Australopithecines Are Not Human Ancestors
by Owen Borville
December 13, 2018
Biology
Evolutionists have long searched for intermediate or transitional fossils that show a link between primates and man. One of these proposed transitional fossils is the australopithecine, known to evolutionists as the "ape-man" but of which most creationists would recognize as a extinct ape species or kind. The australopithecine has a very ape-like skull and a small brain-size, in addition to curved fingers and toes. Evolutionists have claimed that australopithecines like the famous Lucy walked upright. However, Mark Collard and Leslie Aiello in Nature Magazine report good evidence from Lucy's hand-bones that her species "knuckle-walked" as chimps and gorillas still do today (quadrupedal instead of bipedal). The curved fingers and toes of australopithecines give strong evidence that this species did not walk upright and was a tree-dweller like many primates today. Therefore, knuckle-walking gives strong evidence that australopithecines are not transitional forms between primates and humans and are more like today's primates. Donald Johanson, who famously discovered the early australopithecine and proposed human ancestor and transitional fossil Lucy, does not believe that his discovery is an ancestor of man. Anatomy professor and evolutionist Dr. Charles Oxnard believes that australopithecines are not similar to humans and lived partially in trees, therefore concluding after years of study that these are not ancestors of humans. Oxnard also believes that australopithecines lived at the same time as the Homo genus, which is supposed to have "evolved" much later. Oxnard completed the most sophisticated computer analysis of australopithecine fossils ever undertaken, and concluded that the australopithecines have nothing to do with the ancestry of man whatsoever, and are simply an extinct form of ape.
Author Marvin Lubenow in his book Bones of Contention explains that many fossil skeletons which are called "ape-men" by evolutionists have a wide range of ages and do not form a uniform sequence or a transitional line between primates and man. Lubenow also explains that most fossils resemble either ape-like australopithecines or humans with little if any transition. Many claimed "ape-man" fossils are actually fragments and when more pieces of the complete skeleton are found, a greater distinction can be made resembling an ape or a human. However, many fossil fragments remain too incomplete to identify as a human ancestor or ape. Oxnard concluded that the australopithecines are a unique species and not an ancestor of humans. Textbooks have inaccurately illustrated drawings that make australopithecines look more human-like and even having the ability of tool-making, claims that have no evidence. British anatomist Solly Lord Zuckerman also concluded that australopithecines are not in the family of man. There are only a few transitional fossils named by evolutionists between ape-man, namely australopithecines, Homo habilis, Homo erectus, and Homo sapiens. However, where are all of these transitional forms in the fossil record that represent these named transitions? Evolutionists have trouble finding them and when they believe they have found them, the actual identity turns out to be an extinct or modern primate unrelated to humans.
Collard, Mark; Aiello, Leslie C. (March 23, 2000). "From Forelimbs to Two Legs". Nature 404 (6776): 339-340. ISSN 0028-0836.
Oxnard, Charles E., The Order of Man (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1984.)
Oxnard, Charles E., Fossils, Teeth and Sex: New Perspectives on Human Evolution, University of Washington Press, 1987.
by Owen Borville
December 13, 2018
Biology
Evolutionists have long searched for intermediate or transitional fossils that show a link between primates and man. One of these proposed transitional fossils is the australopithecine, known to evolutionists as the "ape-man" but of which most creationists would recognize as a extinct ape species or kind. The australopithecine has a very ape-like skull and a small brain-size, in addition to curved fingers and toes. Evolutionists have claimed that australopithecines like the famous Lucy walked upright. However, Mark Collard and Leslie Aiello in Nature Magazine report good evidence from Lucy's hand-bones that her species "knuckle-walked" as chimps and gorillas still do today (quadrupedal instead of bipedal). The curved fingers and toes of australopithecines give strong evidence that this species did not walk upright and was a tree-dweller like many primates today. Therefore, knuckle-walking gives strong evidence that australopithecines are not transitional forms between primates and humans and are more like today's primates. Donald Johanson, who famously discovered the early australopithecine and proposed human ancestor and transitional fossil Lucy, does not believe that his discovery is an ancestor of man. Anatomy professor and evolutionist Dr. Charles Oxnard believes that australopithecines are not similar to humans and lived partially in trees, therefore concluding after years of study that these are not ancestors of humans. Oxnard also believes that australopithecines lived at the same time as the Homo genus, which is supposed to have "evolved" much later. Oxnard completed the most sophisticated computer analysis of australopithecine fossils ever undertaken, and concluded that the australopithecines have nothing to do with the ancestry of man whatsoever, and are simply an extinct form of ape.
Author Marvin Lubenow in his book Bones of Contention explains that many fossil skeletons which are called "ape-men" by evolutionists have a wide range of ages and do not form a uniform sequence or a transitional line between primates and man. Lubenow also explains that most fossils resemble either ape-like australopithecines or humans with little if any transition. Many claimed "ape-man" fossils are actually fragments and when more pieces of the complete skeleton are found, a greater distinction can be made resembling an ape or a human. However, many fossil fragments remain too incomplete to identify as a human ancestor or ape. Oxnard concluded that the australopithecines are a unique species and not an ancestor of humans. Textbooks have inaccurately illustrated drawings that make australopithecines look more human-like and even having the ability of tool-making, claims that have no evidence. British anatomist Solly Lord Zuckerman also concluded that australopithecines are not in the family of man. There are only a few transitional fossils named by evolutionists between ape-man, namely australopithecines, Homo habilis, Homo erectus, and Homo sapiens. However, where are all of these transitional forms in the fossil record that represent these named transitions? Evolutionists have trouble finding them and when they believe they have found them, the actual identity turns out to be an extinct or modern primate unrelated to humans.
Collard, Mark; Aiello, Leslie C. (March 23, 2000). "From Forelimbs to Two Legs". Nature 404 (6776): 339-340. ISSN 0028-0836.
Oxnard, Charles E., The Order of Man (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1984.)
Oxnard, Charles E., Fossils, Teeth and Sex: New Perspectives on Human Evolution, University of Washington Press, 1987.
