|
Homo Erectus
A skull dating back some
13,000 years unearthed in Kow Swamp in Australia
that has the characteristics of both modern
man and Homo erectus. |
Presented as "primitive
man" by evolutionists, Homo Erectus is actually
a lost human race. The differences between Homo
Erectus and us are simply racial differences.
A typical Homo erectus
skull found in Koobi Fora in Africa in 1975. |
In the scheme of "man's
evolution" devised by evolutionists, fossils
classified as Homo erectus come after the Australopithecus
species. (The classification, "Homo habilis",
which was proposed by certain evolutionists, has
been included in the Australopithecus species
in recent years.)
As the word "erect"
implies, "Homo erectus" means a "man
walking upright". Evolutionists have had
to separate these men from previous ones by adding
the quality of "erectness", because
all the available Homo erectus fossils are straight
to an extent not observed in any of the Australopithecus
or Homo habilis specimens. There is no difference
between the skeleton of modern man and that of
Homo erectus.
|  TURKANA
BOY
"Tall and modern". That
was the comment Richard Leakey made on this
fossil dating back 2.2 million years. There
is virtually no difference between this
fossil classified as Homo erectus and the
modern human skeleton. |
A good indication of this is
the "Turkana Boy" fossil that is included
in the Homo erectus class. It is confirmed that
the fossil was of a 12-year-old boy, who would
have been 1.83 meters tall in his adolescence.
The upright skeleton structure of the fossil is
no different from that of modern man, on which
point American paleoanthropologist Alan Walker
said that he doubted that "the average pathologist
could tell the difference between the fossil skeleton
and that of a modern human."52
 MARINE
ENGINEER HOMO ERECTUS
News published in New Scientist on
March 14th, 1998, tells us that the humans
called Homo Erectus by evolutionists were
practicing seamanship 700,000 years ago.
These humans, who had enough knowledge
and technology to build a vessel and possess
a culture that made use of sea transport,
can hardly be called primitive.
|
The primary reason for evolutionists
to define Homo erectus as "primitive"
is the cranial capacity of its skull (900-1100
cc), which is smaller than that of the average
modern man, and its thick eyebrow projections.
However, there are many people living today in
the world who have the same cranial capacity as
Homo erectus (for instance the pygmies) and there
are some other races that have protruding eyebrows
(for instance the Australian Aborigines).
|  MODERN
HOMO ERECTUS
In its 23 December 1996
issue, Time magazine covered a 27,000-year-old
Homo erectus found on the Island of Java.
The fact that Homo erectus existed till
very recent times is evidence that it is
not a different species but a modern human
race. |
It is a commonly agreed fact
that differences in cranial capacity do not necessarily
denote differences in intelligence or abilities.
Intelligence depends on the internal organisation
of the brain rather than its volume.53
Even evolutionist Richard Leakey
states that the differences between Homo erectus
and modern man are no more than racial variance:
 MAUSTRALIAN
NATIVE PEOPLE
Aborigines, the native people of Australia,
who are still living today, have great
similarities to Homo erectus in terms
of their cranial features.
|
"One would also see differences
in the shape of the skull, in the degree of protrusion
of the face, the robustness of the brows and so
on. These differences are probably no more pronounced
than we see today between the separate geographical
races of modern humans."54
In short, human beings, whom
evolutionists classify as Homo erectus, are a
lost human race whose level of intelligence is
no different from our own. There is, on the other
hand, a huge gap between Homo erectus, a human
race, and the apes that preceded it in the "human
evolution" scenario, (Australopithecus, or
Homo habilis). This means that the first men appeared
in the fossil record suddenly and right away without
any evolutionary history. There can be no clearer
indication of their being created. |
