"Lead suspect" is actually a very apt analogy here in its purest form: while there is no new evidence indicating that H. sapiens and H. floresiensis were actually in competition for resources, there is evidence consistent with that theory, and other explanations for the latter species' demise are less plausible.
We should be careful, in this and when reading about modern-day criminal accusations, to not exaggerate what "suspect" actually means and jump to a presumption of guilt, or even believe that there is evidence for guilt!
In this case, H. sapiens teeth were found in a cave where H. floresiensis was known to live some 4000 years prior. But this itself is no evidence of overlap. From the article:
> Other evidence presented by Sutikna puts humans in Liang Bua very soon after H. floresiensis vanished, which adds weight to the possibility that humans played a role in the extinction of hobbits, possibly by out-competing them for limited resources on Flores.
> “What we don't yet know is whether there was at least a short overlap in the populations, thus raising the question once again of the possible role of modern humans in the extinction of floresiensis,” says Chris Stringer, a palaeoanthropologist at the Natural History Museum in London who attended the meeting.
...and then there's also the premise of whether or not so-called "hobbit" fossils are really evidence of a distinct species at all, or instead just atypical human remains, demonstrating different proportions for any number of other well-known reasons.
In other words, why be so enamoured with the idea of species by any other name, when perhaps other possibilities take less of a leap in explaining, and make as much sense?
If you haven't read Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind by Yuval Harari, it is a great read and has lots of insights into the way early Homo sapiens may have behaved. Hint: we won, probably not by accident...
I agree. There were several times that it made a statement like "Early homo sapiens likely killed off Neanderthals. AND IF WE DON'T CHANGE, WE WILL WIPE OUT ALL HUMANITY WITHIN A GENERATION." The bias showed a little too strongly in places.
6 comments
[ 1.5 ms ] story [ 25.3 ms ] threadWe should be careful, in this and when reading about modern-day criminal accusations, to not exaggerate what "suspect" actually means and jump to a presumption of guilt, or even believe that there is evidence for guilt!
In this case, H. sapiens teeth were found in a cave where H. floresiensis was known to live some 4000 years prior. But this itself is no evidence of overlap. From the article:
> Other evidence presented by Sutikna puts humans in Liang Bua very soon after H. floresiensis vanished, which adds weight to the possibility that humans played a role in the extinction of hobbits, possibly by out-competing them for limited resources on Flores.
> “What we don't yet know is whether there was at least a short overlap in the populations, thus raising the question once again of the possible role of modern humans in the extinction of floresiensis,” says Chris Stringer, a palaeoanthropologist at the Natural History Museum in London who attended the meeting.
In other words, why be so enamoured with the idea of species by any other name, when perhaps other possibilities take less of a leap in explaining, and make as much sense?
I've always thought that if there ever were another intelligent species on this planet, then we very likely wiped them out.