1. Science and Creationism 10. Hominids © Colin Frayn, 2008-2011 www.frayn.net

2. Overview Sahelanthropus tchadensis (7 mya) Orrorin tugenensis (6 mya) Ardipithecus (5.5–4.4 mya) –Ar. kadabba and Ar. ramidus Australopithecus (4–2 mya) –Au. anamensis, Au. afarensis, Au. africanus, Au. bahrelghazali, Au. garhi Kenyanthropus (3-2.7 mya) –K. platyops Paranthropus (3–1.2 mya) –P. aethiopicus, P. boisei, and P. robustus Homo (2 mya–present) –H. habilis, H. rudolfensis, H. ergaster, H. georgicus, H. antecessor, H. cepranensis, H. erectus, H. heidelbergensis, H. rhodesiensis, H. neanderthalensis (sometimes H. sapiens neanderthalensis), H. sapiens idaltu, Archaic H. sapiens, H. floresiensis (probably) © Colin Frayn, 2008-2011 www.frayn.net

3. © Colin Frayn, 2008-2011 www.frayn.net Nebraska Man A humanlike tooth discovered in 1922 Some scientists thought it looked ‘apelike’ –Though their identification was never more than tentative –Henry Fairfield Osborn was the most enthusiastic Others disagreed –George MacCurdy dismissed the find as “not … generally acccepted” (‘Human origins’, 1924) The tooth was never used as proof at the Scopes trial –Despite allegations to the contrary It turned out that the tooth was from a peccary! The news was on the front page of the New York Times Well… science has improved since then!

4. © Colin Frayn, 2008-2011 www.frayn.net Piltdown Man A notorious fake “Discovered” between 1908-1912 –Was regarded as an ‘anomaly’ –Never fitted in with any of the models Exposed as a hoax in 1953 –Contained human and orang-utan remains –Was finally identified using dating techniques –Proved that the remains were modern The identity of the hoaxer is still unknown! 1920s science was rather primitive –We now have dating techniques to protect against such frauds –We also know a great deal more about hominid fossils

5. © Colin Frayn, 2008-2011 www.frayn.net Neanderthals Very closely related to humans –Homo sapiens neanderthalensis –Sometimes Homo neanderthalensis Just humans with disease? –No, we could tell that through other means E.g. rickets causes substantial bone weakness Other differences –Neanderthals were substantially stronger than modern humans They weren’t just elderly humans! –We have infant Neanderthal remains They share the same morphological characteristics We have Neanderthal DNA –It’s substantially different from that of any human

6. © Colin Frayn, 2008-2011 www.frayn.net Rhodesian Man Discovered 1921 in Rhodesia –Now Kabwe, Zambia –Probably around 200 or 300 thousand years old –Found with several other bones –Some may be from the same individual

7. © Colin Frayn, 2008-2011 www.frayn.net Reiner Protsch von Zieten Lied about the age of Neanderthal finds –Faked some dating results –Claimed falsely that some young remains were old –Fortunately, in Science we duplicate our tests –None of the fossils he mis-dated was scientifically prominent –His fraud was Discovered by scientists Exposed by scientists Rectified by scientists –One of the benefits of peer-review and the self- correcting nature of scientific research!

8. © Colin Frayn, 2008-2011 www.frayn.net Laetoli Footprints Fossilised footprints found in May 1976 –Northern Tanzania –Dated to 3.5 Myr ago Some (e.g. Tuttle 1990) suggest they look like more recent footprints (e.g. Homo erectus) –Many others (e.g. Foley 2004) disagree –The debate continues –The majority of scientists agree that the footprints were made by Australopithecus Remains of 13 Australopithecus individuals have also been found in the immediate area

9. © Colin Frayn, 2008-2011 www.frayn.net Java Man Fossil discovered in 1893 –Consists of a portion of the top of a skull Were two human skulls found nearby and ignored? –No, they were 65 miles away! Could this be an ape? –No, the volume of the cranial cavity is far too large –It is very similar to ‘Turkana Boy’ An almost-complete H. erectus skeleton Discovered in 1984 Aged 1.6 Myr

10. © Colin Frayn, 2008-2011 www.frayn.net Peking Man Also known as Sinanthropus Are they apes? –No, the brain cavities are twice that of a large gorilla –"Morphologically,there is not the slightest doubt. Sinanthropus confirms and completes the proof that there are creatures with physical characters intermediate between the group of Anthropoid Apes and the group of Hominians.“ –(Boule and Vallois 1957, p.142) –See picture for comparison: Baboon (left), Sinanthropus (right)

11. © Colin Frayn, 2008-2011 www.frayn.net H. floresiensis So-called ‘hobbits’ –Found in 2003 –Remote island of Flores, Indonesia Were they modern humans with microcephaly? –Perhaps, but unlikely –They may have had Laron syndrome Genetic disease Insensitivity to growth hormone –They are not important to understanding the Hominid lineage