A recent study showing that humans "Hobbits" or short humans as the oldest human form. Independent.com, Saturday (22/4), wrote that since the discovery of their bodies on the island of Flores Indonesia in 2003 ago. Brings up much debate about where they fit into the theory of evolution. There is even a claim, they are short Homo sapiens type.
Now, however, researchers in Australia claim that Homofloresiensis or hobbits are formally known, in fact related to Homo habilis, who lived in Africa about 1.75 million years ago. And it makes it one of the earliest known human species. This raises the possibility that floresiensis flourished in Africa sometime before then and then migrated to Indonesia and possibly other parts of the world. The species was about 3.5 feet tall and used stone tools up around 50,000 years ago. But then mysteriously disappeared. Previous research has suggested that modern humans may have erased it. Deb Debie Argue, from the Australian National University, who led the study, said: "The analysis shows that family tree, Homo floresiensis is probably a species of Homo habilis sister, "Perhaps Homo floresiensis flourished in Africa and migrated, or the same ancestors moved from Africa and then developed into Homo floresiensis somewhere." One competing theory is that "hobbits" evolved from Homo erectus, Which is more than 1.8 million years old and probably only 35,000 years old. However, Dr Argue says that their research, which involves looking at 133 different parts of the hobbit bone, found no evidence that they have evolved from erectus. "We found that if You try and connect them in the family tree, you get a san outcome Gat is not supported, "he said." All the tests say it does not fit - it's not a viable theory. "For example, the hobbit's jaw is considered a version that evolved earlier than the bone seen in erectus." Logically, it will be difficult to understand how you Can get that regression - why Homo erectus jaws evolve back to the primitive conditions we see in Homo floresiensis? " Argue said: "When we did the analysis, there really was a clear support for the relationship with Homo habilis," he said. "Homo floresiensis occupies a primitive position on a human evolutionary tree." We can be 99 percent sure it is not related to Homo erectus and almost 100 percent chance it's not Homo sapiens defect. "The study is published in the Journal of Human Evolution.