Homo erectus: Difference between revisions

There are several problems with the assignment of ''Homo erectus'' as an evolutionary [[transitional form]] to ''Homo sapiens'' and Neanderthals. These include the absence of morphological distinction when compared to the full range of characteristics in modern humans, and overlapping timeframes of ''H. erectus'' with anatomically modern humans.  

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 so-called 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 archaic ''Homo sapiens'' did not differ from ''Homo erectus'' at any of the seven anatomical points. More surprising were the contrasts between ''H. erectus'' and the modern and ancient native Australians. 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:

When the cranial capacity of ''Homo erectus'' is compared with ''Homo sapiens'' the morphological distinctions blur even further. ''Homo erectus'' has a cranial capacity from 780 cc to about 1225 cc, whereas modern humans have a capacity from 700 cc all the way up to 2200 cc. Clearly ''H. erectus'' falls with the natural range of modern humans in not only vault thickness, but cranial capacity as well.<ref name=lubenow128>Lubenow p. 128</ref> The close comparison was extended to new borns by a discovery in 2008 of a ''Homo erectus'' pelvis, which showed that their infants could have had a head much larger than previously thought. According to Sileshi Semaw, a paleoanthropologist at the Stone Age Institute and Indiana University-Bloomington, ''H. erectus'' infants could have had a head size of 318 mm in circumference, which is right at the lower end of the spectrum of modern day humans whose cranial circumferences at birth typically range from 320-370 millimeters.<ref name=nsf/> Neanderthals have also been shown to fall within the range of modern humans, having a skull capacity ranging from 1200 cc to 1650 cc. In fact, the skull morphology of the ''Homo erectus'' is virtually identical to Neanderthal - differing only by size.<ref name=lubenow128>Lubenow p. 128</ref>

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> Jerome Cybulski (National Museum of Man, Ottawa) speaks to the difficulties in characterizing ''H. erectus'' on morphological grounds:

Skulls with ''Homo erectus''-like features are found around the globe in location such as Europe, Asia, Australia, Indonesia, and Africa. Furthermore, researchers have shown that ''Homo erectus'' and ''Homo sapiens'' traits occur concurrently in the stratigraphic layer at many locations. Thick-vaulted and gracile (thin-vaulted) skulls are often found to co-occur in the same strata showing that they lived at the same time and place.<ref name=woodmorappe/>  

The extensive timeframe of ''Homo erectus'' fossils overlaps other hominids so extensively that it should void any attempt to claim an evolutionary sequence. For example, ''Homo erectus'' is almost universally held to have evolved from ''Homo habilis'' despite the fact that their fossils appear at roughly the same time (the oldest ''H. erectus'' fossil is dated at 1.95 mya and the oldest ''H. habilis'' fossil dated at just over 2.0 mya). Furthermore, they continued to coexists throughout the entire 500,000 year span when ''Homo habilis'' is said to have lived.<ref name=lubenow119/> Such inconsistencies between the [[theory of evolution]] and the [[fossil]] evidence are often concealed. Marvin Lubenow warns in his book, [[Bones of Contention]], about the way that evolutionists present the relationship between ''Homo habilis'' and ''Homo erectus''..

For ''Homo erectus'' to provide support as a transitional form between the [[australopithecines]] and modern humans, the dates assigned to ''H. erectus'' fossils should occur between these other groups with minimal overlap.  The extensive timeframe during which ''H. erectus'' is found to exist effectively eliminates the possibility that they evolved into ''Homo sapiens''. These discoveries illustrate significant problems with the evolutionary model. Not only do the dates show that ''H. erectus'' lived contemporaneously with anatomically modern humans, but remained virtually unchanged for almost two million years.