Piltdown Superman

New material added to the end of this post. There was a time when Neanderthals were considered partly-evolved cavemen, a link to our simian ancestry. Scientists caught up to what biblical creationists have said for decades: Neanderthals were fully human just like us. Evidence continued to mount that showed how they were not only human, but intelligent. Now we learn that they were rather sophisticated! Modified from an image at Openclipart Neanderthals were creative and intelligent and fully human. Some scientists were skeptical that there was evidence proving they were the ones who did those high-quality cave wall paintings. While it seems obvious, study on it a spell. Nobody saw them doing the painting, and they could have taken over furnished caves or shared them with Denisovans and modern humans . Nope. Now it is believed the Neanderthals did the painting. This may have been put aside for a spell since they apparently had a proclivity toward sexual promiscuity — like moder

It becomes difficult to reason with atheists and evolutionists. Some of us want to have meaningful conversations, and we are met with arguments akin to, "You st00pid creatards are wrong because atheism and evolution and stuff". They base their "thinking" on invalid assumptions, such as those in a recent Y chromosome study. Made at Pablo Secularists who believe that human males are going extinct  have made some serious errors in that area, and some of the same problems are still recurring. They claim Neanderthals became extinct 40,000 Darwin years ago. The prediction that the Y chromosome is shrinking and will disappear has a challenge from a study from this Neanderthal Y chromosome study. DNA is fragile, and continues to deteriorate even after death. A crime lab technician cannot reasonably expect to test DNA after someone has been long dead. Under the right conditions, it can last a while. That's why scientists were able to do a study on Neanderthal DNA and the

Evolutionary scientists had some basic guidelines for determining how to classify humanoid fossils and so forth. (For that matter, the concept that a larger brain meant that the owner was more intelligent was discredited.) Once again, we see that when more information is discovered, we also see that there is a great deal more information to be learned. Adjustments must be made. Henry Vandyke Carter / PD One of the criteria to determine if a skull belonged to a Neanderthal was the layout of the inner ear — it was unique to them. Or so they thought. Since that same inner ear arrangement has been found in a non-Neanderthal, some rethinking has been happening. The lines of biology are more complicated, and archaic humans traveled quite a bit. This may be startling for evolutionists, but it fits in very well with the biblical creationist timeline. How can you tell a fossilized skull belonged to a Neanderthal? The comparatively large size and prominent brow ridges? Actually — unt

If you study on it, Neanderthals have evolved in evolutionary history. They were links to our apelike ancestors as portrayed in textbooks and museums. Once some of the presuppositions about apeness were dropped, improved technology was invented, and better research was conducted, they were found to be fully human. What did these guys think about? Well, what do you  think about? What is important to people can often be determined by what they own and how they act. For example, visiting the dwellings of people can indicate what is valued or at least what is interesting to them. The same may be said of Neanderthals. Neanderthal reconstruction, Flickr / Michael (a.k.a. moik) McCullough ( CC BY-NC-SA 2.0 ) We should know that it is possible to generalize what groups of people think about, value, and provides them entertainment, but to generalize that each individual was the same as the others is the fallacy of division . My interests in music, science, theology, and other things are vastly

Time and time again, we see how scientists elevate the naturalism narrative over actual science. When they do not have something that works, they use the best-in-field fallacy  instead of abandoning it. Similarly, secularists try to find ways of clinging to refuted "junk" DNA myth . Now they are doing the same thing with Neanderthals. Even though believers in universal common descent evolution get burrs under their saddles when people say that humans evolved from apes (or monkeys), those critters they present sure do look like apes. Also, evolution popularizers also use the same kind of terminology. Cut people some slack, willya? Neanderthals were portrayed as a link between humans and apes, but it has been definitively shown that they were indeed fully human . Researchers tried to bring Neanderthal down a few notches from humanity with a DNA study. It did not go well. Using poor sampling and incomplete research, scientists made assertions that are the opposite of what is rev

Neanderthal bones in Spain fell nowhere near the plain. They have caused a great deal of controversy in several locations, throwing off evolutionary dating timelines and more. Now it seems that remains in Spain may not be Neanderthal. Or they may be. Or both. Or neither. Huh? Personally, I opt for "both", since they are nowhere near the Neander Valley, they may be Neander-Spanish, like other immigrants that hyphenate their old and new homes. Ya dig? It seems that whenever there is a variation in any living organism, the Evo Sith are looking for a way to say that it is an example of evolution in action. This is not only very fallacious because they use circular reasoning, ignore conflicting explanations and so on, but an example of their biases. Trying to shove variations of these ancient humans into some "that must be evolution" scheme seems desperate. If you're confused, it is not surprising, considering the ever-changing speculations that are offered as &quo

In Part 1, we saw that proponents of evolution have a mess, and they are constantly needing to rewrite human evolution because the facts do not fit the narrative. As we continue, we see that other scientific disciplines are also recalcitrant to evolutionary ideas. Background image :  The Passion of Creation ,  Leonid Pasternak, 1880s Radiometric dates assigned to Neanderthal remains conflict with archaeological finds, and the radiometric dating methods used are based on circular reasoning. In addition, these dates were disingenuously adjusted to fit what scientists wanted — especially when they were more compatible with biblical timelines. The archaeologists discovered that the Neanderthals engaged in the same kinds of activities that modern humans would enjoy. A recent report in the journal Science mixed detailed archaeological finds with stories about human origins. As is typical, age assignments for fossils fit evolutionary time instead of the Bible’s much shorter timeline

Once again, I want to emphasize a couple of things. First, informed biblical creationists do not believe in "races", as evinced in Acts 17:26 and the fact that the Bible does not use the word "races". Also, we do not say that evolution causes racism. Racism has existed for millennia, but Darwinism has been used to make it scientifically respectable . If you study on it, the ones making the "science" thought darker-skinned people were of inferior evolution and Caucasians were superior. And before someone from Fallacy Central puts words in my mouth: no, being an evolutionist does not mean you're a racist. There are no races, but there are people groups. But since "people group-ism" is a mite awkward, I'll use the more widely understood and less syllabic word racist for the purpose of discussion. Despite evolutionary mythology, scientists have reluctantly admitted that Neanderthals were indeed fully human. (See the links at " Losin

Who were cave men? Men who lived in caves. Next question. Oh, too short? Okay. In the parlance of proponents of evolution from a common ancestor, our predecessors were stupid brutes that gradually evolved human characteristics, intelligence, culture, and so on. The Neanderthals were popular cave man icons because some lived in caves, but they were not only intelligent, but fully human — much to the consternation of some anti-creationists. It's kind of fun to learn about our distant fully-human cousins, and new discoveries keep on refuting evolutionary ideas. One reason is that we have a whole passel of information about Neanderthals to work with than the usual fragments of teeth and bones of our other alleged evolutionary ancestors. By the way, people in modern times have lived in caves, especially in hot climates. Morguefile / richard_b If you're not too bright and just trying to survive, or just passing through, you're not likely to gussy up a place too much. Neand

Time and again, we see that evolutionists make pronouncements from their speculations, and then the resulting "facts" get overturned. This is seldom rapid, but any reader of evolutionary propaganda who is not wearing his Darwin Spectacles will see the old shell game at work. These scientists are so locked into their materialistic framework that they are unable to see that the logical conclusion is that life was created, and evolution is unsubstantiated. morgueFile/click (very modified) When a bone or artifact is determined to be such-and-so million years old according to evolutionists' preconceptions, anomalies are found to force them to re-date the items or offer other excuses. For instance, human tools should not be found in the same location of apelike alleged ancestors of humans. Here, you can check it out. Recent stories on human evolution continue to illustrate ongoing problems that overturn long-held beliefs.  To hybridize or not to hybridize:  Some

Depictions of Neanderthals as stupid, ugly, partially evolved brutes are becoming increasingly unrealistic. Studies of the inner ear , surprises by advanced art techniques , interbreeding with modern humans , heated water and organized their homes , and more factors show that they were inaccurately portrayed. If you study on it, you'll realize that the differences between us and them is shrinking all the time. Beautiful and Ugly by Adriaen van de Venne, 1634 There was a variety among Neanderthals. Indeed, there is a wide variety among the people you pass on the street every day. Were Neanderthals "ugly"? By what standard? Additional research on their facial constructions shows that the "ugly" features were bone constructions, and in fact, modern humans may actually be physically inferior to them! Let's face it, they are not the products of evolution, and neither are we. Humans are created beings, as are all creatures. The facial differences betw

In the parade of our alleged evolutionary ancestors, Neanderthals were iconic. They were portrayed as brutish cave dwellers. After much time and further investigations, this image was shown to be completely wrong. Living in caves...sure, why not? People have done that through history, and even do so today. It seems that the mystery deepened for anthropologists and paleontologists. To them, Neanderthals could be the Cotton-Eyed Joes: Where did they come from, and where did they go? From a biblical creationist perspective using scientific discoveries, they are not so enigmatic after all. Neanderthal Woman, PLOS One / CCommons /  Bacon CPH ( CC BY 2.5 ), Modified at PhotoFunia It has been demonstrated that Neanderthals had all sorts of human traits but nothing to show simian ancestry. Most evolutionists have reclassified them as fully human, even though there are still some holdouts (because Darwin needs the narrative). Reconstructions show that they clean up nice and can pass as other p

There is a substance called pitch  that is the result of geological processes, and that has been presented as a problem for biblical creationists. Pitch is the result of the Genesis Flood, so how could Noah coat the Ark with this waterproof tar-like substance (Gen. 6:14)? That is not such a "gotcha" as scoffers think, since pitch also comes from plant material . It has been learned that Neanderthals learned how to make and use pitch from birch trees. This shows yet again that they were smarter than secularists previously thought — and this threatens them. Neanderthal reconstruction, Flickr / Michael (a.k.a. moik) McCullough ( CC BY-NC-SA 2.0 ) Obviously, denizens of the secular science industry will not accept the fact that these fully-human folks were descendants of Adam, who was created intelligent from the get-go. Secularists are reluctant to relinquish the evolutionary link concept. Like my Question Evolution Day breakfast, there are link problems.   Excuses are made,

Creationists have been saying for a mighty long time that Neanderthal people were fully human, and the evidence from paleoanthropologists and others continues to affirm this fact.  Evidence for the humanity of Neanderthals, including the inner ear, interbreeding (sharing DNA) with modern humans, facial differences between us and them are minor, home organization, heating water, and advanced art techniques help make the conclusion of the humanity quite solid (see " Losing Face to Neanderthals " for more, including links).  Credit: Freeimages / kelly suzuki Of course, facts will not stop some uneducated anti-creationists from digging up irrelevant rescuing devices and outdated links . Since their phantasmagorical death cult needs every scrap of tendential "evidence", some folks will never admit that this battle is over. The possibility that they were in Spain was met with hesitation , and cave paintings over thataway were compared with those in France and fo

The more we learn about early humans, the more we realize that they were just that — humans. Ideas based on evolutionary presuppositions are presented of semi- or recently-evolved brutish humanoids, but evidence refutes those images. DNA does not give any indication of intelligence. Genome sequences from Denisovans and Neanderthals show the differences between them and modern humans is quite small. And just like modern humans, they traveled. They did a fair amount of breeding. And interbreeding. Which by itself indicates that they were human. The biology, travel and similarities help affirm what we already know that was written in Genesis. If they would drop their evolutionary assumptions, these scientists could really learn something. Like the Denisovan genome recovered from a finger bone, a Neanderthal toe from the very same Siberian cave of wonders has yielded up secrets of humanity’s past. Not surprisingly, the ancestral web evident from the genomic analysis published in

Those Neanderthals were an interesting group, and they were fond of having parties. Especially at the beach. Mayhaps last weekend was a clam bake, but this time it was a crab bake. Those things are a little more of a challenge to gather, which made it more rewarding. One Neanderthal was streaming a video of Beach Blanket Bingo , another was cranking up "Nothing but a Good Time" and someone had to get them to compromise before a fight broke out. Lots of food, cold drinks, telling stories around the fire... No fire here, but that is a story. Except that Neanderthals did know how to bake crabs. Salt-baked crab, Flickr / insatiablemunch ( CC BY 2.0 ) We are blessed to be living in a time when recipes have been passed along for generations and can be recorded for posterity. Cooking and baking techniques are in books and on television, and websites have thousands of recipes available. Also, people can always improvise ( I'm a hack at cooking ). Neanderthals baked crabs and it

The article featured below is from a creationist peer-reviewed technical journal, so it is primarily by and for scientists. However, there are several parts that non-scientists can understand. We can skim through the details (mostly in the middle) and still learn some important things; let the scientists have the rest. Biblical creationists have long pointed out that everyone has the same facts, and the interpretation of the facts are vital. In addition, scientists are human: They start with assumptions and presuppositions which heavily influence the results of their research. The DNA of Neanderthals and Denisovans was used by members of the secular science industry to supposedly support evolution from apelike ancestors. Data were selected that should support their views. Drawing from work by  Dr. Nathaniel Jeanson , creation scientists were able to use much of the data to show how it relates to the sons of Noah. This supports recent creation. Causes of Neanderthal extinction are also

It sure does look like the hands at the Darwin Ranch have been slipping away from Deception Pass, heading down Folly Road, and harvesting the peyote buttons that grow near there. Not only is peyote an endangered species, but it causes hallucinations — useful in making evolutionary propaganda. We have three connected articles to consider. The first is a prairie schooner-full of unscientific and illogical foolishness, such as moving the goalposts by redating inconvenient facts. Some falsehoods were mixed in: Although Neanderthals were fully human with ranges overlapping those of other humans (and a passel of interbreeding going on), dishonest Darwinists are playing fast and loose with dates associated with tool making. Speaking of Neanderthals, evolutionists are asserting they had the capacity for speech. (That is a big problem for them on several levels. See " Children, Reading, and Failed Evolutionary Paradigms " for more.) Although biblical creationists know they could talk,