RSR Takes on the Smithonian's Hall of Origins, Part II
This is the show from Friday, March 18th, 2022
SUMMARY:
RSR host Fred Williams and Brodie Leitch continue to expose the deception behind the Smithonian's Hall of Origins and the widely promoted 'march of progress' illustration that has effectively fooled many into believing in evolution. Today's show uncovers the truth behind 3 more alleged ape-men promoted by the Smithonian: Ardipithecus kadabba, Ardipithecus ramidus (Ardi), and Australopithecus anamensis. The first alleged ape-man in the list was boldly proclaimed as bipedal, all based off of a single toe bone! The 2nd ape included 34 pulverized bones that 14 reconstructions later yielded the look wanted by Dr. Owen Lovejoy, who has a history of bonesaw reconstructions to produce fake ape-men to promote his propagandist narrative. Finally, the last ape-man in the list was just 3 bone fragments scattered 600 miles apart that is unlikely the same creature. As famed Harvard paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould once candidly admitted, “Most hominid fossils ... serve as a basis for endless speculation and elaborate storytelling" all based on "fragments of jaws and scraps of skulls”.
Ape-men article rebuttals 3 through 5... (see Smithonian Part 1 show for first two rebuttal articles; articles courtesy of Brodie Leitch)
3. Ardipithecus kadabba
“Ardipithecus kadabba” (pronounced: “Aar-duh-pith-uh-kuhs kuh-dah-bah” and meaning “oldest ancestor” in the Afar language) was discovered in the Middle Awash Valley in Ethiopia in 1997.
In spite of the fact that this alleged species “is only known in the fossil record by a few post-cranial bones and sets of teeth,” (a total of 36 bone fragments) The Smithsonian claims that: “‘Ardipithecus kadabba’ was bipedal.”
The “evidence” for this claim is: “One bone from the large toe has a broad, robust appearance, suggesting its use in bipedal push-off.”
Claiming to have discovered an ape-man, (and a bipedal one, no less) based off of a single toe bone is already sketchy, but it gets worse for the evolutionists. In the same article, the Smithsonian admits that:“So far, the evidence for ‘Ardipithecus kadabba’s’ upright walking comes from a single toe bone that dates to 5.2 million years old [400,000 years younger than the other specimens] and was found 10 miles away from the other ‘Ardipithecus kadabba’ specimens.”
After their bold claim of bipedality and confession of such little evidence, the Smithsonian asks: “Was Ardipithecus kadabba routinely bipedal?”, “If Ardipithecus kadabba walked upright, what was its gait like?” and “is Ardipithecus kadabba somehow related to Orrorin tugenensis and Sahelanthropus tchadensis?”
So not only are they unsure if “Ardipithecus kadabba” walked upright, they aren’t sure it’s related to humans either.
4. Ardipithecus ramidus (Ardi)
(Partial skeleton (ARA-VP-6/500) "Ardi".)
“Ardipithecus ramidus” (pronounced: “Aar-duh-pith-uh-kuhs ram-ee-dus” and nicknamed “Ardi”) was discovered in Middle Awash and Gona, Ethiopia between 1992 and 1994. The fragments were assembled into a partial skeleton in 2009. (15 years later.)
The Smithsonian claims that: “Since that time, [1992-1994] [paleoanthropologist, Dr. Tim] White’s team have uncovered over 100 fossil specimens of Ardipithecus ramidus.”
Keep in mind that even with 100+ “specimens”, (which are only fragments and according to the Australia museum, “represent about 35 individual members of this species”) they still only have 1 skeleton.
The discoverers argue that “the ‘Ardi’ skeleton reflects a human-African ape common ancestor that was not chimpanzee-like.”
However, the fossils were in such poor condition, that Dr. Tim White (the leading paleontologist on the team who discovered the fossils) stated that they were “like roadkill” with the discovery channel adding in their documentary, “Discovering Ardi”, that: “Her skull was found in 34 pulverized, scattered pieces that were compacted down to about one-and-a-half inches thick.”
One of the allegedly human-like features is the pelvis. Some evolutionists claim that the pelvis shows adaptations that combine tree-climbing and bipedal activity. However, as reported in the Discovery Channel’s documentary titled: “Discovering Ardi”, the pelvis was too badly broken and fragile to take out of the matrix it was in, so Dr. Owen Lovejoy made a reconstruction based on his knowledge of primate anatomy and a Micro CT scanner. After 14 different possible configurations, the team settled on the configuration shown in most reports. Secular paleo-experts Drs. Wood and Harrison, rightly expressed a great deal of concern about this, pointing out that “a whole lot of speculation went into the final pelvis reconstruction.” Dr. Jungers stated that: “That's really kind of a 3-D Rorschach test if you ask me,” and "I'm still not convinced that it's necessarily completely accurate”. The Smithsonian is still asking: “Does the pelvis of Ar. ramidus support the hypothesis that this early human species was bipedal?”
(Ardi’s Pelvis vs. Rorschach Inkblot Test)
Dr. Lovejoy believes that Ardi’s spine was probably long and curved like a human’s rather than short and stiff like a chimp’s. He based that belief on both the pelvis that was reconstructed 14 times and his guess that Ardi had 6 lumbar vertebrae, (despite the fact that most apes have only 3 or 4, and humans have 5) but they don’t even have any of Ardi’s lumbar vertebrae. The displays and animations of Ardi, insert an entirely imaginary spine (with a four-part curve like humans) into the reconstructed base of her skull using imaginary neck vertebrae.
Most of the foramen magnum (the whole in the base of the skull where the spinal chord connects) which the imaginary spine is connected to, is also missing.
Unlike Ardi’s “human-like” features (which are speculative at best) Ardi’s ape-like features are obvious.
According to Science.org: “The skull of this tiny ape can fit into the palm of your hand like a softball and her brain was about the same size as bonobo or a female chimp.” In addition to that, Ardi’s foot had a hallux, (grasping toe, hanging off to the side) just like apes have today so they can use their feet like hands for grabbing branches while moving in trees. According to Dr. Tim White, the toe “really doesn’t differ from apes, and that’s the surprising thing. It is fully apelike.” Dr. Jungers added “I see nothing in the foot that suggests bipedality.”
As Genesis Apologetics states: “When you put her [Ardi] next to a bonobo, it sure seems like she fits into the ape family quite well.”
5. Australopithecus anamensis
Australopithecus anamensis (pronounced “Ah-struh-low-pith-ee-kus A-na-men-sees”) is a set of fossil fragments, discovered between 1965 and 2019. (A 54-Year span)
Fossils of this “species” have been found in the Middle Awash region in northeast Ethiopia and at three sites (Allia Bay, Kanapoi and Sibolot) around Lake Turkana in Kenya. The areas in which these fossils were discovered are almost 600 miles apart.
Most of the fragments undoubtedly came from apes. The Smithsonian’s article on ‘Australopithecus anamensis’ lists multiple obvious ape-like features:
The Australian Museum adds:
And the journal “Nature” reported that anamensis had:
Controversy has surrounded the allegedly more human-like nature of the tibia and humerus.
The Smithsonian says that:
“The top part of the tibia (where the lower leg meets the knee) is concave, or depressed from stress. This shows that the individual often put weight on the bone—evidence of standing upright. The lower part of the tibia (where the lower leg meets the ankle) is wider or thicker—evidence that it acted as a type of shock absorber as this individual walked.”
The Australian Museum says likewise:
“the knee-end of the tibia (shin bone) was human-like as the upper surfaces of the two knobs (condyles) at the top of the tibia were similar in size and concave in shape. This feature indicates this species could walk bipedally (on two legs).”
And the “Scientific American” adds:
“The anamensis humerus lacks a deep, oval hollow, used as a locking mechanism between the humerus and ulna, the latter being present in chimpanzees, but not in humans, and the anamensis tibia is wide, as in humans, because of extra spongy tissue, which acts as shock absorbers during bipedal locomotion.”
These are very strong claims considering that they’re only based on 3 bone fragments. Contrary to these overly-confident claims, in a 1995 article in the journal “Nature”, paleontologist Peter Andrews suggested that the tibia and humerus, coming from different sections (upper level) of the Kanapoi locality strata than the ‘primitive’ jaws and teeth (lower level), might possibly “be related to humans and the other to apes”.
So aside from the fact these two bones don’t necessitate bipedalism, it’s not even clear if they belonged with the obviously ape-like bones. After all, if evolutionists have combined human and ape bones to make an “ape-man”, it wouldn’t be the first time.
The evolutionists also have a timeline problem with this “species”. They previously thought that “Australopithecus anamensis” was the direct ancestor of “Australopithecus afarensis”, but in 2019, Dr. Yohannes Haile-Selassie announced a nearly complete “Au. anamensis” cranium, (MRD-VP-1/1) dated to 3.8 million years ago, which (according to the darwinist timeline) indicates that this species overlapped with “Australopithecus afarensis” for at least 100,000 years.
The Smithsonian asks: “Is ‘Australopithecus anamensis’ a separate species from ‘Australopithecus afarensis’?” With The Austrlian museum adding that:
“The debate about the validity of this species designation continues.”
This is the show from Friday, March 18th, 2022
SUMMARY:
RSR host Fred Williams and Brodie Leitch continue to expose the deception behind the Smithonian's Hall of Origins and the widely promoted 'march of progress' illustration that has effectively fooled many into believing in evolution. Today's show uncovers the truth behind 3 more alleged ape-men promoted by the Smithonian: Ardipithecus kadabba, Ardipithecus ramidus (Ardi), and Australopithecus anamensis. The first alleged ape-man in the list was boldly proclaimed as bipedal, all based off of a single toe bone! The 2nd ape included 34 pulverized bones that 14 reconstructions later yielded the look wanted by Dr. Owen Lovejoy, who has a history of bonesaw reconstructions to produce fake ape-men to promote his propagandist narrative. Finally, the last ape-man in the list was just 3 bone fragments scattered 600 miles apart that is unlikely the same creature. As famed Harvard paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould once candidly admitted, “Most hominid fossils ... serve as a basis for endless speculation and elaborate storytelling" all based on "fragments of jaws and scraps of skulls”.
Ape-men article rebuttals 3 through 5... (see Smithonian Part 1 show for first two rebuttal articles; articles courtesy of Brodie Leitch)
3. Ardipithecus kadabba
“Ardipithecus kadabba” (pronounced: “Aar-duh-pith-uh-kuhs kuh-dah-bah” and meaning “oldest ancestor” in the Afar language) was discovered in the Middle Awash Valley in Ethiopia in 1997.
In spite of the fact that this alleged species “is only known in the fossil record by a few post-cranial bones and sets of teeth,” (a total of 36 bone fragments) The Smithsonian claims that: “‘Ardipithecus kadabba’ was bipedal.”
The “evidence” for this claim is: “One bone from the large toe has a broad, robust appearance, suggesting its use in bipedal push-off.”
Claiming to have discovered an ape-man, (and a bipedal one, no less) based off of a single toe bone is already sketchy, but it gets worse for the evolutionists. In the same article, the Smithsonian admits that:“So far, the evidence for ‘Ardipithecus kadabba’s’ upright walking comes from a single toe bone that dates to 5.2 million years old [400,000 years younger than the other specimens] and was found 10 miles away from the other ‘Ardipithecus kadabba’ specimens.”
After their bold claim of bipedality and confession of such little evidence, the Smithsonian asks: “Was Ardipithecus kadabba routinely bipedal?”, “If Ardipithecus kadabba walked upright, what was its gait like?” and “is Ardipithecus kadabba somehow related to Orrorin tugenensis and Sahelanthropus tchadensis?”
So not only are they unsure if “Ardipithecus kadabba” walked upright, they aren’t sure it’s related to humans either.
4. Ardipithecus ramidus (Ardi)
(Partial skeleton (ARA-VP-6/500) "Ardi".)
“Ardipithecus ramidus” (pronounced: “Aar-duh-pith-uh-kuhs ram-ee-dus” and nicknamed “Ardi”) was discovered in Middle Awash and Gona, Ethiopia between 1992 and 1994. The fragments were assembled into a partial skeleton in 2009. (15 years later.)
The Smithsonian claims that: “Since that time, [1992-1994] [paleoanthropologist, Dr. Tim] White’s team have uncovered over 100 fossil specimens of Ardipithecus ramidus.”
Keep in mind that even with 100+ “specimens”, (which are only fragments and according to the Australia museum, “represent about 35 individual members of this species”) they still only have 1 skeleton.
The discoverers argue that “the ‘Ardi’ skeleton reflects a human-African ape common ancestor that was not chimpanzee-like.”
However, the fossils were in such poor condition, that Dr. Tim White (the leading paleontologist on the team who discovered the fossils) stated that they were “like roadkill” with the discovery channel adding in their documentary, “Discovering Ardi”, that: “Her skull was found in 34 pulverized, scattered pieces that were compacted down to about one-and-a-half inches thick.”
One of the allegedly human-like features is the pelvis. Some evolutionists claim that the pelvis shows adaptations that combine tree-climbing and bipedal activity. However, as reported in the Discovery Channel’s documentary titled: “Discovering Ardi”, the pelvis was too badly broken and fragile to take out of the matrix it was in, so Dr. Owen Lovejoy made a reconstruction based on his knowledge of primate anatomy and a Micro CT scanner. After 14 different possible configurations, the team settled on the configuration shown in most reports. Secular paleo-experts Drs. Wood and Harrison, rightly expressed a great deal of concern about this, pointing out that “a whole lot of speculation went into the final pelvis reconstruction.” Dr. Jungers stated that: “That's really kind of a 3-D Rorschach test if you ask me,” and "I'm still not convinced that it's necessarily completely accurate”. The Smithsonian is still asking: “Does the pelvis of Ar. ramidus support the hypothesis that this early human species was bipedal?”
(Ardi’s Pelvis vs. Rorschach Inkblot Test)
Dr. Lovejoy believes that Ardi’s spine was probably long and curved like a human’s rather than short and stiff like a chimp’s. He based that belief on both the pelvis that was reconstructed 14 times and his guess that Ardi had 6 lumbar vertebrae, (despite the fact that most apes have only 3 or 4, and humans have 5) but they don’t even have any of Ardi’s lumbar vertebrae. The displays and animations of Ardi, insert an entirely imaginary spine (with a four-part curve like humans) into the reconstructed base of her skull using imaginary neck vertebrae.
Most of the foramen magnum (the whole in the base of the skull where the spinal chord connects) which the imaginary spine is connected to, is also missing.
Unlike Ardi’s “human-like” features (which are speculative at best) Ardi’s ape-like features are obvious.
According to Science.org: “The skull of this tiny ape can fit into the palm of your hand like a softball and her brain was about the same size as bonobo or a female chimp.” In addition to that, Ardi’s foot had a hallux, (grasping toe, hanging off to the side) just like apes have today so they can use their feet like hands for grabbing branches while moving in trees. According to Dr. Tim White, the toe “really doesn’t differ from apes, and that’s the surprising thing. It is fully apelike.” Dr. Jungers added “I see nothing in the foot that suggests bipedality.”
As Genesis Apologetics states: “When you put her [Ardi] next to a bonobo, it sure seems like she fits into the ape family quite well.”
5. Australopithecus anamensis
Australopithecus anamensis (pronounced “Ah-struh-low-pith-ee-kus A-na-men-sees”) is a set of fossil fragments, discovered between 1965 and 2019. (A 54-Year span)
Fossils of this “species” have been found in the Middle Awash region in northeast Ethiopia and at three sites (Allia Bay, Kanapoi and Sibolot) around Lake Turkana in Kenya. The areas in which these fossils were discovered are almost 600 miles apart.
Most of the fragments undoubtedly came from apes. The Smithsonian’s article on ‘Australopithecus anamensis’ lists multiple obvious ape-like features:
“Long forearms and features of the wrist bones suggest these individuals probably climbed trees”
“a protruding face”
“long and narrow braincase”
“forwardly projecting cheekbones similar to Paranthropus”
“thickly-built, long, narrow… strong jaws”
“heavily enameled teeth”
“The sites where remains of ‘Australopithecus anamensis’ have been found were forests and woodlands that grew around lakes.”
The Australian Museum adds:
“size was probably similar to that of modern chimpanzees”
And the journal “Nature” reported that anamensis had:
“specialized wrist morphology associated with knuckle-walking.”
Controversy has surrounded the allegedly more human-like nature of the tibia and humerus.
The Smithsonian says that:
“The top part of the tibia (where the lower leg meets the knee) is concave, or depressed from stress. This shows that the individual often put weight on the bone—evidence of standing upright. The lower part of the tibia (where the lower leg meets the ankle) is wider or thicker—evidence that it acted as a type of shock absorber as this individual walked.”
The Australian Museum says likewise:
“the knee-end of the tibia (shin bone) was human-like as the upper surfaces of the two knobs (condyles) at the top of the tibia were similar in size and concave in shape. This feature indicates this species could walk bipedally (on two legs).”
And the “Scientific American” adds:
“The anamensis humerus lacks a deep, oval hollow, used as a locking mechanism between the humerus and ulna, the latter being present in chimpanzees, but not in humans, and the anamensis tibia is wide, as in humans, because of extra spongy tissue, which acts as shock absorbers during bipedal locomotion.”
These are very strong claims considering that they’re only based on 3 bone fragments. Contrary to these overly-confident claims, in a 1995 article in the journal “Nature”, paleontologist Peter Andrews suggested that the tibia and humerus, coming from different sections (upper level) of the Kanapoi locality strata than the ‘primitive’ jaws and teeth (lower level), might possibly “be related to humans and the other to apes”.
So aside from the fact these two bones don’t necessitate bipedalism, it’s not even clear if they belonged with the obviously ape-like bones. After all, if evolutionists have combined human and ape bones to make an “ape-man”, it wouldn’t be the first time.
The evolutionists also have a timeline problem with this “species”. They previously thought that “Australopithecus anamensis” was the direct ancestor of “Australopithecus afarensis”, but in 2019, Dr. Yohannes Haile-Selassie announced a nearly complete “Au. anamensis” cranium, (MRD-VP-1/1) dated to 3.8 million years ago, which (according to the darwinist timeline) indicates that this species overlapped with “Australopithecus afarensis” for at least 100,000 years.
The Smithsonian asks: “Is ‘Australopithecus anamensis’ a separate species from ‘Australopithecus afarensis’?” With The Austrlian museum adding that:
“The debate about the validity of this species designation continues.”