to the fanciful scheme suggested by evolutionists, the internal
evolution of the Homo genus is as follows: First Homo
erectus , then so-called "archaic" Homo sapiens
and Neanderthal man (Homo sapiens neanderthalensis),
and finally, Cro-Magnon man (Homo sapiens sapiens).
However all these classifications are really only variations
and unique races in the human family. The difference between
them is no greater than the difference between an Inuit and
an African, or a pygmy and a European.
The large eyebrow protrusions on
Homo erectus skulls, and features such as the
backward-sloping forehead, can be seen in a number of
races in our own day, as in the Malaysian native shown
Let us first examine Homo erectus ,
which is referred to as the most primitive human species.
As the name implies, Homo erectus means "man who
walks upright." Evolutionists have had to separate these fossils
from earlier ones by adding the qualification of "erectness,"
because all the available Homo erectus fossils are
straight to an extent not observed in any of the australopithecines
or so-called Homo Habilis specimens. There
is no difference between the postcranial skeleton of modern
man and that of Homo erectus .
The primary reason for evolutionists'
defining Homo erectus as "primitive" is the cranial
capacity of its skull (900-1,100 cc), which is smaller than
the average modern man, and its thick eyebrow projections.
However, there are many people living today in the
world who have the same cranial capacity as Homo erectus
(pygmies, for instance) and other races have protruding eyebrows
(Native Australians, for instance). It is a commonly agreed-upon
fact that differences in cranial capacity do not necessarily
denote differences in intelligence or abilities. Intelligence
depends on the internal organization of the brain, rather
than on its volume.197
The fossils that have made Homo erectus
known to the entire world are those of Peking man and Java
man in Asia. However, in time it was realized that these two
fossils are not reliable. Peking man consists of some elements
made of plaster whose originals have been lost, and Java man
is composed of a skull fragment plus a pelvic bone that was
found yards away from it with no indication that these belonged
to the same creature. This is why the Homo erectus
fossils found in Africa have gained such increasing importance.
(It should also be noted that some of the fossils said to
be Homo erectus were included under a second species
named Homo ergaster by some evolutionists. There is disagreement
among the experts on this issue. We will treat all these fossils
under the classification of Homo erectus .)
The most famous of the Homo
erectus specimens found in Africa is the fossil of "Narikotome
Homo erectus ," or the "Turkana Boy,"
which was found near Lake Turkana in Kenya. It is confirmed
that the fossil was that of a 12-year-old boy, who would have
been 1.83 meters tall in adolescence. The upright skeletal
structure of the fossil is no different from that of modern
man. The American paleoanthropologist Alan Walker said that
he doubted that "the average pathologist could tell the difference
between the fossil skeleton and that of a modern human." Concerning
the skull, Walker wrote that he laughed when he saw it because
"it looked so much like a Neanderthal."198
As we will see in the next chapter, Neanderthals are a modern
human race. Therefore, Homo erectus is also a modern
|THE 10.000 YEAR-OLD
These two skulls, discovered on October 10, 1967, in the
Kow Swamp in Victoria, Australia, were named Kow Swamp
I and Kow Swamp V.
|Alan Thorne and Philip
Macumber, who discovered the skulls, interpreted them
both as Homo sapiens skulls, whereas they actually
contained many features reminiscent of Homo erectus
. The only reason they were treated as Homo sapiens
was the fact that they were calculated to be 10.000 years
old. Evolutionist did not wish to accept the fact that
Homo erectus , which they considered a "primitive"
species and which lived 500.000 years before modern man,
was a human race which lived 10.000 years ago.
Even the evolutionist Richard Leakey states that
the differences between Homo erectus and modern man
are no more than racial variance:
One would also see differences:
in the shape of the skull, in the degree of protrusion of
the face, the robustness of the brows and so on. These differences
are probably no more pronounced than we see today between
the separate geographical races of modern humans.
Such biological variation arises when populations are geographically
separated from each other for significant lengths of time.199
AND THE ABORIGINES
The Turkana Boy skeleton shown
at the side is the best preserved example of Homo
erectus that has so far been discovered. The
interesting thing is that there is no major difference
between this 1.6 million-year-old-fossil and people
of our day. The Australian aboriginal skeleton above
particularly resembles Turkana Boy. This situation
reveals once again that Homo erectus was
a genuine human race, with no "primitive" features.
Professor William Laughlin from the University
of Connecticut made extensive anatomical examinations of Inuits
and the people living on the Aleut islands, and noticed that
these people were extraordinarily similar to Homo erectus
. The conclusion Laughlin arrived at was that all these distinct
races were in fact different races of Homo sapiens
Homo erectus 'S SAILING
CULTURE "Ancient mariners: Early humans were much smarter
than we suspected" According to this article in the
March 14, 1998, issue of New Scientist, the people that
evolutionists call Homo erectus were sailing
700,000 years ago. It is impossible, of course, to think
of people who possessed the knowledge, technology and
culture to go sailing as primitive.
When we consider the
vast differences that exist between remote groups such as
Eskimos and Bushmen, who are known to belong to the single
species of Homo sapiens , it seems justifiable to conclude
that Sinanthropus [an erectus specimen] belongs within this
same diverse species.200
It is now a more pronounced fact in the scientific
community that Homo erectus is a superfluous taxon,
and that fossils assigned to the Homo erectus class
are actually not so different from Homo sapiens as
to be considered a different species. In American Scientist,
the discussions over this issue and the result of a conference
held on the subject in 2000 were summarized in this way:
Most of the participants
at the Senckenberg conference got drawn into a flaming debate
over the taxonomic status of Homo erectus started by Milford
Wolpoff of the University of Michigan, Alan Thorne of the
University of Canberra and their colleagues. They argued
forcefully that Homo erectus had no validity as a species
and should be eliminated altogether. All members of the
genus Homo, from about 2 million years ago to the present,
were one highly variable, widely spread species, Homo sapiens
, with no natural breaks or subdivisions. The subject of
the conference, Homo erectus , didn't exist.201
The conclusion reached by the scientists defending
the abovementioned thesis can be summarized as "Homo erectus
is not a different species from Homo sapiens , but
rather a race within Homo sapiens ." On the other
hand, there is a huge gap between Homo erectus ,
a human race, and the apes that preceded Homo erectus
in the "human evolution" scenario (Australopithecus
, Homo Habilis , and Homo rudolfensis ).
This means that the first men appeared in the fossil record
suddenly and without any prior evolutionary history.
Lubenow, Bones of Contention: a creationist assessment
of the human fossils, Baker Books, 1992, p. 83.
198 Boyce Rensberger, Washington Post,
19 October 1984, p. A11.
199 Richard Leakey, The Making of Mankind,
Sphere Books, London, 1981, p. 116.
200 Marvin Lubenow, Bones of Contention:
a creationist assessment of the human fossils, Baker
Books, 1992. p. 136.
201 Pat Shipman, "Doubting Dmanisi," American
Scientist, November- December 2000, p. 491