There are many who claim that some brand of
Australopithecus is the LCA, after many years
of saying it was a sister (or cousin) species and
not an ancestor, which is correct might complicate
matters.

We could just call Naledi australopithecus and be
done with it.

Australopithecus naledi.

But if the LCA was an Australopithecus -- some
variety there of -- then there was a split, there was
a divide with Homo on one side and Pan on the
other, so from that perspective Naledi is clearly on
the Pan side.

Pan naledi.

There is a third option though. Which is, the one
single "Fact" they managed to get right when they
emptied their bowels of Naledi claims is that it
belongs in Homo.

No it really could be Homo naledi. It really could all
be bullshit and not actually exist at all but it could
really be Homo. If for example we did away with Pan
and swung Chimps into Homo then Naledi would
certainly goo with them.

Right?

Which is saying that Naledi groups with Pan.

So; Pan naledi?

We'd really have to get a look at the DNA evidence
that they're not showing us.

Yes. "Conspiracy Theory," if you will. DNA has been
retrieved from similar environments, it's been
retrieved from finds as old and even older than they're
claiming here and it's been retrieved with far less
material to work with. If they're not showing us the DNA
then it contradicts their narrative, simple as that, and
their narrative is Out-of-Africa purity.

Everything they told us was bullshit -- from the 2 million
years PLUS age through the modern brain to the intentional
burial of their dead. It was all bullshit. Not a slip of the tongue,
not a typo, there doesn't appear to be an honest mistake
within nine yards of that cave, It's just plain bullshit.

-- --

https://jtem.tumblr.com/post/667412542217502720