have been many findings demonstrating that Homo sapiens
dates back even earlier than 800,000 years. One of them is
a discovery by Louis Leakey in the early 1970s in Olduvai
Gorge. Here, in the Bed II layer, Leakey discovered that Australopithecus,
Homo habilis and Homo erectus species had
co-existed at the same time. What is even more interesting
was a structure Leakey found in the same layer (Bed II). Here,
he found the remains of a stone hut. The unusual aspect of
the event was that this construction, which is still used
in some parts of Africa, could only have been built by Homo
sapiens! So, according to Leakey's findings, Australopithecus,
Homo habilis, Homo erectus and modern man
must have co-existed approximately 1.7 million years ago.219
This discovery must surely invalidate the evolutionary theory
that claims that modern man evolved from ape-like species
such as Australopithecus.
Indeed, some other discoveries trace the origins
of modern man back to 1.7 million years ago. One of these
important finds is the footprints found in Laetoli, Tanzania,
by Mary Leakey in 1977. These footprints were found in a layer
that was calculated to be 3.6 million years old, and more
importantly, they were no different from the footprints that
a contemporary man would leave.
human footprints in Laetoli, in Tanzania.
The footprints found by Mary Leakey were later
examined by a number of famous paleoanthropologists, such
as Donald Johanson and Tim White. The results were the same.
Make no mistake about
it,... They are like modern human footprints. If one were
left in the sand of a California beach today, and a four-year
old were asked what it was, he would instantly say that
somebody had walked there. He wouldn't be able to tell it
from a hundred other prints on the beach, nor would you.220
After examining the footprints, Louis Robbins
from the University of North Carolina made the following comments:
The arch is raised -
the smaller individual had a higher arch than I do - and
the big toe is large and aligned with the second toe Ö The
toes grip the ground like human toes. You do not see this
in other animal forms.221
A 2.3-MILLION-YEAR-OLD HUMAN JAW
Fossil AL 666-1 was found in Hadar
in Ethiopia, together with A. afarensis fossils. This
2.3-million-year-old jaw bone had features identical
to those of Homo sapiens.
AL 666-1 resembled neither the
A. afarensis jawbones that were found with it, nor
a 1.75-million-year-old Homo habilis jaw.
The jaws of these two species, with their narrow and
rectangular shapes, resembled those of present-day
there is no doubt that AL 666-1 belonged to a "Homo"
(human) species, evolutionary paleontologists do not
accept this fact. They refrain from making any comment
on this, because the jaw is calculated to be 2.3 million
years old-in other words, much older than the age
they allow for the Homo, or human, race.
Examinations of the morphological form of the
footprints showed time and again that they had to be accepted
as the prints of a human, and moreover, a modern human (Homo
sapiens). Russell Tuttle, who also examined the footprints,
A small barefoot Homo
sapiens could have made them... In all discernible morphological
features, the feet of the individuals that made the trails
are indistinguishable from those of modern humans.222
Impartial examinations of the footprints revealed
their real owners. In reality, these footprints consisted
of 20 fossilized footprints of a 10-year-old modern human
and 27 footprints of an even younger one. They were certainly
modern people like us.
This situation put the Laetoli footprints at
the center of discussions for years. Evolutionary paleoanthropologists
desperately tried to come up with an explanation, as it was
hard for them to accept the fact that a modern man had been
walking on the earth 3.6 million years ago. During the 1990s,
the following "explanation" started to take shape: The evolutionists
decided that these footprints must have been left by an Australopithecus,
because according to their theory, it was impossible for a
Homo species to have existed 3.6 million years ago. However,
Russell H. Tuttle wrote the following in an article in 1990:
In sum, the 3.5-million-year-old
footprint traits at Laetoli site G resemble those of habitually
unshod modern humans. None of their features suggest that
the Laetoli hominids were less capable bipeds than we are.
If the G footprints were not known to be so old,
we would readily conclude that there had been made by a
member of our genus, Homo... In any case, we should
shelve the loose assumption that the Laetoli footprints
were made by Lucy's kind, Australopithecus afarensis.223
To put it briefly, these footprints that were
supposed to be 3.6 million years old could not have belonged
to Australopithecus. The only reason why the footprints
were thought to have been left by members of Australopithecus
was the 3.6-million-year-old volcanic layer in which the footprints
were found. The prints were ascribed to Australopithecus
purely on the assumption that humans could not have lived
so long ago.
These interpretations of the Laetoli footprints
demonstrate one important fact. Evolutionists support their
theory not based on scientific findings, but in spite of them.
Here we have a theory that is blindly defended no matter what,
with all new findings that cast the theory into doubt being
either ignored or distorted to support the theory.
Briefly, the theory of evolution is not science,
but a dogma kept alive despite science.
219 A. J. Kelso, Physical
Anthropology, 1.b., 1970, ss. 221; M.D. Leakey, Olduvai
Gorge, volume 3, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1971, s. 272
220 Donald C. Johanson & M. A. Edey, Lucy,
The Beginnings of Humankind, Simon & Schuster, New
York, 1981, p. 250. (emphasis added)
221 "The Leakey Footprints: An Uncertain
Path," Science News, vol. 115, 1979, p. 196.
222 Ian Anderson, "Who made the Laetoli
footprints?" New Scientist, vol. 98, 12 May 1983,
p. 373. (emphasis added)
223 Russell H. Tuttle, "The Pitted Pattern
of Laetoli Feet," Natural History, vol. 99, March
1990, p. 64. (emphasis added)