
New human-like species discovered - m1k3r420
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-34192447
======
samfoo
Awesome to see the Rising Star Expedition on HN! I was working in Johannesburg
while the expedition was active and my partner managed, through a serious of
very fortunate events to become a caver on the expedition. Here she is
carrying up some of the first bones they extracted -
[https://i.imgur.com/IfT4PQz.jpg](https://i.imgur.com/IfT4PQz.jpg).

For those of you interested, the expedition was sponsored by National
Geographic, and there was/is a fairly extensive blog
([http://voices.nationalgeographic.com/blog/rising-star-
expedi...](http://voices.nationalgeographic.com/blog/rising-star-expedition/))
covering most of the details. When they first started pulling up the fossils,
the excitement was palpable -
[http://voices.nationalgeographic.com/2013/11/11/video-
first-...](http://voices.nationalgeographic.com/2013/11/11/video-first-day-in-
fossil-cave/).

The expedition occurred nearly two years ago, and there were so many bones
still left in the catchment that they left many behind.

Incidentally, though the article says it was scientists who discovered the
fossils - they were actually discovered by amateur cavers. The Cradle of
Humankind (so named because there are so many similar catchments in the
surrounding area) has a massive system of caves and some of the most hardcore
amateur cavers in the world.

~~~
scrollaway
Is this a correct mirror for the video? The player on natgeo is not even sort
of working here.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1_r3UnkjcL0](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1_r3UnkjcL0)

~~~
samfoo
That's the one!

------
mootothemax
The Guardian's coverage of this contains a fair amount of scepticism:

 _Christoph Zollikofer, an anthropologist at the University of Zurich, said
that many of the bone characteristics used to claim the creature as a new
species are seen in more primitive animals, and by definition cannot be used
to define a new species._

 _“The few ‘unique’ features that potentially define the new species need
further scrutiny, as they may represent individual variation, or variation at
the population level,” he said._

 _Tim White, a paleoanthropologist at the University of California, Berkeley,
goes further. “From what is presented here, they belong to a primitive Homo
erectus, a species named in the 1800s.”_

\--

 _“Intentional disposal of rotting corpses by fellow pinheads makes a nice
headline, but seems like a stretch to me,” said Jungers. Zollikofer agrees.
“The ‘new species’ and ‘dump-the-dead’ claims are clearly for the media. None
of them is substantiated by the data presented in the publications,” he said.
Hawks is open to other explanations, but said that disposal made sense. “The
evidence really tends to exclude the idea that they entered the chamber one at
a time, alive, over some time, because we have infants, small children, and
very old adults who would almost certainly not have managed to get into this
chamber without being deposited there.”_

[http://www.theguardian.com/science/2015/sep/10/new-
species-o...](http://www.theguardian.com/science/2015/sep/10/new-species-of-
ancient-human-discovered-claim-scientists)

~~~
JoeAltmaier
Do we still depend on bone structure to define species? DNA analysis is
indisputable. Its all speculation until that is done.

~~~
kissickas
A species cannot be clearly defined until you try to mate it with something
else and it fails to produce a viable offspring, as far as I'm aware. No DNA
analysis is indisputable with what we currently know.

~~~
eru
So each infertile individual belongs into their own species?

~~~
SeldomSoup
Each one of an infertile individual's parents belongs to its own species.

~~~
mcv
Until they get another child that does turn out to be fertile.

------
njharman
Something I've never understood (since highschool some 30 years ago) is; when
getting partial skeletons perhaps from only a single individual, how can they
claim new species? I mean what's diff with that and some hypothetical future
anthropoligist looking at siberian with roundish skull thicker brow ridges and
that of six foot tall masai with long face and then a sub 5 foot native
peruvian and declaring them all different species?

~~~
thaumasiotes
What's stopping a future anthropologist from declaring siberians and pygmies
to be different species? It's not done now for political reasons, but the
future has no reason to be concerned with the past's special sensitivities.

Consider that "spanish" and "italian" are officially separate languages, while
the US and Scotland both officially speak "english". The terminology won't
help you predict which pair has an easier time communicating. It's political.

~~~
johnchristopher
> What's stopping a future anthropologist from declaring siberians and pygmies
> to be different species?

The fact that they are capable of producing fertile offspring ?

~~~
simonh
But then you have ring species such as some seaguls. The gulls in Northern
Europe can interbreed with the ones in Canada, which can interbreed with the
ones in Alaska, which can interbreed with the ones in Siberia, which cannot
interbreed with the ones is northern Europe. So is there one species or two,
and if two where do you draw the line?

~~~
Dwolb
I would surmise the answer is N-1 where N is the number of separate gull
groups. A species would then consist of two gull groups who can mate and this
answer assumes there are no mini circles or triangles in the ring.

No idea the academic answer though.

~~~
GFK_of_xmaspast
By that definition a particular individual could simultaneously be a member of
two species.

------
jaxonrice
Here is a short video of caver Rick Hunter squeezing through one of the
tunnels to the Dinaledi Chamber. Not for the claustrophobic.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fTPRx8xVafE](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fTPRx8xVafE)

~~~
bvm
Spelunkers - is the reason he's not wearing a helmet down to the lack of
available space?

~~~
sytelus
Never had a caver without helmet in any of my trips. Taking it off is big no
no and I have seen people going smaller holes then this one. My guess is that
this cave wasn't too long and he just wanted to get in fast.

------
adityar
for a minute there I thought we discovered hominids alive today. Phrasing!

~~~
TuringTest
Ditto. The BBC writer could have specified "new _extint_ human-like species
discovered", or " _Fossils_ of new human-like species discovered".

~~~
rtp
_Extinct_ might not work since that human-like species might be an ancestor of
ours.

------
osazuwa
"What we are seeing is more and more species of creatures that suggests that
nature was experimenting with how to evolve humans, thus giving rise to
several different types of human-like creatures originating in parallel in
different parts of Africa. Only one line eventually survived to give rise to
us," Far out. What if they could make a Jurassic Park, but instead of
dinosaurs, extinct human-like species?

~~~
stopspammers
The keyword there is "suggests".

>> Only one line eventually survived to give rise to us

Why? There are tons of species of plants and animals, why did all the human-
like (according to the suggestion) species disappear? Why?

Why if they all disappeared yet all other plant and animal species variations
lived are there still apes and monkeys today?

Why if life came from amoeba, why is there still amoeba? It's not like there's
some source of amoeba's being rained down on the planet every day, why did not
all amoeba evolve as well?

~~~
coco1989
The amoebas alive today are still here because they are still here and are
alive. The great great grandparents we share with the amoebas alive to day are
not alive today they have died a long long time ago.

------
merah
Amazing fly-through video of the Rising Star cave where these discoveries were
made: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vI-
JF28T44U](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vI-JF28T44U) Using a type of
subterraneous mapping lasers I imagine as you see some kind of globular
markers dotted around the cave as you pass through. Unable to find exactly
what tech they used for this. Would be interesting to hear any more info on
this!

~~~
arxpoetica
Gollum!

------
DCKing
Jerry Coyne had written a nice blogpost that discusses the exaggerated media
response and the actual academic novelty of this discovery and its
description.

[https://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2015/09/10/a-new-
sp...](https://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2015/09/10/a-new-species-of-
hominin-hits-the-news-what-is-it-and-what-does-it-mean/)

Tl;dr: the fossils possess intriguing anatomical features that appear to be
(or more probably closely related to) a transition point between
Australopithecus and Homo. Any inference of behaviour or even fossil age is
speculation. The academia behind it seems to be quite good, but again the
media are blowing it out of proportion.

------
sangnoir
entirely off-topic: 'Naledi' means 'star' (the celestial kind) in both
_Tswana_ and _Sotho_ \- 2 of South Africa's 11 official languages[1].

1\. Also included: English and Afrikaans. South Africa is a pretty diverse
place
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languages_of_South_Africa](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Languages_of_South_Africa)

~~~
PvsNP_ZA
Most people speak English to bridge the gaps. At work, in the shops, etc.

~~~
sangnoir
Most South Africans are multilingual, and English is commonly used (especially
in urban areas. Rural tend to skew Afrikaans). "English is South Africa's
lingua franca, and the primary language of government, business, and
commerce"[1]

However, only 9.6% of the population use English as their first ('home')
language. Zulu has the highest proportion with 22.7%

1\.
[http://www.southafrica.info/about/people/language.htm#distri...](http://www.southafrica.info/about/people/language.htm#distribution#ixzz3lKxOaQnB)

~~~
PvsNP_ZA
Are we by any chance both South African and trying to lecture each other about
South African culture?

~~~
mdpm
Moet ek ook? Miskien as daar meer van ons is.

------
jane_is_here
A number of paleoanthropologists are skeptical of the claims. They say that
the bones look like H.erectus and that some of the more bizarre claims sound
"tailored for the media"

~~~
MrJagil
Do you have links to these claims? I would like to read more.

~~~
mootothemax
I just posted a comment with a few quotes from the Guardian's article, and you
can read more here:

[http://www.theguardian.com/science/2015/sep/10/new-
species-o...](http://www.theguardian.com/science/2015/sep/10/new-species-of-
ancient-human-discovered-claim-scientists)

~~~
MrJagil
Thanks!

------
mhartl
_Like all those working in the field, he is at pains to avoid the term
"missing link"._

"But we're journalists, so we have no such compunctions."

------
ainiriand
The last picture of with all the girl scientists makes me stupidly proud.

~~~
kyberias
I wonder whether they'd like to be called "girl scientists".

~~~
lev_k
Maybe "scientists who are girls" would be more befitting? I suppose that the
phrasing "girl scientists" first emphasizes the fact they are girls before
they fact that they are scientists (clearly the more relevant of the two
traits).

~~~
mcv
As opposed to "scientists who are boys"? How old are scientists these days?

~~~
biot
In modern speech, the opposite of "girls" is "guys". Think "girls night out"
vs. "guys night out". I have female friends approaching their fifties who
refer to themselves and their female friends as "the girls". Perhaps this is a
regional thing, where saying "women" sounds old-fashioned and stodgy.

~~~
erroneousfunk
Right, and I have "girls' night out" with my friends and occasionally address
them as "hey girl!", but god help the new co-worker who comes up to me and
says "you're a girl software engineer!"

Honestly, I can't believe you'd think that would be remotely appropriate in
this context (or that I'd even have to have this discussion on Hacker News at
all, or that ainiriand would feel a sense of "pride" as a male -- yeah, I
checked his gender -- over a group of female biologists -- a science that is
more than 50% female...)

"Guys" is casual. "Guys" is sometimes used for a mix-gendered group, but with
a female-only group, you might use "Gals" or even "Ladies," but "Girls" is
only used if you want to emphasize youth/casualness/fun (hence, the group of
50-something's calling themselves "the girls")

I've lived on the east coast, I've lived on the west coast, I've spent a great
deal of time in the middle -- no one refers to a group of women in a
professional context as "girls." After mid-puberty, that word starts to carry
specific connotations when used as a description.

~~~
biot
I'm not saying it's appropriate; just offering a possible explanation for the
use of the word. Personally, I'd just go with "female" or simply saying "she's
a software engineer" gets the point across well without having to delve into
sex vs. gender identity etc.

~~~
erroneousfunk
You certainly seemed ready to defend lev_k. Someone makes a ridiculous comment
like "Maybe 'scientists who are girls' would be more befitting?" (I thought
that was hilarious until I realized they weren't joking) mcv calls him out,
and then you jump in and explain why "girls" is okay to use here?

Again, it's not. It's really really not. Outside of pop song lyrics and
college parties "girl" is not the opposite of "guy." And if you don't
understand the connotations/subtle unspoken irony when a middle aged woman
says "she's going out with The Girls" (and, yeah, my white-haired grandmother
still says this -- she's less serious and more vocal about the phrase every
year) you probably shouldn't be using the word at all when you're referring to
anyone over the age of 12.

So, okay, great, you said _you_ wouldn't actually use it. But why were you
defending it, or... trying to come up with an explanation and using your 50
year old female friend as a rationalization? I don't get it.

~~~
biot
You're making many false assumptions about my motivations, then proceeding to
tear them down. As I'm not really interested in debating strawwomen, I wish
you the best.

------
knodi123
Pleasantly surprised to see the group photo of the scientists who made the
discovery was all female! Is paleontology one of those strongly gender-biased
fields, like working in HR, or software development?

~~~
Retric
This is a case where the gender bias was more physical than anything. They
needed cavers to fit though a small gap and females tend to fit though smaller
gaps.

------
WalterBright
In the past decade or so, I've become aware of a vaguely human-like species
that invades my lawn now and then. Usually playing some disco music drives
them off.

------
aggie
If truly a new species, this is a huge discovery. Why then is it not published
in a more prestigious journal, such as Science or Nature? Not that a
prestigious journal is necessary, but the authors' choice is curious,
especially when many scientists are skeptical of the claims.

------
thomasfoster96
> "human-like"

Aren't all species of the genus _Homo_ called humans?

~~~
iso8859-1
No. But scientists can't even agree if Neanderthals belong within Homo
sapiens: [http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/evolution/are-neanderthals-
huma...](http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/evolution/are-neanderthals-human.html) I
assume this article would not have been written if all homos were human.

~~~
thomasfoster96
Ah, right, I must be confused then. I've seen a lot of texts refer to Homo
sapiens sapiens as 'anatomically modern humans', so I assumed that other
species of the genus Homo were also commonly called 'humans'.

------
crimsonalucard
Bad headline. They found fossils. No actual living thing discovered.

------
irremediable
Wow! That's so cool. I'm especially interested to see whether this is taken as
evidence that ritual behaviour emerged far earlier than previously believed.

~~~
krauthammer
It's interesting to consider that humans came from apes that randomly starting
performing rituals.

~~~
MrJagil
There could be any number of incentives, i.e. health benefits. Apes, just like
birds, builds nests and this "ritualistic" behaviour could be seen as an
extension of cleaning.

Being this calculated about this seemingly arduous task obviously hints at
something more advanced than cleaning (i.e. spiritual reasons), I'm just
trying to bridge the gap between "calculated rituals" and "random rituals".

------
kaonashi
(extinct)

I only add this because I got really excited by the title at first.

~~~
iso8859-1
I applaud you for being that naive. :)

------
jister
I don't understand why they spend that much money finding out what had
happened in the past or where we came from. Why not spend those money finding
ways to save our future? Maybe a technology that converts those smoke coming
out from factories to oxygen instantly or something that will clean the water
or fix the ozone maybe? We need all the help we can get.

~~~
twright0
Do you work on "a technology that converts those smoke coming out from
factories to oxygen instantly or something that will clean the water or fix
the ozone"? If not, why not? I find that I can often understand why others
make the decisions they do by comparing my own motivations for similar
decisions.

------
lispm
Even today one might be able to find 'human'-like humans. They are rare,
though.

~~~
tinfoilman
Waiting for the mermaids, always liked the idea of the aquatic ape theory.

~~~
fsiefken
Yes, Tolkien was inspired by the theory of his colleguae Alister Hardy so he
described the origin of the hobbits as such. Gollum, as Smeagol, was a proto-
Stoor Hobbit having an affinity for water.
[https://plus.google.com/111888294497330611124/posts/cj73v8Fj...](https://plus.google.com/111888294497330611124/posts/cj73v8FjZgi)

