>> Oops! :-) Still, perhaps Leakey is right. He believed Lucy was a
>> different species:
To clarify, almost everyone believes she is a different species
(although some, including Phillip Tobias, have said that A. afarensis
may be too similar to A. africanus to be a separate species).
The points in dispute are whether the fossils at Hadar are from one
species or two (as the quote Steve gave from Richard Leakey says, he
thinks there is at least two, but that is not the majority opinion at
the moment), and whether they are a human ancestor. Again, the majority
opinion seems to be is that A. afarensis (Lucy) is an ancestor, but
Leakey is, once again, a dissenter. He probably believes that some of
the Hadar fossils are from genus Homo, and are therefore a more probable
ancestor.
(I'm not trying to take sides here, just to document what the current
differences of opinion are)
SJ>This leaves only Homo erectus as ancestors which fits well with
>the 2-Adam model
JF>What about Homo habilis?
>> Sorry. I tend to think of Homo erectus as including H. habilis. The
>> latter's brain size ("between 500 and 800 cc" - Hominid FAQ), would
>> qualify it as Homo sapiens' ancestor, unless it was Neanderthal's
>> ancestor.
Why "unless"? What's to stop them having the same ancestor? Current
thinking is that habilis-erectus-archaic_sapiens are all ancestors
of both H. sapiens sapiens and the Neandertals.
-- Jim Foley Symbios Logic, Fort Collins, COJim.Foley@symbios.com (303) 223-5100 x9765 I've got a plan so cunning you could put a tail on it and call it a weasel. -- Edmund Blackadder