Another Evolutionary Ancestor Gets Nixed | The Institute for Creation Research

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.

References

  1. Chutel, L. and M. Ritter. Study: Bones in South African cave reveal new human relative. Associated Press. Posted on phys.org September 10, 2015, accessed September 10, 2015.
  2. Sherwin, F. Homo naledi, a New Human Ancestor? Creation Science Update. Posted on ICR.org September 10, 2015, accessed May 15, 2017.
  3. Clarey, T. 2016. Homo naledi: Claims of a Transitional Ape. Acts & Facts. 45 (2): 15.
  4. Torchia, C. Scientists in South Africa Reveal More on Human-Like Species. Associated Press. Posted on foxnews.com May 9, 2017, accessed May 12, 2017.
  5. Dirks, P. H. G. M. et al. 2017. The age of Homo naledi and associated sediments in the Rising Star Cave, South Africa. eLife. 6: e24231.
  6. Young Homo naledi surprises. Wits University News. Posted on wits.ac.za May 9, 2017, accessed May 15, 2017.
  7. Sherwin, F. 2017. Lucy Languishes as a Human-Ape Link. Acts & Facts. 46 (5): 10-13.
  8. Line, P. 2016. The mysterious Rising Star fossils. Journal of Creation. 30 (3): 88-96.
  9. O’Micks, J. 2017. Rebuttal to “Reply to O’Micks Concerning the Geology and Taphonomy of the Homo naledi Site” and “Identifying Humans in the Fossil Record: A Further Response to O’Micks.” Answers Research Journal. 10: 63-70.
  10. O’Micks, J. 2016. Homo naledi Probably Not Part of the Human Holobaramin Based on Baraminic Re-Analysis Including Postcranial EvidenceAnswers Research Journal. 9: 263-272.

Image credit: John Hawks/University of Wisconsin-Madison. Adapted for use in accordance with federal copyright (fair use doctrine) law. Usage by ICR does not imply endorsement of copyright holder.

* Mr. Thomas is Science Writer at the Institute for Creation Research and earned his M.S. in biotechnology from Stephen F. Austin State University.

Cite this article: Brian Thomas, Ph.D. 2017. Another Evolutionary Ancestor Gets Nixed. Acts & Facts. 46 (8).

The Latest
ACTS & FACTS
Creation Kids: Crystals!
by Michael Stamp and Susan Windsor* You're never too young to be a creation scientist and explore our Creator's world. Kids, discover...

APOLOGETICS
Playing Chess with Little Furry Critters
God’s multifarious and marvelous designs for basic creature needs are so innovatively clever and providentially purposeful that Christ’s...

ACTS & FACTS
Credit Only Our Creator
History was my favorite subject as a young kid. But it always puzzled me when my teachers said, “We study history so that we don’t repeat...

ACTS & FACTS
Genomic Tandem Repeats: Where Repetition Is Purposely Adaptive
Tandem repeats (TRs) are short sequences of DNA repeated over and over again like the DNA letter sequence TACTACTAC, which is a repetition of TAC three...

ACTS & FACTS
Dinosaur National Monument: Fossil Graveyard of the Flood
Straddling the border of Utah and Colorado, Dinosaur National Monument (DNM) is one of the richest exposures of dinosaur fossils in the world.1...

ACTS & FACTS
The Transforming Influence of Genesis: Worker Dignity and Safety
When Pharisees questioned the Lord Jesus about marriage, He answered by quoting Genesis 1:27: “But from the beginning of the creation, God ‘made...

NEWS
Giant ''Meg'' Shark: Longer and Leaner?
Fossil remains of the giant shark Otodus megalodon have been found in Miocene1 and Pliocene2 rock layers, which ICR scientists...

CREATION.LIVE PODCAST
Searching for Truth Across the Globe | Creation.Live Podcast:...
How can we bring the Gospel of Jesus Christ and the truth of creation to others outside our small spheres of influence?   Host...

NEWS
Marine Mammals: Designed for Deep Diving
While you’re reading this, hold your breath. What is now happening is your blood is delivering the last of oxygenated blood cells to your tissues...

CREATION PODCAST
Humanity's Demise at the Hands of Genetic Entropy | The Creation...
Welcome to the fourth episode in a series called “The Failures of Old Earth Creationism.” Many Christians attempt to fit old earth...