Latest new and speculation on the recent hominid find in the Sahel.
Especially as to Common Anscestor status.

Hello jimbaen  

Thanks for your question on the latest news and speculation about the
skull and skeletal remains from the Sahel. I'll start with a brief
mention of the first report published this summer:

FIRST NEWS IN JULY 

The scientist who found it and whose discovery was reported in July
thinks the skull and other remains found in Africa come from a "human
ancestor":

"Brunet, of the University of Poitiers in France, claims the skull is
a human ancestor with a combination of features like humans and
chimps. It has a flat face and protruding brow like a human but its
brain and body are the size of a chimp. Brunet's team also found what
they describe to be human-like canine teeth."

OCTOBER UPDATE

The latest news is all about a recent article in the reputable journal
'Nature', written by Professor Milford Wolpoff.  He believes the find
suggests an ape:

"It's an ape not a human" 

He leaves open the possibility that it could be from a "common
ancestor":

"[it] could be a common ancestor to humans and chimps before the two
branches split from each other," Wolpoff said. "We don't know if it's
a gorilla and we can't say it's a human ancestor either. It's an ape."

These latest opinions were reported yesterday by CNN:

http://www.cnn.com/2002/TECH/science/10/09/ancient.skull/index.html

The Washington Post has a similar story:

" 'I don't see how you can tell what it is. But it is not human,' said
Mr. Wolpoff, a University of Michigan anthropologist."

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20021010-96518265.htm

According to 'Nature' itself the "row centres on Toumaļ's skull,
particularly a flat plane at the back, where the neck muscles once
attached. Wolpoff claims that the plate is at a steep angle - a sign
that the muscles must have pointed along the back of a four-legged
animal."

http://www.nature.com/nsu/021007/021007-8.html

A National Geographic report dated today makes the point that the
creature, nicknamed Toumaļ, "does not have a feature that they believe
is essential for it to be considered a hominid: the ability to walk on
two feet. "

The same article makes it clear that the debate will continue:

"Chris Stringer, head of the Human Origins Program at the National
History Museum in London, told National Geographic News in July that
discoveries such as this are always complex because evidence is
usually incomplete and there is little agreement about what key
features characterize a distinct human ancestor."

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2002/10/1009_021009_chadskull.html

At present reports are focussing on Wolpoff's opinions but there may
be more speculation in the coming days and weeks. And luckily Google
has recently introduced a 'news' search button which makes getting the
latest information simpler than it used to be. Look for 'News -New!'
above the usual search box towards the right. Using it got me to this
page of references:

http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=hominid+skull&meta=&sa=N&tab=wn

I hope this doesn't sound too much like an ad for Google! I wanted to
let you know about a feature which might prove useful.
Please feel free to let me know if any clarification is needed.

Regards - Leli

This was exactly what I was looking for.