Scientists dispute ‘new’ species discovery: Critics say Lead Researcher's claim jumps the gun

WORLD ^ | 09/11/2015 | DANIEL JAMES DEVINE

[SeekAndFind]

Deep inside a cave 30 miles from Johannesburg, South Africa, a tight crevasse guards the passageway to what was, until recently, the grave of at least 15 human-like individuals. Their bones and teeth—more than 1,500 fragments in all—lay in a heap in the bottom of a pitch-black chamber for ages, until two skinny spelunkers with flashlights squeezed into the earth deep enough to find them.

Now those bones are in the hands of scientists who say they belong to a new species of prehumans, with a mix of features typically associated with modern man or fossils belonging to Australopithecina, a group of creatures considered to be ancestors to humans on the evolutionary tree. The scientists, who announced their findings on Thursday, have named the new species Homo naledi, after the local word for “star.”

Depending on their age, the bones could throw into contention some widely accepted views of human evolution—such as the idea that only modern humans were smart enough to methodically bury their dead. The discovery is unusual in that so many fossils were found at a single dig site.

“With every bone in the body represented multiple times, it is already practically the best-known fossil member of our lineage,” said paleoanthropologist Lee Berger in a conference call with reporters. Berger, a University of Witwatersrand professor and National Geographic explorer-in-residence, led the effort to excavate and study the fossils.

But the discovery has already stirred up controversy among researchers, some of whom are unconvinced the fossils represent a new species of hominin—an evolutionary label that includes modern humans and their ancestors.

The definition of “species” is itself somewhat arbitrary. Christoph Zollikofer, an anthropologist at the University of Zurich, doesn’t believe the new fossils have enough “new and unique” features to justify calling them a new species.

“The fossil ensemble fits very well into what is already known as ‘early Homo erectus,’” he told me by email.

There’s no question the fossils, discovered deep inside Rising Star cave, are intriguing. Although the cave had been explored many times before, the bones were unknown to researchers until two spelunkers discovered, by chance, the narrow passage leading to them. The crevasse was so tight (8 inches in some places) Berger could not enter the fossil chamber himself: Instead he advertised on Facebook for slender scientists willing to carry out the claustrophobic excavation. Six women ultimately got the job. Berger and other team members ended up watching the excavation work by video link outside the cave.

Berger and the team that studied the fossils say the Rising Star hominins had brains as small as a gorilla’s, less than half the size of most people’s brains today. The males stood about 5 feet tall and weighed 100 pounds, on average. They said the creatures had curved fingers useful for climbing, but had feet similar to humans and suitable for long-distance walking. Their teeth had an odd combination of modern and “primitive” characteristics. Altogether, the team said, the fossils exhibited a “mosaic” of atypical features.

“Whenever you hear the word ‘mosaic’ in evolutionary lingo, what that means is this species does not fit very well into our preferred phylogenic scheme,” said Casey Luskin, a research coordinator for the Center for Science and Culture at the Discovery Institute, a think tank in Seattle that promotes intelligent design. “There’s a lot of people that are disputing that this could be a human ancestor.”

The scientists admit they don’t know the fossils’ age: The bones were not in a sediment layer that could be dated, and the researchers have not yet performed radiocarbon dating, which will damage the bones. Based on their interpretation of the evolutionary tree, they believe the fossils to be 2.5 million years old or more. That would potentially make them—to the delight of some evolutionary biologists—a transitional form between ancestral australopiths and the more modern Homo genus.

Berger admitted, though, that the fossils might be only tens of thousands of years old. Dating efforts are ongoing.

But some scientists dispute Berger’s contention that all 1,500 bones came from the same species.

“Why do all belong to the same species? Because they were found in the same cave,” wrote University of Pittsburgh anthropologist Jeffrey Schwartz in a commentary. “But, the published images tell a different story.” Schwartz said the skull fragments had different shapes, suggesting they came from different species and might not even belong in the Homo genus.

The bones came from at least 15 males and females, including infants and elderly. One big mystery is how these individuals ended up so deep in a hard-to-reach cavern: There are no teeth marks suggesting animals dragged the bones there, and no rubble suggesting a flood deposited them there. Berger’s hypothesis is that they were intentionally buried in the cave as part of a ritualistic interment.

[Bob434]

[[Doubtless we will also be told that they were gay as well.]]

one of the monkeys had a rainbow colored tooth implant

[Bob434]

[[Lucy’s actual remains did not included hands or feet and reconstructions are commonly presented with human or near-human hands and feet despite the fact that other skeletons of the same creature have hands and feet which are clearly those of an ape, with curved fingers for moving about in trees.]]

[[The story actually gets better (much better) from there if you can believe that, with evolutionists claiming that a deer or other animal trampled “Lucy”’s hips and pelvis, breaking them into pieces, and that the pieces congealed by chances into the conformation of those of an ape, and deriving the true picture of Lucy’s hips and pelvis by making a plaster cast, breaking it up with a saw, and then rearranging the pieces into a more human conformation. ]]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-backroom/1651429/posts

[House Atreides]

The artist’s rendering looks similar to Obama’s childhood transvestite babysitter. /sarc (or maybe not so sarc?)

[az_gila]

This is the guy with the credit for finding evacuating and describing these fossils. As such, he gets the first shot at proposing the name and placing in a genus. Now, all of the rest get to throw darts at him. Mostly, they are jealous that they didn’t make the discovery, but his opinion will have to withstand considerable criticism over the next few years. Probably none of these first complainers have even seen the fossils except on the PBS NOVA program.

I’m guessing that his description and name will stand, but we’ll see.

---

I agree with your guess, but I think technology has probably overcome your other comment on whether the other scientists had seen the fossils.

The TV presentation showed the bones being 3D scanned into a computer and exact replicas being made by a 3D printing process.

The other scientists world wide only need the digital 3D files to fully examine the shape and details of the fossils.

Score another one for technology and digital engineering...:^)

[House Atreides]

Correction: “She” wasn’t a transvestite, she was transgendered. And “she” was Barry’s “Nanny” and not his babysitter.

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/world/story/2012-03-05/obama-transgender-nanny/53372092/1

[Bob434]

[[“She” wasn’t a transvestite, she was transgendered.]]

Whatever- they all look alike to me- unnatural

[alexander_busek]

From the article:

The scientists admit they don’t know the fossils’ age: The bones were not in a sediment layer that could be dated, and the researchers have not yet performed radiocarbon dating, which will damage the bones. Based on their interpretation of the evolutionary tree, they believe the fossils to be 2.5 million years old or more.

From Wikipedia:

Radiocarbon dating is generally limited to dating samples no more than 50,000 years old, as samples older than that have insufficient 14 C to be measurable. Older dates have been obtained by using special sample preparation techniques, large samples, and very long measurement times. These techniques can allow dates up to 60,000 and in some cases up to 75,000 years before the present to be measured.

Thus - what the author of the article fails to recognize, or outright contradicts - radiocarbon dating would be useless in dating these fossils.

Regards,

[jonno]

Hmmm....I wonder, what would the skeleton’s of these two guys reveal about their “species”:
http://www.media4news.com/tallest-and-shortest-men-in-the-world-met-together-in-london/

[octex]

Might be related to Al Sharpton ...
********************
Reminds me more of former CA Rep. Waxman

[SunkenCiv]

• Homo naledi: New species of human ancestor discovered in South Africa
• New Species of Human Relative Discovered in South African Cave (Homo Naledi)

[ZULU]

I don’t think there is a clear cut division in many cases between these protohumans.