007, 10:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homo-florensis-hobbit-controversy/389471 "2007-01-25T22:00:08Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 4\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![chorpler](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chorpler/32/2888_2.png) [@chorpler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/chorpler)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2007, 3:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homo-florensis-hobbit-controversy/389471/21 "2007-02-06T03:14:52Z")
Somebody on a mailing list posted the following comment about _Homo floresiensis_: > [@](#): > > I saw a very recent documentary on the subject. One thing the original investigators pointed to as evidence of speciation was a supposedly unique dental structure. However, the exact same unique dental structure was found in modern humans living in the area. And the specific form of dwarfism (pygmy, I think) is relatively commonplace in the local population. The current debate raging over the “hobbits” seems to be about whether or not their particular type of microcephalism is unique or not. There are different types of microcephalism, and even if it _is_ unique that doesn’t make them a different species. At bottom, the controversy isn’t about science-- it’s about the discoverers wanting credit for discovery of a new species, which would get them book deals, big-money grants and lecture circuits. What they actually discovered may deserve more than just a footnote in history, but is certainly not all that significant. > > I find it _very_ unlikely that the exact same unique dental structure would be present in local, modern humans as in the remains of the so-called “hobbits”, if they are actually different species. This points to genetic drift a small, isolated population. Of course, if such a trend of genetic drift continues far enuff it can result in speciation, but it seems clear that in this case it didn’t progress that far. No one is claiming that the modern inhabitants of the area are not Homo Sapiens. > > Caveat: Anthropology is not my specialty, and it’s possible I’m wrong on this controversy. Time will tell. Is his analysis accurate? ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2007, 3:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homo-florensis-hobbit-controversy/389471/22 "2007-02-06T03:45:19Z")
[QUOTE=chorpler] Somebody on a mailing list posted the following comment about _Homo floresiensis_: Is his analysis accurate? [/QUOTE] I saw the documentary he’s talking about. The guy who is pushing that hypothesis is the aforementioned Teuku Jacob, with whom most of the other scientists seem to disagree. ---
**Author:** ![FRDE](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e68b1a/32.png) [@FRDE](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FRDE)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2007, 11:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homo-florensis-hobbit-controversy/389471/23 "2007-02-06T11:59:44Z")
As **Phlosphr** said, there are locals round there with the same physical dimensions, except the pictures that I have seen of them show that they wear modern clothing. The thing with modern scientists is that if you give them a chicken bone or two and a tooth, they’ll come up with an entirely new species. They have no understanding of dog breeding. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2007, 2:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homo-florensis-hobbit-controversy/389471/24 "2007-02-06T14:47:38Z")
[QUOTE=FRDE] As **Phlosphr** said, there are locals round there with the same physical dimensions, except the pictures that I have seen of them show that they wear modern clothing. [/quote] No, there are not. And \*\*Phlosphr \*\* didn’t say that, btw. The local people might be smaller than average, but not that small. And the skull is not consistent with our species. > [@](#): > > The thing with modern scientists is that if you give them a chicken bone or two and a tooth, they’ll come up with an entirely new species. No, they don’t. It’s been quite a while since Piltdown. > [@](#): > > They have no understanding of dog breeding. Complete nonsense. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/homo-florensis-hobbit-controversy/389471.md?page=1)