Science Review: The Cannibal in the Jungle · 6:09am Feb 19th, 2017
This is a small thing I'll be doing ever so often, where I take a work of fiction that heavily uses my fortes (history, Paleontology, Anthropology, and Zoology). More specifically I'm going to focus more on works that attempt what is called "Hard Sci-Fi". Hard Sci-Fi is science fiction that claims to or does earnestly attempt to use a lot of real world science to the point it's situations are either entirely possible in real life, or require only one or two small breaks from reality and are otherwise identical to the real world.
In this case, it's a Mockumentary that aired on Animal Planet's Monster Week in 2015, "The Cannibal in the Jungle".
Synopsis: An alleged cannibalism case from Flores in 1977, where an ornithologist who was accused of killing and eating his American college and Indonesian guide. However before and after being incarcerated, he maintains he is innocent to the modern day; insisting his friends were killed by an unknown species of primates resembling legendary creatures called the Ebu Gogo. A fossil discovery in 2004 of a new species of hominid that once lived in Flores of similar description and recovered tapes from the 1977 expedition begin to show he was telling the truth.
Much in the same way "Mermaids: Body Found" and "Megalodon: The Monster Shark Lives", CITJ uses fake found footage, interviews with experts, real world science; and special effects to make the story. And out of those three, in principle it actually is the most on-the-ball in regards to truth and plausibility. The Ebu Gogo is a legendary monster from Flores folklore that is something like their version of a goblin, dwarf, or boggie man. They are short humanoids and covered in hair, but are intelligent enough to have their own language and use some tools. Natives allege they range from a nuisance to a threat, stealing tools and crops in lighter varieties and kidnapping children in the darker ones. The Ebu Gogo is actually very likely a case of cultural memory involving an extinct species, in this case a branch of the human family tree called Homo floresiensis.
Homo floresiensis, Flores Man, or as some media dub them, hobbits, are the smallest members of the genus Homo. Once found on the island of Flores, these people were of only 1.1 meters tall and 1/8th the mass of a human being at their largest size. They weren't as advanced as Homo sapien sapien and Homo sapien neanderthalensis, but still were pretty adept. They used stone and wooden tools, likely had cloths, likely had speech, could create and maintain fire; and considering they lived on an island they very well may have had primitive rafts. They lived only on Flores and were one of three human species to survive the Toba Catastrophe, along with H. s. sapien and H. s. neanderthanesis. Where exactly they came from in the human family tree is unclear, but it's thought they descended from Asiatic Homo erectus, unlike modern humans and neanderthals who came from the African branch. Basically-
Homo habilis -> Asian Homo erectus -> Homo floresiensis
\
African Homo erectus -> Homo heidelbergansis -> Homo sapien sapien/neanderthalensis
And yes, hobbit is a good description because every single one of this species was short.
The species died out somewhere between 40,000-25,000 years ago, likely from climate changes. There is some suggestion the little guys might have hung on until 13,000 years ago, making them the last human relative in the same genus on the planet, when a nearby super-volcano eruption wiped out both them and the Homo sapien population on Flores. Either way, Humans and Flores Hobbits cohabited for thousands of years. Their exact relation isn't precisely known, but there isn't much evidence of conflict so they probably just ignored each other with the Sapiens living on the coast and the Flores Hobbits living more inland in the dense jungles. However given how long the two must have been aware of each other, some exchanges must have happened on reasonably peaceful grounds or else the must larger Sapiens surely could have wiped the Hobbits out if large fighting broke out. Given that and the time frame, it is very possible a cultural memory of the Flores Hobbits gave rise to the legends of the Ebu Gogo, with recollections of generations who saw their lost neighbors gradually becoming more and more fictionalized and fantasized over the passing centuries of retellings. Similar cases of extinct species surviving in folk tales include numerous Maori legends in New Zealand describing giant birds which died out hundreds of years ago, Amazonian legends talking about creatures resembling giant ground sloths; and Pre-classical European folklore about cave lions.
So how accurate are the Ebu Gogo in "Cannibal in the Jungle"? Well, it's really hit and miss.
As the title implies, these Ebu Gogo have implicitly been stalking, hunting, and eating people who wander into their territories; hunting them down in packs. We see them directly involved in the deaths of two persons, stalking a third, and consumed another off-screen. How plausible is this for Flores Hobbits?
Possible, but unlikely outside of extremely fringe cases. Flores Hobbits were definitely capable of hunting and did eat meat; members of the genus Homo have been doing that since H. habilis. We know from signs of campfires and butcher marks on bones they did occasionally hunt birds, dwarf elephants, and large monitor lizards with spears and primitive axes, butchered the carcass with choppers and flint knives; and then cooked it over a fire. However this was not a majority of their diet. Isotope analysis on skull shows 70-85% of their diet was plants and fruit, which is abundant in Flores. Makes sense to. If you're a little guy and wanted a bite to eat, which sounds safer? Trying to spear the cow sized mini-elephant 8x your weight with your buddies? Or going and picking some plantains? This isn't unsurprising as Homo sapien diets from the time were pretty similar. Now could a ticked off hunting party of Flores Hobbits spear and kill a lone Homo sapien and might they eat them? Yes. However before one judges, cannibalism is a trait found in pretty much every single human and great ape species, including both subspecies of Homo sapien. It can be done for a variety of reasons ranging from warfare with enemies, possibly religious contexts, or just taking an opportunity for food.
There is a scene in the movie where the two surviving expedition party members bury their dead friend (who died from falling out of a tree, it's later heavily implied a hidden Ebu Gogo cut his rope) and double back to find one Ebu Gogo is uncovering the body and starting to eat it when they surprise it. This is probably the most accurate ploy at the title in the special given it's just opportunistic cannibalism; something even modern humans have done hundreds of times across many cultures in history. Guy was already dead, so why not? However this bears the problem that the Flores Hobbit, a.k.a one of the Ebu Gogo tribe, was trying to eat the body raw. Now this does give the good shock moment of seeing it turn around and screech at the two men with a blood covered face, but that part isn't very accurate. The Homo genus has known how to control fire since the latter part of the Habilis stage and almost certain used it a lot by the time of the Flores Hobbits. Heck, one of the first finds of the species before they even found the skeleton was of a fire pit with numerous thoroughly cooked bones. These guys loved a good BBQ. And the individual in the species wasn't in any rush, having not known the other humans had doubled back. So realistically he'd have been trying to uncover the corpse and drag it off to the homestead to be processed and cooked. Tiny cavemen gotta have manners you know!
And given how long the two species cohabited, it is extremely unlikely the Flores Hobbits could have survived as dedicated cannibals without the larger, stronger, slightly more intelligent Homo sapiens backlashing and wiping them out. Large apes in general do not see each other as food outside of rare circumstances and there is almost no evidence of one human species eating another the numerous times they bumped into each other.
One thing the species does get right is that the Ebu Gogo/Flores Hobbits are shown as being capable of speech; both their own simple language as well as imitating a few human words they hear. There's one scene that is extremely creepy where we find out the reason some characters hear distorted human words in the middle of the jungle is because the hidden Hobbits are repeating the last word they heard one of their victims scream to confuse or lure in someone. In this case-
"Run." "Rou-un!' "RAH-UN!" "Run" "Rrrrun" "Run...."
Flores Hobbits were almost certainly capable of speech to some degree. The gene responsible for helping form and comprehend words has been found in their DNA and in earlier species, and they did have developed vocal cords. They might not be able to perfectly say everything a Homo sapien could, given smaller size and different mouth shape, but they could probably be reasonably close in both their own language and mimicking others. Given how good modern humans are at copying sounds they hear, it's probably they could manage this.
Some other points for accuracy is they show the Ebu Gogo/Hobbits living in groups, using stone knives (they don't have any spears though), and walking as a biped.
Where it falls off is how the Flores Hobbits look and move.
Real Flores Hobbits most likely looked like this. 
Yes this museum sculpt looks a tad freaky, but that's just because models like this make everyone look off. Really the only odd traits the species had was they had eyes the same size as our's so they appeared proportionally larger, their head sloped back some; and they didn't have any protruding chin. They almost certainly had dark skin because of the tropical climate (pale skin only evolved in the two Homo sapien species due to being in cold, darker climates in Europe and north Asia). And while they probably didn't wear much (its Indonesia, it's hot give 'em a break), they did almost certainly have hide and early fiber cloths.
What do the Ebu Gogo look like in this?
[WARNING: IMAGES MAY BE GRAPHIC OR FRIGHTENING]
IMAGE LINK! (Large Size, Scary Look)
*puts on pirate hat*.... Yo ho ho and a bottle of NO.
Where to start! Should harp on the fur coat none of the genus Homo have had since the genus was a thing? Should I talk about why they look green for some reason in some shots? How about why one of them has whited-out eyes and yet can still see perfectly fine? Or maybe the fact they are stark naked and never shown on-screen using any tools aside from a rock? Jesus, Australopithecus, the first dedicated bipedal ape, is looking at these guys and saying, "Dude, evolve some damn civilization.".
And no, Flores Hobbits could not swing through the trees like a gibbon or orangutan. Their build was very comparable to all other members of the Homo genus, showing they were strictly ground dwellers. They could probably still climb like modern humans can, but actually shorter limbs would make it harder for them to move tree to tree than a Homo sapien.
What's worse is this special makes them out to be basically small green, human munching orcs-apes; a scenario that is entirely impossible because of one big factor. One I can sum up in three words.
Square. Cubed. Law.
Square cube law is a principle in mathematics which says that when you take two objects of comparable shape and make one double the original size, you've multiply the mass by a factor or 8. For example a 1x1 cube contains 1 cube, but if you make it a 2x2 cube, you got 8 smaller cubes. 1 x 8 = 8 
Because Flores Hobbits and Homo sapien sapien have extremely similar proportions and the former is half the height of the latter, square cube law applies. If your average man is about 5'8-6'0 and weighs roughly 150lbs, than a Flores Hobbit, the Ebu Gogo of this movie, should weigh about 1-6th-1/8th that give or take about 10% considering build range. Which means the Ebu Gogo in this movie couldn't have weighed more than 26.3-41.25 lbs. And actually, given these are beings with less than ideal diets, stresses of primitive living in a dangerous environment, and non-optimal health care for diseases or injuries; it realistically be even lower. I'd give the average Ebu Gogo a total weight of maybe 25-34lbs, less than 23% of a modern human male.
And this is where they as a threat falls off, especially given the movie Flores Hobbits never use anything more advanced than a rock they picked up off the ground. 1/2 the size means 1/8th the muscle mass, 1/8th the bone density, 1/8th the heart and lung size to fuel your body, 1/2th the reach; and 1/4th the stride. There is no way a Flores Orc Hobbit could outrun you because you could easily jog and use your bigger stride, lung capacity, and heart pump to both outspeed and outlast one of them even if they were sprinting. There is no way a Flores Hobbit could act aggressive towards you or attack you even in a 2v1 because you got 8x the reach to hit with, 8x the bone density to avoid breaks, 8x the muscle strength to attack harder; and double the height to keep your vitals out of reach. You could pick up a branch and give a good swing at one of these things, and the impact that would just give us a bad bruise would probably shatter their rib cage or bust open their skull.
To put it in short terms, a Homo sapien would be an absolute nightmare to fight for a Homo floresiensis. We're much faster, much stronger, much bigger, and we got better technology. If the guy in the left part of the picture charged me, I could grab him by the arm, yank him off his feet, and beat him to a bloody pulp on the ground before he could even get a hit in. One strong kick would likely shatter a limb or fracture a skull. It would be like 12 year old me trying to pick a fight with WWE's Kane. One of the last scenes of the 1977 expedition is the sole survivor stalked and confronted by a Ebu Gogo at a river he waded into with it watching him from the shore. Even if taken in the context of the film's monsters, he had nothing to fear after he picked up that rock. They were alone and even if it acted aggressive, he could have walked right up to it and dared it to attack him. No matter what it was going to try, he'd win.
It's astounding really. Of all the primate-like cryptids which you could probably attribute to a prehistoric species, like a Almas as a Neanderthal which were twice as strong as modern man or a Yeti as a Gigantopithecus which would tower over anyone alive, they literally picked the one member who when put in a fight against a modern human, would lose pretty damn close to 100% of the time.
There is a good reason relations between Homo floresiensis and Homo sapien on ancient Flores were likely neutral or friendly during the thousands of years they shared the island. If the former even tried to act hostile to the latter, the latter would have wiped them out within a few generations. Modern man does not take kindly to being prey, and we are the most dangerous predators the Cenozoic ever coughed up. To give an idea, an analogy. Homo floresiensis managed to evolve on an isolated island and thrived on it. Homo sapien evolved in the middle of Africa, weathered the challenges of it, Asia, Europe, Australia, and the New World. They ruled an island. We ruled a planet.
Cannibal hobbits? Come at me bro!
Yeah, i saw the special, and i agree on all the points made here. It's like the Lost Tapes series, where they gave some scientific reasoning, but mostly focused on the "monster" aspect, ending up with the creature in the program seeming very different from what the facts claimed (to be clear, i only mean the legitimate cryptid episodes of Lost Tapes, not the ones focusing on supernatural creatures like the Vampire, Hellhound, and Skinwalker)
All that said, the "Run" scene still gave me goosebumps... and actually still does just thinking about it
I have to say, I always love when you do stuff like this. It's fascinating to see you give us a careful breakdown of the history and capabilities of various species.
I didn't see this special, but I do remember seeing a genuine program about the discovery and study of Homo floresiensis. It's quite remarkable to know that our two species ran in parallel for so long and so recently. ^_^
...Oh, and while a 2x2 square would indeed contain 4 smaller squares, the 2x2x2 cube you used as an example contains 8 smaller cubes.
I'd also have to agree, any direct 1v1 confrontation would've been like Trespasser vs. Junior
Doubling volume multiplies the mass by eight, not four. Just a slight nitpick.
So wait, did people actually think this was real?
4428134
4428118
Oh wow that's embaressing. I was just talking about one dimension in square cube law, rather than total volume. Hence why I just said four, but I went back and added in volume parts but must forgotten to change some of the 4s to 8s. Sorry for the confusion ^^;
And yep, just like the mermaids special, some people thought this was real. To be fair, unlike the mermaids one this one was actually done pretty convincingly with extremely little CGI and a much smaller (literally) scale.
As for the other human species, Homo sapien sapien being the literal "Last Man Standing" is actually an anomaly as over 90% of our time as a species has been spent with us rubbing shoulders with another member of the human family tree. And if the fact some populations of humans contain small bits of hybrid DNA, evidently we did the exact opposite of conflict most of the time we met. That's not a factor with the hobbits as the genetic difference was big enough (not to mention size), but seems we and out little cousins got along fine for tens of thousands of years. Still, is kind of a saddening fact that we are a pretty lonely species now. Sole survivor of our line who very well lost the ability to further split due to a genetic bottleneck.
4428140
Well, that plus the lack of isolation to allow for genetic divergence to form. Let's face it, isolation has a huge impact on species divergence, and the travel capability that we developed over the last few centuries has eliminated isolation between populations of humans.
I haven't yet watched this "special". I did see the one on mermaids, and couldn't stop complaining about the insult to my intelligence it represented for a week. I also saw an earlier one on dragons, and found it merely amusingly improbable. Perhaps I'll take the time to watch this. I suspect a copious amount of alcohol will be needed to get through it...
Oh, don't mention the "Square Cubed" Law Tarb, cause then we all know that would destroy the fun of ANY Kaiju of any genre to ever exist.
I personally haven't seen this special, but like the mermaid one, I can tell that it's probably going to be one where I shake my head at. What happened to the ideal of documentaries existing to help us LEARN about the truth? To expand our minds? I appreciate documents such as "Dragons: A fantasy made real" or "Alien Planet", because they are at least dubbed "Speculative Science", not real in any way, but they allow us to see the possibility of these types of creatures to exist based on our own existing knowledge.
But with documentaries like these, where they exist to distort and just to entertain, it's like TMZ.
Makes me wonder if you are ever gonna review Mermaids: the body found special, Tarb
I took care to actually watch the film before commenting. I acquired it by legitimate means, totally did not download on torrent, which would be illegal and very naughty.
I really enjoy theses speculative science pieces, I loved "Dragons: A Fantasy Made Real" when it came out, reminded me of some aspects of "Reign of Fire".
And I remember when "Mermaid: The Body Found" came out, it was so interesting and entertaining for me, not just as a fun film, but for the proposition that this is how a species of aquatic sapiens could have developed. I was disappointed by the sequel however.
This film, CiTJ, I thought 'twas the best one yet. Better writing, tighter story, better execution, and very down-to-earth scientific postulation. Something like this could very easily be a Netflix series. Daredevil season 4: "Little Devils".
You either mean a "Boogie Man" or a "Bog Man" (feared biped of swampy territory like the Skunk Ape). I'll go with the former.
I am very much a fan of concepts like "genetic memory" of "Cultural memory", so instances of peoples telling tales of creatures long gone as if they were still around fascinates me. Like the examples you mentioned, there are of course the more common examples of people's fears of spiders, snakes, large birds, and that bears live in caves. The notion that we are more connected to our ancestors than simply carrying on their genetic information I think holds a lot of potential.
The FACT that modern man coexisted with our bipedal cousins for most of our time is for me, probably the single greatest revelation about our history as a species. Wha tit must have been like for our ancestors to walk around, and see these... people(?), to trade with them, to make war against them. There was something I watched [stops writing to check youtube for reference]
....... [Alright, can't find it, I'l get back to you on that] wherein a small band of humans were migrating westward, where they encountered ancient white-man in the forest, and were pursued by an aggressive group of other homo's to the edge of the ocean. It was very well done, and told a great story. And that's something I like about the history of human evolution, in that it tells a great story.
You know Tarb, I know that a picture of an extinct species of Homo, but I could have sworn that guy asked me for change last weekend.
Seriously, the biodiversity of the modern human is an incredible thing, I'm almost saddened that we'll never get the chance to interact with other members of our genus.
wordsrhymesandrhythm.files.wordpress.com/2013/12/human-race.png?w=600
As diverse as our species is, having around some Neanderthals, Heidelbergensis, and Java Man, would be much more interesting.
Then again, you approach controversial territory, with theories about the ancient Nephilim being extinct species, that we warred out of existence. Plus other ancient tales of interactions with giants, and dwarves, and such.
You offer some comments as to the problems in their portrayal in the show, And there were a couple I had a thought on.
1) They looking a tad green around the gills in some scenes. Well, they might not have been green back when they were real, but using a little speculative evolution, one might say that prolonged development in a lush jungle environment might naturally select some of them who could blend in with the scenery. Might help to avoid some predators or evade the "tall-folk" who were trying to wipe them out.
2) They be rockin' in the tree-tops. Here again, life in a thickly wooded jungle, might spurn a small primate who could navigate through with enough proficiency to avoid predators, and outpace prey. Since they're not a large and strong as Chimpanzees and Bonobos, the ground might be a little more perilous for them, so absconding along the branches might be a safer route.
Listen mister, you take your fancy college-boy math and you just turn right around. Ain't nobody got the need for yer' formulations and equasilizers in this town.
i.imgur.com/vLYLQ.gif
I say all that knowing that I'm wading into dangerous waters by banting about evolution with somepony who actually goes to school to learn about it, when all I've got is some amateur reading, documentaries, and a pocket-full of gumption.
As hilarious and entertaining as it would certainly be to watch a full grown man take on a group of Hobbit-men in a bare-knuckle fight, like when a normal sized wrestler takes on all the midget luchadores, I have to think that a group of "people" who know how to track, kill, and butcher animals in the wild would produce a number of individuals who could hold their own against a gangly-armed ornithologist. I mean, a podiatrist sure, maybe even an ichthyologist could send them sleepin' with the fishes, but an orni?
Plus hey, you ever see someone get attacked by a house cat? They send grown-ass-adults running! Nevermind something that can shank you with a flint.
4432122
Responding to this review first before I finish the long winded 35 one
Oh I still love the movie, finding it quite well made, very authentic looking, and carrying the good tradition of Dragons and Mermaids in taking a mythological creature (in this case the delightful surprise of a fairly obscure monster) and combining it with the surviving species angle from Megalodon. This was purely a paleoanthropological critique on it. Namely I was amused how in practice they were right on the money in some ways (proper use of fire, stone tools of multiple types, right location, right size), but then flew way off in others (lacking weapons, cannibalism, making what looked pretty human into some kind of ape-man).
Regional spelling, but I'll change it so I don't confuse anyone with my crazy 'ccent.
Tis a fascinating concept indeed. Not just restricted to animals or plants either as it's suggested many stories from around the world of ancient cataclysms like Noah's flood may have been based off folk memory of natural disasters. There is an aboriginal legend from Australia for instance that tells of the ground splitting and sea waters swallowing huge swaths of land. While it does have mythic elements (like ancient heroes halting the flood waters with walls of spears), it does closely match up with an actual flood even over 10,000 years prior; quite possibly making it the oldest story ever known.
Title you're looking for is Planet of Apemen, a label that still confuses me given the two episodes dealt with Homo sapien sapiens meeting the very decidedly human-looking Homo erectus (ocean episode, took place on Indian coast) and Homo sapien neanderthalensis (the white-men in the forest). Definitely a good documentary with good production values and people who looked the part very well. Heck, they correctly showed the earlierest modern humans are still pretty dark skinned, something I see botched lord knows how many times.
And yes the idea of multiple species of humans is a nifty one, especially given how interactions might vary group to group, species to species. How modern man met the equally intelligent Neanderthals might differ from how they met the more primative Erectus. Heck, given the number of Neanderthal and Devosian genes in anyone not from Africa, definitely seems loke some groups got along pretty well. Times showing continued, long term contact between two groups like Sapiens, Neanderthals, and Devosians all in the Middle-East/Urals or Sapiens and Flores Hobbits on Flores, for thousands of years, does suggest most interactions weren't hostile. Not saying some hostility didn't occur, but given how low population densities were, mortality rates, and harshness of climate, makes sense it seems trade or teaming up was more common.
Modern humans are a very lonely species. Heck, sometimes I wonder if the reason man has so many myths and modern fiction about meeting other sapient races (the fae folk in legend, aliens in modern times) is because something in the back of our mind remembers when we had neighbors.
It could be true, but do take into fact how many types of primate live in forests and next to none of them are green. It's because green on the wrong kind of green (like dark green on light green or tea leaf green on beige) sticks out a lot, so colors like dull grays and browns make for good forest camo. Actually, the dark skin they had already would make for pretty good camouflage in a dense jungle given it blends in with the shadows and branches. Clothing would also help to break up the outline. I was more griping over the fact they were furry when no species of the genus still had both fur in anything approaching that amount. Preserved remains show ancient humans had a concept of camouflage (Neanderthals used body paint), so it seems like if they wanted to hide they'd use pigments or fiber bound leaves to cover themselves. Plus if they were trying to hide from the "tall-folk", why keep making themselves known by attacking them or revealing themselves?
Problem here is they very clearly made the Ebu Gogo in the species the Flores Hobbits. Flores Hobbits were definately ground dwelling as their skeletal build was extremely similar to all other members of the genus, Homo. Lack of grasping big toe, rigid wrist, upright stance, wide hips, and perpendicular shoulders with a distinguished neck all show they walked on the ground. You see, the reason gibbons and Orangutans can swing through the trees is because their wrist design differs from our's. At the cost of some finger flexibility (some types of gibbons almost lack opposable thumbs), they can freely rotate and apply large amounts of torque to their wrist almost like it was a ball-and-socket joint. If a human tried the same, we might break our wrist. Flores Hobbits were built much the same, with similar limb proportions to our own, much larger and strong hindlimbs than forelimbs. So while a Hobbit could climb a tree, swinging arboreally would be extremely difficult given they'd be using their weaker limbs (arms) in a manner they weren't built for; on top of a short reach due to being little fellas. And 12,000 years isn't long enough for such drastic changes to happen. If a human species became even partially arboreal, we'd sacrifice a lot (like delicate grip needed for using and making complex tools).
Oh please, speak by all means in the future. I really do love these sort of discussions and hope my replies don't seem snot-nosed or thumbing of said nose. Plenty of brilliant people without even GEDs and from experience, plenty of dumb people with Master's degrees.
Maybe an ornithology could make them see the tweety birds?
As for hobbits being able to take a Sapien, I don't doubt it's not possible. These little guys didn't big game hunt often (gathering or small game was quicker, safer, and often more productive), but hunting parties were capable of taking down cow-sized dwarf elephants so a single Homo sapien could be dispatched by a hunting party. The thing that made me raise an eyebrow at the movie was we never saw one Ebu Gogo use a manufactured tool. Closest we got was word they used flint knives to carve up a carcass and a rock to smash a cranium (of an already-dead guy, guess Gogo wanted to do a double-tap just to be sure). Where's the spears? Where's the handaxes? Where's the clubs? Where's the choppers? Heck I didn't even see one use a throwing stick or rock. Seems instead they used their bare hands, which is extremely risky business fighting a Homo sapien given sheer size, reach, and durability different. Primative weapons are the reason ancient humans became so dangerous. Pit 5 of these naked, ape-ish midget brutes against a hunting party of 3 armed, actual Flores Hobbits; and I bet on the latter every day of the week.
4432152
Firstly- spammed your PM box. I know your busy, and you'll get around to 'em.
I first watched the Dragons one when I was in Iraq on '06, I'd bulk order DVDs, and I got a lot of Discovery/Animal Planet ones. Along with all the seasons of Law & Order at the time. It blew my mind that someone had actually made a legit documentary about how dragons could theoretically be real, and have regional speciation.
The Mermaid one I watched after hearing so much about it, and that so many people thought it was real. I saw it, and for a bit, it even had me thinking: "wait a minute....nooooo.....". I forthwithly showed it to my friend, who said it was the most interesting thing he'd watched in years.
Things like that, that take the natural sciences, like marine biology, anthropology, and archeology, and give them an inspiring narrative is how more people can get into these fields. I know it makes me want to learn more about the subjects, I can only imagine what a little kid feels.
The recent Cosmos run, for all its progressive hooey, did a fantastic job of relating science to the lay man. And films like CiTJ, for it's minor flaws, do more I think, to tell the story about these forgotten hominids than some academic text book.
Hey, you're down in Florida, you ever get curious about the Skunk Ape?
A thing about the flood myths I've heard about: is that since so many human civilizations are built around water, either on coasts or on rivers, it's not too wild to expect them to have stories about overflows or surges.
It is [buy some apples] Planet of the Apemen! I have it on a hard-drive, along with weeks worth of other documentaries on numerous subjects. I was gonna dig through the sub-folders for it, but you saved me the trouble. It was probably the most compelling documentary on the subject I can recall watching. I only wish someone would make something that covered earlier times, like when we were still arboreal, and looked kinda like bush-babies.
Though... the decision to title it "..of the Apemen", and then have it star a bunch of black people must have raised a few eyebrows. Hmmm....
carlylarson.files.wordpress.com/2011/12/dsc06518.jpg
This topic also makes me wonder about the place of peoples like the Pygmies, and the Aboriginal Australians.
mendosa.com/fitnessblog/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/pygmies.jpg themindunleashed.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/austrailannn.jpg
These two groups, I think if left to themselves are clearly on the path to their own evolutionary ends than the majority of Humanity. And I wouldn't think it terrible at all if we allowed their unique development to continue.
And I don't even have to that exotic; I've got central and south Americans walking around my city right now, who are full grown adults, and stand a whopping 5' flat. I feel like that guy in the Pygmy picture. Well, maybe more like Pizarro.
Yeah, I think there's somehting to that. Like how certain animals are born with some survival know-how, we humans have the gut instinct to think: "Wait a second, shouldn't there be some other critters like us around here somewhere?". [insert theory about the people Cain was worried about murdering him if he went among them]
Perhaps that's a reason why so many readily believe in tales of human-like beings living with us, because there used to be.
I chose those two points because I could conceive of a defense for them. Just a basic-bitch natural selection of why things evolve the way they do in a jungle. And like I said, just some speculation. It would buck the trend, of monkeys having generally dark colors to blend in, and even any number of other jungle creatures that run the rainbow of colors. Though I suppose it wouldn't be out of nature's wheelhouse to spit out a green monkey, and see if it survives long enough to have any offspring.
I didn't say these were water-tight defenses, just me spitballing. I'm confident that mother nature has produced plenty of stranger creatures that defy cursory explination.
static2.therichestimages.com/cdn/429/594/90/cw/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/pauly-shore.jpg
And it would be just like nature to take a bipedal ape, and send that little prick right back into the trees, like she did with the whale. Nature you sneaky bastard...
Your most potent point I think Tarb, is that the timespan would be to short to produce a change that drastic. And while I agree with this specific case, I would humbly submit, that it's not years we should consider when thinking of evolution, but rather generations. I wouldn't start by asking how many years it would take, I'd start by sorting life-spans and wondering how many generations it could take with sufficient pressures to manifest "change X".
I'm sure you could conceive of some equation for that Tarb, but I assure you, it's not necessary. We both know what I mean, and that the actual answer is not my point.
How I feel about banting evolution with you:
cdn1.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_asset/file/6914877/04_zpshtfejye6.0.gif
Guess which one I am... I'll give you a hint: it's not the big guy.
And why aren't they getting to them?
4.bp.blogspot.com/-yTdl7dwY9DE/UUcdzZTvehI/AAAAAAAAOxM/Pif1RqKX0ZY/s1600/notfunny.gif
I think if the focus of the film had been more on the factuallity of Homo Floresiensis, they would have gone into depth with some of the details you cite. But there was the A plot of Darrow's mission, and how he was wrongfully blamed for being a cannibal.
4432152
As one with interests in both biology and computer science, I would ask your opinion about the phenomenon known as "The Uncanny Valley"; in particular the theory that it came about due to competition with near-human species?
4432413
While it was no documentary, an animated special that aired on ABC on the third Sunday of July in 1982 (I missed the beginning due to the Family Picnic) titled "The Flight of Dragons" actually included many similar theories on Dragon physiology, and particularly on how they could fly. That movie was loosely inspired by a book of the same name, but used a different source for it's story elements. While it was a kid's movie, you may just enjoy it if you can track it down...
4433291 I briefly remember that little film. Thanks for the links though.
Since you're a bit older, you might recall another animated dragon movie. I only remember small bits, but it involved a child speaking to a dragon, I think it took place in England during WW2, and it ended with the dragon laying down, and over time being covered by grass, until a bunch of houses dotted the sleeping dragon-shaped hill for the credits. There was some element of "realm travel" I think...
I tried to find it for a week before surrendering.
4433341
... doesn't ring any bells. Then again, there were a large number of mostly forgettable "specials" that were made, shown once, and never brought back out for whatever reason; The Flight of Dragons mostly stuck with me because it was one of the few I was able to record (Video recorders had been a thing for a long time, but AFFORDABLE VHS was very new in the early '80s.) Then again, unlike earlier bits that were broadcast a total of once and then forgotten, this was about the time that (relatively) cheap Home VHS movies got started....
4433368 I remember when I was little, and my uncle got us a VCR for Christmas, and I was spazzing out about how we'd put a tape in, and how that was able to put the movie on the television. I just didn't understand it.
The first tape we played was Godzilla vs. Megalon.
Man, that's the thing about specials and other broadcasts from back then, somebody had to have the foresight to record them, for even the chance for them to be remembered.
A few examples that I remember, were animation's like "Noah's Animals", some cartoon film about a cat with a magical tail who had it cut off and goes on a journey to get it back, and "Sebastion Star Bear".
4433392
Much earlier, and the question stops being if anyone watching recorded and saved the show, it becomes did anyone at a TV station decide to not tape over it...
I honestly suspect that the majority of shows from the first three decades of Television history have been lost just because no one bothered to save them. The exceptions, of course, being shows that were popular enough to go into syndication and truly major news events. As for the rest......
The annoying part of this is the biological differences could be explained by them having tens of thousands of years to change (even if scientifically speaking THAT much is a little hard to swallow in that amount of time, but COULD at least explain a better ability to navigate the jungle), but the changes make NO SENSE.
Green would make sense as camo, but humans changing THAT way doesn't make sense, it'd make more sense if it was war paint or something for that purpose.
But the biggest problem is the fur: in a WINTER environment, that might make sense to evolve denser fur, but they live in a JUNGLE, where that's really not a beneficial adaptation.
A more logical adaptation if they DID go that route would probably be means to better navigate the jungle.
This is the annoying part about this 'what if they survived' things: they don't actually take it as far as it COULD go and explore paths that didn't happen.