1. Evidence,Citations, Researcher Supports New
Species
Supports Diseased
Modern Human
Inconclusive
Teeth
When teeth were examined further, scientists realized
that the teeth were not of a child but of an adult due to
the "wear and tear" on the molars. (NOVA video)
Stefan Krause
Skeptic of the
overall findings of
the "little people" is
named Teuku
Jacob who
suggests that the
little people are of
our species but they
suffer from a
developmental
deformity. (What is
the Hobbit)
There are many
similarities due to the
make up and structure of
the subject, they had the
ability to use technology,
tools, and hunting
abilities. They had to of
used a way to
communicate within
each other. With all of
these factors, there is
still no conclusive
evidence to suggest they
are of modern times. It is
both true when I say that
they are different kinds
of humans and also
deformed individuals.
If chinlessness can’t illuminate the discussion, what
about teeth? Can teeth provide us with enough
evidence to suggest an entirely new species. hobbit
teeth are small in the sapiens pattern: first molars are
biggest and third molars smallest. H. erectus and
Australopiths have different patterns. Zachary Benoff
Indriati responds
that it is sounder
scientifically to
compare LB1 with
Flores pygmies, its
closest neighbors in
both space and
time.
Robert Eckbart argues
that chance
convergence of traits in
different hominid
lineages is unlikely to
explain these
similarities. Colleague of
Jacob’s, notes that
hobbit teeth also share
features with
Rampasasa pygmy
teeth, such as rotation of
the premolar, that imply
genes in common.

2. Skull
when the subject was discovered, the skull was
examined what they found was the skull was low,
broad, and obviously smaller in size. (NOVA) Stefan
Krause
Holloway suggests
the same as the
teeth; the skull is
not like that of
modern humans.
The little people that
were discovered did
not have the feature
of the chin such as
modern man, which
argues the concept
of being another
species.
As with the same
critique, where he
argues that the little
people are of the same
species, where he also
believes is that due to
there retard growth
disease, and there
environmental factors in
which they lived, they
were evolved to get
smaller structures.
Goes same
aspect as teeth
there is no
conclusive
evidence to
suggest that th
little people are
either a differen
species or they
are just deform
unique differen
style of modern
man.
Skeleton
Liana Buonanno
"Jacob pronounced that the bones did not belong to a
new hominid species, but were those of Homo
sapiens after all." (2186, Powledge). He had believed
that the species suffered from a disorder that called
microcephaly which causes an abnormal development
of the brain as well as the body and skeleton.
This evidence supports
the idea that the fossils
represent a diseased
modern human. Jacob
believed that the bones
we similar and
possessed similar
qualities to bones of a
human with
microcephaly. Therefore,
he thought that they
were just homo sapiens.

3. Liana Buonanno
"Chins mark a skeleton as sapiens; no other hominids
have them." (2187, Powledge). Research and
examination of the skeleton of these little people
showed that they did not have chins. No other
hominids besides homo sapiens have chins and
having a chin makes the skeleton of a sapien species.
On the other hand, the absence of a chin does not
mean that the species is not a homo sapien. Chins
were not found on some pygmy, a sapien species, just
like the little people.
This evidence
does not help u
come to a
conclusion abo
the new bones
found. Having a
chin means you
are sapien. Sin
the absence of
chin does not
define that the
species in not
sapien, this
evidence is
inconclusive. T
fact that the littl
people were
chinless does n
mean that they
were not homo
sapiens.
Brain-(Zachary Benoff)
In the journal Science a paper was published in March
2005, stating, "a virtual endocast of LB1's cranium
shows the imprint of the once existing brain features
and suggested that the hobbits were not just miniature
sapiens or erectus but because of their enlarged
cortex and temporal lopes, they may have had human
like thinking abilities" (Powledge). Zachary Benoff
Debbie Argue,
states that because
the cranium is
nothing that they
have ever seen in
hominid fossil
record, it may be
that of an older
species but not
homo(Powledge).
Holloway believes that
the brain is some form of
abnormality because of
thin parts of area 10,
also know as gyri recti,
and that he has never
seen a human endocast
so flattened out before.
No fossils
unearthed so fa
match that of
LB1's cranium
but it does not
rule out deform
so until further
evidence is
found, there ca
be no definitive
answer.
Liana Buonanno
"Jacob pronounced that the bones did not belong to a
new hominid species, but were those of Homo
This evidence supports
the idea that the bones
were of a diseased
modern human. Since

4. sapiens after all." (2186, Powledge). Along with the
skeleton, microcephaly also affects the brain. Since
Jacob believed this species was just a human with
microcephaly, the brains were similar to each other.
the brain of a human
with microcephaly was
similar to the brain of the
newly discovered
remains, the bones
belonged to a homo
sapien.
Liana Buonanno
In the video, "Little People of Flores", it was pointed
out that the brain cavity of these little people was
different than that of a human being. Their brain cavity
differed because it was lower and more broad
compared to humans.
Since the brain was
different than a
humans, they
believed that the
newly discovered
remains were those
of a new species.
This evidence
confirms that the
brain cavity was too
low and too broad
to be human and
could not make us
the same species.
Liana Buonanno
In the video, "Little People of Flores", it pointed out
that the remains found showed that the brains of the
little people were much smaller than those of a
human. Instead of having a larger brain like a homo
sapien, these remains were about 1/3 of the size of a
normal human brain.
This evidence
shows that the little
people were in fact
a new species. A
human brain is
much larger than
the remains found
from the little
people. Their brain
size was too small
to be put into the
same category as
even a diseased
human species.
Other Fossils Found at Site
Paul Zohil
In the "Little People of Flores" video Evidence of at
least one campfire in the cave.
The cave site i
where the
supposed
species was

5. found So it was
started by them
Paul Zohil
In the "Little People of Flores" video evidence of
multiple sophisticated tools where discovered.
Unknown if the
where develop
by the suppose
species living in
the cave
Zachary Benoff
In the article "What is the Hobbit", stone tools were
found near LB1's remains that suggested higher
cognitive abilities even though their brains were very
small.
It may suggest that
they had culture but
is not proven.
The discovery
teams belive th
this is the first
real example o
island dwarfing
Dating Techniques -(Kurt Hoffman)
Scientist believe that the first Homo-erecctus migrated
out of Africa and made their way to the island of
Flores sometime around 800,000 years ago. It has
also been established that modern humans have been
on the island for around 50,00 thousand years
according to Michael John Morwood. Both species are
believed to arrive to the Island by way of land bridge
because during these times the world was still in an
ice age. During ice ages a higher percentage of the
earths water is locked up in massive glaciers and
there fore cause the sea levels during these periods to
be much lower than they are currently. Even though
Flores Island may still have been an island during
these ice age periods, the water gaps between the
island would be more manageable to be crossed via
swimming, floating, and drifting on "floating island"
cause by massive storms. It is obvious from this
information now that the island has been populated by
both homo-erectus and modern humans for sometime,
enough time for the possibility of a branching of
another separate species. Now I come to dating
techniques which I am sad to say there were not to
many mentions of in this video or any of the other
references. The first dating technique that was
mentions was that little person's remains were said to
As far as the
dating
techniques use
go, none could
be used to
definitively com
to a conclusion
on whether the
little person of
Flores was tha
of a new specie
or just a moder
human inflicted
with
microencephal
witch would
cause a lack of
grown and
possible other
stunted growth
anomalies. I
believe I can no
come to a
conclusion bas
solely on dating

6. be of a female that was approximately 30 years old. At
first they thought that the remains must have belonged
to that of a child, however the teeth were clearly adult
teeth and "the wear and tear on the teeth shows that
this individual was an adult probably aged about 30"
(Michael John Norwood "Little People of Flores"). The
other dating technique used was not stated
specifically but was most likely radio carbon dating,
which showed that the bones of this little person were
approximately 18,000 years old. Unfortunately this
date does not show that either a new species had
been discovered or that this was a modern human
species inflicted with microencephaly.
"Little People of Flores." PBS. NOVA Science Now, 19
Apr. 2005. Web. 28 Feb. 2016.
techniques use
by the scientist
and
archeologists.
Team's Summary Conclusions with Citations:
Majority of the groups finding points to the discovery of an entirely new species. When LB1’s fossil was discovered it
was like nothing the discovery team had seen before. It was a one meter tall skeleton and through wear and tear by
its teeth was aged to be around thirty. Since LB1’s skull had no existence of possessing a chin it may suggest that o
a different species. This is due to the fact that chins mark the skeleton as sapien and only sapiens posses a chin
feature. LB1’s cranium size showed that it had a very small brain, and one scientists have never seen before. It's
brain was only one third the size of a normal human and it possessed different qualities. For example, the LB1's brai
cavity was low and broad compared to a human's brain. Holloway tried to state that area 10 of the brain suffered
some kind of deformity but could never prove it. Also the cranium is one not found in any fossil records to date.
Debbie Argue from Australian National University, states that, “whereas LB1’s cranium is not like anything else in the
hominid fossil record, some other hobbit bones resemble much older early human (but non-Homo) fossils known on
from Africa—the Australopithcines”(Powledge). Diamond’s conclusion on how the dwarfs came to be is a great
example supporting our own conclusion. These were a new species of humans that traveled either by floating,
swimming, or by boat to get to this isolated island, and through evolution, due to limited resources, caused them to
shrink in size. This would allow them to sufficiently live on the island; as did other pygmy animals without going
extinct. The idea of deformity is an idea that researchers have tried to show as being why LB1’s remains are the way
they are but through much our discovery, and the evidence provided by these authors leaves us to conclude an
entirely new species. Without their use of the scientific method to provide us with these theories, we could never
make a definitive prediction of LB1’s remains.

7. Zachary Benoff
Works Cited
“Little People of Flores” Online Video Clip. April 2005. NOVAscienceNOW, February 24, 2016. Web. pbs.com
Powledge, Tabitha M. What Is the Hobbit? 12th ed. Vol. 4. PLoS Biology, 2006. Print. E440.