I know I’m considered dumb when it comes to discussing things evolutionary, but let’s consider the following and see who‘s dumb. I’ve just come across a headline in The Times newspaper for the 9th August, 2007. It states Evolutionary theory overhauled after the discovery of ‘handy man’ fossil. All I can say is, I wish. I wish the Evolutionary theory was being overhauled, but regrettably it’s not.
What the report was about was that two human fossils have been found in Africa, by Mrs Leavey and her daughter. From the way the report reads you’d think that these were full blown skeletons, possibly complete with various anatomical parts. Nope. The two fossils are a jawbone and a skull.
From the first fossil, the scientists have deduced that the idea that two previously ‘discovered’ species of humans, one called homo erectus and the other called homo habilis (he’s the tool-maker) has to be reconsidered. Now, as a result of finding said jawbone, they have come (rather quickly, I feel) to the conclusion that instead of one descending from the other - descending in evolutionary terms that is, which means millions of years, they actually lived side by side for a long time. (You know all that time evolutionists have to play around with - it’s very convenient.)
But if the finding of a jawbone brought us to this overhauling of the theory, the finding of the skull brought us even further. I have to quote this bit: “The second fossil is significant for what it reveals about the probable sexual habits of Homo erectus.” Keep that stuff about the sexual habits in your head for a minute and remember that this is nothing more than one skull.
Apparently it’s the smallest skull ever found, but do the scientists just say that? No, they say, it’s the smallest homo erectus ever found. Pardon me? They then go on to tell us that it’s an adult skull, almost certainly that of a female. Now because they think it’s a female they deduce from this that the males of the homo erectus group were much large than the females. I think Homer Simpson has it right when he says, Duh. Haven’t you noticed that the males of the currently existing homo erectus happen to be larger than the female? Obviously this has been overlooked by the scientists writing the discovery up. .
You could forget this point if they didn’t go on to burble on about the disparity between male and female gorillas and between modern male and female apes and monkeys. Because the latter are monogamous, and the gorillas tend to have a male who has a form of harem, therefore - wait for it - the homo erectus was a male who kept a harem. This is deduced from the small size of the discovered skull. Which is almost certainly a female.
Oh, dear. Evolutionists can get away with anything, because no one can actually prove them wrong.
You can read an article that's almost identical to the Times on here.