I have written about the wonderful Flores Hobbit skeleton found in Indonesia.  I knew from the first moment I saw the skull, this was truly a separate, earlier species of homobilis-type pre-human and it seems these wonderful relations of ours co-habited  Indonesia’s dense jungles long after homo sapiens, the murderous apes, took over.  It is eternally tragic that these lovely forest-dwellers are now extinct.  But then, we are extinguishing the last of the Great Ape communities.  Anyway, the debate about the ‘hobbit skull’ is pretty much done and yes, it is a distinct species related to us.




















‘Hobbit’ skull found in Indonesia is not human, say scientists | Mail Online


Scientists analysing a ‘hobbit’-sized skull found five years ago have claimed that it is not human.

The fossil was discovered in Indonesia and named Homo floresiensis, or ‘hobbit’, but its species was not known.

Now researchers at the Department of Anatomical Sciences at Stony Brook University claim the shape of skull is consistent with a scaled-down human ancestor but not with modern humans, Science Daily reports.

They used 3-D shape analysis to study the size, shape and asymmetry of the cranium.

They compared it with other extinct homini species as well as with modern humans and apes.



Once again, I am very pleased.  Here are two previous stories I wrote about this:

May, 2006:  Evolution News: Hobbits Are A Different Species

I finally had time today to sit down and examine the “hobbit” skull. I draw a lot of faces and use photos and other items to study how faces are built upon the bones below. I took one look at the Hobbit’s skull and it was immediately obvious it is not any homo sapiens. So I drew on top of it, following the contours. Meet the shy dweller deep in her lush forest as she leaves her Hobbit hole.

The scientists who revealed this astonishing find are very aggravated that news stories ran all over the place yesterday “debunking” their find. I was very angry about those stories, too, for there was no hard data to back up the contentions that this wonderful creature was just “a diseased human.”

Here are the scientists who found the skull and tools, debunking the debunking:

When I discussed in an email that the other finds of Homo floresiensis were being ignored, Alan Mann, professor of anthropology at Princeton University, reinforced Martin’s point of view in an online reply: “I am aware of the other, very fragmentary materials, but they show nothing of the features that would distinguish these guys from the very small living locals.”


Peter Brown, however, denounces this in an exclusive to Cryptomundo, and says critics should be asked “to point you at a human mandible with the same features as those from Liang Bua. Claiming that they have the same features as small local people is simply untrue.”

In October 2005, in Nature, Mike Morwood’s team described more fossil remains, including a mandible, arm and other similarly small bones from nine individuals. Two mandibles also share dental features and lack of a chin, a portion of the jaw common to all Homo sapiens regardless of size.

“We can now reconstruct the body proportions of H. floresiensis with some certainty,” the researchers wrote in the Oct. 11 online issue of the journal Nature. “The finds further demonstrate the LB1 … is not just an aberrant or pathological individual but is representative of a long-term population.”

I agree with them. My artist’s eye which studies human faces closely all the time is strongly struck by the differences within the face of this….shy forest dweller.

First: the eye orbits are huge! As a proportion of the skull, much much larger than homo sapiens! Here is a classic microcephalic skull.Deformed_human_skull_1

This is a multiple view of the Hobbit’s skull.


Click on image to enlarge


The orbits of the shy forest dwelling hobbit are huge while the microcephalic skull keeps the orbs in proportion to the face, unlike the hobbit, the face is scrunched up whereas the hobbit’s face is open and clear with a long upper lip/nose and no chin whereas the human has a very sharp, obvious chin!


Here is a human skull and neandertal skull side by side. Homosapiens_neanderthal_skulls
Neither has huge eye orbs! Neither looks remotely like the hobbit. And both dwarf the hobbit’s skull. The primitive tools found with the hobbit look like Archaean period tools not the later Stone Age tools, the hobbit’s brains were smaller than homo sapiens or other near relatives but packed in more social/tool using skills than any of the older members of the Great Ape families.
S3_1Here is a homo erectus skull.Note how much more great apian it looks! Like a gorilla. Not like the hobbit’s skull which looks more like small forest dwelling monkey skulls. Yet it is certainly very close to us, genetically. Much closer than the chimpanzee. The genetic differences were probably extremely small, less than 0.5%.

Also the teeth are not sharp. The jaw is wider at the hinge than ours probably for chewing on hard to chew plants and nuts. But a chimpanzee can rip a human apart with their sharp fangs, this gentle creature couldn’t cause us much fear or harm! 
Click on image to enlarge
_hobbit_vs_human_skullsHere is my scale of comparison. It is plainly obvious that the hobbit skull has some very strong non-homo sapiens aspects to it. The orbs are the same size as ours yet the head is much smaller plus the shape is totally different, the orbs being nearly totally round in the forest dweller and in humans, this oval shape that has a cruel edge to it’s formation. Sagging downwards from the nose.

The noses are totally different. Humans have a bridge whereas the hobbit doesn’t. The top of the nostrils in humans has a sharp upwards tilt while in the hobbit, this is missing entirely. The nose opening is the same size for both with the hobbit perhaps somewhat larger, again, a small human would have a small opening there.

The cheekbones stick out much sharper on the hobbit and no chin while it is the opposite in the human skull. Lastly, the tops of the heads are significantly different with probably the hobbit having more muscles attached to the top but not as many as the other Great Apes who have huge ridges there. This truly makes the hobbit well within the class of homo erectus-family groupings.

I really wish they were still running around in the forest, darting in and out of shafts of sunlight. What a tragedy they are no more!



January, 2007:  Evolution News: Scientists Verify Hobbit Species From Indonesian Cave

It is so satisfying to be proven right! I said, after closely examining the Hobbit’s skull and drawing her face, this is a new creature. Not a diseased human. This has now been confirmed by further examinations of this lovely hobbit’s bones. I really wish they still lived on, deep in the jungles of Asia!

Many homo sapiens still refuse to understand evolution, understand how we turned into a specific species.  They don’t want to believe that there were other humanoids on this planet.  Instead, they want to believe in some sort of magical but very malicious gods created us out of various odds and ends like pieces of bone or mud.  Yuck.  Why such stories are considered to be ‘elevated’ always baffles me.  


Nothing is stranger than and more marvelous than evolution!  Evolution has many levels to it.  Recently, people were posting links to stories about the possibility of a sudden ‘flip’ in the magnetic poles. I kept putting off, talking about this.  Some people fear this will lead to mass extinctions. But it probably will not.  What is required is a long term change in the environment.  And one very specific thing: the babies, the young, the next generation dies.  


A polar flip won’t do this because all species will be affected the same time and I don’t see a polar flip causing plants to die, oceans to shift or other mega-effects.  It won’t take too many generations of migratory animals to incorporate the ‘flip’ since all of them depend on currents, wind directions and amount of sunlight, to find their way around.  


For example, migratory birds can, by looking at the sun, know which is north and which is south. Also, they migrate north or south by tracking and following the prevailing winds.  They have to wait until the wind is blowing south, in Fall.  For example, and they have to judge when the winds are strong enough or it takes too much effort to fly.  


I am much more worried about human depredation.  We are a killer species.  We even hate each other with amazing fury.  We have been directly responsible for more extinctions than anything aside from a mega-caldera event or direct hit from a very large meteorite.









P.O. BOX 483

BERLIN, NY 12022

Make checks out to ‘Elaine Supkis’






Filed under nature


  1. Zorro

    We have met the enemy and he is us!


  2. if

    A not so new Theory about really old Forgeries. History is written by Winners:

  3. WNC Observer

    “Instead, they want to believe in some sort of magical but very malicious gods created us out of various odds and ends like pieces of bone or mud. Yuck. Why such stories are considered to be ‘elevated’ always baffles me. ”

    The Genesis account is obviously metaphor, poetry. It cannot possibly be a literal eyewitness historical narrative – there were no eyewitnesses around at the time. This is so obvious, I never have understood why some people insist on reading it literally.

  4. Charlie the jester

    Creation myths are rooted in prehistoric times. At that time, mythology was a means of preserving knowledge that was necessary to the survival of humans in early civilizations.
    So the affinity for these stories became intertwined with the self, or “that which must survive”, on an instinctual level
    The type of rabid fundamentalism that everyone complains about is likely a result of what is commonly referred to as Priestcraft, which is a way of exploiting the religion instinct to manipulate people utilizing deception.
    However, there is a lot of wisdom contained in those myths that we still need for our survival and so forth, which is why if I had to roll the dice in a pinch I would be inclined to trust my lot to an “ignorant creationist” that feels the necessity of God over an “enlightened humanist” that does not.

  5. Charlie the jester

    Oh, and before anyone tries to talk about Bush or any other warmonger being a Christian: “know them by their fruits”.

    I hope that’s not too hard to understand.

  6. PLovering

    Lay me down Lord, racism is dead.

  7. Gary

    Ck out the book , “The Forest People” sometime. Its about the
    Pygmies of central Africa. There are lots of legends about
    small people all over the world. There must be some basis
    for those legends way way back in the past. Probably a deep cultural “memory” lodged in our subconscious. In Hawaii there are
    the legends of the Menehune who were supposedly there
    before the Polynesians arrived. In Kaui there is a large
    fish pond that is attributed to them. Sometimes when people “see” small people and bigfoots, yetis etc what they may be having is some kind of experience with a psychological flash back deep out of our species memory. Who knows

  8. Kat

    Amen to the Bush comment. The sad thing is the number of “real Christians” who bought into Bush. Could you have a better example of a Publican?

  9. nah

    Its like one of the little men from the movie ‘time machine’ coming up from the pits for entertainment
    clapping is a purely homosapien activity

  10. emsnews

    That was a cute movie.

  11. Its quite an assumption to assume they were peacefull hobbits.

  12. emsnews

    Ah, yes. Compared to humans, though…um…they were smaller and used much more primitive tools. So I wish I could have met them….this is so sad…..

  13. Simon

    The monster is them! oh no the monster is them 🙂

  14. GK

    This hobbit was probably a terrorist and therefore killed by the ruling Homo Sapien elite. HAHAHA!
    10,000 years from now, what do you think we will see?
    Distinct but diverse groups of people like we have now?
    One intermingled generic group of uniform people?
    Will man have merged with machine?
    The elite will have tracked and exterminated the feeble-minded?
    A Darwinian battle for superiority where one race will exterminate all the others?

  15. CK

    So there has been no human evolution in the last 10,000 years? Humans are the exception to the hypothesis of evolution? ( Botoxed does not count as evolution.)

  16. None of the above GK (in my opinion), or perhaps maybe the first one about distinct and diverse. And the last one about “Darwinian battle” seems to have already run its course.
    Will we either see nothing (cause we will be GONE) or we will be “Mutual” with ourselves and with the rest of life.
    “Life” favors cooperation and if humanity is a “killer species” (who have been on a crazy collective orgy of late), then its only purpose was to “stir the pot” and that has now been done successfully such that there is no more use for the “killer species”. So hopefully, we are more than that.

  17. rewrite ——

    We will either sense nothing (because we will be GONE) or we will be “mutual” (as in “Mutual Aid”) with each other and with the rest of life of which we are but a part.

  18. Plus, I can’t resist putting forth this premise.
    If the “self-appointed” fittest survive by dominance, then they will inevitably encounter a more dominant force that is more fit!
    If we ever want to get into space we’d be advised to go there humbly if we want to survive!
    Go Dirigibles!

  19. You want to know something else – I don’t think “neutrons” even exist. Neutrons are just chance – lady luck so to speak, cause if the numbers were all “whole” not much would happen.
    Please consider the above a poem.
    We need Peace, and I think a “generation or two” of time spent becoming more self-sufficient would be Great for this part of the continent in the so-called “New World”. Ha. Ha.

  20. I suppose I might as well expound upon that a bit more. Suppose protons don’t have a uniform shape. In this way, the positively charged portion could exist in many forms, and lets assume that charge is NOT a function of mass. If this was the case, then why does there even need to be a neutron? It just seems like an “extra unneccessary complexity” – and these sort of complexities if they get “ingrained” can lead to all sorts of confusion.
    Anyhow, to me the above seems plausible, but I’m still learning.

  21. Simon

    See the latest New Scientist
    It claims evolution is not just vertical, but horizontal as well. Meaning that organisms take genes from those around them. For example, staged insects like caterpillars and moths may have started as two separate species

  22. emsnews

    Really? Most interesing, Simon.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s