Intelligent Design

Another Problem in Dating Human Origins

Spread the love

The dating of human origins seems, at times, to be all over the place. However, the one constant appears to be an increasingly older dating of the split between humans and apes.

This is bad for Darinian theory since the incredible differences between humans and chimpanzees, i.e., our consciousness, not to mention just the physiological differences, have less and less time to arise via ‘gradualism.’ E.g., some date the divergence between chimps and gorillas at only 8 1/2 million years ago (mya), while the split between chimps and humans had to have occurred, according to this new finding, at least 7 1/2 mya. One million years to bring about the immense differences between chimps and humans? Quite a problem.

Here’s the new finding.

And a couple of quotes:

Put simply, the study argues there was another — previously unidentified — human-like creature walking the Earth long before we believed it was possible.

Yes, it’s all about ‘belief,’ isn’t it?

The footprints’ discovery also comes shortly after the fragmentary fossils of a 7.2 million-year-old primate Graecopithecus, discovered in Greece and Bulgaria, were reclassified as belonging to the human ancestral tree.

4 Replies to “Another Problem in Dating Human Origins

  1. 1
    daveS says:

    One million years to bring about the immense differences between chimps and humans? Quite a problem.

    Is there really a problem here? The “immense differences” between chimps and humans didn’t have to arise in that 1 million year interval. There were still ~7.5 million years left for that to happen, after the split.

  2. 2

    The one million years would appear to be referring to differences between chimps and gorillas, not chimps and humans, which would be 7.5 million years.

    Still, 7.5 million years is a mere blink of an eye in the evolutionary model. I am certainly not convinced that random processes working on natural selection (or genetic drift, etc.) can account for the “immense differences” betweens chimps and humans requiring huge amounts of new genetic information and morphological changes.

  3. 3
    ET says:

    The problem is there isn’t any map between the genetics and the form. That means we don’t know if any amount of genetic change can produce the changes required. And without that there isn’t a mechanism.

    That is a huge problem.

  4. 4
    Dean_from_Ohio says:

    Somewhat off topic: this article is about finding “oldest human evah,” much as the global warming alarmists are all about finding the “hottest (insert time period here) evah!”

    rvb8 recently lectured us on how Australia was turning away from coal to the glorious future of renewable energy. Well, it turns out the time period used to record the “hottest day evah” statistics in Australia are captures of ONE SECOND sample periods from electronic thermometers, even if that reading is 2 deg C higher than any one-minute period reading recorded throughout the entire day! Added to the low temp clipping scandal recently unearthed in the Australia BOM, you have the smoking gun of a 1 to 2 deg C upward artificial shift in temp records reported to the Australian nation and the world. And additionally, the Australian Bureau of Meteorology’s temperature adjustment algorithms are secret.

    The Green Blob’s hideous bulk is propped up not only by corrupt and illegal funding subsidies, but also by corrupt and illegal TEMPERATURE subsidies.

    The house of cards that is Australia’s renewable energy boondoggle is crumbling, but the “crumbling deniers” will look the other way and go on singing their marching songs at the top of their lungs.

    The mechanisms are different in dating the “earliest human evah,” but the swamp there is just as deep as in the global warming temperature record.

Leave a Reply