W
willow the wip
Guest
watch the vid for evedence
if you want to see why also i dont believe in it.
Below is the outline for the video. We recommend you print the outline below before viewing the video. Then watch the video with the hard copy (printed) of the outline in your hand. Enjoy!
You need real player to play this you can download it free from.
click on the link below to download the player.
http://www.realplayer.com
if you already have the player click on the link below to play the vid it is apx 1 hr 09 mins
There are 2 parts to this film
http://www.bible.ca/tracks/patton-fossil-man.ram
prof that man could not of evolved
Fossil Man
APES UP FROM?, Donald Johanson, "At any rate, modern gorillas, orangs and chimpanzees spring out of nowhere, as it were. They are here today; they have no yesterday....", Lucy, p.363
Reconstructions are unscientific
GREAT GRANDPA APE, EARNST A. HOOTEN, Harvard, "If we are descended from apes our remote ancestors ought to look their part. You may not be willing to admit that you resemble an ape;.... But if that thousandth ancestor's forebearers become progressively more simian as you trace back the genealogical lines you will have to admit that somewhere in your family tree there squats an ape.", UP FROM THE APE, p.289
RECONSTRUCTIONS? EARNST A. HOOTEN, Harvard, "To attempt to restore the soft parts is an even more hazardous undertaking. The lips, the eyes, the ears, and the nasal tip, leave no clues on the underlying bony parts. You can with equal facility model on a Neanderthaloid skull the features of a chimpanzee or the lineaments of a philosopher. These alleged restorations of ancient types of man have very little if any scientific value and are likely only to mislead the public.... So put not your trust in reconstructions.", UP FROM THE APE, p.332
RECONSTRUCTIONS? W. HOWELLS, Harvard, "A great legend has grown up to plague both paleontologists and anthropologists. It is that one of these wondrous men can take a tooth or a small and broken piece of bone, gaze at it, and pass his hand over his forehead once or twice, and then take a sheet of paper and draw a picture of what the whole animal looked like as it tramped the Terriary terrain. If this were quite true, the anthropologists would make the F.B.I. look like a troop of Boy Scouts.", MANKIND SO FAR, p138
THEORY DOMINATED DATA, DAVID PILBEAM, Yale, "I am also aware of the fact that, at least in my own subject of paleoanthropology, ‘theory’ - heavily influenced by implicit ideas - almost always dominates ‘data.’ ...Ideas that are totally unrelated to actual fossils have dominated theory building, which in turn strongly influences the way fossils are interpreted." Quoted in Bones of Contention, p.127
PARANORMAL ANTHROPOLOGY, Lord Zolly Zuckerman, "We then move right off the register of objective truth into those fields of presumed biological science, like extrasensory perception or the interpretation of man's fossil history, where to the faithful anything is possible - and where the ardent believer is sometimes able to believe several contradictory things at the same time." BEYOND THE IVORY TOWER, p.19
BASIS OF "FAMILY TREE," ROGER LEWIN, Ed., Research News, Science, "The key issue is the ability correctly to infer a genetic relationship between two species on the basis of a similarity in appearance....can be deceptive, partly because similarity of structure does not necessarily imply an identical genetic heritage: a shark (which is a fish) and a porpoise (which is a mammal) look similar..." Bones of Contention, 1987, p.123
PROVEN? R. C. LEWONTIN, Harvard , "Look, I'm a person who says in this book [Human Diversity, 1982] that we don't know anything about the ancestors of the human species. All the fossils which have been dug up and are claimed to be ancestors - we haven't the faintest idea whether they are ancestors. ...All you've got is Homo sapiens there, you've got that fossil there, you've got another fossil there...it's up to you to draw the lines. Because there are no lines.", Harper's, 2/84
UNRELIABLE "TREES," J. LOWENSTEIN & ADRIENE ZIHLMAN, "But anatomy and the fossil record cannot be relied on for defining evolutionary lineages. Yet, paleontologist persist in doing just this. ...the subjective element in this approach to building evolutionary trees, which many paleontologist advocate with almost religious fervor, is demonstrated by the outcome: there is no single family tree on which they agree." Nature, 1992, Vol.355, p.783
MARY LEAKEY’S CONCLUSION, According To Associated Press, "Since scientists can never prove a particular scenario of human evolution, Leakey said "All these trees of life with their branches of our ancestors, that's a lot of nonsense." 12/9/1996
Ramapithecus Is Discarded Ape
"APE-MAN" OUT, ROGER LEWIN, Ed., Research News, Science, "The dethroning of Ramapithecus - from putative first human in 1961 to extinct relative of the orangutan in 1982 - is one of the most fascinating, and bitter, sagas in the search for human origins." Bones of Contention, 1987, p.86
"APES", Robert B. Eckhardt, Penn.S.U., "...there would appear to be little evidence to suggest that several different hominoid species are represented among the Old World dryopithecine fossils... (Ramapithecus, Oreopithecus, Limnopithecus, Kenyapithecus). They them-selves nevertheless seem to have been apes -morphologically, ecologically, and behaviourally." Scientific American, Vol.226, p.101
Australopithecus Is An Ape
SECOND "APE-MAN" OUT" ROGER LEWIN, Ed., Research News, Science, Richard and his parents, Louis and Mary, have held to a view of human origins for nearly half a century now that the line of true man, the line of Homo - large brain, toolmaking and so on - has a separate ancestry that goes back millions and millions of years. And the ape-man, Australopithecus, has nothing to do with human ancestry." BONES OF CONTENTION, 1987, p.18
LEAKEY DEFECTION, "Dr. Leakey bases his repudiation of Darwin on the results of his long search in East Africa for the remains of the original man. The generally accepted post-Darwin view is that man developed from the baboon 3 to 5 million years ago. But Leakey has found no evidence of a spurt in development at that time.", Chicago American, 1/25, 1967
DISMISSED APE, LORD SOLLY ZUCKERMAN, "His Lordship's scorn for the level of competence he sees displayed by paleoanthropologists is legendary, exceeded only by the force of his dismissal of the australopithecines as having anything at all to do with human evolution. 'They are just bloody apes', he is reputed to have observed on examining the australopithecine remains in South Africa. ...Zuckerman had become extremely powerful in British science, being an adviser to the government up to the highest level. ...while at Oxford and then Birmingham universities, he had vigorously pursued a metrical and statistical approach to studying the anatomy of fossil hominids. ...it was on this basis that he underpinned his lifelong rejection of the australopithecines as human ancestors." Bones of ContentioN, 1987, p.164, 165
DEFINITELY AN APE, LORD Solly Zuckerman, "The australopithecine skull is in fact so overwhelmingly simian as opposed to human (figure 5) that the contrary proposition could be equated to an assertion that black is white." BEYOND THE IVORY TOWER, p.78
LIKE APE, William Howells, Harvard, "...the pelvis was by no means modern, nor were the feet: the toes were more curved than ours; the heel bones lacked our stabilizing tubercles; and a couple of small ligaments that, in us, tighten the arch from underneath, were apparently not present. The finger bones were curved as they are in tree-climbing apes. ...Here is something of an enigma. Excellent evidence of a very modern foot from the from the hominid footprints at Laetoli. Excellent evidence of hominid but not fully modern feet from the Afar bones. Russel Tuttle of the University of Chicago, a leading expert on hominoid gaits and limbs, finds that all aspects of the footprints, especially toe proportions, are remarkably like modern human feet and that the Afar feet are significantly less than human." GETTING HERE, 1993, p.79
LIKE APE, A. afarensis...The recent description of four articulating foot bones from 3-3.5 Myr deposits in the South African cave site of Sterkfontein support this. ...the divergent big toe indicates some degree of prehensile grasping as in apes. Developmental patterns were also more ape-like than human. ...ecologically they may still be considered apes." Nature, 376, 8/17/1995, p.556
LIKE ORANGUTAN, CHARLES E. OXNARD, Dean of Graduate School, Prof. of Biology & Anatomy, USC, "...conventional wisdom is that the australopithecine fragments are generally rather similar to humans...the new studies point to different conclusions. The new investigations suggest that the fossil fragments are usually uniquely different from any living form: when they do have similarities with living species, they are as often as not reminiscent of the orangutan, ...these results imply that the various australopithecines are really not all that much like humans. ...may well have been bipeds,....but if so, it was not in the human manner. They may also have been quite capable climbers as much at home in the trees as on the ground." The American Biology Teacher, Vol.41, 5/1979, pp.273-4
Like Pygmy CHIMP, Adrienne L. Zihlman, U.C. Santa Cruze, "Zihlman compares the pygmy chimpanzee to 'Lucy,' one of the oldest hominid fossils known, and finds the similarities striking. They are almost identical in body size, in stature and in brain size , she notes, and the major differences (the hip and the foot) represent the younger Lucy's adaptation to bipedal walking. These commonalities, Zihlman argues, indicate that pygmy chimps use their limbs in much the same way Lucy did..." Science News, Vol.123, 2/5. 1983, p.89
SHRIVELED Status, Matt Cartmill, Duke; David Pilbeam, Harvard; Glynn Isaac, Harvard, "The australopithecines are rapidly shrinking back to the status of peculiarly specialized apes...", American Scientist, July-August 1986, p.419
Failed Links: Piltdown Man, Nebraska Man, Java Man, Peking Man
BELIEVE IT SEE IT, ROGER LEWIN, Editor of Research News, Science, "How is it that trained men, the greatest experts of their day, could look at a set of modern human bones - the cranial fragments - and 'see' a clear simian signature in them; and 'see' in an ape's jaw the unmistakable signs of humanity? The answers, inevitably, have to do with the scientists' expectations and their effects on the interpretation of data. ... It is, in fact, a common fantasy, promulgated mostly by the scientific profession itself, that in the search for objective truth, data dictate conclusions. If this were the case, then each scientist faced with the same data would necessarily reach the same conclusion. But as we've seen earlier and will see again and again, frequently this does not happen. Data are just as often molded to fit preferred conclusions." Bones of Contention, pp.61, 68
EVIDENCE MISSING, W. Howells, Harvard, "Java Man went into Dubois' locker for a time. But Peking Man seems to have gone into Davy Jones' locker, and for good. He disappeared, one of the first casualties of the war in the Pacific, half a million years after he had died the first time." Mankind IN THE MAKING, p.165
CONTEMPORARY, "[H. erectus] would have been alive when modern human and Neandertals roamed the earth. ...If the dates are right, we have three different species coexisting at the same time..." SCIENCE, V.274, p.1841, 12/13/1996
Homo erectus = Homo sapien, S.C.ANTON, Anthropologist, U. of FL, "Anthropologist Milford H. Wolpoff of the University of Michigan...argue that H. erectus fossils actually belong to an anatomically diverse form of H. sapiens... ‘The proper way to define both a living and a fossil species is the $64,000 question,’ Anton states." Science News, V.150, p.373, 12/14/1996
Neanderthal, Cro-Magnon Are Men
EVOLUTION OR VARIATION? "...a Neanderthaler is a model of evolutionary refinement. Put him in a Brooks Brothers suit and send him down to the supermarket for some groceries and he might pass completely unnoticed. He might run a little shorter than the clerk serving him but he would not necessarily be the shortest man in the place. He might be heavier-featured, squattier and more muscular than most, but again he might be no more so than the porter handling the beer cases back in the stock room." EVOLUTION, Time-Life Nature Library.
LARGER BRAIN, William Howells, Harvard, "The Neanderthal brain was most positively and definitely not smaller than our own; indeed, and this is a rather bitter pill, it appears to have been perhaps a little larger." MANKIND SO FAR, p.165
"FULLY HUMAN," Mat Cartmill, Duke U., Pres., Amer. Asso. of Phys. Anthropology, "I tend to think they [Neanderthals] had fully human language. After all, they had larger brains than those of most modern humans, made elegant stone tools, and knew how to use tools." Discover, 11/98, p.62
MODERN CAME FIRST, O. Bar-Yosef, Peabody Museum, Harvard, B. Vandermeerch, U. Bordeaux, "Modern Homo sapiens preceded Neanderthals at Mt. Carmel. ...modern looking H. sapien had lived in one of the caves some 50,000 to 100,000 years ago, much earlier than such people had been thought to exist anywhere. ...The results have shaken the traditional evolutionary scenario, producing more questions than answers." Scientific American, p.94, 4/1993
Man "Older" Than Proposed Ancestors
RUINED FAMILY TREE, "Either we toss out this skull [1470] or we toss out our theories of early man," asserts anthropologist Richard Leakey of this 2.8-million-year-old fossil, which he has tentatively identified as belonging to our own genus. "It simply fits no previous models of human beginnings." The author, son of famed anthropologist Louis S. B. Leakey, believes that the skull's surprisingly large braincase "leaves in ruins the notion that all early fossils can be arranged in an orderly sequence of evolutionary change.", National Geographic, 6/1973, p.819
Human Brain, "Leakey further describes the whole shape of the brain case [1470] as remarkably reminiscent of modern man, lacking the heavy and protruding eyebrow ridges and thick bone characteristics of Homo erectus." Science News, 102. 4/3/72, p.324
Human Brain, Dean Falk, S.U.of N.Y. at Albany, "...KNM-ER 1805 [Homo habilis] should not be attributed to Homo... the shape of the endocast from KNM-ER (basal view) is similar to that from an African pongid, where as the endocast of KNM-ER 1470 is shaped like that of a modern human." Science, 221, (9/9/83) p.1073
Fossil Wastebasket, Ian Tattersal, Head, Anthropology Dep. American Museum of Natural History, "This assignment more than anything else reflects the usefulness of having around a basket called Homo habilis into which paleoanthropologists could sweep a lot of fossil loose ends. And of course, the more this basket swelled, the less biological meaning it possessed." The Fossil Trail, 1995, p.135
Human Brain "The foremost American experts on human brain evolution – Dean Falk of the State University of New York at Albany and Ralph Holloway of Columbia University–usually disagree, but even they agree that Broca's area is present in a skull from East Turkana known as 1470 Philip Tobias...renowned brain expert from South Africa concurs." Anthro Quest: The Leakey's Foundation News. No.43 (Spring 91) p.13
NOT ERECTUS, "According to paleoanthropologist Ian Tattersall of the American Museum of Natural History in New York the African skulls...assigned to erectus often lack many of the specialized traits that were originally used to define that species in Asia, including the long low cranial structure, thick skull bones, and robustly built faces. In his view, the African group deserves to be placed in a separate species..." Discover, 9/94, p.88
"OLD" MODERN MEN, LEWIS LEAKEY "In 1933 I published on a small fragment of jaw we call Homo kanamensis, and I said categorically this is not a near-man or ape, this is a true member of the genus Homo. There were stone tools with it too. The age was somewhere around 2.5 to 3 million years. It was promptly put on the shelf by my colleagues, except for two of them. The rest said it must be placed in a ‘suspense account.’ Now, 36 years later, we have proved I was right." Quoted in Bones of Contention, p.156
TOO HUMAN – TOO OLD, Russel H. Tuttle, Professor of Anthropology, U.of Chicago, Affiliate Scientist, Primate Research Center, Emory U., "In sum, the 3.5-million-year-old footprint trails at Laetoli sight G resemble those of habitually unshod modern humans. ...If the G footprints were not known to be so old, we would readily conclude that they were made by a member of our genus ...In any case we should shelve the loose assumption that the Laetoli footprints were made by Lucy's kind..." Natural History, 3/90, p.64.
MODERN & TALL, Richard Leakey, "...the boy from Tukana was surprisingly large compared with modern boys his age; he could well have grown to six feet. ... Suitably clothed and with a cap to obscure his low forehead and beetle brow, he would probably go unnoticed in a crowd today. This find combines with previous discoveries of Homo erectus to contradict a long-held idea that humans have grown larger over the millennia." National Geographic, p.629, 11/1985
Man Even "Before" Lucy
CHARLES E. OXNARD Dean, Grad. School, Prof. Bio. and Anat., USC, "...earlier finds, for instance, at Kanapoi...existed at least at the same time as, and probably even earlier than, the original gracile australopithecines... almost indistinguishable in shape from that of modern humans at four and a half million years...", American Biology Teacher, Vol.41, 5/1979, p.274.
Henry M. McHenry, U. of C., Davis, "The results show that the Kanapoi specimen, which is 4 to 4.5 million years old, is indistinguishable from modern Homo sapiens...." Science, Vol.190, p.428.
William Howells, Harvard, "...with a date of about 4.4 million, [KP 271] could not be distinguished from Homo sapiens morphologically or by multivariate analysis by Patterson and myself in 1967 (or by much more searching analysis by others since then). We suggested that it might represent Australopithecus because at that time allocation to Homo seemed preposterous, although it would be the correct one without the time element.", Homo Erectus, 1981, p.79-80.
Eve KICKED OUT, STEPHEN J. GOULD, "...'mitochondral Eve' hypothesis of modern human origins in Africa, suffered a blow in 1993, when the discovery of an important technical fallacy in the computer program used to generate and assess evolutionary trees debunked the supposed evidence for an African source...disproving the original claim." Natural History, 2/94, p.21
Variation within kind is observed – Evolution is not observed!
FALSIFIED CASTS, Ales Hrdlicka, Smithsonian (Re: Java Man) "None of the published illustrations or casts now in various institutions is accurate." Science, 8/17/1923
if you want to see why also i dont believe in it.
Below is the outline for the video. We recommend you print the outline below before viewing the video. Then watch the video with the hard copy (printed) of the outline in your hand. Enjoy!
You need real player to play this you can download it free from.
click on the link below to download the player.
http://www.realplayer.com
if you already have the player click on the link below to play the vid it is apx 1 hr 09 mins
There are 2 parts to this film
prof that man could not of evolved
Fossil Man
APES UP FROM?, Donald Johanson, "At any rate, modern gorillas, orangs and chimpanzees spring out of nowhere, as it were. They are here today; they have no yesterday....", Lucy, p.363
Reconstructions are unscientific
GREAT GRANDPA APE, EARNST A. HOOTEN, Harvard, "If we are descended from apes our remote ancestors ought to look their part. You may not be willing to admit that you resemble an ape;.... But if that thousandth ancestor's forebearers become progressively more simian as you trace back the genealogical lines you will have to admit that somewhere in your family tree there squats an ape.", UP FROM THE APE, p.289
RECONSTRUCTIONS? EARNST A. HOOTEN, Harvard, "To attempt to restore the soft parts is an even more hazardous undertaking. The lips, the eyes, the ears, and the nasal tip, leave no clues on the underlying bony parts. You can with equal facility model on a Neanderthaloid skull the features of a chimpanzee or the lineaments of a philosopher. These alleged restorations of ancient types of man have very little if any scientific value and are likely only to mislead the public.... So put not your trust in reconstructions.", UP FROM THE APE, p.332
RECONSTRUCTIONS? W. HOWELLS, Harvard, "A great legend has grown up to plague both paleontologists and anthropologists. It is that one of these wondrous men can take a tooth or a small and broken piece of bone, gaze at it, and pass his hand over his forehead once or twice, and then take a sheet of paper and draw a picture of what the whole animal looked like as it tramped the Terriary terrain. If this were quite true, the anthropologists would make the F.B.I. look like a troop of Boy Scouts.", MANKIND SO FAR, p138
THEORY DOMINATED DATA, DAVID PILBEAM, Yale, "I am also aware of the fact that, at least in my own subject of paleoanthropology, ‘theory’ - heavily influenced by implicit ideas - almost always dominates ‘data.’ ...Ideas that are totally unrelated to actual fossils have dominated theory building, which in turn strongly influences the way fossils are interpreted." Quoted in Bones of Contention, p.127
PARANORMAL ANTHROPOLOGY, Lord Zolly Zuckerman, "We then move right off the register of objective truth into those fields of presumed biological science, like extrasensory perception or the interpretation of man's fossil history, where to the faithful anything is possible - and where the ardent believer is sometimes able to believe several contradictory things at the same time." BEYOND THE IVORY TOWER, p.19
BASIS OF "FAMILY TREE," ROGER LEWIN, Ed., Research News, Science, "The key issue is the ability correctly to infer a genetic relationship between two species on the basis of a similarity in appearance....can be deceptive, partly because similarity of structure does not necessarily imply an identical genetic heritage: a shark (which is a fish) and a porpoise (which is a mammal) look similar..." Bones of Contention, 1987, p.123
PROVEN? R. C. LEWONTIN, Harvard , "Look, I'm a person who says in this book [Human Diversity, 1982] that we don't know anything about the ancestors of the human species. All the fossils which have been dug up and are claimed to be ancestors - we haven't the faintest idea whether they are ancestors. ...All you've got is Homo sapiens there, you've got that fossil there, you've got another fossil there...it's up to you to draw the lines. Because there are no lines.", Harper's, 2/84
UNRELIABLE "TREES," J. LOWENSTEIN & ADRIENE ZIHLMAN, "But anatomy and the fossil record cannot be relied on for defining evolutionary lineages. Yet, paleontologist persist in doing just this. ...the subjective element in this approach to building evolutionary trees, which many paleontologist advocate with almost religious fervor, is demonstrated by the outcome: there is no single family tree on which they agree." Nature, 1992, Vol.355, p.783
MARY LEAKEY’S CONCLUSION, According To Associated Press, "Since scientists can never prove a particular scenario of human evolution, Leakey said "All these trees of life with their branches of our ancestors, that's a lot of nonsense." 12/9/1996
Ramapithecus Is Discarded Ape
"APE-MAN" OUT, ROGER LEWIN, Ed., Research News, Science, "The dethroning of Ramapithecus - from putative first human in 1961 to extinct relative of the orangutan in 1982 - is one of the most fascinating, and bitter, sagas in the search for human origins." Bones of Contention, 1987, p.86
"APES", Robert B. Eckhardt, Penn.S.U., "...there would appear to be little evidence to suggest that several different hominoid species are represented among the Old World dryopithecine fossils... (Ramapithecus, Oreopithecus, Limnopithecus, Kenyapithecus). They them-selves nevertheless seem to have been apes -morphologically, ecologically, and behaviourally." Scientific American, Vol.226, p.101
Australopithecus Is An Ape
SECOND "APE-MAN" OUT" ROGER LEWIN, Ed., Research News, Science, Richard and his parents, Louis and Mary, have held to a view of human origins for nearly half a century now that the line of true man, the line of Homo - large brain, toolmaking and so on - has a separate ancestry that goes back millions and millions of years. And the ape-man, Australopithecus, has nothing to do with human ancestry." BONES OF CONTENTION, 1987, p.18
LEAKEY DEFECTION, "Dr. Leakey bases his repudiation of Darwin on the results of his long search in East Africa for the remains of the original man. The generally accepted post-Darwin view is that man developed from the baboon 3 to 5 million years ago. But Leakey has found no evidence of a spurt in development at that time.", Chicago American, 1/25, 1967
DISMISSED APE, LORD SOLLY ZUCKERMAN, "His Lordship's scorn for the level of competence he sees displayed by paleoanthropologists is legendary, exceeded only by the force of his dismissal of the australopithecines as having anything at all to do with human evolution. 'They are just bloody apes', he is reputed to have observed on examining the australopithecine remains in South Africa. ...Zuckerman had become extremely powerful in British science, being an adviser to the government up to the highest level. ...while at Oxford and then Birmingham universities, he had vigorously pursued a metrical and statistical approach to studying the anatomy of fossil hominids. ...it was on this basis that he underpinned his lifelong rejection of the australopithecines as human ancestors." Bones of ContentioN, 1987, p.164, 165
DEFINITELY AN APE, LORD Solly Zuckerman, "The australopithecine skull is in fact so overwhelmingly simian as opposed to human (figure 5) that the contrary proposition could be equated to an assertion that black is white." BEYOND THE IVORY TOWER, p.78
LIKE APE, William Howells, Harvard, "...the pelvis was by no means modern, nor were the feet: the toes were more curved than ours; the heel bones lacked our stabilizing tubercles; and a couple of small ligaments that, in us, tighten the arch from underneath, were apparently not present. The finger bones were curved as they are in tree-climbing apes. ...Here is something of an enigma. Excellent evidence of a very modern foot from the from the hominid footprints at Laetoli. Excellent evidence of hominid but not fully modern feet from the Afar bones. Russel Tuttle of the University of Chicago, a leading expert on hominoid gaits and limbs, finds that all aspects of the footprints, especially toe proportions, are remarkably like modern human feet and that the Afar feet are significantly less than human." GETTING HERE, 1993, p.79
LIKE APE, A. afarensis...The recent description of four articulating foot bones from 3-3.5 Myr deposits in the South African cave site of Sterkfontein support this. ...the divergent big toe indicates some degree of prehensile grasping as in apes. Developmental patterns were also more ape-like than human. ...ecologically they may still be considered apes." Nature, 376, 8/17/1995, p.556
LIKE ORANGUTAN, CHARLES E. OXNARD, Dean of Graduate School, Prof. of Biology & Anatomy, USC, "...conventional wisdom is that the australopithecine fragments are generally rather similar to humans...the new studies point to different conclusions. The new investigations suggest that the fossil fragments are usually uniquely different from any living form: when they do have similarities with living species, they are as often as not reminiscent of the orangutan, ...these results imply that the various australopithecines are really not all that much like humans. ...may well have been bipeds,....but if so, it was not in the human manner. They may also have been quite capable climbers as much at home in the trees as on the ground." The American Biology Teacher, Vol.41, 5/1979, pp.273-4
Like Pygmy CHIMP, Adrienne L. Zihlman, U.C. Santa Cruze, "Zihlman compares the pygmy chimpanzee to 'Lucy,' one of the oldest hominid fossils known, and finds the similarities striking. They are almost identical in body size, in stature and in brain size , she notes, and the major differences (the hip and the foot) represent the younger Lucy's adaptation to bipedal walking. These commonalities, Zihlman argues, indicate that pygmy chimps use their limbs in much the same way Lucy did..." Science News, Vol.123, 2/5. 1983, p.89
SHRIVELED Status, Matt Cartmill, Duke; David Pilbeam, Harvard; Glynn Isaac, Harvard, "The australopithecines are rapidly shrinking back to the status of peculiarly specialized apes...", American Scientist, July-August 1986, p.419
Failed Links: Piltdown Man, Nebraska Man, Java Man, Peking Man
BELIEVE IT SEE IT, ROGER LEWIN, Editor of Research News, Science, "How is it that trained men, the greatest experts of their day, could look at a set of modern human bones - the cranial fragments - and 'see' a clear simian signature in them; and 'see' in an ape's jaw the unmistakable signs of humanity? The answers, inevitably, have to do with the scientists' expectations and their effects on the interpretation of data. ... It is, in fact, a common fantasy, promulgated mostly by the scientific profession itself, that in the search for objective truth, data dictate conclusions. If this were the case, then each scientist faced with the same data would necessarily reach the same conclusion. But as we've seen earlier and will see again and again, frequently this does not happen. Data are just as often molded to fit preferred conclusions." Bones of Contention, pp.61, 68
EVIDENCE MISSING, W. Howells, Harvard, "Java Man went into Dubois' locker for a time. But Peking Man seems to have gone into Davy Jones' locker, and for good. He disappeared, one of the first casualties of the war in the Pacific, half a million years after he had died the first time." Mankind IN THE MAKING, p.165
CONTEMPORARY, "[H. erectus] would have been alive when modern human and Neandertals roamed the earth. ...If the dates are right, we have three different species coexisting at the same time..." SCIENCE, V.274, p.1841, 12/13/1996
Homo erectus = Homo sapien, S.C.ANTON, Anthropologist, U. of FL, "Anthropologist Milford H. Wolpoff of the University of Michigan...argue
Neanderthal, Cro-Magnon Are Men
EVOLUTION OR VARIATION? "...a Neanderthaler is a model of evolutionary refinement. Put him in a Brooks Brothers suit and send him down to the supermarket for some groceries and he might pass completely unnoticed. He might run a little shorter than the clerk serving him but he would not necessarily be the shortest man in the place. He might be heavier-featured, squattier and more muscular than most, but again he might be no more so than the porter handling the beer cases back in the stock room." EVOLUTION, Time-Life Nature Library.
LARGER BRAIN, William Howells, Harvard, "The Neanderthal brain was most positively and definitely not smaller than our own; indeed, and this is a rather bitter pill, it appears to have been perhaps a little larger." MANKIND SO FAR, p.165
"FULLY HUMAN," Mat Cartmill, Duke U., Pres., Amer. Asso. of Phys. Anthropology, "I tend to think they [Neanderthals] had fully human language. After all, they had larger brains than those of most modern humans, made elegant stone tools, and knew how to use tools." Discover, 11/98, p.62
MODERN CAME FIRST, O. Bar-Yosef, Peabody Museum, Harvard, B. Vandermeerch, U. Bordeaux, "Modern Homo sapiens preceded Neanderthals at Mt. Carmel. ...modern looking H. sapien had lived in one of the caves some 50,000 to 100,000 years ago, much earlier than such people had been thought to exist anywhere. ...The results have shaken the traditional evolutionary scenario, producing more questions than answers." Scientific American, p.94, 4/1993
Man "Older" Than Proposed Ancestors
RUINED FAMILY TREE, "Either we toss out this skull [1470] or we toss out our theories of early man," asserts anthropologist Richard Leakey of this 2.8-million-year-old fossil, which he has tentatively identified as belonging to our own genus. "It simply fits no previous models of human beginnings." The author, son of famed anthropologist Louis S. B. Leakey, believes that the skull's surprisingly large braincase "leaves in ruins the notion that all early fossils can be arranged in an orderly sequence of evolutionary change.", National Geographic, 6/1973, p.819
Human Brain, "Leakey further describes the whole shape of the brain case [1470] as remarkably reminiscent of modern man, lacking the heavy and protruding eyebrow ridges and thick bone characteristics of Homo erectus." Science News, 102. 4/3/72, p.324
Human Brain, Dean Falk, S.U.of N.Y. at Albany, "...KNM-ER 1805 [Homo habilis] should not be attributed to Homo... the shape of the endocast from KNM-ER (basal view) is similar to that from an African pongid, where as the endocast of KNM-ER 1470 is shaped like that of a modern human." Science, 221, (9/9/83) p.1073
Fossil Wastebasket, Ian Tattersal, Head, Anthropology Dep. American Museum of Natural History, "This assignment more than anything else reflects the usefulness of having around a basket called Homo habilis into which paleoanthropologists could sweep a lot of fossil loose ends. And of course, the more this basket swelled, the less biological meaning it possessed." The Fossil Trail, 1995, p.135
Human Brain "The foremost American experts on human brain evolution – Dean Falk of the State University of New York at Albany and Ralph Holloway of Columbia University–usually disagree, but even they agree that Broca's area is present in a skull from East Turkana known as 1470 Philip Tobias...renowned brain expert from South Africa concurs." Anthro Quest: The Leakey's Foundation News. No.43 (Spring 91) p.13
NOT ERECTUS, "According to paleoanthropologist Ian Tattersall of the American Museum of Natural History in New York the African skulls...assigned to erectus often lack many of the specialized traits that were originally used to define that species in Asia, including the long low cranial structure, thick skull bones, and robustly built faces. In his view, the African group deserves to be placed in a separate species..." Discover, 9/94, p.88
"OLD" MODERN MEN, LEWIS LEAKEY "In 1933 I published on a small fragment of jaw we call Homo kanamensis, and I said categorically this is not a near-man or ape, this is a true member of the genus Homo. There were stone tools with it too. The age was somewhere around 2.5 to 3 million years. It was promptly put on the shelf by my colleagues, except for two of them. The rest said it must be placed in a ‘suspense account.’ Now, 36 years later, we have proved I was right." Quoted in Bones of Contention, p.156
TOO HUMAN – TOO OLD, Russel H. Tuttle, Professor of Anthropology, U.of Chicago, Affiliate Scientist, Primate Research Center, Emory U., "In sum, the 3.5-million-year-old footprint trails at Laetoli sight G resemble those of habitually unshod modern humans. ...If the G footprints were not known to be so old, we would readily conclude that they were made by a member of our genus ...In any case we should shelve the loose assumption that the Laetoli footprints were made by Lucy's kind..." Natural History, 3/90, p.64.
MODERN & TALL, Richard Leakey, "...the boy from Tukana was surprisingly large compared with modern boys his age; he could well have grown to six feet. ... Suitably clothed and with a cap to obscure his low forehead and beetle brow, he would probably go unnoticed in a crowd today. This find combines with previous discoveries of Homo erectus to contradict a long-held idea that humans have grown larger over the millennia." National Geographic, p.629, 11/1985
Man Even "Before" Lucy
CHARLES E. OXNARD Dean, Grad. School, Prof. Bio. and Anat., USC, "...earlier finds, for instance, at Kanapoi...existed at least at the same time as, and probably even earlier than, the original gracile australopithecines... almost indistinguishable in shape from that of modern humans at four and a half million years...", American Biology Teacher, Vol.41, 5/1979, p.274.
Henry M. McHenry, U. of C., Davis, "The results show that the Kanapoi specimen, which is 4 to 4.5 million years old, is indistinguishable from modern Homo sapiens...." Science, Vol.190, p.428.
William Howells, Harvard, "...with a date of about 4.4 million, [KP 271] could not be distinguished from Homo sapiens morphologically or by multivariate analysis by Patterson and myself in 1967 (or by much more searching analysis by others since then). We suggested that it might represent Australopithecus because at that time allocation to Homo seemed preposterous, although it would be the correct one without the time element.", Homo Erectus, 1981, p.79-80.
Eve KICKED OUT, STEPHEN J. GOULD, "...'mitochondral Eve' hypothesis of modern human origins in Africa, suffered a blow in 1993, when the discovery of an important technical fallacy in the computer program used to generate and assess evolutionary trees debunked the supposed evidence for an African source...disproving the original claim." Natural History, 2/94, p.21
Variation within kind is observed – Evolution is not observed!
FALSIFIED CASTS, Ales Hrdlicka, Smithsonian (Re: Java Man) "None of the published illustrations or casts now in various institutions is accurate." Science, 8/17/1923