<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_03_25_0054235</id>
	<title>New Ancient Human Identified</title>
	<author>samzenpus</author>
	<datestamp>1269536280000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>krou writes <i>"Working on a finger-bone that was discovered in the Denisova Cave of Siberia's Altai mountains in 2008, Johannes Krause from the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology and colleagues managed to extract mitochondrial DNA. They compared it to the genetic code of modern humans and other known Neanderthals and discovered <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8583254.stm">a new type of hominin that lived in Central Asia between 48,000 and 30,000 years ago</a>. Professor Chris Stringer, human origins researcher at London's Natural History Museum, said, 'This new DNA work provides an entirely new way of looking at the still poorly-understood evolution of humans in central and eastern Asia.' The last common ancestor of the hominid (dubbed 'X-Woman'), humans and Neanderthals seems to have been about one million years ago."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>krou writes " Working on a finger-bone that was discovered in the Denisova Cave of Siberia 's Altai mountains in 2008 , Johannes Krause from the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology and colleagues managed to extract mitochondrial DNA .
They compared it to the genetic code of modern humans and other known Neanderthals and discovered a new type of hominin that lived in Central Asia between 48,000 and 30,000 years ago .
Professor Chris Stringer , human origins researcher at London 's Natural History Museum , said , 'This new DNA work provides an entirely new way of looking at the still poorly-understood evolution of humans in central and eastern Asia .
' The last common ancestor of the hominid ( dubbed 'X-Woman ' ) , humans and Neanderthals seems to have been about one million years ago .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>krou writes "Working on a finger-bone that was discovered in the Denisova Cave of Siberia's Altai mountains in 2008, Johannes Krause from the Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology and colleagues managed to extract mitochondrial DNA.
They compared it to the genetic code of modern humans and other known Neanderthals and discovered a new type of hominin that lived in Central Asia between 48,000 and 30,000 years ago.
Professor Chris Stringer, human origins researcher at London's Natural History Museum, said, 'This new DNA work provides an entirely new way of looking at the still poorly-understood evolution of humans in central and eastern Asia.
' The last common ancestor of the hominid (dubbed 'X-Woman'), humans and Neanderthals seems to have been about one million years ago.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607434</id>
	<title>Sleeper</title>
	<author>MichaelSmith</author>
	<datestamp>1269455100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If only they had this persons nose. They could recreate the whole person then. Not much you can do with half a finger.</p><p>(and if he had eaten organic rice he would still be alive now).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If only they had this persons nose .
They could recreate the whole person then .
Not much you can do with half a finger .
( and if he had eaten organic rice he would still be alive now ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If only they had this persons nose.
They could recreate the whole person then.
Not much you can do with half a finger.
(and if he had eaten organic rice he would still be alive now).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607644</id>
	<title>Want to know what he looked like?</title>
	<author>Chees0rz</author>
	<datestamp>1269458400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Take a picture, load it into photoshop, content aware fill, and BAM sneak peak into the past.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Take a picture , load it into photoshop , content aware fill , and BAM sneak peak into the past .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Take a picture, load it into photoshop, content aware fill, and BAM sneak peak into the past.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607770</id>
	<title>where are the tin-foil-hats?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269547560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's kinda late and I'm a bit brain-dead at the moment.  But the first thing that came to my mind was...... The Abominable Snow Man.  What are the chances that this ends up being the smoking gun for that oh-so-elusive cryptoid that has had people arguing about hairy wild apemen since time forgotten?  Personally, I think it'll realistically end up being a case of contamination or something else mondan.  But with the odd chance that this turns out to be scientifically investigatable, we can hang on to the slim hope that there are other samples out there waiting to be found.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's kinda late and I 'm a bit brain-dead at the moment .
But the first thing that came to my mind was...... The Abominable Snow Man .
What are the chances that this ends up being the smoking gun for that oh-so-elusive cryptoid that has had people arguing about hairy wild apemen since time forgotten ?
Personally , I think it 'll realistically end up being a case of contamination or something else mondan .
But with the odd chance that this turns out to be scientifically investigatable , we can hang on to the slim hope that there are other samples out there waiting to be found .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's kinda late and I'm a bit brain-dead at the moment.
But the first thing that came to my mind was...... The Abominable Snow Man.
What are the chances that this ends up being the smoking gun for that oh-so-elusive cryptoid that has had people arguing about hairy wild apemen since time forgotten?
Personally, I think it'll realistically end up being a case of contamination or something else mondan.
But with the odd chance that this turns out to be scientifically investigatable, we can hang on to the slim hope that there are other samples out there waiting to be found.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607396</id>
	<title>Summary is slightly optimistic.</title>
	<author>JoshuaZ</author>
	<datestamp>1269454440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yes, they definitely extracted mitochondrial DNA (that's DNA that isn't in the nucleus but is rather in the mitochondria and is only passed down by your mother). Yes, the DNA looks different enough that they're pretty sure this isn't any form of contamination from modern samples (always a worry when doing this sort of thing). However, it is far from clear that this DNA is belonged to another species. There are multiple possible other explanations which could make this not another species. The details are a bit technical, but anthropologist John Hawks has a piece on his blog laying out the basic issues- <a href="http://johnhawks.net/weblog/reviews/neandertals/neandertal\_dna/denisova-krause-2010.html" title="johnhawks.net">http://johnhawks.net/weblog/reviews/neandertals/neandertal\_dna/denisova-krause-2010.html</a> [johnhawks.net]. A slightly more lay-oriented piece by Carl Zimmer (the writer for Science Times and author of the very excellent book Parasite Rex) is also worth reading: <a href="http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/loom/2010/03/24/the-x-womans-fingerbone/" title="discovermagazine.com">http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/loom/2010/03/24/the-x-womans-fingerbone/</a> [discovermagazine.com]. The bottom line is that concluding that this is a new species is as of yet very premature.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , they definitely extracted mitochondrial DNA ( that 's DNA that is n't in the nucleus but is rather in the mitochondria and is only passed down by your mother ) .
Yes , the DNA looks different enough that they 're pretty sure this is n't any form of contamination from modern samples ( always a worry when doing this sort of thing ) .
However , it is far from clear that this DNA is belonged to another species .
There are multiple possible other explanations which could make this not another species .
The details are a bit technical , but anthropologist John Hawks has a piece on his blog laying out the basic issues- http : //johnhawks.net/weblog/reviews/neandertals/neandertal \ _dna/denisova-krause-2010.html [ johnhawks.net ] .
A slightly more lay-oriented piece by Carl Zimmer ( the writer for Science Times and author of the very excellent book Parasite Rex ) is also worth reading : http : //blogs.discovermagazine.com/loom/2010/03/24/the-x-womans-fingerbone/ [ discovermagazine.com ] .
The bottom line is that concluding that this is a new species is as of yet very premature .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, they definitely extracted mitochondrial DNA (that's DNA that isn't in the nucleus but is rather in the mitochondria and is only passed down by your mother).
Yes, the DNA looks different enough that they're pretty sure this isn't any form of contamination from modern samples (always a worry when doing this sort of thing).
However, it is far from clear that this DNA is belonged to another species.
There are multiple possible other explanations which could make this not another species.
The details are a bit technical, but anthropologist John Hawks has a piece on his blog laying out the basic issues- http://johnhawks.net/weblog/reviews/neandertals/neandertal\_dna/denisova-krause-2010.html [johnhawks.net].
A slightly more lay-oriented piece by Carl Zimmer (the writer for Science Times and author of the very excellent book Parasite Rex) is also worth reading: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/loom/2010/03/24/the-x-womans-fingerbone/ [discovermagazine.com].
The bottom line is that concluding that this is a new species is as of yet very premature.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607414</id>
	<title>Preference</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269454860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Frankly, I'm more partial to ancient new humans. I used to dig the ancient ancient humans, but y'know, not a very lively bunch.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Frankly , I 'm more partial to ancient new humans .
I used to dig the ancient ancient humans , but y'know , not a very lively bunch .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Frankly, I'm more partial to ancient new humans.
I used to dig the ancient ancient humans, but y'know, not a very lively bunch.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607364</id>
	<title>Oh yeh, hey there...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269453840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hey Butt-head, this dude's a homo sapiens.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hey Butt-head , this dude 's a homo sapiens .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hey Butt-head, this dude's a homo sapiens.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607608</id>
	<title>Re:Sleeper</title>
	<author>jamesh</author>
	<datestamp>1269457740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Not much you can do with half a finger.</p></div><p>You have far too little imagination.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Not much you can do with half a finger.You have far too little imagination .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not much you can do with half a finger.You have far too little imagination.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607434</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31608156</id>
	<title>Re:It's pretty amazing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269510600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Apes have intelligence and hands, but lack effective communication due to the inability to control vocalization ( like birds ).</p></div><p>I would say that Apes have quite effective communication as do many creatures...it's just not (as) vocal. Vocal communication may be \_more\_ effective in many ways, but even a simple house cat does a hell of a lot more than meow if you know what to look for.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Apes have intelligence and hands , but lack effective communication due to the inability to control vocalization ( like birds ) .I would say that Apes have quite effective communication as do many creatures...it 's just not ( as ) vocal .
Vocal communication may be \ _more \ _ effective in many ways , but even a simple house cat does a hell of a lot more than meow if you know what to look for .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apes have intelligence and hands, but lack effective communication due to the inability to control vocalization ( like birds ).I would say that Apes have quite effective communication as do many creatures...it's just not (as) vocal.
Vocal communication may be \_more\_ effective in many ways, but even a simple house cat does a hell of a lot more than meow if you know what to look for.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607468</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607386</id>
	<title>Re:It's pretty amazing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269454320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There is only one extant species of <i>Homo</i>, and that's <i>Homo sapiens</i>.  People like you are what give Anthropology a bad name.  The pressures on the minds of those who lived in Europe have been the same as those on people who lived in Africa have been the same as those who lived in Asia -- outwitting other human beings, and struggling against a hostile universe.</p><p>There are plenty of trivial physical differences between the different 'races', and that's just what they are -- trivial.  Superficial.  Unimportant.  My mind is the same as the mind of a child growing up in China is the same as the mind of a woman in Europe.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is only one extant species of Homo , and that 's Homo sapiens .
People like you are what give Anthropology a bad name .
The pressures on the minds of those who lived in Europe have been the same as those on people who lived in Africa have been the same as those who lived in Asia -- outwitting other human beings , and struggling against a hostile universe.There are plenty of trivial physical differences between the different 'races ' , and that 's just what they are -- trivial .
Superficial. Unimportant .
My mind is the same as the mind of a child growing up in China is the same as the mind of a woman in Europe .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is only one extant species of Homo, and that's Homo sapiens.
People like you are what give Anthropology a bad name.
The pressures on the minds of those who lived in Europe have been the same as those on people who lived in Africa have been the same as those who lived in Asia -- outwitting other human beings, and struggling against a hostile universe.There are plenty of trivial physical differences between the different 'races', and that's just what they are -- trivial.
Superficial.  Unimportant.
My mind is the same as the mind of a child growing up in China is the same as the mind of a woman in Europe.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607370</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607450</id>
	<title>BAG is clueless on this one.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269455460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The term Caucasian came about became some German thought the prettiest white people came from the Caucasus region in Eastern Europe.</p><p>Considering how nationalistic Germans are, that guy must have felt quite strongly about it to pick some foreign group to be the role models of physical beauty.</p><p>The Internet has confirmed his wisdom... all the beautiful big boobed babes with charming accents come from the Slavic countries.  Search for yourself and see.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The term Caucasian came about became some German thought the prettiest white people came from the Caucasus region in Eastern Europe.Considering how nationalistic Germans are , that guy must have felt quite strongly about it to pick some foreign group to be the role models of physical beauty.The Internet has confirmed his wisdom... all the beautiful big boobed babes with charming accents come from the Slavic countries .
Search for yourself and see .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The term Caucasian came about became some German thought the prettiest white people came from the Caucasus region in Eastern Europe.Considering how nationalistic Germans are, that guy must have felt quite strongly about it to pick some foreign group to be the role models of physical beauty.The Internet has confirmed his wisdom... all the beautiful big boobed babes with charming accents come from the Slavic countries.
Search for yourself and see.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607370</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607408</id>
	<title>Huh?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269454740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Is Professor Xavier being politically correct nowadays? Being 48,000 years old is a cool super power but she's dead so I fail to see how she could help fellow mutants.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is Professor Xavier being politically correct nowadays ?
Being 48,000 years old is a cool super power but she 's dead so I fail to see how she could help fellow mutants .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is Professor Xavier being politically correct nowadays?
Being 48,000 years old is a cool super power but she's dead so I fail to see how she could help fellow mutants.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31608154</id>
	<title>Re:It's pretty amazing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269510600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Your reply w.r.t. neanderthals apparently assumes that neanderthals had lower intelligence.</p><p>This is not true, or at least not proven. Just google "neanderthal intelligence" and you'll see many references that believe that neanderthals had higher or at least equal intelligence than homo sapiens. Also they interbred with homo sapience (google for "neanderthal interbreeding with humans" for many references to that claim), so "people like you" you were responding to do not have to give anthropology a bad name.</p><p>Apart from that, it is not proven that each current human race must have the same average intelligence. On the contrary, there are indications that this is not the case.</p><p>Ideologically motivated people can give anthrolopogy a bad name. This goes in both directions.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Your reply w.r.t .
neanderthals apparently assumes that neanderthals had lower intelligence.This is not true , or at least not proven .
Just google " neanderthal intelligence " and you 'll see many references that believe that neanderthals had higher or at least equal intelligence than homo sapiens .
Also they interbred with homo sapience ( google for " neanderthal interbreeding with humans " for many references to that claim ) , so " people like you " you were responding to do not have to give anthropology a bad name.Apart from that , it is not proven that each current human race must have the same average intelligence .
On the contrary , there are indications that this is not the case.Ideologically motivated people can give anthrolopogy a bad name .
This goes in both directions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your reply w.r.t.
neanderthals apparently assumes that neanderthals had lower intelligence.This is not true, or at least not proven.
Just google "neanderthal intelligence" and you'll see many references that believe that neanderthals had higher or at least equal intelligence than homo sapiens.
Also they interbred with homo sapience (google for "neanderthal interbreeding with humans" for many references to that claim), so "people like you" you were responding to do not have to give anthropology a bad name.Apart from that, it is not proven that each current human race must have the same average intelligence.
On the contrary, there are indications that this is not the case.Ideologically motivated people can give anthrolopogy a bad name.
This goes in both directions.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607386</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31611158</id>
	<title>Re:where are the tin-foil-hats?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269534120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It's kinda late and I'm a bit brain-dead at the moment.  But the first thing that came to my mind was...... The Abominable Snow Man.  What are the chances that this ends up being the smoking gun for that oh-so-elusive cryptoid that has had people arguing about hairy wild apemen since time forgotten?  Personally, I think it'll realistically end up being a case of contamination or something else mondan.  But with the odd chance that this turns out to be scientifically investigatable, we can hang on to the slim hope that there are other samples out there waiting to be found.</p></div><p>Not a Yeti but another group is a good candidate. They are called Almas among other names. Oddly enough the description fits the divergence nicely. They were described as tall and very hairy. The point being there's no evidence that Neanderthals were extremely hairy and were probably closer to humans in the amount of hair they had. Alma type people were described from Eastern Europe nearly to the Pacific Ocean. If this group survived up to even a few thousand years ago they could be the source of the stories. Remember the date given for Hobbit extinction is based strictly on the most recent bones. They have no extinction date in truth because there are far too few bones to set a date. Stories matching their description by locals stop in the mid 1800s so it's possible they survived until very recent times. The same could be true of Almas and this bone could possibly be evidence of Almas. This would bring the number hominids surviving until recent time to four. Three of the four seem to have gone extinct in the last 30,000 years. Climate could be a factor but the most likely cause would be humans. The locals in Flores even talk of burning to death the last Hobbits because they stole food and possibly young children. There's even stories about a group of hairy humans being massacred during the Russian civil war so the last of the Almas could have been wiped out in the early part of the last century. None of this is based on particularly extreme speculation. It's more extreme to think it purely coincidence that the locals on Flores described people that looked exactly like hobbits dying out in the 1800s. It points to a likely survival until recent times. The evidence for Almas is very thin at this point and amounts to a single finger bone but it's still intriguing and the old stories at the very least should be taken more seriously.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's kinda late and I 'm a bit brain-dead at the moment .
But the first thing that came to my mind was...... The Abominable Snow Man .
What are the chances that this ends up being the smoking gun for that oh-so-elusive cryptoid that has had people arguing about hairy wild apemen since time forgotten ?
Personally , I think it 'll realistically end up being a case of contamination or something else mondan .
But with the odd chance that this turns out to be scientifically investigatable , we can hang on to the slim hope that there are other samples out there waiting to be found.Not a Yeti but another group is a good candidate .
They are called Almas among other names .
Oddly enough the description fits the divergence nicely .
They were described as tall and very hairy .
The point being there 's no evidence that Neanderthals were extremely hairy and were probably closer to humans in the amount of hair they had .
Alma type people were described from Eastern Europe nearly to the Pacific Ocean .
If this group survived up to even a few thousand years ago they could be the source of the stories .
Remember the date given for Hobbit extinction is based strictly on the most recent bones .
They have no extinction date in truth because there are far too few bones to set a date .
Stories matching their description by locals stop in the mid 1800s so it 's possible they survived until very recent times .
The same could be true of Almas and this bone could possibly be evidence of Almas .
This would bring the number hominids surviving until recent time to four .
Three of the four seem to have gone extinct in the last 30,000 years .
Climate could be a factor but the most likely cause would be humans .
The locals in Flores even talk of burning to death the last Hobbits because they stole food and possibly young children .
There 's even stories about a group of hairy humans being massacred during the Russian civil war so the last of the Almas could have been wiped out in the early part of the last century .
None of this is based on particularly extreme speculation .
It 's more extreme to think it purely coincidence that the locals on Flores described people that looked exactly like hobbits dying out in the 1800s .
It points to a likely survival until recent times .
The evidence for Almas is very thin at this point and amounts to a single finger bone but it 's still intriguing and the old stories at the very least should be taken more seriously .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's kinda late and I'm a bit brain-dead at the moment.
But the first thing that came to my mind was...... The Abominable Snow Man.
What are the chances that this ends up being the smoking gun for that oh-so-elusive cryptoid that has had people arguing about hairy wild apemen since time forgotten?
Personally, I think it'll realistically end up being a case of contamination or something else mondan.
But with the odd chance that this turns out to be scientifically investigatable, we can hang on to the slim hope that there are other samples out there waiting to be found.Not a Yeti but another group is a good candidate.
They are called Almas among other names.
Oddly enough the description fits the divergence nicely.
They were described as tall and very hairy.
The point being there's no evidence that Neanderthals were extremely hairy and were probably closer to humans in the amount of hair they had.
Alma type people were described from Eastern Europe nearly to the Pacific Ocean.
If this group survived up to even a few thousand years ago they could be the source of the stories.
Remember the date given for Hobbit extinction is based strictly on the most recent bones.
They have no extinction date in truth because there are far too few bones to set a date.
Stories matching their description by locals stop in the mid 1800s so it's possible they survived until very recent times.
The same could be true of Almas and this bone could possibly be evidence of Almas.
This would bring the number hominids surviving until recent time to four.
Three of the four seem to have gone extinct in the last 30,000 years.
Climate could be a factor but the most likely cause would be humans.
The locals in Flores even talk of burning to death the last Hobbits because they stole food and possibly young children.
There's even stories about a group of hairy humans being massacred during the Russian civil war so the last of the Almas could have been wiped out in the early part of the last century.
None of this is based on particularly extreme speculation.
It's more extreme to think it purely coincidence that the locals on Flores described people that looked exactly like hobbits dying out in the 1800s.
It points to a likely survival until recent times.
The evidence for Almas is very thin at this point and amounts to a single finger bone but it's still intriguing and the old stories at the very least should be taken more seriously.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607770</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607370</id>
	<title>It's pretty amazing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269453960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have a friend who is of Eastern European descent who we always tease about looking like a Neanderthal, maybe there really is something to it. He's got a large jaw, largish head, lots of thick, dense hair. His facial features are relatively flat but with prominent eyebrows. His parents are equally ugly, but they come from Baltimore, so it might just be a result of the environment.</p><p>If Eastern Europeans come from a different homo (genus) lineage than homo sapiens, it would make sense that they would have a physical structure and mental capacity that was different from ours.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have a friend who is of Eastern European descent who we always tease about looking like a Neanderthal , maybe there really is something to it .
He 's got a large jaw , largish head , lots of thick , dense hair .
His facial features are relatively flat but with prominent eyebrows .
His parents are equally ugly , but they come from Baltimore , so it might just be a result of the environment.If Eastern Europeans come from a different homo ( genus ) lineage than homo sapiens , it would make sense that they would have a physical structure and mental capacity that was different from ours .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have a friend who is of Eastern European descent who we always tease about looking like a Neanderthal, maybe there really is something to it.
He's got a large jaw, largish head, lots of thick, dense hair.
His facial features are relatively flat but with prominent eyebrows.
His parents are equally ugly, but they come from Baltimore, so it might just be a result of the environment.If Eastern Europeans come from a different homo (genus) lineage than homo sapiens, it would make sense that they would have a physical structure and mental capacity that was different from ours.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607360</id>
	<title>Hello? Anybody here?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269453780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>&lt;sound&gt;Crikets.wav&lt;/sound&gt;<br><br>You can tell this story is going to lead the 5am ET local news tomorrow... what? Nobody cares? Okay... next story please, Mr. Editor.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Crikets.wavYou can tell this story is going to lead the 5am ET local news tomorrow... what ? Nobody cares ?
Okay... next story please , Mr. Editor .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Crikets.wavYou can tell this story is going to lead the 5am ET local news tomorrow... what? Nobody cares?
Okay... next story please, Mr. Editor.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31608368</id>
	<title>Re:It's pretty amazing</title>
	<author>wall0159</author>
	<datestamp>1269514200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What makes you think that homo neanderthalensis were less intelligent than homo sapiens?</p><p>Oh, and haven't you heard the expression: beauty is in the eye of the beholder?<br>(you sound like quite an ugly person to me)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What makes you think that homo neanderthalensis were less intelligent than homo sapiens ? Oh , and have n't you heard the expression : beauty is in the eye of the beholder ?
( you sound like quite an ugly person to me )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What makes you think that homo neanderthalensis were less intelligent than homo sapiens?Oh, and haven't you heard the expression: beauty is in the eye of the beholder?
(you sound like quite an ugly person to me)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607370</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607356</id>
	<title>On Closer Examination...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269453720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>...it turned out to be Jesse Helm.</htmltext>
<tokenext>...it turned out to be Jesse Helm .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...it turned out to be Jesse Helm.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607468</id>
	<title>Re:It's pretty amazing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269455820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>That is very strange talk from a Pak Protector.<br>
I saw a very interesting Ted Talk by Elaine Morgan and it seems to me that a single non mutation change in the apes could have fostered any number of branches in the early evolution. I agree that there is no great genetic difference across the planet. <br>
It seems to me that a single change in the ability to control breathing consciously could have been the difference that makes us the human branch. There is no strong linear delimiter that I have seen which would cause speciation from the apes. <br>
It seems that an ape that could escape from others by traveling through deep water to safety or isolation would allow a population to become isolated. It would allow a new dominance similar to  the ability to escape predators in trees.<br>
 I believe that it might be proved or disproved by the genetic SNP distance of the change which defines the ability to control respiration. If it were the oldest conserved gene, then it would seem that it could be possible.<br>
It also leads to the ability to communicate. Apes have intelligence and hands, but lack effective communication due to the inability to control vocalization ( like birds ).</htmltext>
<tokenext>That is very strange talk from a Pak Protector .
I saw a very interesting Ted Talk by Elaine Morgan and it seems to me that a single non mutation change in the apes could have fostered any number of branches in the early evolution .
I agree that there is no great genetic difference across the planet .
It seems to me that a single change in the ability to control breathing consciously could have been the difference that makes us the human branch .
There is no strong linear delimiter that I have seen which would cause speciation from the apes .
It seems that an ape that could escape from others by traveling through deep water to safety or isolation would allow a population to become isolated .
It would allow a new dominance similar to the ability to escape predators in trees .
I believe that it might be proved or disproved by the genetic SNP distance of the change which defines the ability to control respiration .
If it were the oldest conserved gene , then it would seem that it could be possible .
It also leads to the ability to communicate .
Apes have intelligence and hands , but lack effective communication due to the inability to control vocalization ( like birds ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That is very strange talk from a Pak Protector.
I saw a very interesting Ted Talk by Elaine Morgan and it seems to me that a single non mutation change in the apes could have fostered any number of branches in the early evolution.
I agree that there is no great genetic difference across the planet.
It seems to me that a single change in the ability to control breathing consciously could have been the difference that makes us the human branch.
There is no strong linear delimiter that I have seen which would cause speciation from the apes.
It seems that an ape that could escape from others by traveling through deep water to safety or isolation would allow a population to become isolated.
It would allow a new dominance similar to  the ability to escape predators in trees.
I believe that it might be proved or disproved by the genetic SNP distance of the change which defines the ability to control respiration.
If it were the oldest conserved gene, then it would seem that it could be possible.
It also leads to the ability to communicate.
Apes have intelligence and hands, but lack effective communication due to the inability to control vocalization ( like birds ).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607386</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31613308</id>
	<title>Re:Summary is slightly optimistic.</title>
	<author>WhiteDragon</author>
	<datestamp>1269540600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So you're basically saying that the ancient human is<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... your mom!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So you 're basically saying that the ancient human is ... your mom !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So you're basically saying that the ancient human is ... your mom!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607396</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31609532</id>
	<title>Re:It's pretty amazing</title>
	<author>Artifakt</author>
	<datestamp>1269526860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Evolution of speech seems to have required changes in several related areas, and this sets a minimum number of favorable mutations that had to have occurred.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Speech requires specialized centers in the higher brain. It also requires changes in what we normally call the primitive brain, so that speaking stays synced to breathing and swallowing. There are changes to the tongue and soft palate, and given the way all modern languages use some form of modifiers like adjectives or adverbs, there are probably hard wired rules for making speech more sophisticated built into those upper brain speech centers. There may even be changes to the diet, to accomodate teeth that have to also help with speech as well as chew.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; The problem with deriving anything from that point is, one mutation can impact multiple areas of body formation, so until we know more about which genes do specifically what in humans. we don't know enough to make a detailed model of what changes came first, or decide just what the differences were between h. saps and the Neanderthals, or any of those neat interesting questions idle slash-dotters are bringing up.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; I think moteyalpha gets this, and hope at least most of the rest of this thread's posters do - the speculations are answerable in principle, but just because we've mapped the genome doesn't mean we've figured out all the connections. In 20 to 40 years, the truth about at least half the speculations in this whole slashdot thread will be known science.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Evolution of speech seems to have required changes in several related areas , and this sets a minimum number of favorable mutations that had to have occurred .
      Speech requires specialized centers in the higher brain .
It also requires changes in what we normally call the primitive brain , so that speaking stays synced to breathing and swallowing .
There are changes to the tongue and soft palate , and given the way all modern languages use some form of modifiers like adjectives or adverbs , there are probably hard wired rules for making speech more sophisticated built into those upper brain speech centers .
There may even be changes to the diet , to accomodate teeth that have to also help with speech as well as chew .
        The problem with deriving anything from that point is , one mutation can impact multiple areas of body formation , so until we know more about which genes do specifically what in humans .
we do n't know enough to make a detailed model of what changes came first , or decide just what the differences were between h. saps and the Neanderthals , or any of those neat interesting questions idle slash-dotters are bringing up .
        I think moteyalpha gets this , and hope at least most of the rest of this thread 's posters do - the speculations are answerable in principle , but just because we 've mapped the genome does n't mean we 've figured out all the connections .
In 20 to 40 years , the truth about at least half the speculations in this whole slashdot thread will be known science .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Evolution of speech seems to have required changes in several related areas, and this sets a minimum number of favorable mutations that had to have occurred.
      Speech requires specialized centers in the higher brain.
It also requires changes in what we normally call the primitive brain, so that speaking stays synced to breathing and swallowing.
There are changes to the tongue and soft palate, and given the way all modern languages use some form of modifiers like adjectives or adverbs, there are probably hard wired rules for making speech more sophisticated built into those upper brain speech centers.
There may even be changes to the diet, to accomodate teeth that have to also help with speech as well as chew.
        The problem with deriving anything from that point is, one mutation can impact multiple areas of body formation, so until we know more about which genes do specifically what in humans.
we don't know enough to make a detailed model of what changes came first, or decide just what the differences were between h. saps and the Neanderthals, or any of those neat interesting questions idle slash-dotters are bringing up.
        I think moteyalpha gets this, and hope at least most of the rest of this thread's posters do - the speculations are answerable in principle, but just because we've mapped the genome doesn't mean we've figured out all the connections.
In 20 to 40 years, the truth about at least half the speculations in this whole slashdot thread will be known science.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607468</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607438</id>
	<title>Re:It's pretty amazing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269455160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>His parents are equally ugly, but they come from Baltimore, so it might just be a result of the environment.</p></div><p>H.P. Lovecraft, is that you?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>His parents are equally ugly , but they come from Baltimore , so it might just be a result of the environment.H.P .
Lovecraft , is that you ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>His parents are equally ugly, but they come from Baltimore, so it might just be a result of the environment.H.P.
Lovecraft, is that you?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607370</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31609776</id>
	<title>Re:BAG is clueless on this one.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269527940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Considering how nationalistic Germans are</p></div></blockquote><p>I believe the correct word would be "were".
</p><p>Nationalistic Germans have all but died out (for nation and leader) by 1945, and the few that might have escaped, were prevented from breeding by extensive re-education.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Considering how nationalistic Germans areI believe the correct word would be " were " .
Nationalistic Germans have all but died out ( for nation and leader ) by 1945 , and the few that might have escaped , were prevented from breeding by extensive re-education .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Considering how nationalistic Germans areI believe the correct word would be "were".
Nationalistic Germans have all but died out (for nation and leader) by 1945, and the few that might have escaped, were prevented from breeding by extensive re-education.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607450</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31610378</id>
	<title>Re:It's pretty amazing</title>
	<author>zorro-z</author>
	<datestamp>1269531060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>More to the point, the genetic differences between human beings of all racial groups are incredibly insignificant. According to a Wikipedia article on the subject, there is an average 0.1\% difference between any two randomly-selected human beings, with a maximum difference of 8\% between racial groups. This has led to a conclusion that race is largely insignificant at a genetic level. Race is, more than anything else, a social construct.</p><p>To paraphrase psychologist Harry Stack Sullivan's One Genus Theory, any randomly-selected human being has far more in common w/any other randomly-selected human being than w/anything else on the planet.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>More to the point , the genetic differences between human beings of all racial groups are incredibly insignificant .
According to a Wikipedia article on the subject , there is an average 0.1 \ % difference between any two randomly-selected human beings , with a maximum difference of 8 \ % between racial groups .
This has led to a conclusion that race is largely insignificant at a genetic level .
Race is , more than anything else , a social construct.To paraphrase psychologist Harry Stack Sullivan 's One Genus Theory , any randomly-selected human being has far more in common w/any other randomly-selected human being than w/anything else on the planet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>More to the point, the genetic differences between human beings of all racial groups are incredibly insignificant.
According to a Wikipedia article on the subject, there is an average 0.1\% difference between any two randomly-selected human beings, with a maximum difference of 8\% between racial groups.
This has led to a conclusion that race is largely insignificant at a genetic level.
Race is, more than anything else, a social construct.To paraphrase psychologist Harry Stack Sullivan's One Genus Theory, any randomly-selected human being has far more in common w/any other randomly-selected human being than w/anything else on the planet.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607386</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607456</id>
	<title>Re:Hello? Anybody here?</title>
	<author>ultranova</author>
	<datestamp>1269455640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>You can tell this story is going to lead the 5am ET local news tomorrow... what? Nobody cares? Okay... next story please, Mr. Editor.</p></div> </blockquote><p>This is news for nerds. Science, including anthropology, is of interest to some of the nerds. Therefore, this story belongs here, even if you personally don't happen to find it interesting.</p><p>Since you have an UID, you could simply hide science stories in your settings rather than complain.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You can tell this story is going to lead the 5am ET local news tomorrow... what ? Nobody cares ?
Okay... next story please , Mr. Editor. This is news for nerds .
Science , including anthropology , is of interest to some of the nerds .
Therefore , this story belongs here , even if you personally do n't happen to find it interesting.Since you have an UID , you could simply hide science stories in your settings rather than complain .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can tell this story is going to lead the 5am ET local news tomorrow... what? Nobody cares?
Okay... next story please, Mr. Editor. This is news for nerds.
Science, including anthropology, is of interest to some of the nerds.
Therefore, this story belongs here, even if you personally don't happen to find it interesting.Since you have an UID, you could simply hide science stories in your settings rather than complain.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607360</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31612546</id>
	<title>Re:where are the tin-foil-hats?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269538200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>What are the chances that this ends up being the smoking gun for that oh-so-elusive cryptoid that has had people arguing about hairy wild apemen since time forgotten?</i>
<br> <br>
Well, let's put it this way: Zero.</htmltext>
<tokenext>What are the chances that this ends up being the smoking gun for that oh-so-elusive cryptoid that has had people arguing about hairy wild apemen since time forgotten ?
Well , let 's put it this way : Zero .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What are the chances that this ends up being the smoking gun for that oh-so-elusive cryptoid that has had people arguing about hairy wild apemen since time forgotten?
Well, let's put it this way: Zero.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607770</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31609658</id>
	<title>Re:It's pretty amazing</title>
	<author>corbettw</author>
	<datestamp>1269527340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Does his head have an occipital bun? Do his ribs flare out at the waist? Are his hips set back further than yours? Do his legs bow outward? No? Then he doesn't look like a neanderthal, he just looks like a guy with lots of testosterone. Doesn't sound like someone I'd want to tease all the time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does his head have an occipital bun ?
Do his ribs flare out at the waist ?
Are his hips set back further than yours ?
Do his legs bow outward ?
No ? Then he does n't look like a neanderthal , he just looks like a guy with lots of testosterone .
Does n't sound like someone I 'd want to tease all the time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does his head have an occipital bun?
Do his ribs flare out at the waist?
Are his hips set back further than yours?
Do his legs bow outward?
No? Then he doesn't look like a neanderthal, he just looks like a guy with lots of testosterone.
Doesn't sound like someone I'd want to tease all the time.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607370</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607426</id>
	<title>Re:It's pretty amazing</title>
	<author>BadAnalogyGuy</author>
	<datestamp>1269454980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We aren't talking about modern day humans. The article, which I'll assume you have already read, is about a possible species separate and distinct from homo sapiens and homo neanderthalensis that may have existed in Eastern Europe a long long time ago. The article also discusses the "Hobbit" of Southeast Asia which lived alongside homo sapiens for thousands of years.</p><p>If, as the article suggests, there was interbreeding going on, then the genes would be passed along to offspring. Given that long range mobility has only recently become possible, these pockets of special genes would have remained in the same area for a long time, even after the original species disappeared.</p><p>But you read the article, so I'm just telling you what you already read and disagree with. Silly me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We are n't talking about modern day humans .
The article , which I 'll assume you have already read , is about a possible species separate and distinct from homo sapiens and homo neanderthalensis that may have existed in Eastern Europe a long long time ago .
The article also discusses the " Hobbit " of Southeast Asia which lived alongside homo sapiens for thousands of years.If , as the article suggests , there was interbreeding going on , then the genes would be passed along to offspring .
Given that long range mobility has only recently become possible , these pockets of special genes would have remained in the same area for a long time , even after the original species disappeared.But you read the article , so I 'm just telling you what you already read and disagree with .
Silly me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We aren't talking about modern day humans.
The article, which I'll assume you have already read, is about a possible species separate and distinct from homo sapiens and homo neanderthalensis that may have existed in Eastern Europe a long long time ago.
The article also discusses the "Hobbit" of Southeast Asia which lived alongside homo sapiens for thousands of years.If, as the article suggests, there was interbreeding going on, then the genes would be passed along to offspring.
Given that long range mobility has only recently become possible, these pockets of special genes would have remained in the same area for a long time, even after the original species disappeared.But you read the article, so I'm just telling you what you already read and disagree with.
Silly me.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607386</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31608794</id>
	<title>Re:Sleeper</title>
	<author>esme</author>
	<datestamp>1269521400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Not much you can do with half a finger.</p></div></blockquote><p>

Wendy's would beg to differ.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Not much you can do with half a finger .
Wendy 's would beg to differ .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not much you can do with half a finger.
Wendy's would beg to differ.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607434</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31608390</id>
	<title>Re:X-Woman</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269514560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>That's the name of my next daughter.</p></div></blockquote><p>That's the name of the next girl I'm gonna do.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's the name of my next daughter.That 's the name of the next girl I 'm gon na do .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's the name of my next daughter.That's the name of the next girl I'm gonna do.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607366</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31612170</id>
	<title>Re:Hello? Anybody here?</title>
	<author>tompaulco</author>
	<datestamp>1269537060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>More importantly, the editors know they can cause another evolution versus creationism argument that is sure to generate lots of advertisement revenue.</htmltext>
<tokenext>More importantly , the editors know they can cause another evolution versus creationism argument that is sure to generate lots of advertisement revenue .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>More importantly, the editors know they can cause another evolution versus creationism argument that is sure to generate lots of advertisement revenue.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607456</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607366</id>
	<title>X-Woman</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269453900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That's the name of my next daughter.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's the name of my next daughter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's the name of my next daughter.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31654494</id>
	<title>Re:Hello? Anybody here?</title>
	<author>Hognoxious</author>
	<datestamp>1269855960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Since you have an UID</p></div></blockquote><p>Pity his mother didn't have one.  Er, wait...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Since you have an UIDPity his mother did n't have one .
Er , wait.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since you have an UIDPity his mother didn't have one.
Er, wait...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607456</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607688</id>
	<title>Re:Summary is slightly optimistic.</title>
	<author>DavidD\_CA</author>
	<datestamp>1269459480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The summary doesn't say anything about this being a new species.  The word "species" doesn't even appear.</p><p>And in the article, the first use of the word "species" says this:</p><blockquote><div><p>However, for now, the researchers have steered away from describing the specimen as a new species.</p></div></blockquote><p>And this:</p><blockquote><div><p>Other experts agreed that while the Siberian specimen may be a new species, this has yet to be shown.</p></div> </blockquote><p>I'm all for shooting down<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. summaries and sensational headlines, but this appears to be right on.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The summary does n't say anything about this being a new species .
The word " species " does n't even appear.And in the article , the first use of the word " species " says this : However , for now , the researchers have steered away from describing the specimen as a new species.And this : Other experts agreed that while the Siberian specimen may be a new species , this has yet to be shown .
I 'm all for shooting down / .
summaries and sensational headlines , but this appears to be right on .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The summary doesn't say anything about this being a new species.
The word "species" doesn't even appear.And in the article, the first use of the word "species" says this:However, for now, the researchers have steered away from describing the specimen as a new species.And this:Other experts agreed that while the Siberian specimen may be a new species, this has yet to be shown.
I'm all for shooting down /.
summaries and sensational headlines, but this appears to be right on.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607396</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607454</id>
	<title>Re:It's pretty amazing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269455580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Highly unlikely. More likely a case of convergent evolution if anything at all.</p><p>By the way, how do we know that Neanderthals had those features? They might have had based on the shape of their skulls, but that's all guesses and extrapolations, since no-one has seen a live one.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Highly unlikely .
More likely a case of convergent evolution if anything at all.By the way , how do we know that Neanderthals had those features ?
They might have had based on the shape of their skulls , but that 's all guesses and extrapolations , since no-one has seen a live one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Highly unlikely.
More likely a case of convergent evolution if anything at all.By the way, how do we know that Neanderthals had those features?
They might have had based on the shape of their skulls, but that's all guesses and extrapolations, since no-one has seen a live one.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607370</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_25_0054235_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607608
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607434
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_25_0054235_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31609532
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607468
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607386
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607370
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_25_0054235_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607438
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607370
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_25_0054235_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31612546
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607770
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_25_0054235_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31608154
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607386
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607370
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_25_0054235_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31608794
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607434
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_25_0054235_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607426
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607386
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607370
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_25_0054235_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31611158
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607770
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_25_0054235_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31654494
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607456
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607360
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_25_0054235_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607454
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607370
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_25_0054235_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31613308
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607396
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_25_0054235_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31610378
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607386
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607370
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_25_0054235_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31608390
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607366
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_25_0054235_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607688
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607396
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_25_0054235_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31612170
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607456
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607360
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_25_0054235_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31609658
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607370
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_25_0054235_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31608368
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607370
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_25_0054235_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31608156
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607468
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607386
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607370
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_25_0054235_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31609776
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607450
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607370
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_25_0054235.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607434
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607608
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31608794
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_25_0054235.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607770
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31611158
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31612546
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_25_0054235.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607370
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607454
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607386
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607426
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31610378
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31608154
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607468
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31609532
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31608156
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31608368
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607450
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31609776
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31609658
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607438
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_25_0054235.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607408
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_25_0054235.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607360
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607456
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31654494
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31612170
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_25_0054235.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607644
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_25_0054235.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607396
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607688
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31613308
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_25_0054235.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31607366
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_25_0054235.31608390
</commentlist>
</conversation>
