December 18, 2015 | David F. Coppedge

Antique Homo Claims Threatened by New Bones

The number of potential overhauls in thinking from this thigh bone in China is staggering.

A painted thigh bone found in a China cave shouldn’t be there. It looks like something ancient, but it’s dated to just 14,000 years ago. If the articles on PhysOrg and New Scientist are correct, here are some of the pillars of human evolution ready to topple:

  • The “out of Africa” theory.
  • The antiquity of Homo erectus.
  • The overthrow of the Denisovans and Neanderthals by modern humans.
  • The evolutionary status of “The Hobbit” (Homo floresiensis)

Quotes in the New Scientist article reflect astonishment among the scientists pondering the meaning of these bones.

Among the discoveries appears to be a primitive human species, which most closely resembles the earliest human species, Homo habilis and Homo erectus.

But while these lived about 2 million years ago, this new species lived just 14,000 years ago, says Darren Curnoe of the University of New South Wales in Sydney, Australia, who lead the team behind the discoveries. This would make it the most recent human species to have gone extinct.

“If true, this would be rather spectacular and it would make the finds of truly global importance,” says Michael Petraglia at the University of Oxford, who wasn’t involved in the discoveries.

Paleoanthropologists have insisted that ancient humans disappeared after modern humans took over.

“This turns that on its head,” says Curnoe. “Its young age shows that remarkably primitive-looking humans must have shared the landscape with very modern-looking people at a time when China’s earliest farming cultures were beginning to flourish.”

Another implication, however, is that so-called “primitive” features of early man were not less fit, if they survived so long into the modern era. One of the anthropologists is interpreting the condition of the bones to indicate that the “ancient” hominid was mating with a modern human.  Some experts are unconvinced of the claims, but the implications are staggering:

Curnoe says the discoveries point to a profound shift in our understanding of what it means to be human.

Adding to the now well-established interbreeding that occurred with our cousins the Neanderthals and Denisovans, we can no longer consider ourselves a single lineage that emerged from Africa.

“We had particular notions of our evolution: That we found ourselves evolving in isolation in Africa and quickly replaced all the other species that were around because we thought we were superior to them. And it happened very quickly, without question, and without biological interaction,” Curnoe says. “But the hybridisation story has turned that on its head.

Is it a relic of Victorian notions of European superiority that misled research for a century and a half? If modern humans interbred with “archaic humans,” maybe they weren’t primitive at all. It’s just more evidence of variability within a single human species.

Another bombshell came from a report from the University of Vermont, casting doubt on the long ages of evolution in general.

A new analysis of the fossil record shows that a deep pattern in nature remained the same for 300 million years. Then, 6,000 years ago, the pattern was disrupted — at about the same time that agriculture spread across North America.

This means that the stamp of human nature came suddenly and recently. Yet paleoanthropologists insist that hominids equal in stature and brain size to us lived in Africa, Europe and Asia for one to two million years. Suddenly, without explanation, agriculture appears just 6,000 years ago, and the world’s ecology shifts. What were the predecessors of the first farmers doing for the other 99.7% of their existence?

It gets boring to keep hearing “Everything you know is wrong” — the annual chant of the evolutionary paleoanthropologists. Why do we even listen to this racist crowd? The dates are all manufactured in Darwin Years to fit their myth of progress. None of these bones are old, and they don’t tell a story of progress from primitive to advanced. Who knows; the “archaic” models might have been the Einsteins of their day. It’s inconceivable that humans who were smart enough to hunt, make tools, use fire and travel long distances existed for two million years without building cities (see previous entry).

All the evidence makes sense if you cleanse the mind of Darwinian notions and realize this all happened recently. Why don’t we see cities of Homo erectus? Because they lived within the past few thousand years, not two million years ago! Keep this in mind next time Lee Berger tries to tell us that Homo naledi is a primitive human ancestor and manufactures a date in Darwin Years to put it in the narrative. The dates are myths. This all happened since the Flood and Babel, when people scattered in all directions. Many sought refuge in caves. Others eked out a hard living in the harsh conditions of the Ice Age. But most were farming and raising livestock, skills they knew before the Flood, at the same time, not after a hunting-gathering stage of evolution. Inbreeding was rampant, accentuating certain traits in various tribes, but they were all human, all still able to interbreed, because they had not been separated for long.

 

 

Comments

Leave a Reply