Is this even a hominid?
And if its not that most likely would be because its too complex to be hominid.
Funny how things work out like that.
"This skull is too complex to be a hominid and seven million years old."
"You are right. It looks like a whole new species."
So is it an ancestor or not?
I'm guessing it will be established as a whole new species, but....
That means if a fossil doesn't fit the timeline then you can remove it. Is that even good science?
[quote of Bernard wood]
"It was the conventional assumption that the human-chimp common ancestor, and the earliest members of the chimp lineage … would have been adapted for life in the trees, with the trunk held either horizontal or upright and with the forelimbs adapted for knuckle-walking on large branches or on the ground. This would have been combined with projecting faces that accommodated elongated jaws bearing relatively small chewing teeth and, in males, large upper canine teeth ..."
"If we accept these as sufficient evidence to classify [Toumai] as a hominid at the base, or stem, of the modern human [lineage] then it plays havoc with the tidy model of human origins," Wood said. "Quite simply, a hominid of this age should only just be beginning to show signs of being a hominid. It certainly should not have the face of a hominid less than one-third of its geological age."
Linear Mode
