John Misasi wrote:
Thank you for the information. I can not answer your questions. I have
ordered a search for the original article, if it is available. I will see
what they say. I would point out that this type of work is progressing in
paleontology where they are trying to extract DNA from extinct animals.
Results so far have been mixed as may be the case with the albumin. The point
of all this is that eventually, like most technologies, the difficulties at
first are tough and then someone solves it. Christians need to be prepared
for the possibility of molecular data from extinct animals supporting
evolutionary trees in the future. (see Raul J. Cano and Monica K.
Borucki, "Revival and Identification of Bacterial Spores in 25-
to 40-Million-Year-Old Domincan Amber", Science, 268, May 19,
1995, p. 1060. I do not know if this has been refuted or not yet. the point
is that they are trying)
>5) to answer your question is a cheap philosophical trick... I don't mean
>to be rude, but it is. Your question leaves no room for the other person
>to say anything about the homonids humanity. You are baiting a YEC in
>the same way my philosophy teacher used to bait our class into answering
>his questions, which no matter what he would be able to prove us wrong.
Possibly. However, I think that the issues desperately need discussion because
of what happened to me when I was taught YEC geology and I ended up in the oil
business. I learned to my dismay that everything I had been taught by
christians about geology was absolutely wrong. I have found the same thing
with anthropology as I have learned that subject, only in that area it is both
the YECs and the old earthers who are misrepresenting the data (If you
consider that a philosophical trick I am sorry). The only way I know how to
eductate people is to get them to talk. And in these areas people don't want
to hear what I have to say.
Until last summer, I was unable to find any Christian publisher in the US that
would publish anything I wrote on the area of Creationism/evoluton. This is
both book publishers and journals. Is it because I don't know the issues or
the data? Is it because I know nothing about geology or anthropology? No.It
is because I am saying things Christians don't want to hear. They don't want
to hear that the data does not support what they are teaching. As a result I
have had to get on internet and 'bait' in order to get enough discussion to
get my message out. Believe me I would prefer to go through more conventional
>Yes, he used logic, but anyone who asks a question can always word it so
>that they can respond against the other persons answer. Back to the
>your question though:
> How can one define
>humanity? DNA, protein, spirit, soul, intelligence. If it is DNA or
>protein, how much DNA or protein must be similar to be concidered human?
>50%, 75%, 99%... the fact is homo sapien is greater than 99% chimpanzee.
>I could ask the same question and if that is the case i can ask the same
>question, what does that say about the monkey's humanity? If it is
>Intellegence, we all know about intelligent animals and therefore
>intellegence does not define our humanity.
Obviously spirituality is not defined by DNA however Christians are doing
exactly that when they try to equate humanity with anatomically modern men!
Hugh Ross has said that neanderthal is not human. (Hugh Ross,"Link with
Neanderthals Cut by Computer," Facts & Faith, 9:3, 3rd Qtr. 1995, p. 2)
He says that no hominids earlier than 24,000 years ago were human.Which means
that he is implicitly defining humanity as those who have very close DNA to
ourselves. (Hugh Ross, The Fingerprint of God, (Orange: Promise Publishing,
1991), p. 159-160.)
>What then do we have to define humanity, that is something that separates
>us from the rest of the natural world? To answer this we must go to
>religous perspective and this being a Christian discussion, we must look
>to the Bible to see how God separates man from the other creatures:
> 1) God breathes life into man, giving man a spirit/soul
> 2) God puts man in charge of the earth
> 3) He cares for mankind above all other creature
> 4) Add your ideas here
5. art (thus the need for the prohibition on graven images)
6. murder such as (cain and Abel)
7. cities (cain built a city) which requires the ability to work wood.
8. clothing (given at the fall)
9. meat eating
The evidence for all of these activities goes way back in the fossil record;
back at least 2 million years.
Consider this from John Wiester:
"I believe we can dismiss Homo habilis and Homo erectus as
likely candidates for Adam and Eve. For one thing science is not
certain whether they led to Homo sapiens at all. They may have
become extinct. Furthermore, the present fossil evidence does
not indicate they possessed those traits that we consider
uniquely human."~John Wiester, The Genesis Connection,
(Nashville: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1983), p. 188
This, and Ross' position is simply wrong. I have a moral choice. I can
remain silent and let things be, or I can attempt to change things. I have
chosen the latter but as noted above internet has so far been the only means
available to me to attempt these things.
The list above:
1. God breathing life==does not fossilize
2. Puts man in charge--Man must be here; he fossilizes but we must define who
3. God loves us--does not leave evidence.
4. Language is controlled by Broca's and Wernicke's areas in our brain. It
leaves an impression on the interior of the skull. The earliest skull which
shows this impression is the Homo habilis skull, KNM-ER 1470, dated at 1.8
million years ago.(Dean Falk, Comments, Current Anthropology, 30:2, April,
1989, p. 141-142.)
5. The absolutely oldest piece of man-made art I have been able to find is an
image of a face chipped into a phonolite pebble and reported by Mary Leakey.
It is dated at 1.6 million years ago. It resembles a primate face. (M.D.
Leakey, Olduvai Gorge 3, Excavations in Beds I and II, 1960-1693, (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1971), p. 269)
Homo erectus also made the Golan Venus figurine, a crude image of a naked
lady. It dates to 300,000 years ago. (Alexander Marshack, "On the "Geological'
Explanation of the Berekhat Ram Figurine," Current Anthropology, 36:3, June,
1995, p. 495; R.G. Bednarik, "Comments", Rock Art Research 5:2(1988):
91-107, p. 98;L. A. Schepartz, "Language and Modern Human Origins," Yearbook
of Physical Anthropology, 36:91-126(1993), p. 117)
There is one report in the literature of Homo erectus engraving a bone with an
image of a four-footed beast 300,000 years ago. (Paul G. Bahn, "Comments",
Rock Art Research 5:2(1988): 91-107, p. 96)
6. Murder. there is evidence of humans being scalped at 300-400 thousand years
ago. (Ian Tattersall, The Fossil Trail (New York: Oxford University Press,
1995), p. 244)
"Second, the presence of stone-pointed spears in the Mousterian is still
a viable thesis. There is evidence for projectile impact and hafting from use
wear studies in the Levantine Mousterian collections. Further proof is
provided by Neanderthal skeletal remains, specifically from the rib cage of
Shanidar Neanderthal III. The rib in question is the left ninth rib, located
in one of the most vital areas of the body. It exhibits a slit, about 1.5 mm
wide, evidence of a wound that had begun to heal when the individual was
killed in a rockfall. Recently, I had the opportunity to study the cast of
this rib in the Natural History Museum of the Smithsonian Institution. The
rib was also examined by R. W. Mann, a forensic anthropologist at the museum,
and a specialist in stab wounds. He concluded that the direction of the wound
was from back to front and from above to below. A study of the slit itself,
its shape, narrow width, and complete penetration of the rib, indicate that
only a thin stone point set in some sort of haft and projected with much force
by another individual, could have produced such a result."~Rose L. Solecki,
"More on Hafted Projectile Points in the Mousterian," Journal of Field
Archaeology, 19(1992):207-212, p. 211
7. Cities. The first known village was inhabited by Homo erectus.
"The home base of early man from Bilzingsleben was situated on a shore
terrace close to the outflow of a karst spring into a small lake. Previous
excavations revealed a division of the camp site into different activity areas
and outlines of three simple shelters with hearths and workshops set up in
front of them. Five to 8 m from the dwelling structures, an artifically paved
area with a diameter of 9 m was found. According to the archaeological
evidence, special cultural activities may have been carried out there.
"Along with large pebble tools( choppers, chopping tools, and
hammerstones), small specialiezed tools of flint appear. Basic standard forms
are knives, scrappers, denticulates and notches, simple points which are
pointed-oval, Tayac and Quinson points, borers, and core-like tools. Edge
retouches predominate, but also unifacial and bifacial retouches occur. Large
scrapers, knives, chisel-shaped tools, wedges, bodkins,and work supports were
manufactured from the compact bone, preferably of the straight-tusked
elephant. Mattock- and cudgel-shaped tools were made from cervid antlers.
Specific, deliberate manufacturing activities are recognizable in the
workshops. Apart from the dissection of the animal prey, these tools served
for the working of predominantly organic materials which in turn were used for
the manufacture of other tools and objects of daily use. Wood was also a
frequently used raw material. Numerous calcified remains of wood artifacts
were found at the site. Some bone tools dispaly deliberately engraved sets of
lines which we regard as expressions of abstract thinking, perhaps as gravphic
symbols."~D. Mania and U. Mania and E. Vlcek, "Latest Finds of Skull Remains
of Homo erectus from Bilzingsleben (Thruingia)", Naturwissenschaften,
81(1994), p. 123-127, p. 124
8. Clothing--Evidence that stone tools were used to work leather goes back to
300,000 years ago. (Kathy D. Schick and Nicholas Toth, Making Silent Stones
Speak, (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1993), p.162)
9. meat-eating--all the way back.
I cannot remain silent while Christians say erroneous scientific
things. Considering that 32+ Christian book publishers rejected my manuscript
and several journals rejected any article based upon these ideas, how exactly
would you suggest that I get my message out except to attempt to arouse
discussion on internet?
Foundation,Fall and Flood