Posted on 06/01/2006 1:12:18 PM PDT by Sopater
"Australopithocines evolved into Homo erectus around 1.5 million years ago and Homo erectus, in turn, evolved into Homo sapiens around 400,000 years ago." This is presented to school children as no less certain than Washington's crossing of the Delaware. The statement makes dual claims: (1) there are fundamental anatomical differences between these three categories, and (2) each occurs in the right time frame. Let us examine these claims.
The anatomical differences between these three groups must be very substantial for the statement to have any meaning. Any anthropologist should be able to spot a Homo erectus on a crowded subway train, even clean-shaven and in a business suit, as different from modern humans. Not so. In fact, leading anthropologists Milford H. Wolpoff (University of Michigan), William S. Laughlin (U. of Connecticut), Gabriel Ward Lasker (Wayne State U.), Kenneth A. R. Kennedy (Cornell), Jerome Cybulski (National Museum of Man, Ottawa), and Donald Johanson (Institute of Human Origins) find the differences between these fossil categories to be so small that they have wondered in print if H. sapiens and H. erectus are one and the same. Fossils classified as H. erectus all share a set of "primitive" traits including a sloping forehead and large brow ridges, yet these all fall comfortably within the range of what are called normal humans today. For example, the very same traits are found in some modern people groups, including Eskimos! Eskimos might not like being referred to as "primitive" humans, yet evolutionists must do so if they are to be consistent. There are a lot of problems with the continued use of this taxon, yet it is essential to the evolution story.
The second truth claim embedded within the statement given to school kids has to do with these fossils occurring in the right time frame. For example, fossils with a H. erectus anatomy should be found exclusively in rocks that are older than those with its youthful descendents, "anatomically-modern" humans. This is decidedly not the case. Putting aside the validity of age-dates for a moment, the range for H. erectus is usually given at between about 1.5 million years and 400,000 years. Studiously avoided in most museum depictions is the fact that fossils with a H. erectus anatomy that are younger than 400,000 years number well over 100, including some as young as 6000 years. Even more amazing is this: fossil humans that are easily interpreted as "anatomically modern" (i.e., non-H. erectus) have been found in rocks that are much older than 1.5 million years. From a dozen different sites have come cranial fragments, including one good skull, teeth, several arm and leg bones, a fossil trackway, and stone structure that each screams out "modern human." The trackways at Laetoli, Tanzania, dated at 3.6 million years, and tibia (leg bone) and humerus (arm bone) from Kanapoi, Kenya, dated at 3.5 million, are especially significant for these pre-date even "Lucy," the celebrated upright-walking ape. These embarrassments have been revised, reinterpreted, and re-dated, but will not go away.
Keep these things in mind the next time you hear of a "missing link" being reported, for example, between H. erectus and modern man (as has been in the recent popular press). God made His creatures to reproduce "after their own kind," and it appears from the fossils that they have done just that.
* William A. Hoesch, M.S. geology, is an ICR Research Assistant in Geology.
Apparently with some grasp of reality.
Don't even have to be an anthropologist to recognize one. I've had a Homo Erectus try to brush up against me a few times, and it was really obvious what he was.
hmmm, so Jesus never walked on water or performed miracles I guess...?
Its no different than Al Gore and his Global Worming BS based off shoddy computer models.
Are you actually familiar with the database for evolution? So that you can, from your own knowledge, say "A couple bones from here a couple bones from there?" Or are you getting this from some creation website?
Here is an example which might help:
The fossil below is numbered "KNM-WT 15000" -- which stands for Kenya National Museum, West Turkana area, specimen #15,000.
There are a lot more than 15,000 now. There are a lot more areas in Kenya with their own numbering systems. And there are a lot more countries in Africa producing fossils. Further, there are a lot of fossils from other continents as well.
So much for your "couple of bones" contention.
Site: Nariokotome, West Turkana, Kenya (1)
Discovered By: K. Kimeu, 1984 (1)
Estimated Age of Fossil: 1.6 mya * determined by Stratigraphic, faunal & radiometric data (1, 4)
Species Name: Homo ergaster (1, 7, 8), Homo erectus (3, 4, 7, 10), Homo erectus ergaster (25)
Gender: Male (based on pelvis, browridge) (1, 8, 9)
Cranial Capacity: 880 (909 as adult) cc (1)
Information: Most complete early hominid skeleton (80 bones and skull) (1, 8)
Interpretation: Hairless and dark pigmented body (based on environment, limb proportions) (7, 8, 9). Juvenile (9-12 based on 2nd molar eruption and unfused growth plates) (1, 3, 4, 7, 8). Juvenile (8 years old based on recent studies on tooth development) (27). Incapable of speech (based on narrowing of spinal canal in thoracic region) (1)
Nickname: Turkana Boy (1), Nariokotome Boy
See original source for notes:
Source: http://www.mos.org/evolution/fossils/fossilview.php?fid=38
The phrase "non sequitur" springs to mind.
First of all, PROVE that was a human and not some type of extinct ape.
Can you document an instance wherein the Institute for Cretion Research has misrepresented the views or words of evolutionists? If not, why assume the ICR is not to be believed as regards the evolutionary worldview. In its publications the ICR quotes at length the exact words written or spoken by leading evolutionists, and does not twist them or take them out of context.
Archive
>>The theory of evolution is entirely consistent with belief in a Creator.<<
Which part?
"Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!"
I believe that is a form of Ad-Hominem attack. :)
"But the bottom line is this: I don't believe evolution explains US, modern humans, and our sudden emergence with so many attributes not seen before." ~ David Allen
There is more than one "theory of evolution".
The dust was created and man was "formed" from it.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1585972/posts?page=69#69
>>Similar to the debate in the church years ago when it was still believed that the sun rotated around the earth.<<
Uh, no, not really. No.
Although I am sure you would like it to be. You see, the difference is that one is clearly stated in the Bible while the other is not.
It's not an ape as it falls far closer to human features than any modern ape. The shape of the skull and the teeth are far more human like than modern apelike. the cranium capacity is much larger too. Also it walked upright.
What were Galileo's scientific and biblical conflicts with the Church?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.