Page 129 - The Transitional Form Dilemma

HARUN YAHYA

Based on the length of the femur in relation to the length of the humerus
(humerofemoral index), the emerging picture is that H. habilis has humero-
femoral proportions similar to living African apes... 104
Ian Tattersall, in a paper titled “The Many Faces of Homo habilis,”
makes this comment:
It is increasingly clear that Homo habilis has become a wastebasket taxon, little
more than a convenient recipient for a motley assortment of hominid fossils. 105

To summarize the outcome of all these findings, two important
conclusions may be set out:
(1) The fossils known as Homo habilis are actually part of the class
Australopithecus, not of the class Homo.

(2) Both H. and Australopithecus walked bent over and had the skeletons of
monkeys. They have nothing to do with human beings, and are not transitional
forms in the so-called human evolutionary tree.

Homo erectus
Homo erectus
Homo erectus means “erect-walking man.” Evolutionists have had
to distinguish these humans from earlier ones with the appellation
erect. That is because all the H. erectus fossils obtained are upright, un-
like Australopithecus or H. habilis: There is no difference between the modern
human skeleton and that of H. erectus.
One of the major grounds for evolutionists declaring H. erectus as
“primitive” is its small brain volume (900 to 1,100 cubic centimeters)
compared to the average for man living today, its narrow forehead and
thick eyebrows. However, many people alive in the world today have
the same average skull dimension as H. erectus (pygmies, for instance).

And various modern races also have narrow foreheads and protruding
eyeridges (native Australians, or Aborigines, for example).
It is an established fact that differences in skull volume constitute
no difference in terms of intelligence and ability. Intelligence does not

127