There are only three ways to make an ape-man: 1) make an ape more human-like, 2) make a human more ape-like, or 3) fraudulently mix the two together. Homo naledi, a new fossil species discovered in a South African cave chamber, is another example of trying to make an ape more human-like.
Determining the genetic basis for differences between humans and chimps does not explain the origin of those differences. We share not a common ancestor but a common Designer.
Genetics has clearly established that Neanderthals and Denisovans were fully human. Any physical differences should be viewed as nothing more than variations that can occur within the human race descended from Adam and Eve.
Human fossils —and their stone tools—are strikingly similar everywhere they are found in the Lower and Middle Pleistocene layers. These people had large brow ridges, small chins, and receding foreheads.
Evolutionary anthropologists believe mental abilities had to evolve. Yet they note large gaps in this archaeological record across which it is difficult to discern whether mental evolution was gradual or punctuated by leaps and losses.
Can man’s ancestry be traced back to an ape-like ancestor? How much do we really have in common with primates? Have fossil ape-men been found?
Australopithecus sediba is not an ancestor of man. The evidence properly interpreted shows that such fossils are either human or ape, not an in-between species.
Was early man truly a stone-age, lumbering brute grunting his way toward primitive language? The evidence says the opposite—early man was intelligent!
The news often eagerly reports the discovery of another link in the supposed chain of hominid evolution. What do these finds really show?
The Homo floresiensis of Indonesia, three-foot-tall people affectionately called hobbits, were fully human descendants of Adam and Eve.
Humans have always been interested in our origins: where did we come from, and how did we get here? The Bible soundly answers the question of human origins.
Was the australopithecine Lucy—most famous of all the supposed human ancestors—really a precursor to modern man, or was she simply an ape?
Neanderthals are often treated as subhuman despite having all the hallmarks of full humanity. Except a few skeletal variances, they were very similar to us.
Piltdown man, and other paleoanthropological hoaxes and forgeries, call attention to the academic dishonesty that is sometimes pedaled as evolutionary evidence.
Evolutionists say that man is just an animal, descended from an ape-like ancestor. However, humans show features that clearly separate us from animals.
Two chimps swaying and walking in synchronization is thought by these researchers to provide insight into the evolution of dance.
A recent study shows human saliva is different from that of chimpanzees, gorillas, and macaques—not surprising results from a biblical perspective.
Our modern society believes we are just reaching the height of human intelligence. If we accept this evolutionary view, what do we do with the biblical account?
Perhaps, in fact, it’s our discomfort with not knowing what to do with cavemen that makes us laugh. So just who were they?
If you just connect all the dots, isn’t it easy to see how the first humans could evolve from a shared ancestor with the apes?
Evolutionists claim that this similarity between humans and primates is evidence of common ancestry. Closer study verifies differences that point to a common Designer.
No matter how hard they try, scientists can’t connect the missing links in human evolution. Why not?
Scientists report the biochemical footprint of a particular sugar polymer—a type that modern humans cannot make—has been found in an ancient African fossil.
Amphioxus is an “obvious” link between invertebrates and vertebrates for those who believe they must be linked by a shared evolutionary ancestor.
Evolutionists insist that the underlying similarity of all animals, including man, is compelling evidence for their evolution from a common ancestor.
The discovery of an ancient man entombed in the Alps’ ice was one of the greatest finds of the last century.
Are human feet the foundational distinction between knuckle-walking apes and us? How did we learn to walk this way?
A study in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences suggests that the modern practice of Caesarean section is rapidly altering human evolution.
Could hobbits be a dwarfed variety of Homo erectus, an archaic human whose presence in Southeast Asia, specifically Flores, has been demonstrated?
Three of the genes that control our immune system's first line of defense (and our allergies) bear a significant footprint from Neanderthals.
The Naledi skeletons in South Africa, whose discovery was announced last September, represent the latest species declared to be a likely human relative.
Some believe the Gibbon-like fossil Pliobates cataloniae sheds light on the common ancestor supposedly shared by monkeys, apes, and humans.
An ape that can learn to walk on its hind legs or has some similarities to humans does not demonstrate that it is an evolutionary cousin of human beings.
From God’s Word we know “nature” did not experiment “with how to evolve humans.” We do not believe evidence supports a Homo designation for Homo naledi.
Evolutionists say scales and teeth share evolutionary history but wonder, “Which evolved first?” However, God created scales and teeth at the same time.
The date evolutionists report for Little Foot is old enough to keep it in the running for human ancestor, but there is no reason to consider the dates reliable.