partitions. Australopithecus africanus s.l. clusters with Au. afarensis in 89% of the partitions, but Au. africanus s.l. clusters with Au. sediba in only 46% of our partitions. Homo sapiens, H. erectus s.l., Neandertals, and H. heidelbergensis cluster together in at least 96% of all partitions. These four Homo taxa are analogous to the “Lubenow Core” of Ross et al. (2023), if we consider H. heidelbergensis a form of Neandertal. Homo naledi clusters with members of the Lubenow Core in at least 84% of the partitions, and H. georgicus clusters with members of the Lubenow Core in at least 82% of the partitions. Homo habilis clusters with the Lubenow Core in 75% to 80% of the partitions. In contrast, Homo floresiensis clusters with the Lubenow Core in only 41% of the partitions but co-occurs in 59% of the partitions with Homo habilis. Thus if we choose to include H. habilis in the same cluster as the Lubenow Core based on the high frequency with which they cluster together, Homo floresiensis might also be included with it but with less confidence. Homo floresiensis clusters with outgroup taxa in at most 36% of partitions (with Au. africanus s.l.). Finally, we see that Au. sediba clusters with Homo taxa in at least 55% of the partitions and with Au. africanus s.l. and Au. afarensis in only 46% and 34% of the partitions respectively. If we recognize clusters from these partition frequencies based on a simple majority rule, where two taxa belong to the same cluster if they appear together in a cluster in at least 50% of the partitions, we find three clearly-defined clusters. The first cluster contains chimpanzee, gorilla, and Ardipithecus. The second cluster contains Au. afarensis and Au. africanus s.l. The third cluster contains all Homo taxa and Au. sediba. If we require a more stringent 75% rule, where two taxa belong to the same cluster only if they appear together in a cluster in at least 75% of the partitions, the outgroup clusters are retained, but Homo floresiensis no longer belongs to the Homo cluster, instead appearing as a taxonomic singleton. Australopithecus sediba connects to the Homo cluster only by co-occurring in the same cluster as Homo habilis in 77% of partitions. DISCUSSION Previous results in hominin baraminology using only craniodental characteristics have strongly supported a large human holobaramin that includes unexpected taxa such as Homo habilis and Au. sediba (Wood 2010, 2016, 2017; Sinclair and Wood 2021). Creationists previously accepted Homo erectus s.l., Neandertals, and Homo heidelbergensis as human, but this was based especially on postcranial considerations (Hartwig-Scherer 1998; Lubenow 2004). With H. naledi and Au. sediba so different from the others postcranially, questions persist about their human status. In the case of Homo naledi, cultural evidence of body disposal (Dirks et al. 2010) tentatively confirms their status as human, but with Au. sediba, no such supplemental evidence exists and legitimate uncertainty remains. Here we present a new character matrix of 239 postcranial characters scored for 14 taxa to evaluate the baraminic relationships of hominins. These new characters should aid us in developing a much more holistic perspective on hominin baraminology. Considered alone without craniodental characters, the postcranial characters reveal clustering patterns quite similar to what we have seen repeatedly with different samples of craniodental characters. Unsurprisingly, Homo sapiens always clusters together with Neandertals, Homo heidelbergensis, Homo erectus s.l., and the Dmanisi hominins. Likewise, chimpanzees, gorillas, and Ardipithecus always cluster together and never cluster with Homo sapiens. The status of the Australopithecus taxa and H. naledi, H. floresiensis, and H. habilis are less clear. Because of the unusual nature of their postcranial skeletons, this should come as no surprise. Distance correlation supports placing Homo naledi with other members of Homo, which is confirmed by cluster analysis. In contrast, Australopithecus sediba sometimes clusters with Figure 12. Orthogonal views of 3D MDS results for simple matching (left) and Jaccard distances (right) calculated from the combined character set. Au. sediba is indicated by a symbol with a black outline. WOOD AND BRUMMEL Hominin Baraminology Reconsidered 2023 ICC 263
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTM4ODY=