The article was dated 11/14/07 in one of those scientific news articles.Im not sure but i believe it was discovery news.That makes you like all evolutionist,either a liar or misinformed.
Seeing as nobody can find your article and you can't remember where you got it from, this is a pretty bold statement.
Message 195He said the wrist bones are monkey absolutely and that the case was closed.
That doesn't mean much without having the article to read - one would expect intermediate forms. Why do I suspect a creationist source?
Having a wrist like a monkey doesn't mean that the whole creature is a monkey - rather than an ape eh?
Message 201And another thing.Tool evidence is a sign they were a prey item.Did they call mammoths hunters when they found clovis points buried with them?
Aren't you jumping to conclusions based on minimal information?
Doing a google news search on "Homo floresiensis" returns
Hobbits mastered use of tools 40,000 years before modern humans, November 14th, 2007
Nothing there about being monkeys or having monkey wrists, but it does talk about the tools found:
quote:
The scientists studied wear patterns and residue on about 100 stone tools found with the remains of hobbits (Homo floresiensis) in Liang Bua cave by Australian and Indonesian researchers.
The researchers found evidence of plant work and butchery on stone flakes and cobbles from archaeological layers ranging from 12,000 to 55,000 years old.
The scientists also identified blood and bone on some tools. The team discovered the remains of fires and numerous animal bones, especially of baby stegodons (small elephants), komodo dragons and giant rats. The animal bones were found near tools and hobbit remains, and had cut marks indicative of butchery.
But the researchers also found that more than 90 per cent of the residues were from woody and fibrous plants.
They said it didn’t mean that the metre-high people ate only a little meat, but rather that most of the tools studied so far were used for working with plants.
Notice that the animal bones had evidence of butchery.
Doing a google on "homo floresiensis monkey wrist" I found that this is rather old information, and not surprisingly in misrepresented ...
Yes, it's a Hobbit. The debate that has divided science is solved at last (sort of) | Science | The Guardian
quote:
But the discovery of the fossilised "Hobbit", as she quickly became known, has provoked a long-running and sometimes acrimonious debate among scientists: was she really one of a race of mini-humans or was she merely one of us, but with a brain-shrinking disease?
Now scientists have analysed fossilised wrist bones that were part of the original discovery in 2003 but had not been looked at in detail. They say they prove the Hobbit really was a distinct and previously unknown type of human, and not just an abnormally small member of our own species.
That analysis has revealed significant differences between the bones and human or Neanderthal equivalents. At the same time there are crucial similarities with older species of human and living apes such as chimps and gorillas. The researchers say this puts paid to the idea that Homo floresiensis could be a "normal" human being with a brain-shrinking disease called microcephaly or some form of dwarfism.
and
Primate Diaries
quote:
In the new edition of Science (subscription required), Matthew W. Tocheri and colleagues have analyzed the wrist bones of this controversial specimen and determined that the species retains a primitive morphology from before the origin of modern humans. Wrist elements can be powerful diagnostic tools in classification because the bones are so numerous and can undergo evolutionary changes through both adaptive pressures (such as morphologies necessary for grip structure or style of locomotion) or because of neutral changes as the result of reproductive isolation.
As the authors described the bones in the article released today:
Each is well preserved and shows no signs of pathology or abnormal development. . . . [T]hese three articulating bones display none of the shared, derived features of modern human and Neandertal carpals. Instead, they show the general symplesiomorphic pattern exhibited by all extant African apes, as well as fossil hominins that preserve comparable wrist morphology and date before 1.7 Ma.
A symplesiomorphy is any trait that exists in multiple living species and also in the most recent common ancestor of those species.
This shows your assertion(s) to be wrong, thus calling into sever question your ability to cast aspersions on other people.
I suggest you look in your history file (if you haven't cleared it) to see where you saw the article.
Enjoy.
Edited by RAZD, : msg not mwg
Join the effort to unravel AIDS/HIV, unfold Proteomes, fight Cancer,
compare Fiocruz Genome and fight Muscular Dystrophy with Team EvC! (click)
we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.
™ Version 4.2