"early-Pliocene"
It was dated using other fossils so evolution is assumed in the dates given for it.
There is evidence that suggests that it is really a female gorilla.
So much for the latest missing link.
"mid-Pliocene"
dated at 4.4 Million years
Click here to see picture of fossils
Click here to see picture of fossils
Note the quote from the following web site.
What was found? Fossils were collected from the surface at 17 different positions7 spread over 1.55 km (see Figure 1)8 and probably represent 17 separate individuals. The holotype (ARA- VP-6/1) is based solely on eight teeth, most of which were damaged. Other material discussed as representing A. ramidus included parts of the base of a skull (ARA- VP-1/500) found 550m away, and fragmented arm bones (ARA- VP-7/2) found 270 m away. The larger pieces of bone exhibited carnivore teeth marks. Eleven of the fossils were comprised of a single tooth, a piece of tooth or, in one case a piece of bone. The paucity of material is illustrated in the detailed treatment given a single deciduous (temporary) molar tooth found 1.55 km from the location of the holotype.9 In appearance and measurements this tooth looks identical to a chimpanzee (Pan paniscus) tooth.
Australopithecus ramidus
The fragmentary nature of the Australopithecus ramidus finds and their distribution put its reality in to question. Even if Australopithecus ramidus did exist as a species, the remains are too fragmented too really know what it looked like.
"late Pliocene"
dated at 3.9 Million years
"Lucy"
This is the most complete Australopithecus afarensis ever found.
Click here to see picture of a fossil skull
Note the quote:
This palate shows that the dentition of early humans was essentially ape-like. It had broad "spatulate" incisors -- wide front teeth that are spatula-like in appearance, visible in the frontal view at the top -- and the cheek teeth were arranged in sub-parallel rows, giving the dental arcade a distinct "U-shape" (visible in the inferior view, bottom). Notice also the presence of a diastema, or gap, between the canine teeth and the outside incisors, again similar to apes and not humans.
Human Ancestors Hall: AL 200-1
Since it is so ape like why can't it belong to an ape.
Click here to see picture of a fossil jaw
The next link has a picture of some of the Lattoli foot prints. Note the quote.
The importance of the fossil footprints at Laetoli cannot be overstated. They demonstrate incontrovertibly that 3.6 million years ago, early humans were bipedal (walking upright on two legs). Their big toes hardly diverged from the rest of the foot, this can be seen in the photograph at the top right of the imprint. In comparison, a chimpanzee has a highly diverged big toe, and is able to use it like a thumb. Additionally, it is possible to tell that the gait of these early humans was "heel-strike" (the heel of the foot hit first) followed by "toe-off" (the toes push off at the end of the stride); the way modern humans walk. Thus, bipedality was essentially developed by this time.
Human Ancestors Hall: The Laetoli Footprints
Even though they go on to attribute the prints to Australopithecus afarensis, their description shows just how human the tracks are. These foot prints seem to be human. Since no bones were found, the only reason for attributing these prints to Australopithecus afarensis is because it was found in strata evolutionarily dated at 3 million years.
The fossil called "Little Foot" ( Fossil Stw 573 )
had the first Australopithecus foot bones ever found. It
had four articulating foot bones. The joints in the foot bones
showed the flexibility that suggests it was capable of grasping
limbs, like chimpanzee's does and totally unlike human foot.
Simply put Australopithecus could not have made the Laetoli
Footprints so they were probably human.
Reference: First ever
discovery of a well-preserved skull and associated skeleton of an
Australopithecus - R.J. Clarke
The following site has several fossils pictures, consisting of lucy, AL 129-1, a jaw and 2 partial skulls.
Australopithecus afarensi may not be extinct.
"late Pliocene"
dated at 3.0 Million years
Taung Child
Click here to see picture of a fossil
Click here to see picture of a fossil skull
Click here to see picture of a fossil skull
Australopithecines are clearly all the same kind of animals, and they were simply a type of ape. They seem to have walked both upright and on their knuckles. It has also been suggested that they are ancestral to modern apes and that the apes we know are just degenerated Australopithecines.
"late Pliocene /
earliest Pleistocene"
dated at 2.5 Million years
There is some question concerning whether Homo habilis
actually existed. It seems to be a mixture of different types.
Even if did exist, it has been mis-classified. If it did exist it
probably should be classified as Australopithecus habilis. The
alleged stone tools could be human artifacts, usually a tool's
evolutionary date; not fossils; identifies tools as belonging to
habilis.
"Pleistocene"
dated at 1.8 Million years
Click here to see picture of a fossil skeleton
Human Ancestors Hall: Homo erectus
Evidently the physical differences between Homo erectus and modern man are so small as to show that they are the same kind as Homo sapiens. Their general body structure is human, and their brain size is with in range of modern man.
Skull wars: new Homo erectus skull in Ethiopia
Use fire and buildings. (huts)
Use of ochre pigments for ceremonial purposes.
There is evidence that Homo erectus are still alive. There are reports from asia of wild men called Almas. The evidence shows that they seem to lack the ability to speak but this could be a degenerative condition, or even a cultural taboo against speaking to outsiders. If the reports are true, then they are human since one; called Zana by the villagers who captured her in the 1800's; had several children by some of the men of the village. The village Tkhina is located in the Ochamchir region of Georgia a providence of Russia.
The evidence shows Homo erectus to fully human and should be classified as Homo sapiens, erectus.
"Pleistocene"
dated at 500,000 years
This another name for Homo heidelbergensis.
Human Ancestors Hall: Kabwe Cranium
Copyright © 2002 Smithsonian
Institution
Originally classified as Neanderthal, this fossil is quit interesting since it has a hole on its left side that has been identified as a bullet hole complete with exist wound on the under side of the skull. The bullet hole was the result of an ancient skull being shot while siding on the ground, such a shot would have shattered a dry skull. If the bullet hole was the result of an ancient skull being shot while siding on the ground, such a shot would have shattered the dry skull. The wound had to have been made while the person was alive and was probably the cause of death. This leaves two possibilities:
Both eliminate this skull and other heidelbergensis skulls as evidence for evolution.
Human Ancestors Hall: Homo heidelbergensis
Several views of the Broken Hill skull.
Broken Hill skull from Zambia - a modern human not an ape-man
Archaic Homo sapiens is essentially a category for fossils that who do not fit, the Neanderthal or the Home erectus.
The reasons why that are classified as Archaic Homo sapiens are:
1. Different skull morphology from the Neanderthals.
2. Many are dated earlier than Neanderthal, but more than half are dated at the same time as Neanderthal.
3. Cranial capacity that is too large to be classified as Homo erectus.
From: Bones of Contention : A Creationist Assessment of the Human Fossils
Unquestionably Archaic Homo sapiens were members of the human race.
"Pleistocene"
dated at 125,000 years
Neanderthal's appearance seems to be a result of extreme old age. 300-400 years old. Genesis 11
Prehistoric
Cultures, University of Minnesota Duluth
Note the depiction of the kids having large brow ridges, this is contrary to evidence. The skulls of Neanderthal kids do not have the thick brow ridges. That is because the brow ridges grew over many years. In fact the human skull grows in a manner during adult hood that would produce a neanderthal looking skull if we lived long enough. Neanderthals were not primitive humans, they were post flood humans who lived to 400+ years. An interesting fact is that they had larger brains than we do. Sounds like we have lost something.
"Late
Pleistocene"
dated at 40,000 years
Click here to see picture of a fossil skull
Human Ancestors Hall: Homo sapiens
Here we are, if you want to see this type look in the mirror.
Homo erectus, Neanderthals and modern man are all part of man kind with no evidence of a relationship to Australopithecus and other apes.
The supposed evidence of human evolution is highly questionable, with evidence for the Biblical claims of long lives being claimed as evidence for evolution. The data is really consistent with the fact that God created man on day six, without using evolution. This alleged transition would be laughable if it were not causing people to reject Christ and go to Hell.
Return to: Transitional Forms?