110,311
edits
Homo erectus: Difference between revisions
From CreationWiki, the encyclopedia of creation science
Jump to navigationJump to search
→Morphological distinction
| Line 29: | Line 29: | ||
=== Morphological distinction === | === Morphological distinction === | ||
One of the primary defining characteristics of ''Homo erectus'' has been a skull with a thick wall, but until recently little data was present to support whether there was truly a difference between modern skulls and ''H. erectus''. In 1994 a substantial comparison was conducted to determine if cranial thickness was a true criteria for identify ''H. erectus'' fossils.<ref name=brown>.Brown, P., cranial-vault thickness in Asian Homo erectus and Homo sapiens, in: Franzen, J.L., ed., 100 Years of Pithecanthropus: The Homo Erectus Problem, Courier Forschungs Institut Senckenberg 171, pp. 33–45, 1994.</ref> The skulls of four modern ''Homo sapiens'' populations were studied; south Chinese, Romano-British, aboriginal Australians, and the famous Australian Kow Swamp remains - aborigines that were dated from 10,000 to 30,000 years ago. These modern skulls were contrasted against samples of Asian ''Homo erectus'' and Chinese archaic ''Homo sapiens'' by measuring seven anatomical points on the skulls. Although the cranial-vault thickness was significantly different between modern Europeans and Chinese when compared to ''Homo erectus'', the modern and ancient native Australians were found to be surpisingly similar. The Kow Swamp remains differed at only one of the seven anatomical points of the skull, and presently living Australian aborigines differed from ''Homo erectus'' in only four of the seven anatomical points on the skull.<ref name=woodmorappe>[http://creation.com/how-different-is-the-cranial-vault-thickness-of-homo-erectus-from-modern-man How different is the cranial-vault thickness of Homo erectus from modern man?] by John Woodmorappe, ''Journal of Creation'' 14(1):10–13, April 2000.</ref> | One of the primary defining characteristics of ''Homo erectus'' has been a skull with a thick wall, but until recently little data was present to support whether there was truly a difference between modern skulls and ''H. erectus''. In 1994 a substantial comparison was conducted to determine if cranial thickness was a true criteria for identify ''H. erectus'' fossils.<ref name=brown>.Brown, P., cranial-vault thickness in Asian Homo erectus and Homo sapiens, in: Franzen, J.L., ed., 100 Years of Pithecanthropus: The Homo Erectus Problem, Courier Forschungs Institut Senckenberg 171, pp. 33–45, 1994.</ref> The skulls of four modern ''Homo sapiens'' populations were studied; south Chinese, Romano-British, aboriginal Australians, and the famous Australian Kow Swamp remains - aborigines that were dated from 10,000 to 30,000 years ago. These modern skulls were contrasted against samples of Asian ''Homo erectus'' and Chinese archaic ''Homo sapiens'' by measuring seven anatomical points on the skulls. Although the cranial-vault thickness was significantly different between modern Europeans and Chinese when compared to ''Homo erectus'', the modern and ancient native Australians were found to be surpisingly similar. The Kow Swamp remains differed at only one of the seven anatomical points of the skull, and presently living Australian aborigines differed from ''Homo erectus'' in only four of the seven anatomical points on the skull.<ref name=woodmorappe>[http://creation.com/how-different-is-the-cranial-vault-thickness-of-homo-erectus-from-modern-man How different is the cranial-vault thickness of Homo erectus from modern man?] by John Woodmorappe, ''Journal of Creation'' 14(1):10–13, April 2000.</ref> Brown summarizes the implications of the findings: | ||
{{cquote|Now that comparable data is available it appears clear that if H. sapiens includes all the people alive in the world today, their ancestors in the Late Pleistocene and “archaic” H. sapiens like Dali and Xujiayao then vault thickness can not be used to distinguish H. erectus from H. sapiens.<ref name=brown/>} | |||
The morphology of the ''Homo erectus'' skull is virtually identical to Neandethal with the latter differing only by size. This tremendous similarity between the various ancient human fossils causes considerable difficulty for the evolutionist who attempts to place the discoveries in various categories. The African early ''Homo sapiens'' have been referred to as "African Neanderthals", and Asian ''Homo erectus'' fossils have been called "Asian Neanderthals". In fact some scholars treat Neaderthals as a population of late ''Homo erectus'', describing their skulls as an "''enlarged and developed version of the ''Homo erectus'' skull''". <ref>Lubenow p. 128</ref> Lubenow comments: | The morphology of the ''Homo erectus'' skull is virtually identical to Neandethal with the latter differing only by size. This tremendous similarity between the various ancient human fossils causes considerable difficulty for the evolutionist who attempts to place the discoveries in various categories. The African early ''Homo sapiens'' have been referred to as "African Neanderthals", and Asian ''Homo erectus'' fossils have been called "Asian Neanderthals". In fact some scholars treat Neaderthals as a population of late ''Homo erectus'', describing their skulls as an "''enlarged and developed version of the ''Homo erectus'' skull''". <ref>Lubenow p. 128</ref> Lubenow comments: | ||
