Books
Facts and Fallacies of the Fossil Record:
Re-Evaluating the Supposed Evidences for Human Evolution
By Brett A. Rutherford
Lesson Nine
Facts and Fallacies of the Fossil Record of Neanderthal and Cro-Magnon (Part One)
The reason that Neanderthal man, Cro-Magnon man, and Homo sapiens are discussed in the same chapter is due primarily to the evidence which indicates they are all of the same genus and species. Although evolutionists believe that Neanderthal, Cro-Magnon and modern Homo sapiens represent different branches and stages of the evolutionary scale, it will be shown that the evidence indicates otherwise.
Homo neanderthalensis
Homo neanderthalensis, or simply Neanderthal, is perhaps the most maligned race in human history. The reader may have noticed that the author chose to refer to Neanderthal as a “race.” This reference is justified in light of evidence which will be presented in this chapter.
Unfortunately, the image of Neanderthal is one of a grunting, club carrying sub-human primitive. In fact, the Neanderthal race was a part of a sophisticated society. They had complex religious beliefs, protected feeble members in their society, had language skills, and an advanced tool technology. All of these characteristics indicate they were just as human as the author and the reader.
Aside from the sophistication of their society, it will be shown that the anatomical makeup of Homo neanderthalensis proves that they were nothing less than Homo sapiens. In other words, Neanderthal was not a close relative of man; he was man! Before any evidence which proves this thesis is brought to the reader’s attention, it is important to first lay the foundation of this argument by looking at a few essential Neanderthal discoveries. This is necessary in order to understand how his remains came to be considered by evolutionists as an important chapter in the story of human origins. It is also essential to consider the paleoanthropologist’s assessment of these sites in order to show that once again, reason was set aside in formulating this stage of their theory.
The story of Neanderthal man begins in 1856 when fossilized bones were uncovered from a limestone quarry in the Neander Valley near Dusseldorf, Germany. At first, the unusually thick bones, the prominent brow ridges, the absence of a protruding chin, and the bowed legs of the Neander skeleton were thought to be evidence of an ancient, extinct race of men. This was the impression of anatomy professor, Hermann Schaffhausen, who presented the Neander remains as such to the Lower Rhine Medical and Natural History Society in Bonn on February 4, 1857. As later evidence would reveal, Schaffhausen’s analysis of the Neander bones was correct.99 Unfortunately, only two years after Schaffhausen introduced Neanderthal man to scientific scholars, Darwin published his Origin of the Species. Shortly after its publication, evolution slowly began to gain a foot hold in the scientific community.
Even though many scientists of the latter half of the nineteenth century found Darwin’s evolutionary model appealing, it was still a theory rooted in speculation. They needed something substantial from the fossil record that could be used to show it was not completely devoid of evidence from the natural world. Their search brought them to Schaffhausen’s Neander skeleton. By the end of the nineteenth century, the Neander remains were labelled Homo neanderthalensis (after the valley in which they were found) and were given a supposedly prestigious place in the “human evolutionary line of descent.”100 Neanderthal man was proclaimed to be the immediate predecessor of modern man. The evolutionists thought this was a great honor for this “primitive” creature. In fact, it turns out to be an incredible insult to a race of men who were just as intelligent as the Homo sapiens population in the twenty-first century.
Unfortunately for the Neanderthal man, his reputation would further be marred by conclusions drawn from a 1908 discovery in Chapelle-aux-Saints in France. The remains uncovered here were of an almost complete skeleton of a Neanderthal. The bones were taken to Marcellin Boule at the Museum of Natural History in Paris. After analyzing the skeleton, Boule declared in a series of lectures and publications that Neanderthal man was not a predecessor of modern man, but a failed branch of the evolutionary process.101 In other words, Neanderthal man was an evolutionary dead end. Although his conclusions about Neanderthal are the same held by present day evolutionists, they are puzzled by the way Boule reached his final analysis. The anatomy of Neanderthal does not fit Boule’s view of him as a dim-witted caveman.
What led Marcellin Boule to his conclusion? Why do evolutionists today agree with Boule’s conclusions, but disagree with the way he arrived at his final analysis? In order to answer these questions, it will be necessary to discuss the anatomical makeup of Neanderthal.
In a 1996 article for Archaeology Magazine, archaeologist Jean-Jacques Hublin summed up the general physical makeup of Neanderthal as
rather short and sturdy, with a long trunk and short legs. The skeleton is robust, and the muscle attachments imply a powerful body. The head is remarkable. It is big, enclosing a brain comparable in volume to that of modern humans, but the brain case and face are very long, the forehead is low, and the brow ridges protrude. The mandible is strong and lacks a projecting chin. The face is structured around a large nasal cavity, and its middle part projects forward. 102
Are these characteristics uniquely Neanderthal, or can they be observed in Homo sapiens groups of the twenty-first century? In fact, in the very same article Hublin admits that Eskimos, Latts, and some present day Homo sapien African groups share many of these same characteristics.
One may have also noted from Hublin’s description of the Neanderthal that he has an unusually large skull. In fact, on average Neanderthal heads are bigger than the modern Homo sapiens head. One may recall from earlier chapters that evolutionists proposed the principle of the larger the head, the greater the intelligence. This is why Neanderthal fossils present them with such an incredible dilemma. If hat size determines intelligence, then the Neanderthal is not more primitive than modern man. He is modern man’s intellectual superior. As Boule’s investigation was based solely on Neanderthal anatomy, how then did he come to the conclusion that Neanderthals were dim-witted? Boule’s final analysis remains a mystery in light of what Ralph Holloway of Columbia University points out. He states that “Neanderthal brains do not show primitive features, if size, convolutional patterns, and asymmetries are considered together.”104
Perhaps Boule’s perception of Neanderthal as a dim-witted, primitive came from the analysis of the lower body of the creature. What about the lower body of Neanderthal? Does it exhibit signs of “an early stage of evolution”? Jean-Jacque Hublin described its lower body as “rather short and sturdy, with a long trunk and short legs.”105 These physical traits are not absent in present day Homo sapiens populations. In fact, the physical appearance of the author of this book can be described in these terms. One certainly cannot honestly come to the same conclusion of Boule based on the anatomical make up of Neanderthal remains. He simply misrepresented the data. Upon reflection of Boule’s misinterpretation of the Neanderthal remains Roger Lewin wrote:
It is, in fact, a common fantasy, promulgated mostly by the scientific profession itself, that in the search for objective truth, data dictates conclusions. If this were the case, then each scientist faced with the same data would necessarily reach the same conclusion. But as we’ve seen earlier and will see again and again, frequently this does not happen. Data are just as often molded to fit preferred conclusions.106
What Lewin admits is that evolutionists often misinterpret data to suit their particular view of human origins. Such is certainly the case with the Neanderthal data!
If Neanderthal man is not anatomically more “primitive” than Homo sapiens then how would one classify Neanderthal man? Is he a Homo sapiens? To give that question a definitive answer it will be necessary to discuss a very important Neanderthal site in Israel.
About 18 miles south of Mount Carmel, French archaeologist Rene Neuville was excavating in an area known as Qafzeh when he uncovered remains which revolutionized the way evolutionists had previously viewed the Neanderthal enigma. Neuville found 18 individuals which appeared to be anatomically modern humans. They even had protruding chins. However, even though they were overall anatomically human, they had one so called “primitive” characteristic. These Homo sapiens had distinct brow ridges which were thought to be unique to Neanderthal skulls.107
Several reasonable implications can be drawn from the Qafzeh remains. In the first place, this evidence dispels the evolutionist’s view that brow ridges and other previously thought unique Neanderthal features were definite indicators of a non Homo sapiens creature. After all, some known Homo sapiens populations share these traits.
In the second place, the fossils from Qafzeh may also indicate that crossbreeding occurred between Neanderthals and Homo sapiens. This is the only reasonable way to answer the question; “How did these Homo sapiens acquire physical traits that supposedly only belong to Neanderthals? They must have inherited those features by mating with Neanderthals. If Neanderthals and Homo sapiens successfully crossbred, that can only mean one thing! They had to have been of the same genus and species. For example, a Caucasian male and an Asian female can successfully mate and produce healthy offspring. They can successfully mate because they are of the same genus and species. However, the child of that union is going to be neither Caucasian nor Asian. He is going to share character traits from both racial groups. This is exactly what happened at Qafzeh. Creatures of the same species and genus mated and successfully produce offspring. In other words, the Neanderthal represents a different racial classification, not a different species. As has already been pointed out, it is a biological law that everything must produce after its own kind. Therefore, one can assume that Neanderthals and Homo sapiens are of the same kind.
In addition to the evidence from Qafzeh which indicates that Neanderthals and present day humans are of the same genus and species, there are also cultural indicators from Neanderthal sites which support this thesis. This was alluded to in the introductory remarks to this section. The artifacts and burials at Neanderthal settlements show they created a society with the sophistication of any modern hunting and gathering group. A few key sites will now be discussed to show that Neanderthal culture was as complex as comparable Homo sapiens cultures. The first of these important Neanderthal settlements takes the reader back to Israel.
On the slopes of Mount Carmel, a Neanderthal settlement was discovered by Dorothy Garrod in 1929. The remains were found in a cave known as “Tabun” (cave of ovens). This settlement had all of the typical artifacts expected to be found at a Neanderthal site. In 1931, all doubts were removed when Garrod uncovered a skull which exhibited Neanderthal characteristics. What puzzled archaeologists about Garrod’s Neanderthal site was that it was just three hundred yards from a Homo sapiens settlement of the same archaeological and technological level.108 In other words, so called “primitive Neanderthal” was not only living at the same time as “modern” Homo sapiens, he was also sharing the same tool technology.
Another significant discovery which demonstrated that Homo sapiens were no more technologically advanced than contemporary Neanderthals was found in a cave called Saint-Cesaire in France. In 1979, Neanderthal remains were discovered here alongside tools archaeologists had previously only associated with Homo sapiens.109
If two populations living at the same time shared the same tool technology, then one can logically assume that one group was not inferior to the other. The only difference between the two groups is slight physical variation. It has already been proven that slight physical variation does not indicate they are of a different species. For example, the skeletal structure of a “modern” Negro is much more robust than that of a present day Caucasian. Even with these differences in physical makeup, we do not assume that Negroes and Caucasians are of different species. They are both Homo sapiens and on the same intellectual level. The same can be said of Homo sapiens and Neanderthals. Their shared technology proves they are of the same genus and species.
Review Questions
1. Where were the first Neanderthal remains uncovered?
2. Who was the first to declare Neanderthal man was not a human ancestor, but a failed branch of the evolutionary process?
3. Can Neanderthal physical features be found in present day human groups?
4. Why does the size of the Neanderthal head cause evolutionists so many problems?
5. Why did Boule come to the conclusion that Neanderthals were dim-witted?
6. Is it common for evolutionists to intentionally misinterpret the data in order to suit their particular view of human origins?
7. Why do the remains at Qafzeh puzzle evolutionists?
8. What do the remains at Qafzeh prove?
9. What is significant about the Neanderthal sites at Tabun, Israel and Saint-Cesaire, France?
10. If two populations living at the same time shared the same tool technology what can one assume about the two groups?
11. Are there skeletal variations among present day racial groups?
12. What genus and species is the Neanderthal?
|
