Another Evolutionary Ancestor Gets Nixed
Homo naledi skyrocketed to international fame in 2015 as a claimed ape-like ancestor of man that fit the story of human evolution. Discoverer and promoter Lee Berger published hasty reports and then toured the world with dynamic, media-packed presentations. Back then, the Associated Press wrote that scientists had “discovered a new member of the human family tree” in the odd-looking fossil assembly.1
The Institute for Creation Research responded to the claims and made a bold prediction that further research has now verified. Creation zoologist Frank Sherwin wrote, “We predict, on the basis of the creation model, Homo naledi too will become just one more dead end in the questionable human evolution parade.”2 New dating results show why Mr. Sherwin was right.
Why does the fossil’s age assignment matter? According to the evolutionary story, a gaggle of extinct apes slowly morphed closer toward the form of modern humans over millions of years. Supposedly, the first truly modern-looking people did not evolve until two to three million years ago. This follows from the long ages assigned to unquestionably human fossils. What, then, should qualify a fossil as a true evolutionary ancestor of man? First, it should have body parts that look more human-like than ape-like. Second, it should bear an age assignment of no fewer than two million years.
ICR geologist Tim Clarey described a key dating dilemma when he analyzed details published in 2015 about Homo naledi’s setting. He wrote that a relatively young evolutionary age assignment would place “Homo naledi alongside species of modern humans” instead of demonstrating it to be an ancestor of modern humans.3
Now in 2017, scientists including Berger revealed new dates that place Homo naledi only several hundred thousand years ago—far too recently to match their 2015 claims that it represented a human ancestor.4
A large team of scientists published the unexpectedly young age assignments in the online journal eLife.5 The University of the Witwatersrand in South Africa wrote about the results:
After the description of the new species in 2015, experts had predicted that the fossils should be around the age of these other primitive species. Instead, the fossils from the Dinaledi Chamber are barely more than one-tenth that age.6
In other words, those who believed that this fossilized creature was evolving into humans had predicted an age of older than two million years. Now their own dating methods have refuted this. Meanwhile, experts have completely disagreed over the evolutionary significance of every other supposed ape-human transition, including the famous Lucy—which is merely an extinct ape.7 Those who believe God created apes separately from man therefore predicted that more research would eliminate Homo naledi from the fake parade of human evolution candidates. Creation science got this one right.
Despite its initial glad entry into the evolutionary lobby, it didn’t take long for Homo naledi to turn right around and exit the building, just like creation thinkers foresaw.
What Is Homo naledi?
In short, we don’t know yet. Its fragmentary remains might represent human variations or diseased people.8 Detailed trait analyses suggest an extinct ape, possibly related to Lucy’s kind.9 Then again, maybe it’s a mix of human parts (especially its feet) with parts from extinct apes (like curved finger bones and tiny skulls).10 That would make the whole construct farcical, like Java man, Piltdown man, and possibly Homo habilis. Whether extinct human, extinct ape, or man-made mixture, none of these creation-friendly categories helps evolution.
God's Balanced Ecosystem
If the apostle Paul is right and God�s attributes in creation are �clearly seen� (Romans 1:20), then we should see them manifest in both the biotic (animals and plants) and abiotic (geology and meteorology) areas of His creation. These two basic areas interact in a sophisticated ecological web. Disturbance of one facet (e.g., a species of animal or plant) may reverberate throughout the biological system.
In the beginning, God gave humans a dominion mandate:
Then God blessed them, and God said to them, �Be fruitful and multiply: fill the earth and subdue it; have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over every living thing that moves on the earth.� (Genesis 1:28)
We are to respect and care for the created environment, but not idolize it. However, natural man has rejected the Creator�s commandment. As a result, the creation is often worshipped (Romans 1:25), and modern militant environmentalism has become a religion.1
Although sometimes it doesn�t seem like it, God really does have everything under control. He designed ecological niches to interact in such a way as to have a balanced ecosystem. Each creature God created has the ability to move in and fill niches in the environment.
One of the more fascinating stories of ecological recovery and conservation involves the gray wolf (Canis lupus) of North America. This magnificent animal was nearly wiped out in the early 20th century in the lower 48 states due to the mistaken assumption that wolves were a treacherous competitor and predator to both man and beast. Because of this, there was a campaign to eliminate them, specifically in and around Yellowstone National Park. What followed between 1926 and 1995 is what ecologists call a trophic cascade.
Wolves�the apex predators�had kept elk and deer numbers in check. As a result of the wolves� removal, the populations of these large herbivores increased exponentially. They over-browsed the vegetation, causing many species of plants to disappear. Stream edges where cottonwood and willows (riparian vegetation) grew were devastated, leading to a reduction in the numbers of smaller animals such as rabbits and insects. Aspen saplings in the northern Yellowstone valleys were decimated, leaving no expansive root system to curb erosion. With the loss of trees, birds lost nesting sites.
The overgrazing of trees in turn reduced food for beavers in the northern range. The animals soon disappeared from that area, along with the ponds produced by their dam building. There followed heavy stream erosion. More animals and plants such as mature willows and aspen were affected. Even the numbers of scavenger species such as the golden and bald eagle, coyote, raven, magpie, and grizzly bear dipped because they had no wolf kills to feed on.
An environmental recovery began in 1995 when the conservation community and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service introduced about 30 Canadian wolves into Yellowstone. The impact was nothing less than dramatic. In just seven years, Yellowstone had 16 free-ranging packs of wolves.
Woody species of plants such as the willow, cottonwood, and aspen made a comeback. Indeed, new aspen groves are now over 20 feet high thanks to the reduction of elk from more than 15,000 before 1995 to a more manageable 6,000 in 2005. Many animals returned to areas from which they had almost disappeared, including the willow flycatcher, the insectivorous ground feeding redstart, and other birds. Wolves even help keep the coyote population in check, allowing the recovery of the magnificent pronghorn sheep. Dozens of God�s furry engineers, beavers, are now making productive marshes and ponds by damming streams. Small mammals, birds (green-wing teal), fish (cutthroat trout), and amphibians (boreal chorus frog) are moving into these newly created aquatic ecosystems. Insects flourish as well to feed them.
There are clear indications that biological equilibrium is being regained in Yellowstone. How should this welcome ecological recovery affect the biblical creationist? With joy! This is responsible environmental stewardship, caring for what God has given us.
by Brian Thomas, M.S. *
Homo naledi skyrocketed to international fame in 2015 as a claimed ape-like ancestor of man that fit the story of human evolution. Discoverer and promoter Lee Berger published hasty reports and then toured the world with dynamic, media-packed presentations. Back then, the Associated Press wrote that scientists had “discovered a new member of the human family tree” in the odd-looking fossil assembly.1
The Institute for Creation Research responded to the claims and made a bold prediction that further research has now verified. Creation zoologist Frank Sherwin wrote, “We predict, on the basis of the creation model, Homo naledi too will become just one more dead end in the questionable human evolution parade.”2 New dating results show why Mr. Sherwin was right.
Why does the fossil’s age assignment matter? According to the evolutionary story, a gaggle of extinct apes slowly morphed closer toward the form of modern humans over millions of years. Supposedly, the first truly modern-looking people did not evolve until two to three million years ago. This follows from the long ages assigned to unquestionably human fossils. What, then, should qualify a fossil as a true evolutionary ancestor of man? First, it should have body parts that look more human-like than ape-like. Second, it should bear an age assignment of no fewer than two million years.
ICR geologist Tim Clarey described a key dating dilemma when he analyzed details published in 2015 about Homo naledi’s setting. He wrote that a relatively young evolutionary age assignment would place “Homo naledi alongside species of modern humans” instead of demonstrating it to be an ancestor of modern humans.3
Now in 2017, scientists including Berger revealed new dates that place Homo naledi only several hundred thousand years ago—far too recently to match their 2015 claims that it represented a human ancestor.4
A large team of scientists published the unexpectedly young age assignments in the online journal eLife.5 The University of the Witwatersrand in South Africa wrote about the results:
After the description of the new species in 2015, experts had predicted that the fossils should be around the age of these other primitive species. Instead, the fossils from the Dinaledi Chamber are barely more than one-tenth that age.6
In other words, those who believed that this fossilized creature was evolving into humans had predicted an age of older than two million years. Now their own dating methods have refuted this. Meanwhile, experts have completely disagreed over the evolutionary significance of every other supposed ape-human transition, including the famous Lucy—which is merely an extinct ape.7 Those who believe God created apes separately from man therefore predicted that more research would eliminate Homo naledi from the fake parade of human evolution candidates. Creation science got this one right.
Despite its initial glad entry into the evolutionary lobby, it didn’t take long for Homo naledi to turn right around and exit the building, just like creation thinkers foresaw.
What Is Homo naledi?
In short, we don’t know yet. Its fragmentary remains might represent human variations or diseased people.8 Detailed trait analyses suggest an extinct ape, possibly related to Lucy’s kind.9 Then again, maybe it’s a mix of human parts (especially its feet) with parts from extinct apes (like curved finger bones and tiny skulls).10 That would make the whole construct farcical, like Java man, Piltdown man, and possibly Homo habilis. Whether extinct human, extinct ape, or man-made mixture, none of these creation-friendly categories helps evolution.
God's Balanced Ecosystem
by Frank Sherwin, M.A. *
If the apostle Paul is right and God�s attributes in creation are �clearly seen� (Romans 1:20), then we should see them manifest in both the biotic (animals and plants) and abiotic (geology and meteorology) areas of His creation. These two basic areas interact in a sophisticated ecological web. Disturbance of one facet (e.g., a species of animal or plant) may reverberate throughout the biological system.
In the beginning, God gave humans a dominion mandate:
Then God blessed them, and God said to them, �Be fruitful and multiply: fill the earth and subdue it; have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over every living thing that moves on the earth.� (Genesis 1:28)
We are to respect and care for the created environment, but not idolize it. However, natural man has rejected the Creator�s commandment. As a result, the creation is often worshipped (Romans 1:25), and modern militant environmentalism has become a religion.1
Although sometimes it doesn�t seem like it, God really does have everything under control. He designed ecological niches to interact in such a way as to have a balanced ecosystem. Each creature God created has the ability to move in and fill niches in the environment.
One of the more fascinating stories of ecological recovery and conservation involves the gray wolf (Canis lupus) of North America. This magnificent animal was nearly wiped out in the early 20th century in the lower 48 states due to the mistaken assumption that wolves were a treacherous competitor and predator to both man and beast. Because of this, there was a campaign to eliminate them, specifically in and around Yellowstone National Park. What followed between 1926 and 1995 is what ecologists call a trophic cascade.
Wolves�the apex predators�had kept elk and deer numbers in check. As a result of the wolves� removal, the populations of these large herbivores increased exponentially. They over-browsed the vegetation, causing many species of plants to disappear. Stream edges where cottonwood and willows (riparian vegetation) grew were devastated, leading to a reduction in the numbers of smaller animals such as rabbits and insects. Aspen saplings in the northern Yellowstone valleys were decimated, leaving no expansive root system to curb erosion. With the loss of trees, birds lost nesting sites.
The overgrazing of trees in turn reduced food for beavers in the northern range. The animals soon disappeared from that area, along with the ponds produced by their dam building. There followed heavy stream erosion. More animals and plants such as mature willows and aspen were affected. Even the numbers of scavenger species such as the golden and bald eagle, coyote, raven, magpie, and grizzly bear dipped because they had no wolf kills to feed on.
An environmental recovery began in 1995 when the conservation community and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service introduced about 30 Canadian wolves into Yellowstone. The impact was nothing less than dramatic. In just seven years, Yellowstone had 16 free-ranging packs of wolves.
Woody species of plants such as the willow, cottonwood, and aspen made a comeback. Indeed, new aspen groves are now over 20 feet high thanks to the reduction of elk from more than 15,000 before 1995 to a more manageable 6,000 in 2005. Many animals returned to areas from which they had almost disappeared, including the willow flycatcher, the insectivorous ground feeding redstart, and other birds. Wolves even help keep the coyote population in check, allowing the recovery of the magnificent pronghorn sheep. Dozens of God�s furry engineers, beavers, are now making productive marshes and ponds by damming streams. Small mammals, birds (green-wing teal), fish (cutthroat trout), and amphibians (boreal chorus frog) are moving into these newly created aquatic ecosystems. Insects flourish as well to feed them.
There are clear indications that biological equilibrium is being regained in Yellowstone. How should this welcome ecological recovery affect the biblical creationist? With joy! This is responsible environmental stewardship, caring for what God has given us.
PLEASE VISIT MY WIFES WEBSITE. SHE RUNS "YOUNG LIVING" WHICH PROVIDES ALL NATURAL OILS THAT CAN BE USED INTERNALLY AND EXTERNALLY INCLUDING A DEFUSER WHICH PUTS AN AMAZING ODOR IN THE AIR. THIS PRODUCT IS SO AMAZING AND KNOW THAT YOU WILL GET YEARS OF ENJOYMENT FROM IT. GOTO HTTP://WWW.YOUNGLIVING.ORG/CDROSES
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.