I am biological anthropologist with a specialization in paleoanthropology. My research focuses on the pattern of evolutionary change in humans over the past two million years, with an emphasis on the early evolution and dispersal of our genus, Homo. My work spans a number of areas including comparative anatomy, genetics and demography.
This site is designed to provide a public outlet for thoughts and commentary on my work, the work of my students, as well as current topics related to the broader field of biological anthropology.
On twitter: @APV2600
Hi, I saw your post on the abnormal skull from New Guinea which had a jaw portion that nearly rivaled the size of “Meganthropus” Sangiran 6. I was curious if any post cranial remains were described in that paper indicating a height of the subject?
I enjoy collecting antiquated reports of anomalous skeletons of giants and little people, usually reported in the press in the late 19th to mid 20th century. Some turn out to be quite bogus, others are kind of interesting. The giant bones of Castelnau are one of my more intriguing “finds:” http://cnum.cnam.fr/CGI/fpage.cgi?4KY28.35/16/140/536/0/0 . whether they are human, and truly gigantic, or even still exist is certainly debatable. But it’s fun to look into old reports, if anything for entertainment.
Cheers.
Jim
I am not a ‘professional’ paleoanthropoligist by any means but I have read some in the area. Your stance regarding the number of Homo species is refreshing. I think the desire to ‘Name’ a species and bathe in the the glow of fame sways some to push the envelope a little. If one reflects upon the vast variety displayed by present day H. sapiens and project that into passed Homo and related members of the last several million years, then splitting hairs among similar fossils doesn’t make a lot of sense. Add to that the concept of temporal issues and the things get real narley. When, over time does an organism acquire enough change to warrant a new species name. Also looking back over time, when does the normal species variation reach the magnitude of a specieation event. You can’t tell from a temporal point of view if members separated in time could possibly have mated and had viable, fertile offspring, Jurassic Park need not apply. I suspect that two to three million years ago there was as much, if not more variation among ‘Australopiths,’ or whoever our ancestors sprung from, than today. With a wide variety of local environs and ever changing climactic conditions, trials on the theme of Homo were trotted out but withered over time. Our ancestors were the lucky lotto winners from this fret. When, during the course of history do these ‘failed’ trials become a new species. It’s really hard to tell from the point of view of a couple of million years after the fact. But it’s fun to speculate.
Chuck
Hello Professor Van Arsdale.
My name is Cecil Ramos and I am a doctor and phd in Brazil. Started their course of paleoanthropology unpretentious way but my excitement with classes, with the choice of teaching and the flow of ideas and information made me consider this one of the best courses I’ve ever done, even compared to classroom courses. Congratulations for the initiative, the care with teaching and the visible involvement and pleasure in spreading their knowledge.
A big hug
Cecil