The 10 Things You Should Know About the Creation vs. Evolution Debate by Ron Rhodes Page B
Authors: Ron Rhodes
Tags: Reference, Evolution, Religion & Spirituality, Science & Math, Philosophy, Christian Books & Bibles, Theology, Creationism, Religious Studies, Science & Religion, Organic, Religious Studies & Reference
Ads: Link
African Ape (Zinjanthropus)
Louis S.B. Leakey discovered East African ape, also known
as Zinjanthropus, in 1959 in Olduvia, Tanzania. The discovery
consisted of a skull cap and some fragments of bone. This apeman link, dated at two to four million years old, was featured
in National Geographic Magazine as a support for evolution.
Again, however, the supposed significance of the discovery
turned out to be nothing. In 1965, professor Phillip Tobias of
the University of the Witwatersrand thoroughly examined and
measured the skull and found that it belonged to a variety of
Southern ape (Australopithecus)."
Lucy
Donald Johanson discovered Lucy in Ethiopia in 1974.
The discovery consisted of the skeletal remains-about 40
percent intact41-of a female hominid and was categorized as Australopithecus afarensis and dated at three million years old.
Lucy could supposedly walk upright like a human.
Scholars have made special note of Lucy's small apelike braincase, comparable in size to those of chimpanzees when measured relative to overall body size (the brain was estimated to be
about one-fourth the size of that of a human42). The jaws and
face were apelike.43 Lucy's teeth were far larger than those of a
human. She was probably about three feet, six inches tall and
weighed less than 60 pounds, far less than a human.44 Scholars
have also noted that the hands and feet of other more recent
Australopithecus afarensis discoveries are chimpanzee-like and not
human. Indeed, the hands and feet are typically long and curved,
common among tree-dwelling apes that swing on branches.45 As
for the claim that Lucy could walk upright, the evidence reveals
she could walk somewhat upright, much like pygmy chimps do
today. She certainly could not walk fully upright like human
beings. Lucy's knee structure points more to tree-climbing abilities than the ability to walk upright.46
Because of such evidence, Lucy has been dismissed as an
ancestor for man-not just by creationists but by respected secularists. Britain's Lord Solly Zuckerman, an authority on the
Australopithecus, concluded that the evidence that this animal
walked upright is extremely flimsy. Charles Oxnard, former
professor of anatomy at the University of Southern California
Medical School, did a computer analysis of the Australopithecus
skeleton and concluded that it is "now irrevocably removed"
from a place in the evolution of man's ability to walk on two
feet and "from any place in the direct human lineage. "17
What Conclusions Can We Draw?
In this chapter we have seen that:
• Neanderthal man turned out to be not an ape-man but
rather truly human.
• Java man turned out to be an arboreal ape.
• Piltdown man turned out to be a colossal hoax.
• Peking man turned out to be a monkey.
• Nebraska man turned out to be a wild pig.
• Lucy was apparently a chimpanzee.
Yet, in each case, when these discoveries were made, the
popular media reported them as hard proof for evolution theory.
Even evolutionists have observed how sensational the press
reports can be. Richard Fortey writes:
Every discovery of a new hominid fossil makes the
news. The reports that have appeared in the newspapers over the years are interesting for the light they cast
upon the psychology of both scientist and the
reporter. I have never seen a new discovery reported
as SMALL TOEBONE ADDS DETAIL TO
AFRICAN HOMINID. It is always something like
NEW FIND OF FOSSIL MAN OVERTURNS
GENESIS, and the accounts nearly always include
phrases claiming that the textbooks will now have to
be rewritten.48
Despite all the media hoopla about alleged ape-men,
however, no hard evidence yet exists for their reality. To be sure,
we do have lots of fossils and bones of human beings, and we
do have lots of fossils and bones of apes, but we do not have
any fossils or bones of transitional ape-men, nor do we have
any fossils demonstrating that human beings and apes derived
from a
Louis S.B. Leakey discovered East African ape, also known
as Zinjanthropus, in 1959 in Olduvia, Tanzania. The discovery
consisted of a skull cap and some fragments of bone. This apeman link, dated at two to four million years old, was featured
in National Geographic Magazine as a support for evolution.
Again, however, the supposed significance of the discovery
turned out to be nothing. In 1965, professor Phillip Tobias of
the University of the Witwatersrand thoroughly examined and
measured the skull and found that it belonged to a variety of
Southern ape (Australopithecus)."
Lucy
Donald Johanson discovered Lucy in Ethiopia in 1974.
The discovery consisted of the skeletal remains-about 40
percent intact41-of a female hominid and was categorized as Australopithecus afarensis and dated at three million years old.
Lucy could supposedly walk upright like a human.
Scholars have made special note of Lucy's small apelike braincase, comparable in size to those of chimpanzees when measured relative to overall body size (the brain was estimated to be
about one-fourth the size of that of a human42). The jaws and
face were apelike.43 Lucy's teeth were far larger than those of a
human. She was probably about three feet, six inches tall and
weighed less than 60 pounds, far less than a human.44 Scholars
have also noted that the hands and feet of other more recent
Australopithecus afarensis discoveries are chimpanzee-like and not
human. Indeed, the hands and feet are typically long and curved,
common among tree-dwelling apes that swing on branches.45 As
for the claim that Lucy could walk upright, the evidence reveals
she could walk somewhat upright, much like pygmy chimps do
today. She certainly could not walk fully upright like human
beings. Lucy's knee structure points more to tree-climbing abilities than the ability to walk upright.46
Because of such evidence, Lucy has been dismissed as an
ancestor for man-not just by creationists but by respected secularists. Britain's Lord Solly Zuckerman, an authority on the
Australopithecus, concluded that the evidence that this animal
walked upright is extremely flimsy. Charles Oxnard, former
professor of anatomy at the University of Southern California
Medical School, did a computer analysis of the Australopithecus
skeleton and concluded that it is "now irrevocably removed"
from a place in the evolution of man's ability to walk on two
feet and "from any place in the direct human lineage. "17
What Conclusions Can We Draw?
In this chapter we have seen that:
• Neanderthal man turned out to be not an ape-man but
rather truly human.
• Java man turned out to be an arboreal ape.
• Piltdown man turned out to be a colossal hoax.
• Peking man turned out to be a monkey.
• Nebraska man turned out to be a wild pig.
• Lucy was apparently a chimpanzee.
Yet, in each case, when these discoveries were made, the
popular media reported them as hard proof for evolution theory.
Even evolutionists have observed how sensational the press
reports can be. Richard Fortey writes:
Every discovery of a new hominid fossil makes the
news. The reports that have appeared in the newspapers over the years are interesting for the light they cast
upon the psychology of both scientist and the
reporter. I have never seen a new discovery reported
as SMALL TOEBONE ADDS DETAIL TO
AFRICAN HOMINID. It is always something like
NEW FIND OF FOSSIL MAN OVERTURNS
GENESIS, and the accounts nearly always include
phrases claiming that the textbooks will now have to
be rewritten.48
Despite all the media hoopla about alleged ape-men,
however, no hard evidence yet exists for their reality. To be sure,
we do have lots of fossils and bones of human beings, and we
do have lots of fossils and bones of apes, but we do not have
any fossils or bones of transitional ape-men, nor do we have
any fossils demonstrating that human beings and apes derived
from a
Similar Books
