Last time, I mentioned starting a series on what we really
know about human evolution, following on what we really know about origin of
life and origin of the universe. None of it supports modern materialism or
atheism.
Here are the first two installments in the human evolution
series:
Late last year, it was announced that the oldest assumed
human sequence then published (400 kya) baffles experts because it belongs to
an unknown group, one more like Denisovans (an extinct type of human) than
Neanderthals. The DNA results from the “Pit of Bones” site in Spain were
described as baffling (Nature), perplexing (BBC), hard to make sense of (The
Scientist ), don’t quite know what to make of it (New Scientist), and creating
new mysteries (New York Times) instead of neatly clarifying human evolution.
October of that year had already brought the news that the human remains found
at Dmanisi, Georgia, showed that many “separate species of human ancestors”
never really existed and “may now have to be wiped from the textbooks.”
“Separate species” of human ancestors (that nonetheless
interbreed)? There are many definitions of “species,” so the term can be flung
around freely, if accompanied by suitable credentials.
One researcher in a discipline that tries to keep track of
the general direction of findings (theoretical anthropogeny) recently found no
consensus as to when the human race arose, after he offered colleagues a spread
ranging from ~60,000 to ~500,000 years ago. In this context, it hardly seems
worth mentioning that no known hominin (assumed human) is clearly an ancestor
of both Neanderthals and current humans.
For all practical purposes, today’s humans are orphans,
seeking our roots via scraps and artifacts, many of unknown authenticity or
significance. If we are convinced that any discovery we make is better than
uncertainty, we are in a suitable frame of mind to explore the questions. More.
The search for our
earliest ancestors: signals in the noise. Now and then, a signal rises above the noise. From
surprisingly early periods, we encounter special respect for the dead and a
sense of the divine. Meanwhile, because we keep finding artifacts and organized
activities from earlier periods than “expected,” the half human creature we
were originally seeking continues to elude us. More.
Science-Fictions-square.gif Note:The Science Fictions –
cosmology series is here. The Science Fictions – origin of life
series is here.
3 comments:
I find this a very interesting debate. I tried, in my own small way, to address some of these inconsistencies in current evolutionary theory in my novel AND THE BEAT GOES ON.
Thank you again, Denyse, for providing another compendium of fascinating reading from your prodigious research.
It seems from the material you share that what goes on in the minds of those who strive persistently to ignore the evidence of what is, choosing rather to perpetuate their naturalistic myths without evidence, arises from the condition of the heart. ~~+~~
. . .showed that many “separate species of human ancestors” never really existed and “may now have to be wiped from the textbooks.”
I shake my head when I read information like this. Why not confuse our children all the more?
You always give us plenty to think about, Denyse. Thanks for always being so passionate about your topic!
Post a Comment