[allmendream]

The articled did nothing to substantiate the inane idea that some sort of inter-species cross is needed for evolutionary descent. But typical that you are unable to grasp that.

Evolutionary biology has never postulated descent of man from the orangutan or the gorilla; but has always postulated the same thing, that humans descended via common descent from other apes, and that our most recent common ancestor is shared, among living apes, with the chimpanzee.

Talk about a strawman. Why do you feel you have to invent untruths about evolutionary biology?

Perhaps you time would be better served actually LEARNING something about it rather than inventing untruths about it.

But if you wanted to learn something, instead of proudly insisting you already know, you wouldn't be a creationist.

[valkyry1]

No what she was saying for the descent to work at some point the descendant had to be bred from the ancestor and she was using Neanderthal man as an example (it did not happen) and that genetically he was closer than the chimp. I have no problem with the larger concept that man did not descend from Neanderthal or the chimp-like creature.

All that evolutionary biology needs is circular logic saying that it is true, everything else is interchangeable and easily replaced.

Now all the evolutionist hyperbole aside, the latest missing link is obviously another ape. It was 4’ tall, had long arms and hands and a very small brain.

For one thing, unlike human species but like other australopithecines, A. sediba had a very small brain. The fossil species also had long ape-like arms with primitive wrists that were well suited for climbing trees.