Originally posted by John MacNeil All of the hominid skulls found by science, and of which a categorical representation is displayed by the Smithsonian Institution on their website, are the known fossil evidence. Only one type of hominid skull displayed is representative of the existing species of hominid on the planet at this time. That hominid skull is of the Cro-Magnon. All of the previously dated skulls represented in the display are substantially different and, scientifically, are differentiated in numerous measurements. The Cro-Magnon skulls are dated to 30,000 year ago and there is no intermediate species that could be a link to the more primitive appearing species of hominids.
But I posted intermediate
individuals that link H. sapiens (Cro-Magnon) with H. erectus. The differences are not "substantial" and show an intermediate character. Such as the skulls from the Olmo I and II sites in Africa.
Now, why don't you specify those "numerous measurements" for us. Citations, please.
Such a link must be scientifically proven, and not just believed in, for a theory of evolution to be viable.
Fossils are not the only evidence. Of course, you also limited yours to the "skull" didn't you? Ever think that there are more bones in the body than the skull?
Tompkins RL. Relative dental development of Upper Pleistocene hominids compared to human population variation. Am J Phys Anthropol 1996; 99(1):103-118.
13: Am J Phys Anthropol 1999 Nov;110(3):365-77
Ontogeny and phylogeny of femoro-tibial characters in humans and hominid fossils: functional influence and genetic determinism.Tardieu C U.R.A.1137 C.N.R.S., Laboratoire d'Anatomie Comparee, M.N.H.N., 75005 Paris,
France.
tardieu@mnhn.fr
"Three different human femoro-tibial characters are selected as functionally relevant and derived hominid characters: femoral bicondylar angle, shape of the femoral distal epiphysis, and the tibial insertion of the lateral meniscus. The timing and mode of formation of these characters are investigated during human
ontogeny and are shown to differ considerably. The available hominid fossils (Australopithecus afarensis and early Homo) are interpreted in the light of this ontogenetic analysis with the conclusion that, during hominid evolution, different modes of selection of these features must have occurred. In modern
humans, the femoral bicondylar angle proves to be an epigenetic functional feature, which develops during early childhood growth. It is present in all australopithecines and we suggest that it developed following a change in their locomotor behavior and not upon a genomic change: the early practice of bipedal walking, with adducted knee joints, in the locomotor repertoire of infant
australopithecines, was sufficient to promote this angle. Later in hominid evolution, the knee joint evolved from having a single insertion of the lateral meniscus on the tibia to a double one. While Australopithecus afarensis exhibits a single insertion, early Homo clearly exhibits a double insertion of the lateral meniscus on the tibia. The double insertion restricts the mobility of
the meniscus on the tibial plateau, indicating a habitual practice of full extension movements of the knee joint. Among modern humans, the posterior insertion of the lateral meniscus appears early in fetal life. Consequently in early Homo, this new selected feature developed directly as a result of a genomic change. The derived shape of human distal femoral epiphysis includes a prominence of the lateral lip of the femoral trochlea, an elliptical profile of the lateral condyle, and an anteroposterior lengthening of the epiphysis. Analysis of human fetal and neonatal distal epiphyses shows that the prominence of the lateral lip of the trochlea arises before any use, and thus appears to be genetically determined. However, the postnatal development of this joint shows that this feature is also modified epigenetically by use. It is argued that the hominid femoro-patellar joint would have been reshaped following the process of genetic assimilation (Waddington [1942] Nature 3811:563-565)."
The body of the paper lists individual fossils from A. afarensis, H. habilis, H. erectus, and H. sapiens showing the transition of the features.
Of course, if you want "proof" of the transition in brain volume, there is this paper.
Leigh SR. Cranial capacity evolution in Homo erectus and early Homo sapiens. Am J Phys Anthropol 1992; 87(1):1-13.
That key question for the evolution theory is, "How does the fossil evidence link Cro-Magnon to the next previous hominid from which it derived?"
As all scientists know, judging from the fossil evidence, there is no evidence that links Cro-Magnon to any previous species of hominid.
Hmm, you seem to be able to ignore the links I've stated, don't you? You seem to be forgetting the scientists whose papers I'm posting. Do your PubMed search and then get back to us.
The people who profess that the link exists but that we just haven't found it are not scientifically minded,
We are claiming that the transistional individuals exist and have been found. A couple of dozen of them. Fossils with features so mixed between H. sapiens and H. erectus that it is arbitrary as to which species you assign them to.
