RSS

I. SCIENCE K. Origin of Man, Evolution Style: Neanderthal Man

11 Mar

neanderthal-la-chapelle

In this chapter of our quest to find the Origin of Man we open with some Artist’s Conceptions as to what Neanderthal Man, our current subject, was supposed to have looked like. As you can see, from the same skull we can get two very different interpretations.

Although the consensus is that Neanderthal Man was a primitive form of Man, and not quite fully human, a few in in science and almost all Creationists are of the opinion that the Neanderthal was a full-blown human being, indistinguishable from Cro Magnon Man and so current humans in basic features. Taxonomic problems persist, to this day about its classification of Neanderthal Man being sometimes Homo neanderthalis, a species unto itself, and other times as Homo sapiens neanderthalis, a “subspecies” of human beings.

Just a note on the possibilities of a sub-species of human: if this be an approach, we must assume then that there are varying degrees of humans walking around this planet right now, today some of us more evolved than others, or just merely different than others. We could approach such a science two ways, by measuring traits of assorted humans as a sample: intelligence, physical features like stature and frame, facial features, walking style, emotional capacities, and so on. Studies about race, ethnicity, even skulls sizes and shapes as in Cranioscopy, that ancient belief in divination by skull type, and even the accepted science of phrenology, emphasize difference in physical features and/or skull structure.

Given also the tendency today to continue to ask people to declare race or ethnicity via silly categories as if it has any bearing on their humanity, viz., “White,” “Black (or “African American,” in America),” “Asian/Pacific Islander,” “Hispanic,” “Aleut/Native American,” and so on, thereby in essence creating “subspecies” like this:

1. Homo sapiens niveus

2. Homo sapiens niger

3. Homo sapiens asianus

4. Homo sapiens hispania

5. Homo sapiens paternus,

we should then be allowed, given this same classificatory license, to separate living Man in other ways, one concentrating less on physical features and more on mental, emotional, or strength of will capacity. Here then let us propose a new system of check-boxes which Man must declare on his census sheet. If not, let us declare it for them, the same way science declares what are and are not humans:

1. Homo sapiens ignoramus (ignorant man)

2. Homo sapiens stupidus (stupid man)

2. Homo sapiens automatona (robot man)

3. Homo sapiens secuutus (follower man)

4. Homo sapiens agrestis (simple, boorish man)

5. Homo sapiens sententia (thinking man)

6. Homo sapiens sensus (feeling man)

7. Homo sapiens authenticus (authentic man)

Each higher type of Man, we can continue to imagine, encompasses the type before it as well. By such a chart we may classify every existing human being.

My point here is that much of what we know when it comes to the determinations of theoretical science is utter balderdash, and we the common folk are made to look stupid because we do not understand the local lingo of the particular scientific culture, mastery of which gives those theoreticians, to themselves at least, a “special” insight into knowledge. We have just shown how easily a layman could divide humans into subspecies even today, using a whole new method, with at least the same degree of scientific credibility.

Back to our immediate matter at hand, namely Neanderthal Man. Depending where you look, you will get various ages (less than 30,000 years ago, to over 300,000 years ago) for the fossils, as to how long ago neanderthalis (from German city Neandertal) flourished. I tend to agree with the opinion that neanderthalis is human, but with qualification; while some evidence from the fossil record is definitely of true humans, the fossil record itself it not as overwhelming as we have been led to believe.

It does not help matters that some of the best evidence to date for the existence of Neanderthal Man has been a cesspool of controversy, bad science, and mistakes. We need to, as best as we can, take a look at the fossil record ourselves, then, to see what we can discern as objective Truth regarding this supposed granddaddy of ours.

The fossil record for neanderthalis is better than what we have yet seen for any Cave Men, but it is still paltry given the relatively recent dates assigned to the creature. I count fossil remains from 33 individuals, hailing from many places all over the world. The following fossils I will discard for our purposes as too insignificant to mean much:

1. Vindija G3: humerus fragment from Croatia.

2. The Engis Child from Belgium: fractured skull of a child, here it is, there were also some teeth found with it:

engis-child

3. Tabun C1-C5 series from Israel: Almost all experts agree this is a human being, it is dated at about 20,000 years, and here it is:

tabun_c1>8.  The St. Cesaire cranium fragments from France are human:

stcesaire

If we eliminate these fossils as either insignificant or as human, we have 25 fossil specimens left to consider. Of these two are from Amud, Israel. These are Amud (I assume 1) and Amud 7. These were found by Japanese digging in Israel. Here are the assembled fragmentary remains of Amud 1, and the fossil evidence for Amud 7:

amud1a

amud_7

It is difficult to discern with precision anything about these samples, especially not enough to, by these fossils, make statements like these, I put in bold the guesses which cannot be drawn from the existing evidence:

The Amud Neanderthals emphasized both wood and grass exploitation. Ligneous parts of trees and shrubs were used mainly for fuel. Herbaceous plants were used for bedding, possibly fuel, and for food. There is clear and repetitive evidence for the exploitation of mature grass panicles, inferred to have been collected for their seeds. These findings suggest that, as with the
pattern recently discerned for faunal resources, a broad spectrum of plants
has been exploited from at least the end of the Middle Paleolithic. ”
(“The Exploitation of Plant Resources by
Neanderthals in Amud Cave (Israel): The Evidence from Phytolith Studies”,
Journal of Archaeological Science, Vol. 29, No. 7, July 1, 2002, pp. 703-71).

To say all this involves too much conjecture would be an understatement, but this haphazard guessing is mild compared to some of the conjecture about other specimens; at least here some vegetation-in-use, for example, was discovered along with the remains… These caves in Amud produced several fossils including a baby, which by most sources was human. It is not a far stretch for us to conclude from the evidence that the Amud Neanderthals were human beings living in a cave just outside of Galilee, perhaps lepers?

Of the 22 remaining samples the infant from Kebara (Kebara 1), the partial skeleton from the same place (Kebara 2), the cranium from Qafzeh (Qafzeh 6), and the the skull from Skuhl (Skuhl 5), all appear quite human. Here are some of the extant fossils, I have been unable to locate the infant remains:

kebara-laferrassie

This picture is interesting because this “complete” skeleton was made using parts of different individuals. The brownish color is pieces from La Ferrassie 1 which we will get to soon, the green is Kebara 2, and the white is man-made material meant to be human bone. The other colors are assorted fragments or assumptions. The evidence from Kebara 2 is better seen, rebuilt here:

kebara_2

It is important to recognize that one of the few reasons this skeleton is not considered 100% human is because of the pelvic region. You can see in this photo where the hip is either deformed, destroyed, or set in the wrong place by the artists. This is a human skeleton, by all other evidence, all difference with average humans today are within the range of human variance. The hip, with brow ridge, etc. line, is a tired old tack, certainly too inconsequential to be a primary defense of such a scientific dynasty.

Here is Qafzeh 6, another human skull:

qafzeh6

The consensus today seems to be that this specimen is “proto-Cro-Magnon,” meaning it is almost just like us, but not quite. I say there is enough similarity for it to be of a human. Finally we have Skhul 5 which is also supposed to be a transition from Neanderthal to Cro Magnon. Note that we have yet to find a solid “completely” Neanderthal specimen:

skhul_5

In Syria they found a partial skeleton as well, known as Dederiyeh, of an infant or very young child. This first photo below is a computer-generated reconstruction (read: Artist’s Conception), the second, Artist’s Conception models of the parts Oriental style, the third, reconstructed skull and other parts found. Notice how in the top image also the toe is made to look less human than any evidence suggests. The fact is we have never found prehistoric feet to go with any of these skulls. We have found monkey and ape feet, and human feet, but no “Intermediate Man” feet:dederiydederiy21dederiy3

This too is from Japanese excavations. The only reason this human is considered other than that is because its age is erroneously assumed. It is estimated to have been 2 years old when it died, but the bone structure and development seems to indicate it was 5 or 6 years old when it died. Seems nobody wants to make the assumption that maybe this child was 5 or 6 and not 2 or 3. Let us make that claim, and wonder why it was estimated to be 2 years old to start with.

Leaving the Levant now, with no Neanderthal yet, we head to Europe, where samples of Neanderthals have achieved great fame. Of the 17 remaining we have yet to consider, the fossils from Europe are 10 of them: 1 from Gibraltar (British Spain, Iberia), 1 from Croatia, 1 from Germany, 1 from Spain, 3 from Italy, and 3 from France. My information for these numbers is up to date until 2003, so new finds may have been discovered since then, which we will consider as they are brought to our attention. So let’s begin in the stated order of nations, beginning with the skull from Gibraltar, the Forbes Quarry skull:

gibralter_1_rangle1

gibraltar

This was discovered a while ago, in 1848 to be exact, and is the second “Neanderthal” ever found.  She has become known as “Gibraltar Woman” and it was not until 1863 that it was considered a Neanderthal skull. These reconstructions are misleading to some degree, here below I present another view of the same skull, alongside a female skull from 350 A.D. Huluga:

350adandgibraltar1

On the left, above, is Gibraltar Woman, and on the right, the Huluga Woman. As you can see from these generous angles, the only real difference, that is beyond standard deviation, is in the height of the forehead, more particularly, the slope; a higher forehead need not mean more capable of reason. These foreheads vary today. Anyway, both above are skulls of women approximate in age, but who lived, at least we are told, 30,000 years apart. They are both human, of different stock.

The Croatian skull, Krapina 3, is very much like Gibraltar 1, in that it shares human characteristics and also a short forehead with large brow. It’s remains were found scattered throughout a cave, and what scientists “have” are remnants of several individuals (again), usually combined together (again), perhaps as “The Cave Assemblage,” like a traveling circus, to give us an idea of the people that were living, or we should say dying, in that cave. You can find photos at the sources I have already cited, here is a drawing of Krapina 3:

krapina_3

If it is merely a brow and low forehead that are to define Neanderthals then a good portion of the world is today Neanderthal still.  Here, an average Neanderthal (one genuine one which we have yet to see), and modern Man (on the right):

Neanderthal and Modern

The larger brow ridge is simply a fading once common human feature that still exists, along with the wider nasal opening. The brow ridge is still found commonly in Man today. Have you not seen ever a face like one of these below, reconstructions of Neanderthals? Is that at the bottom really a Neanderthal flute, showing they even enjoyed the arts, and maybe they did actually do painting and sculpture? The oldest art dates as old as Neanderthal man, if not older. Art is a sure sign of something distinctly human. More arguably, even the first garment, or article of clothing, would qualify as the invention of a human. Here then, the reconstructions:

neanderthal-reconstructions1

neanderthal-flute

Certainly I have met similar -looking people, and seen a flute just like that, made of bone.

Krapina 3, like the best of the rest, are human beings. Very old, deteriorated, deformed skeleton parts of long-dead Homo sapiens. These people being called a “hybrid” or “intermediate step” to humanity is necessary for backing up Evolution’s imagined course of human progression and nothing else. No evidence that these beings were not human exists. No improvement to our way of life comes via the effort.

People have changed over time, no doubt. Sexual selection is enough to change the appearance of any species; add in environmental factors, and simply those unnecessary features which no longer have a use, but this, if it be, minute change from Neanderthal to Cro-Magnon does not mean a change of Man’s kind. It is no different than getting a sun tan: your features change, your color to be exact, permanently were you to sunbathe daily, but you the human being will still be the same human being, with a tan. Neanderthals are humans, with heavy facial features and bones that needed to withstand the elements.

From the Neandertal Valley itself we have one specimen, the “type specimen” for Neanderthal Man. It is a cranium, the features of which we have already discussed, and which are not unknown today. Neanderthal 1:

neanderthal

It is a human skull. This was discovered in 1856 with scores of fragments, and discoveries are still being made in the area, few of which are related. An old German teen, many would say.

From Spain we have this mandible specimen, known as Zafarraya 1:

zafarraya

Amazing, isn’t it, that this evidence of an innocent-enough-looking Andalusian man’s jaw can lead to charges of cannibalism (ibid.)? Here for comparison a modern human mandible:

human-mandible

Conjecture based on this is insulting to our intelligence. Is this digging up of ancient graves worth this kind of evidence?

In Italia, we have 3 interesting finds, impressive in appearance, human by our diagnosis. Saccopastore 1 and 2 are skulls of humans, as you can see form this comparison collage, showing refinished Sacco 1 and 2 on the left, and a replica human skull on the right:

saccopastore-human

Apparently either this chap (top skull) Saccopastore 1 had his head speared, fell on a sprig, or somebody tried surgery all those years ago. Either way, he is a human, his skull well within normal human limits. Before we leave our sojourn in Italy, let’s see the evidence from Mt. Circeo, which has labeled those troubling features for us:

mount_circero

and again, Circeo Man, this time next to a modern human:

cece

Bones do deteriorate with age, and a scientist by the name of Jack Cuozzo has already made the claim that Neanderthals were humans. We would have to agree with that; whether we agree with Cuozzo’s contention that they lived hundreds of years, we will have to take up later on.

We head now to France, and there we have three important specimens, from La Chapelle-aux-Saints, La Ferrassie,  and Le Moustier:

france

Much literature is available about these finds, some better than others, all simply ancient Gauls. Here are some more views of the trio, first La Ferrassie:

la ferrassie bones

neanderthal-ferrassie_skullNow, Le Moustier:

le-moustierle-moustier skeleton

And finally, from La Chapelle-aux-Saints, reconstructions of which began this chapter:

la_chapelle_aux_saints_skull

We leave Europe, then, having seen the best it has to offer, its four-star accommodations for Evolution. What we have found are humans, their skulls more hardy to withstand the elements we now shelter ourselves from more adequately. Who knows what we have lost, as almost all experts are agreed that Neanderthal’s brain capacity was as much if not greater than a modern human’s.

A comparison I would like to see is these Neanderthals alongside remains from Caesar’s time. My bet is they would look very similar. Something like this:

compare

We have now then 7 Neanderthal specimens left to consider. I eagerly await the end of this fossil-hunting expedition, as I am convinced, by now, that Evolution not only cannot tell us the Origin of Man;  it has enough trouble just telling us the Truth.

But before we leave these dirty pits, which evidences nothing more than grave robbing, and rather than leave all 7 remaining fossils to the odds and gamble that they won’t make us any more able to swallow the idea of a semi-human  being, let’s take a quick jaunt to Iraq, an ancient place called by the beautiful name Shanidar. All the important fossils, with photos can be found here. Here are some other pictures:

Shanidarshanidar

These skulls, indicative of Neanderthal Man, are of ancient human beings, and testify more to Man’s great tenure on this planet, than as indicative of any half-breed or evolved-out-of-something-else creature. I will close this chapter with some more photos and charts (note the variance of artistic interpretation), and when we next meet, we will have to summarize our understanding of Science and its Evolutionary claims.

neanderthal artist conception

neanderthal_womanneander1neander-recons2

neanderthal-fossil_cannibalism evidence?neanderthal-parietalsneanderthal_female1clipboards

neanderthal1bneanderthalkidneanderthal-prehistoric-man

dino-fight-1millbc

Advertisements
 
5 Comments

Posted by on March 11, 2009 in Creation, Evolution, Origin of Man, Science, Theory

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

5 responses to “I. SCIENCE K. Origin of Man, Evolution Style: Neanderthal Man

  1. Anthony J. Forte

    November 20, 2009 at 4:05 pm

    great site. I share the same belifs about Neanderthals being human. as for humans today who exhibit neanderthal traits, I have noticed photos of native americans that do probably because of a more physical existance and the fact that they also used their teeth to process materials explaining a heavier looking face.

     
  2. D A Pennebaker

    February 11, 2012 at 12:41 pm

    I never believed that different races ever existed. It was apes then humans and all the reasoned racial differences could be found by taking a bus ride. The most interesting times for biological or archeological study seem to me to be the interval between tree livers and ground hunters, what they thought about themselves, what they thought about their companions and what they thought about the world around them. I assume unless time travel is much improved these are times we’ve missed and will never know for certain what that was like except in our imaginations which may be the only real source for study we will ever have. I thought this a most arresting tract. Thank you. D A Pennebaker

     
  3. Fatcat

    November 21, 2012 at 8:35 am

    “We need to, as best as we can, take a look at the fossil record ourselves, then, to see what we can discern as objective Truth”

    Thank you for doing what pretty much no one else has done.

     
  4. Andrew Payne

    October 21, 2013 at 3:05 pm

    I think these skeletons easily look human. People have so many wildly varying feature size traits I feel that scientists who support the theory that neanderthals were some kind of evolutionary step before modern man are trying to convince others to convince themselves. The strangest looking skull to me was the one from Le Moustier, but I’m wondering if the lighter colored sections are reconstructions from a fragment or if the skull was complete. It could still be just someone with a big nasal opening.

     

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

 
%d bloggers like this: