New Species of Homo Discovered: Homo naledi

Indeed. Unfortunately we will have to wait for a reconstructed pelvis for H. naledi. What we do have suggests that it is similar to Australopithicus or intermediate with them and H. habilis.Might be able to look at the femurs to see how the socket would need to be oriented.Enjoy

Welcome to the fray, lasthero Curiously I feel that if Ken Ham says something it is usually wrong ...But Homo sapiens sapiens and all members of the Homo clade are members of the ape clade and all apes are members of the animal clade, so in that sense he is correct, but I get the feeling that you think Homo naledi is not human (Homo) -- can you tell me why, what is your basis for this?Presumably you have looked through the evidence and read the technical paper with the comparisons to other fossils, yes? (see Message 1 for links).Why do you think Kurt Wise is wrong?Enjoy Edited by RAZD, : splngEdited by RAZD, : clrtyEdited by RAZD, : correction

Let's ALL try to keep the focus on Homo naledi, and perhaps take the discussion of other fossils to the Evolution. We Have The Fossils. We Win. thread.For instance See Message 113 on the Evolution. We Have The Fossils. We Win. thread.Enjoy

The point, Faith, was that IF the information in the journals was all made up arbitrary evolutionist nonsense, then those students were studying arbitrary evolutionist nonsense. No Faith, evolution does not make errors -- it is not a person.The reason we find such a neat pattern is because it is the history of evolution as it occurred, a little change here, a little change there, and over time creating the path from early hominid to modern man.This path has many side branches, cousins, like the Neanderthals.But the main point is that IF you have an actual evolutionary lineage, THEN there will be intermediate stages from one point to another in the fossil record. Finding intermediates confirms this. Homo naledi is the latest find in a field with increasing numbers of intermediates between a common ancestor with Chimpanzees and modern humans. It fits neatly into the sequence shown.The similarities between (A) and (B,C) point to that common ancestor.Here is one image of possible lineage from 1998 with skull images: Fossil Skulls!

quote:

---

Below are 12 fossil skulls that represent more than 3.5 million years of human evolution. Click on any of them to find out more. This exhibit is enhanced with the Shockwave plug-in, which you can download for free from Macromedia.

​

​

American Museum of Natural History

---

Note that this is interactive on the referenced page so that you can pick a skull and get further information on it.Another version of such a tree can be seen at The human story: We’re still here!

quote:

---

In Fossils: The Key to the Past (2009), British palaeontologist Richard Fortey points out, Not many years ago, there were very few named species of Homo — now there are a whole clutch of them. The original idea of ‘links in a chain’ leading to modern humankind has been replaced by a view recognising a number of branches that did not give rise to any survivors, and a rather special lineage that led to the whole panoply of the human race in all its diversity of colour, language and creed: that is to say, Homo sapiens.

​

---

You can check these against the Talk Origins skulls picture that DrA posted:29 Evidences for Macroevolution: Part 1You can also note that the new find, Homo naledi fits into these diagrams, as does a previous find by Lee Berger of Australopithicus sediba

quote:

---

Australopithecus sediba

​

The fossil skeletons of Au. sediba from Malapa cave are so complete that scientists can see what entire skeletons looked like near the time when Homo evolved. Details of the teeth, the length of the arms and legs, and the narrow upper chest resemble earlier Australopithecus, while other tooth traits and the broad lower chest resemble humans. These links indicate that Au. sediba may reveal information about the origins and ancestor of the genus Homo. Functional changes in the pelvis of Au. sediba point to the evolution of upright walking, while other parts of the skeleton retain features found in other australopithecines. ...

---

MH1

quote:

---

MH1 is a juvenile australopithecine, about 12-13 years old. It was the first specimen of Au. sediba found at Malapa Cave. Both cranial and postcranial remains have been recovered from this individual. The mixture of primitive and derived traits may help link the genus Australopithecus with the genus Homo.

​

---

Arranged by time the evolutionary trends appear.EnjoyEdited by RAZD, : added

So now we come to the reconstructed skull of Homo naledi:

quote:

---

Homo naledi, a new species of the genus Homo from the Dinaledi Chamber, South Africa

​

The endocranial volume of all H. naledi specimens is clearly small compared to most known examples of Homo. We combined information from the most complete cranial vault specimens to arrive at an estimate of endocranial volume for both larger (presumably male) and smaller (presumably female) individuals (larger composite depicted in Figure 11). The resulting estimates of approximately 560cc and 465cc, respectively, overlap entirely with the range of endocranial volumes known for australopiths. Within the genus Homo, only the smallest specimens of H. habilis, one single H. erectus specimen, and H. floresiensis overlap with these values.

​

​

Figure 11. Virtual reconstruction of the endocranium of the larger composite cranium from DH1 and DH2 overlaid with the ectocranial surfaces.
(A) Lateral view. (B) Superior view. The resulting estimate of endocranial volume is 560cc. Scale bar = 10 cm.

​

Despite its small vault size, the cranium of H. naledi is structurally similar to those of early Homo. ...

---

Again there is a lot of detailed information that follows this, discussing the differences and similarities to other skulls.Enjoy

My Canadian side likes that ... although that may be evidence of a more primitive human behavioral system, rather than a derived one ... maybe the small brain fits in there too ... In my own reading I first read it as "nailed it" ... ie got it right the first time.EnjoyEdited by RAZD, : .

Here are the other two parts: Homo nalediAnother Awesome Twig on the Human Family Tree, Part 2With this sketch of the cave chamber: and Homo nalediAnother Awesome Twig on the Human Family Tree, Part 3With this picture of the assembled skull: and this comment:

quote:

---

... if you can’t pinpoint the age of a fossil find it’s a big problem. Age gives context and you can’t draw firm evolutionary conclusions without context. Geologists infer that Rising Star cave where H. naledi was found is less than 3 million years old, so there seems to be a firm oldest possible date, but that doesn’t help a whole lot. Does H. naledi represent a root of the Homo genus? Or is it something younger, representing an as-of-yet unknown twig of the hominin tree? We don’t know. Paleoanthropologist William Jungers said it well: Without a date, these fossils are more curiosities than game-changersWhere they fit in the family tree will be influenced by their age[right now] they are a twig, looking for a trunk.

---

As mentioned before, it is the spacial\temporal matrix that is important to determining the evolutionary trends of fossils.AND there is a link to some interview videos with Berger made during the dig. Lots of information there.Enjoy

So we now have the modeled skull: And the assembled head of Dinaledi Hominin 1 (DH1) from the NSCS part 3 article: and I would expect a more complete model of the complete skull using scaled elements from DH2 and DH3 could be produced, but I have not yet found a picture of this. I have seen glimpses of a model skull using DH1 but can't tell from it what else is included. Has anyone else seen this?[abe] I found these from Huffington Post: Looking at wikipedia there is also this picture showing something like a reconstruction of H. naledi: I don't think these are to scale (no info on that) ...All we need is a frontal and we can add it to the picture that Dr A has posted.EnjoyEdited by RAZD, : added wiki profilesEdited by RAZD, : add skullEdited by Admin, : Reduce image width.Edited by Admin, : Rerender for mobile usability.

and it's not just because they are socially backwards and a little mixed up ...

quote:

---

Homo naledi: determining the age of fossils is not an exact science

​

The skull of Homo naledi is built like those of early Homo species but its brain was just more than half the size of the average ancestor from 2 million years ago.

​

Age is nothing but a number when it comes to unravelling the relationships of species from our past. We do not know the actual geological age of the Dinaledi fossils, the single largest fossil hominin find in Africa, but the discovery of Homo naledi still provides insight into how our ancestors evolved.

​

The bottom line is that, for now, we have little idea how old the fossils may be.

​

But how old is it?

​

Our lack of a geological age for the fossils caught some other experts by surprise. ...

​

Indeed, so-called relic species can be among the most important indicators of biological relationships, survivors that carry anatomical features from deep time. The coelacanth is much more than a curiosity: its anatomy provides vital clues that helped scientists understand how early land creatures could evolve from lobe-finned fish ancestors.

​

How our ancestors evolved

​

No matter its geological age, Homo naledi may provide vital clues about the way our ancestors stepped along a humanlike evolutionary path. This is where the real mystery comes in.

---

More at link.What we see from the fossils is a lot of mix and match with other hominids, a fact which speaks to not just a mosaic of developments, but a braided past of possible hominid interbreeding, similar to the way we know Cro Magnon and Neander interbred, leaving us with hybrid traits?And the question remains: where do they fit in the natural history of hominids.Enjoy