In NOT A CHIMP I briefly mention the scientific spat over the most likely identity of the remains, LB1, originally thought to be those of a new, small, hominin, named Homo floresiensis. Some scientists at the time suggested the skull more likely resembled a severely microcephalic Homo sapiens, than a new species and Ralph Holloway and colleagues have re-visited this argument. As their abstract below says, they cannot rule out the interpretation that "The Hobbit" was a microcephalic human. Holloway is probably THE world authority on skull endocasts and thus must be taken seriously. The debate rumbles on!
Abstract
The designation of Homo floresiensis as a new species derived from an ancient population is controversial, because the type specimen, LB1, might represent a pathological microcephalic modern Homo sapiens. Accordingly, two specific craniometric ratios (relative frontal breadth and cerebellar protrusion) were ascertained in 21 microcephalic infants and children by using MRI. Data on 118 age-equivalent control (normocephalic) subjects were collected for comparative purposes. In addition, the same craniometric ratios were determined on the endocasts of 10 microcephalic individuals, 79 normal controls (anatomically modern humans), and 17 Homo erectus specimens. These ratios were then compared with those of two LB1 endocasts. The findings showed that the calculated cerebral/cerebellar ratios of the LB1 endocast [Falk D, et al. (2007) Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 104:2513–2518] fall outside the range of living normocephalic individuals. The ratios derived from two LB1 endocasts also fall largely outside the range of modern normal human and H. erectus endocasts and within the range of microcephalic endocasts. The findings support but do not prove the contention that LB1 represents a pathological microcephalic Homo sapiens rather than a new species, (i.e., H. floresiensis).