Creation of Man

          The just so stories of animal creation pale before the battle of human creation. Christianity and much of Western thought is based on mankind being distinct from the animal kingdom. In the Bible, God created man in His image and gave him dominion over the animals, the plants and the creatures of the sea. The creation myth of the materialists and Darwinian evolution is quite a different scenario. In The Descent of Man Darwin clearly explains his vision of the origin of mankind.

             In the class of mammals the steps are not difficult to conceive which led from the ancient Monotremata to the ancient marsupials; and from these . . . the interval is  not  very wide from these to the Simiadae [monkeys and apes]. . . at a remote period. Man,  the wonder and glory of the universe, proceeded . . . There can, consequently hardly be a doubt that man is an off-shoot from the Old World simian stem. (Descent   of Man p. 51) .

     Darwin stated that mankind evolved from a monkey. The so-called “Monkey Trial” was a media circus that was aptly named. The Neo-Darwinian Theory of Evolution no longer claims that mankind is a direct descendant of an Old World monkey. The theory has been modernized and hypothesizes that mankind and the “other primates” had a common ancestor millions of years ago. Multiple branches evolved into apes and monkeys with mankind occupying a twig. 

      As a citizen of the Twenty-First Century you might protest calling evolutionary science a myth. Science is the amassing of facts that are wielded together in a logical assessment. The Theory of Evolution is science; it has bones and fossils to prove it is not a myth. Dr. Landau however has written persuasively that the story of human evolution is written in the form of a narrative - the hero myth. As the story goes a humble hero (a diminutive prosimian) is expelled from an initially safe environment because of climatic change. Forced to embark on a hazardous journey he must overcome a series of tests (new environmental conditions) and display worth (intelligence, bipedalism, etc.); thus endowed, our hero develops further advantages (tools); only to be tested again. (Bones of Contention p.33)   -

     Written this way the plot line of evolution becomes an Arthurian Legend or the Hobbit. A young hero is sent on a journey. On the journey he is tested. Under stress he makes changes, grows and eventually triumphs. A familiar plot line that is echoed in science. “Why, then has evolutionary fate treated ape and man so differently? The one has been left in the obscurity of its native jungle, while the other has been given a glorious exodus leading to the domination of earth, sea, and sky.” (Bones of Contention p.34 ) Elliot Smith, writing of the early history of humanity, finds it “. . . Well within the bounds of reasonable conjecture to picture the wide stretch of Southern Asia and Africa as peopled by weird caricatures of mankind, roaming far and wide to satisfy their appetites and avoid extinction. In this competition, the distinctive characters of Man were fashioned in the hard school of experience.”

     Evolution postulates a constant upward progression as a prosimian changes into a bipedal creature who abandoned the trees. A deadly competition drives our hero to “evolve” a bigger brain or become “road kill” in the spiral of life. Man, the animal, fought his way up the evolutionary ladder to become the supreme hunter, the master of his fate. The evolutionary creation myth appeals to our human ego. Mankind's ancestors, according to evolution’s heroic myth, were small creatures scurrying among the bushes while the mighty T-Rex reigned. The dinosaurs failed. They are extinct. Mankind survived. We adapted while the stupid dinosaurs failed. Get the emphasis? We did it. We survived. We fought our way to the top.

     How we see mankind and our creation controls the cultural discussion. It is a fundamental reason Christians object so strongly against the Evolutionary Theory. Evolution classifies humanity as an animal. Once mankind is no longer made by God in His image we are left to random chance and the heroic myth. We are still rebellious children who want to shake our fist in God's face and say “We did it!”

     Christianity and Darwinian Evolution are diametrically opposed in the battle for creation. Fossils, skeletal remains and flaked stones are all weapons in a war to validate existence. Both cannot be true and each are seen through a strong set of prescription lenses. The iconography of evolution is very powerful.

Whether it is used for political satire or to ridicule others  Darwin's Theory of Evolution has reached iconic status. The concept is used wordlessly to deliver its message.  Let’s review what is fundamental to Darwin’s Theory of Evolution. First, there is no outside influence or design allowed in the process. The ancient ancestor that walked on four legs (i.e., a quadruped) did not know or decide that to evolve it would have to become a biped and stand up. Evolution is a non-directed process. According to Darwin’s theory there was a gradual and smooth transition - an accumulation of small changes - that led to a different species. The urban legend encourages us to believe that the mere excavation of fossils is proof that macroevolution occurred. However like most myths we need to look behind the smoke. Fossils dated at 12 mya (million years ago) and another set dated at 5 mya can serve as marker points. However fossils that are dated between these two marker points are not in the process of transforming into the other just because they occurred during that time period.

     These pictures present the fossilized remains of trilobites across a span of over 300 million years. They depict slight variations in the basic morphology of a trilobite but they were not transforming into anything else. The following list provides some of the fossils or fragments that have been proposed as ancestors of modern mankind. The missing links reputed to connect mankind to its evolutionary ancestors.

Fossil's Representing Humanities Reputed Ancestry: 

Neanderthal 130,000- 30,000

Java Man, (Homo erectus) 1.8 million – 100,000

Piltdown Man fraud

Hesperopithecus (Nebraska Man) fraud

Australopithecus (africanus) 3.0 – 2.2 mya (million years ago)

Australopithecus Robustus 1.8 - 1.0 mya

Paranthropus boisei 2.2 – 1.3 mya

Homo habilis 2.4 - 1.5 mya

Ramapithecus 1.2- 1.4 mya

Australopithecus afarensis “Lucy” 4.0 - 3.0 mya

Australopithecus anamensis 4.2 - 3.8 mya

Ardipithecus ramidus 5.8 - 5.2 mya

Orrorin tugenensis 6.0 mya

Sahelanthropus tchadensis 7.0 mya

     Given a plethora of names and dates a definition of terms and dating is required. Let’s start with the dating. All of these hominids are extinct. There are no more Neanderthals despite what you called the “lunatic” who cut you off in traffic. The dates listed for their existence are given as approximate ranges based on the available fossils. Now for the more sensitive matter of what to call these extinct species. “Hominids” refers to all bipedal primates who preceded modern man. Bipedal primates describe a species that walked upright.

     The figure below incorporates most of the "missing links" proposed as the lineage of humanity. Note that the dotted lines connecting different fossils are inferred relationships with the question marks indicating an even more tentative connection. The fossils recovered are not full skeletons and massive amounts of time and effort are expended to retrieve a jaw bone or a fragment of a skull. All are tantalizing hints of creatures that once roamed the earth.

Since the fossil record is such an important part of the evidence for the evolution of species it is essential to analyze how the process of reconstruction works. Pictured below are three different fossils.

This first fossil is from the early Cambrian Period (app. 550 mya) and is obviously a primitive life form. The second fossil is from the Ordovician era (450 mya). Definitive “evolution” has occurred in fossil #2, as evidenced by the deep ridging.  The third fossil is from the Jurassic era (150 mya). This final fossil has reached a crucial transformation as evidenced by it increased size and strong hinge. Fossil #3 demonstrates the transitional phase leading to bivalves (i.e., mussels and clams).    While this scenario is visually appealing it is totally wrong. All three fossils are real and accurately dated however they are all brachiopods. The internal structure of brachiopods is completely different from that of bivalves. Mussels and clams are members of the phylum mollusca. Brachiopods were present in the Cambrian Explosion and still exist in the deep oceans. At no point in their existence were they transforming into another phylum. To line up fossils and connect the dots is a very risky attempt at science. The picture below is of a brachiopod living in the deep oceans of Earth- currently.

     Christians need to refocus the conversation. As long as the discussion concerning the creation of man is focused on merely shuffling the fossils and rearranging them in a different order the battle over the creation of man is already lost. Evolutionists already control the conversation because it is assumed that man is an animal that evolved from a lower species. Therefore all they have to discuss is which fossil came first in the evolutionary chain. Stephen Jay Gould, an ardent evolutionist, wrote the book Wonderful Life on the misinterpretation of the Burgess Shale. These fossils are at the heart of the evidence for the Cambrian Explosion. Gould wrote with great insight about the error Charles Walcott made when he forced the interpretation of the Burgess Shale fossil into a strict interpretation of the Darwin evolutionary model. The truth of what the fossils revealed was distorted for nearly a 100 years.

     Are we not faced with a similar misinterpretation when we string hominid fossils on a predetermined path?

Beginnings:

     We have been repeatedly assured it is a proven fact that mankind evolved from an apelike progenitor. Each time a skullcap or a tooth from an ancient hominid fossil is found it gets worldwide press and possibly a cover story from the National Geographic. The paleontologist is given an interview and the new species is named after him or the place where it was discovered. The following months are a foment of inquiry as scientists argue about exactly where the new species fits in the presumed pathway of evolution. As a Christian it is difficult to resist the onslaught of “data.” We must remember that while the fossil is real the interpretation of what it means is a highly subjective process. One that is significantly colored by what you expect to see.

     The basic outline of the evolutionary process calls for a knuckle-walking apelike primate as the root of the evolutionary tree. Following the prescribed pattern a knuckle walking quadruped would "evolve" into a biped, who would become a tool maker, leading to Neandertal in a clear path of upward progress. The picture below is a skeletal display of the orthodox view of the evolution of mankind.

     Since evolution postulates that an apelike ancestor gave rise to both the great apes and humanity it is appropriate to look at the development of bipedalism. According to the Theory of Evolution fossils should reveal a gradual appearance of the abilities that define humanity (i.e., the arrival of the ability to walk upright, an increased brain size and tool making).     The ancestral pro-simian at the root of the evolutionary tree was a knuckle-walking quadruped. Gorillas as well as chimps knuckle-walk. Their hands do not rest on their palms or fingers but on their knuckles as they traverse the ground. In the textbook evolutionary sequence the process of becoming bipedal (upright) is frequently described as if an ape stood up one afternoon and discovered how much further he could see and the rest is history.      Evolutionists have proposed a variety of reasons that drove the transition from 4 legged locomotion to two feet. One of the favorite hypotheses is that Homo habilis needed his hands free to make and use tools. That theory fell by the way side when the fossil record revealed that hominids were bipedal millions of years before Homo habilis began using tools. Tool usage appeared long after hominids were walking erect.     Another factor that is proposed as having driven the emergence of bipedalism is the change of the African woodland and forest into open grassland. This environmental change would initiate the following stress factors; (1) reduced food supply, (2) increased risk of predation due to a lack of camouflage and (3) the inability to avoid direct sunlight.

     Bipedalism offers a means to meet all these challenges. Walking erect conserves energy. Bipeds are able to travel long distances to forage for food. Erect stature allows the visual ability to scan the horizon and detect predators sooner. Finally an erect stature has a cool advantage. An upright biped absorbs 60 percent less heat than an ape walking on all fours. A knuckle dragging position exposes the entire back to direct sunlight whereas an upright pose exposes only the neck and shoulders. However altering a knuckle-walker into an erect biped is not a one step process. The Figure below highlights in red some of the areas that must be significantly altered to permit bipedalism. The change involves at least eight major alterations in the anatomy.                                                                           

1.  Location of the foramen magnum 2.  Spinal curvature 3.  Inner ear 4.  Rib Cage 5.  Pelvis 6.  Lower Limbs 7.  Enlarging Joint Surfaces 8. Restructured Foot

While briefly going through each of the changes that are required it is essential to remember that each physical change requires multiple changes at the genetic level. Evolution is frequently presented as if it were a volitional act. The chimpanzee willed itself to stand upright or the giraffe stretched it's neck to reach the leaves on top of the tree and that behavior changed the species. A re-design of this magnitude had to occur simultaneously and required information at the genetic level. It is genetic information that permanently changes any species.

     The opening in the base of the skull that receives the spinal column (i.e., foramen magnum) must be altered. In great apes powerful neck muscles keep the skull stable and in line with a prone means of locomotion (walking on all four). A human’s skull, in an erect posture, is aligned with the spinal column. The Figure below provides a visual presentation of the difference between a quadruped alignment and that of a human.

In apes the foramen magnum is angled backward rather than beneath the skull (brain-case), as in humans. In humans the foramen magnum is located beneath the skull to balance the head and hold it upright. The spinal column enters the base of the skull in the center and is balanced by slender neck muscles. It is easy to see the alignment of the skull and the spinal column in the two distinctly different means of locomotion.     The human spine has several curves that are necessary to maintain balance. Of these, the lumbar curve (lower back) is of special importance. The human lumbar region is very flexible, allowing humans to not only bend forward at the hips, but also to bend sideways and backwards. Apes have no lumbar curve to pull the upper body back over their pelvis. Their weight pulls them forward and away from an erect posture. Humans, however, have an additional curve that positions the body inward, over the pelvis. This postural feature positions the weight of the human trunk over the hips. The unique lumbar curvature makes walking possible. The center of gravity is lowered, increasing efficiency and stability while walking or running. Anyone who has had problems with their back knows how very sensitive the spine is to even the smallest misalignment.

All of which indicates the multiple differences between quadrupedal and bipedal means of locomotion. Changing from a quadrupedal means of walking to upright bipedal locomotion requires a complete redesign of at least eight different anatomical components. Becoming an obligatory bipedal species that can walk for extended periods of time and run if needed is not a matter of volition. We see images of a chimp waddling a few steps across the stage or a jungle movie and tend to presume that if a chimpanzee can remain upright for a few steps that the transition from knuckle walking to being bipedal merely requires a little practice. The evolutionary scenario portrays the transformation as a gradual process in which the prosimian might have stayed on his feet a little longer in a rudimentary or less efficient means of locomotion and gradually transitioned into a permanent bipedal stance. It is frequently presented as if all that was required was for the pro-simian to “want” to stand up and that was sufficient to account for the change. Much like the search for the Mythic Primordial Soup once the evolutionary story-line is plotted all data must match the expected scenario. 

     Having listed the characteristics necessary for the transformation of a quadruped into a biped the fossil evidence should be easy to assemble according to the evolutionary theory. The great debate among paleoanthropologists seemed to be which Australopithecine morphed into the Homo habilis ( tool user). In 1995, a team of paleoanthropologists discovered a species named Australopithecus anamnesis. Discovered in Kenya and dated around 4.7 mya the tibia clearly indicated that A. anamnesis had bipedal capacity. This find pushed the appearance of bipedalism back 250,000 years. Placing the appearance of bipedalism closer to the reputed split between ape and human lineage. This discovery gave the forces of evolution and natural selection much less time to generate bipedalism (remember all the multiple changes that had to occur).

     In 2001, a team of researchers found the remains of a hominid named Ardipithecus ramidus which lived between 5.8 - 5.2 mya. This hominid also walked erect. Two more finds by French researchers reinforced the early appearance of bipedalism. This hominid named Orrorin tugenensis, was dated as early as 6 million years ago, clearly showed the anatomy of a bipedal hominid. The researchers weren't simply flipping a coin to determine which hominids were bipedal. Remember all the anatomical differences and changes that are required for a bipedal means of locomotion. Given the numerous marked differences an anthropologist can look at a fossilized femur bone and determine whether he/she was a quadruped or walked upright. The bone structure would be completely different depending on whether the creature walked on two legs or knuckled–walked.

     Bipedalism appeared suddenly in the fossil record.   The debate among the various factions of paleoanthropologists concerning which Australopithecine was the link to more "evolved" species ended with the discovery of these ancient bipedal fossils. The entire line of Australopithecus is an evolutionary dead end.

     Additionally, early bipedalism creates difficulty for the evolutionary hypothesis that the environmental change from wood land to an open savanna drove hominids to stand up. These early bipedal hominids did not live in an open savanna. They inhabited woodlands and forests. Roger Lewin, an anthropologist, wrote “The popular notion of our forebears striding out of dense forest onto grassland savanna is likely to be more fiction than fact.” (Who was Adam ? pg. 161.)

     Yet the iconography persists. According to the evolutionary theory mankind evolved from a primitive pro-simian, diverged into a quadruped who gradually pulled himself erect and walked out of the forest onto the savanna where he struck two rocks together to become a tool maker. What the fossil record shows are multiple appearances of different hominids. The Australopithecines were separate hominid groups that demonstrated facultative ( optional) bipedalism. They existed for nearly 3 million years and showed no signs of altering their locomotion. They were not gradually changing into an obligatory form of bipedalism. It is even more difficult, from an evolutionary point of view, to explain the fact that earlier hominids (6-7 mya) were bipedal. The fossil record is consistently a record of rapid appearances of life forms that are complete, whole and optimally suited to the environment in which they lived. Multiple sets of hominids co-existed however they were not changing or transmuting into other species.

The Brain Thing:

     Bones are important but humanity is really defined by our intelligence. The brain’s the thing. We revel in the special things that mankind is capable of (including a dangling participle). We are constantly pummeled with the concept that the fossil record provides a smooth transition from chimp to ape man to Homo habilis to Homo erectus to Neandertal and finally man. The figure below illustrates the increase in hominid brain volume across time.

While the diagram shows growth the pattern that is obscured is that each hominid’s brain size and behavior remained static once it appeared. Each species represents a discontinuous jump in brain size. For example, the Australopithecus brain size was approximately 400 cm for its entire existence (i.e., 5- 1.5 mya). Homo habilis’ appearance brought a jump to 650 to 800 cm. Homo erectus/ergaster had a brain size that ranged from 850 to 1,000 cm. The modern human brain ranges in size from 1,000 to 1,500 cm. however brain volume must be evaluated in conjunction with body mass to determine the encephalization quotient. That is the ratio of body mass to brain size. Dinosaurs were massive creatures with a brain the size of a walnut. It is assumed they were not very “smart” creatures. They didn’t have much to work with. Australopithecus afarensis’s encephalization quotient was 2.5; Homo habilis was 3.1; Homo ergaster was 3.3 and humans is 5.8 which is nearly double. In addition to the measurement of brain size or volume the use of endocasts can reveal the brain structure. Through the usage of endocasts Paleoanthropologists have been able to assess the brain architecture. What is revealed is that each species (Australopithecus, Homo habilis, Homo erectus and Homo neandertalis) all appeared with a specific “mind set” that was intact and remained constant throughout its existence. Each appearance of a hominid represented a specific and unique species.

     The modern human brain averages around 1,350 cc. whereas the Neanderthal brain averaged between 1,500 - 1,700 cc. Before you get an inferiority complex the difference in capacity is based on a different distribution of the little grey cells. Much of the Neanderthal's brain was in the lower, rear part of the skull, which was wider than modern humans. Modern man has a larger portion of the brain in the frontal lobe, which is the seat of higher mental processes.

     Louis Leakey, the renowned paleontologist, is known for his extensive work with hominid fossils. Speaking from his years of experience he stated that what is frequently labelled as primitive (i.e., the simian palate, the ratio of length of arms to legs or “knuckle dragging”) may be a question of perspective. Each of these aspects represents a feature more closely allied with apes. By definition apes are more primitive creatures than man and any ancient hominid that came before mankind must also be more primitive. This is verified by its anatomical similarity to apes. Leakey proposed that the ancient hominids are more correctly identified as specialized for their function. The fossils may be older than mankind but the definition of primitive is used by those who are seeking to find a lineage. The “primitive” species were perfectly adapted to their environment. They were declared primitive to fulfill an evolutionary hunt for ancestors.

     Lining up fossils chronologically doesn’t make the earliest one primitive. Remember the example of the brachiopod fossils or the beauty of the unique Cambrian fauna. The pictures below illustrate only a few of the varied designs and intricate morphology that erupted at the very inception of animal life. They were early in Earth’s history but their design was not crude, incomplete or primitive.

Neanderthal

     The skull of a Neanderthal was discovered prior to the publishing of The Origin of Species. At the time the skull was not considered valuable. It was labeled as possibly a micro cephalic idiot, an ancient Celt, a diseased specimen, or possibly a Cossack from the war of 1814. With the publication of the Theory of Evolution and the discovery of more specimens in Europe, Neanderthal became a primary proof. T.H. Huxley wrote that the Neanderthal was an intermediate between “ancient apes” and man.

     The public perception of Neanderthal has waxed and waned through the years. Early on Neanderthals were depicted as brutish cavemen dragging a club. The image on the far right of the Figure below is from 1909 and clearly illustrates the original perception of a Neanderthal. More recently attempts have been made to rehabilitate his image. Some are now saying that if he shaved, washed and wore a three piece suit he would blend in on a crowded street. Neanderthal is currently portrayed as capable of carrying on a lucid conversation and explaining how he has been misunderstood. The figure below also illustrates multiple reconstructions of Neanderthal. It also shows how remarkably varied these reconstructions can be from fossilized material.

Who is this mystery figure? The Neanderthals of Western Europe are described as very robust, squat beings with bull necks, and enormous brow ridges. They had thicker skulls, which may have led to their being depicted as the brute with a club. Skeletal remains evidenced a long flat skull with receding forehead enormous nasal cavities and probably noses to match. The average height for a male was slightly above 5 feet and women were slightly less than 5 feet.        Most of the skeletal remains of Neanderthal were found in Europe during a glacial period and it was assumed that the facial and body attributes were reflective of the harsh climate. Modern human populations that live in arctic environments are smaller with barrel-shaped bodies and shorter limbs than those in warmer climates. Stockier bodies with shorter arms and legs help retain heat.      The discovery of an infant Neanderthal refuted this assumption. The 50,000-year-old infant displayed the unique anatomical features of Neanderthal. The infant morphology established that the characteristics were genetic not environmental adaptation. Research on the comparison of skull anatomies has reinforced the data that indicates that Neanderthal and modern humans are two distinct clusters. The differences in morphology led to the conclusion that classifies the two as separate species. Paleoanthropologists increasingly view Neanderthal as an evolutionary side branch.

     In 1997 researchers at the Max Plank Institute and Pennsylvania State University reported the first genetic comparison of modern humans and Neanderthal DNA. The sequencing compared Neanderthal DNA to human specimens from around the globe (i.e., Europeans, Asians, Africans, and Native Americans). The results found an average 28-base-pair difference between Neanderthals’ and Europeans, a 27-base-pair difference between Africans and Asians, and a 28-base-pair difference between Native Americans. To verify this data the investigation was repeated. The original results were replicated. Human populations exhibit distinct differences across all populations from Neanderthals. The extent and nature of the genetic differences are powerful data that Neanderthal and humans are distinct species.

      All this mumbo jumbo about DNA is high tech marvelous but what about all the cave drawings? Doesn't that prove that Neanderthals were just different humans since they could produce art? Plus I’ve seen some commercials (very powerful visual evidence) that show cavemen walking, talking and angry about being misinterpreted. There is some confusion between the terms Neanderthals and cave men. Neanderthals did live in caves however the “cave men” who are responsible for the beautiful cave drawings are Cro-Magnon - which was the name given to the first discovery of skeletons of modern humans in Europe. Also the current cavemen who are doing commercials would have to be Cro-Magnon - humans. Despite what you may have heard or read Neanderthal probably had no language skills or at the best very limited vocalization. The structure of the Neanderthal skull was not conducive for speech. Humans have a shorter skull base, which allows for a lower larynx. This placement leaves a large air space which provides the capacity for a range of language sounds. The Neanderthal's skull places the larynx too high to allow for speech. It did however enhance their ability to live in a frigid climate. The placement limited the amount of cold air they breathed.

     Neanderthal does not fill the position of “missing link”. In fact, “virtually all our theories about human origins were relatively unconstrained by fossil data,” observes David Pilbeam. “The theories are. . .fossil-free or in some cases even fossil-proof.” This shocking statement simply means that there is and has been far more fleshing out of the course and cause of human evolution than can be justified by the scrappy fossil evidence. As a result, he continues, “our theories have often said far more about the theorists than they have about what actually happened.” (Bones of Contention p. 43).

Arrival of Modern Man

     Around a 100,000 years ago earth was populated by a diverse group of hominids. Africa and the Middle East were occupied by Archaic sapiens; Asia - Homo erectus and Europe -Neanderthals. However by 30,000 years ago all this diversity vanished. Humans were present globally in the anatomically and behaviorally modern form and ALL other species were extinct. The nature of this sudden transformation is the focus of great debate between two schools of thought. It is accepted by all anthropologists that the appearance of modern man is noted for a sudden eruption of vastly improved technology however a question remains as to how they rapidly populated the Earth? One theory stresses multi-regional continuity and the other a single origin for modern humans.

     According to the multi-regional hypothesis modern humans evolved roughly simultaneously around the world from different hominid populations. According to this view, H. erectus in Asia gave rise to Asian and Oceanic peoples, H. neandertalensis produced Europeans, and archaic H. sapiens in Africa evolved into Africans. Multi-Regionalists propose that gene flow among these different hominids kept Homo sapiens sapiens (modern man) a single species but that long-term geographical separation explains humanity’s racial diversity. (Who Was Adam ? p.37) According to the Multi-Regional theory the evolution and spread of mankind goes something like this. Homo habilis evolved in Africa 2 million years ago. A descendant of Homo habilis known as Homo erectus “upright” is thought to be the first hominid to migrate out of Africa approximately 1.5 million years ago, during a warm period between ice ages. Homo erectus is also thought to have migrated over Europe and evolved into H. neandertalensis. In Asia fossils of Homo erectus include Peking man in China and Java man from Indonesia. The populating of Asia was to have followed a coastal route as hominid ancestors inched their way eastward. Europe would have been settled by migrants from India and the Middle East as the Ice Age softened its grip. The Americas were the last global area to have been settled by people from Asia, across the Bering Strait. Although a battle rages over whether there was one wave of immigration or several different waves. Some have even advanced the possibility of a southern route via the oceanic archipelago which would account for the rapid and early presence of humans in South America (i.e., 33,000 years ago).

The Multi-Regional theory, hypothesizes that Peking Man was the founder population for the Asian peoples and Neanderthal was the stock from which Europeans developed. Particularly since Neanderthal and modern mankind co-existed in Europe.

Out-of- Africa Hypothesis

An alternative model, has emerged recently which maintains that modern humans evolved exclusively from African H. sapiens populations and then migrated round the world to replace pre-existing hominids. This model is called the Out-of-Africa hypothesis, or the replacement model. According to this view, H. neandertalensis and H. erectus are evolutionary dead ends and racial differences among modern humans result from genetic drift and natural selection effects. ( Who Was Adam? p. 38)

 Recent research into the genetic history of mankind has produced data which has forced a rethinking of both theories. Humans have 23 pairs of chromosomes. One of those pairs, known as the sex chromosomes (because they determine gender), consists of two X chromosomes in females, and one X-chromosome, one Y-chromosome in males. Girls receive one of their X-chromosomes from their mother and the other from their father. Boys receive the X from their mother and the Y from their father. Therefore, the Y-chromosome is passed directly from father to son. Two pieces of the human genome are quite useful in deciphering human history: mitochondrial DNA and Y-chromosome. These are the only parts of the genome that are not shuffled about by reproductive mechanisms. These elements are passed down intact.     The journal Science published the results of a study in which a segment of the human Y-chromosome from 38 men from different ethnic groups was analyzed for variation (Dorit, R.L., Akashi, H. and Gilbert, W. 1995). To their surprise, the researchers found no variation. Their conclusion was that the human race must have experienced a genetic bottleneck sometime in the not too distant past. Further research was done and it was determined that every man alive today descended from a single human, scientists now refer to as “Y-Chromosomal Adam.”

      While Y-chromosomes are only passed down from father to son, mitochondrial-DNA (mt-DNA) is passed down from mother to both daughters and sons. Because mitochondrial-DNA is only passed on by the mother and never the father, mitochondrial-DNA lineage is the same as maternal lineage. The DNA in the mitochondria is relatively short (i.e., 16,569 base pairs). When a woman's mitochondria are copied and packed into an egg cell it is almost always the same. However every once in a while a mistake takes place - a mutation. Making mutations in mt-DNA useful in determining lineage and migratory patterns. When researchers began studying the mt-DNA of peoples around the world they found that the greatest diversity of lineage’s were in Africa. Of the 33 maternal clans of the world, 13 were in Africa. The Figures below show the migration route of the mt-DNA lineages.

 Accordingly it is now hypothesized that all 6.7 billion people alive today inherited the same mitochondria from one woman who lived in Africa. She has been named Mitochondrial Eve. The first lineage to branch off from mitochondrial Eve is L0. This haplogroup is found in high proportions among the San of Southern Africa and the Sandawe of West Africa. Haplogroups L1, L2 and L3 are descendants of L 1-6 and are largely confined to Africa. The macro haplogroups M and N, which are the lineages of the rest of the world, outside of Africa descend from L3. Haplogroup is a shortened form of haploid genotypes. These are groups that share a common ancestor. In genetics a haploid is a combination of alleles that are transmitted together on the same chromosome. Some scientists believe that only a few people left Africa in a single migration that went on to populate the rest of the world. It has been estimated that from a population of 2,000 to 5,000 in Africa, only a small group of possibly 150 people crossed the Red Sea. This is because of all the lineages present in Africa, only the daughters of one lineage, L3, are found outside Africa. Had there been several migrations one would expect more than one African lineage outside Africa. L3's daughters, the M and N lineages, are found in very low frequencies in Africa.       Other scientists propose that there were two migrations out of Africa. One across the Red Sea that followed the coast to India (Group M). Haplogroup N followed the Nile and headed northward into Asia and then turned into Europe. Which explains why Haplogroup N is predominant in Europe and why Haplogroup M is absent in Europe. The descendants of Haplogroups M and N are both found in the Americas.  Studies of contemporary DNA, especially mitochondrial (mt-DNA) reveal that humans are astonishingly homogeneous, with relatively little genetic variation. The high degree of similarity between human populations stands in strong contrast to our "closest living relative," the chimpanzee. There is significantly more genetic variation between two individual chimpanzees drawn from the same population than between two humans drawn randomly from the general population. Furthermore, genetic variation between populations of chimpanzees is enormously greater than differences between Europeans, Asian and African human populations. All of which points to a very recent appearance of modern humanity. The longer a species has existed the more opportunity there is for inherent variability to be expressed.

     Which has forced the re-evaluation of the Out of Africa and the Multi-Regional theories. The Multi-Regional Theory is severely challenged by data which shows that the Homo erectus (i.e., Peking man and Java Man) were extinct with a gap of 70,000 years before modern human suddenly appears. Neandertal is now dismissed as the founder group for Europeans. The Out of Africa theory is supported by the sudden and recent appearance of modern mankind. The genetic information supports a single source for all mankind. While this theory was proposed as an evolutionary hypothesis the parallel to the Genesis account of creation is obvious. Evolutionists however are quick to point out that Mitochondrial Eve and Y-chromosomal Adam were not contemporaries.

     Mitochondrial Eve is the older woman and Y-Chromosomal Adam lived approximately 40,000 to 60,000 years ago. To explain the difference in ages scientists propose that all males living prior to “Adam” failed to pass on their genes. What is called a genetic bottle neck. As a sole survivor Y-chromosomal Adam passed his genetic fingerprint down to all mankind. Christians should have anticipated this exact scenario because of the Flood. Noah as the sole survivor would have been the most recent ancestor to provide a genetic fingerprint and not Adam. The maternal history would have been more diverse as each of Noah’s sons had different wives who would have provided a more varied genetic history that would still have traced back to Eve.

     So let’s review what we know. Modern mankind is of a very recent origin. As evidenced by the lack of genetic variation. Mankind’s arrival was sudden and spread rapidly globally. Mankind replaced Neanderthal- the last living hominid species. Neanderthal did NOT evolve into modern man. There was a gap of at least 40,00 years between the Homo erectus species and the arrival of modern mankind. All other hominids led to dead-ends.

       Australopithecines were not fully bipedal. They were rendered an evolutionary dead end when it was discovered that other hominids were bipedal millions of years prior to the existence of the entire Australopithecus line. In other words they were not evolving into a descendant of modern mankind. The hominid species follows the same pattern of all other species on the planet Earth in that there is an extended period of stasis and then new species appear suddenly, are uniquely suited to their environment and designed with a specific functionality. Remember Dr. Leakey’s comment that fossil hominids were only primitive by definition. Paleontologists sought to find a progressive lineage for mankind by lining up fossils in the pattern required by evolution. There is not a one step process from a quadruped to a biped. At least eight differing anatomical features had to be altered to transform a knuckle-walking creature into a bipedal species that could walk or run on two legs. What was required was a redesign. Because this happened rapidly it is important to consider that new genetic information had to be added. Mankind experienced a quantum leap in brain power and a cultural leap forward.

     Most anthropologists discuss the differences between ancient ancestors and the arrival of modern mankind as evidenced by a greatly enlarged brain and the appearance of high culture, technology and tool making. Currently the dates of approximately 30,000 to 50,000 years are recognized as the arrival of modern man. Dr. Jared Diamond coined the phrase        “ Great Leap Forward” to encompass the sudden and dramatic changes that occurred around these marker points. Humans started to bury their dead with specific rituals. They wore clothing made of animal skins for the first time. They used sophisticated hunting techniques (i.e., trapping pits and stampeding animals off cliffs), as well as creating cave paintings. Modern man exhibited behavior that was distinctly different from animals in four specific areas: (1) Abstract thinking, ( 2) Planning, (3) Innovation and (4) Symbolic behavior. This is the hypothesis of a scientist who still speaks of mankind evolving. A Christian should look at the same information and say Imago Dei (In the Image of God).

      Abstract thinking is the ability to consciously vocalize about an object that is not present. Humans tend to take this behavior for granted. However the ability to demonstrate abstract thinking is a big step forward in children’s development. It occurs when we tell them we are going to buy them an apple and they understand even if there isn’t an apple sitting on the table. They understand and can talk meaningfully about an item when it is not present. It should be reinforced that this presumes that mankind was fully capable of speech. Humans were able to communicate with others and make plans. Planning represents a vital step forward. It would have been impossible for early mankind to bring down a mammoth or other large prey. However by planning and functioning in larger groups they would have been to organize a stampede to drive mammoths off a cliff. Cooperative effort would have benefited a larger community and raised the level of all individuals. Humans would have been able to share their food and nurture infants through an extended childhood.

     Innovation is illustrated by the sudden appearance of such items as buttons and jewelry. The shells and other objects used in jewelry were completely foreign to the habitat in which they were found. Shells were traded from other places for the specific purpose of decoration. Which would imply some type of barter system.

Humans were no longer limited by the environment. They made plans and found ways to alter their environment. Modern humans invented fishing hooks. Although Neanderthals and other hominids had lived next to lakes and the ocean they never fished as evidenced by their diet. Bone needles were developed to sew together the skins that now functioned as clothing. The appearance of modern mankind was the stimulus for a range of rapid innovation.  In direct contrast to species such as Homo habilis which developed the technique of flaking out a scraper and did not alter this technique for over a million years. Similar cultural stasis is noted in all other hominid species. In the Just So Story of homo habilis - handy man is frequently discussed in reference to a toolkit. Today when you talk about a tool kit most of us imagine the tool chest in the garage. Most homeowners and veteran DIY (Do It "Yourselfers") have every known gadget in both standard and metric to drill holes, extract nails, spray paint, and build or repair their castle.

Homo habilis' basic tool kit- consisted of using a hammerstone to flake off chips from a core stone. Basically he banged two rocks together. Gee even sea otters have figured that one out. Humans on the other hand can’t get a product out the door before we are figuring out ways to alter and improve it. We thrive on innovation. Walking can be tiring - So domesticated animals were hitched to carts, wagons and chariots.

     The horses may be under the hood however we still travel with style and as quickly as possible. We are no longer content to wonder if the moon is made of green cheese we have gone to walk on its surface and we seek to explore other worlds. The contrast between a "primitive" hominid and humanity is truly a quantum leap. Given a million years of innovation mankind will be traveling between the stars having devised teleportation, warp drive and a cure for the common cold. The speed and pace of innovation is the significant factor.

     Symbolic behavior is evidenced by ritual behaviors such as burying the dead with grave goods, music, painting, sculpture and decorating utilitarian items. Symbolic behavior is evidenced when objects, pictures or rituals are imbued with other meanings. The cave paintings of Lascaux are an example of ritualized behavior in which paintings in a special hidden place were thought to render aid to the humans who hunted the deer or bring the strength of the hunted animal. For whatever purpose humans had imbued these paintings (symbols) with special meanings. They still evoke a resonance today.

   Mankind was made in the image of his Creator and the spiritual side of mankind was evidenced with rituals for death and the usage of language and paintings to create symbols that held special meaning. All mankind, all cultures seek to find meaning in their existence. We seek to connect to a spiritual side, to the eternal.

             The origin of mankind is limited to a single location, probably in Northeast Africa. The initial population that left Africa and spread globally was quite small. Mankind’s genetic lineage has been traced back to a single male and a single female. They were separated in time by a genetic bottleneck in which only a single male survivor passed on his genetic fingerprint. How Biblical is that? Fossils and DNA material and genetic fingerprints are part of a verbal war that will go on for years. There will always be another fossil or another genetic study and we cannot be victims of sound bytes from PBS or sensational finds in Africa. Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image” (Genesis 1: 26) and it was so. We are the God breathed Children of a mighty God. We are made in His image.