[_ Old Earth _] For ID'rs it doesn get much worse

[Charlie Hatchett]

What do you expect to see, though? What is 'smooth'?

The whole point of the genetic species vs. biological species is that there is not necessarily a linear development from one to the next, simply because some populations are not 'species' in a real sense.

Any two (or more) populations that we define mistakenly as species may have exchanged genetic information to become ancestors.

Thus, the division between australopithecines and the genus homo may not be 'real' because they were not necessarily distinct genetic species.

I would hazard a guess that before the worldwide spread of populations in the genus homo there were no distinct genetic species. Later, due to isolation, the genetic species of homo sapiens, homo neanderthalensis and asian homo erectus developed.

Ardipithecus ramidus

Australopithecus afarensis

Australopithecus robustus

Paranthropus boisei

Homo habilis

Homo erectus

Homo neanderthalensis

Homo sapien

Australopithecines and Homo Habilis seem way too different to of been

variable expressions of the same species. And I don't buy that Habilis was

Homo. I think that's an attempt to smooth out the transistion by calling this

"chimp" Homo.

Look at the jump between Hablis and Erectus, Neanderthalensis, and

Sapien.

It's very very hard to believe that these are four expressions of the same

species. I do find the notion of Erectus, Neanderthalensis, and Sapien being

racial expressions of the original human genetic stock plausible. The

transistion from Habilis to Erectus is hard to swallow.