It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
What happened is that a small set of large crania were taken from a much larger sample of varied crania, and given the name, "Boskopoid." This selection was initially done almost without any regard for archaeological or cultural associations -- any old, large skull was a "Boskop".
—Professor of anthropology John HawksWikipedia's W.svg
Boskop Man (Homo capensis) was an alleged (and now discredited) group of hominids thought to date from 10,000 years ago. Named after Boskop, South Africa, they were thought to have had remarkably large brains (1,800-2,000cc typical) and childlike facial features, and were all super-evolved geniuses, with an IQ of 150, compared to us mere nose picking Cro-Magnons.
Unfortunately, they turned out to be a figment of anthropologists' imaginations, based on completely spurious speculation from a tiny number of severely biased samples. The term "Boskop Man" is no longer even in use by anthropologists....
...So the Boskops had been consigned to the trash can of science. But as sometimes happens, the idea was kept alive in popular culture. Loren Eiseley included an essay on Boskop Man in his 1958 collection The Immense Journey. Eiseley conjectured that the Boskops had large brains and small faces and were therefore, as evidenced by their pedomorphism, more highly evolved than Cro-Magnons. They were therefore the "Future Man."
You know what these people look like from sci-fi: they have the facial proportions of grey aliens.
Horrifyingly for their claim to be doing anything resembling science, Lynch and Granger actually referenced Eiseley's ridiculous teleological puffery in their own work.
The Boskops had a bigger cranial cavity, at about 1800 cc - 1980 cc, than any other species of the homo genus. Modern humans have an average cranial cavity of 1400 cc. However, apparently the Boskop also had very small faces, making their faces almost child like.
There are "theories" that they were killed off by the stronger genus of humanoids. But if that was true then how is it that homo sapiens survived the stronger species?
Heather Frigiola, M.S. in Anthropology from Purdue University
Answered Sep 26, 2018 · Author has 114 answers and 30.6k answer views
The fossil originally dubbed Homo capensis is real. Today it is simply referred to as Boskop Man and is classified as an anatomically modern human, not a separate species. The fossil was discovered at a time when it was fashionable for anthropologists to classify pretty much every new discovery as a new species.
Here's why that risk isn't all it's cracked up to be....
....A Problem Of Overlapping Genes
While the dangers of inbreeding are generally overstated, they certainly do exist, and can get quite extreme over multiple generations. At its root, the problem is all about recessive genes. While most of the genes that we carry are either beneficial or neutral in character - otherwise, we wouldn't survive - we all have a handful of genes that have the potential to have a serious negative impact on our health. These are known as autosomal recessive disorders, and they include cystic fibrosis, sickle cell anemia, Tay-Sachs disease, albinism, and a variety of other conditions.
These recessive genes, however, generally remain inactive b
Is The Boskop Species of Mankind Evidence Against Evolution?
Their frontal lobe was larger than that of other homo genus.
Homo capensis: In the early 1910s, two farmers stumbled across hominid fossils, including bits of a skull, near Boskop, South Africa. The bones were passed around to many anatomists—including Raymond Dart, who later discovered the first Australopithecus fossil—before ending up in the hands of paleontologist Robert Broom. Broom estimated the brain size of the skull (PDF): a whopping 1,980 cubic centimeters (the typical modern person’s brain is around 1,400 cubic centimeters). Broom determined that the skull should be called H. capensis, also known as Boskop Man. Other specimens from South Africa were added to the species, and some scientists became convinced southern Africa was once home to a race of big-brained, small-faced people. But by the 1950s, scientists were questioning the legitimacy of H. capensis. One problem was that the thickness of the original skull made it difficult to estimate the true brain size. And even if it were 1,980 cubic centimeters, that’s still within the normal range of variation for modern people’s brains, anthropologist and blogger John Hawks explained in 2008. Another problem, Hawks pointed out, was that scientists were preferentially choosing larger skulls to include in H. capensis while ignoring smaller skulls that were found in association with the bigger specimens. Today, fossils once classified as H. capensis are considered members of H. sapiens.
Cranial/ Brain Size of Homo Neanderthalensis
Many people are under the misconception that Homo neanderthal had a smaller brain than modern humans since they were not as evolved. But their brains were just as large as ours and often larger, proportional to their brawnier bodies. Homo neanderthal brain size was larger than the average modern human brain and averaged 1500 cubic centimetres and an average 3.3 lbs. This is to be expected, as Neanderthals were generally heavier and more muscular than modern humans. People that live in cold climates also tend to have larger brains than those living in warm climates.
originally posted by: Blaine91555
Sounds like a classic case of making the evidence fit the theory to me.
originally posted by: MichiganSwampBuck
The Neanderthals had larger brains than modern humans but have long been characterized as primitive brutes. Thankfully attitudes have been changing about how intelligent the Neanderthals really were.
Rather than basing intelligence on brain size alone some researchers believe that a better correlate of intelligence or cognitive skill should be based on the size of specific parts of the brain and how they compare to the rest of the brain and overall body size.
Areas such as the frontal lobe, temporal lobe, parietal lobe and visual/auditory systems among others may be measured separately to determine an animals level of performance related to that specif brain function.
Studies among children and adults show that when one part of the brain has abnormal growth/reduced size it can alter the brains ability to function and either enhance or reduce specific functions associated with that part of the brain.
Funny how old bad science seems to hang on long past the time it was debunked.
originally posted by: gort51
We are basically a mixed breed......just like all the dogs.