Humans, and 'hobbits' existed together

Probably because hobbits weren't good swimmers? I wouldn't believe that because then land were not only covered by sea but some part of it was connected by land thanks B???

I wouldn't believe that because then land were not only covered by sea but some part of it was connected by landthanks B??? Unless you have some information that I am not aware of, pretty much everything about the Hobbit's island indicates that it has always been an island. Heck, even the elephants shrunk.

And why are their fossil specific on one place?? Quite simply, this was a small endemic population that never really spread anywhere, and thus became very genetically different until it finally died out.

It is unlikely.Homo floresiensis has only been discovered in fossil record on Flores Island, making the myth of 'little people' in various other widespread cultures throughout the world very unlikely to be based on their [H. flor] existence. There is no evidence for a world-wide existence of diminutive species of humans such as H. floresiensis elsewhere in the world, although certainly pygmy people are known in other locales. However, these pygmy peoples are entirely H. sap. sapiens (modern humans). Ancient myth must, it seems at least for the moment, remain myth. I would agree that for the mo... [More]

Is all this speculation from one specimen found?

It's what they've deduced from the multiple specimens found.

Unless you have some information that I am not aware of, pretty much everything about the Hobbit's island indicates that it has always been an island. Heck, even the elephants shrunk. The existence of the super continent called Pangea? Thanks B???

The existence of the super continent called Pangea?Thanks B??? You are aware that Pangea existed about 60 million years ago? With the dinosaurs? The big deal about the Hobbit is that it lived in the same time period as man.

The big deal about the Hobbit is that it lived in the same time period as man. Not only that, but..... If this is confirmed by new discoveries and further analysis, it could imply that hobbits should be classified as australopithecines (i.e. Australopithecus floresiensis) rather than as part of the genus Homo, since they lack a key attribute (known as a shared derived character) that distinguishes the latter. This interpretation would appear to be consistent with other anatomical characteristics, such as the shape of certain wrist bones, which resemble those of the australopithecines. Such a r... [More]

That's awesome! The human branch is spreading wider!