• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

  • CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.

Turkana Child KNM-WT 15000

Status
Not open for further replies.

hiscosmicgoldfish

Liberal Anglican
Mar 1, 2008
3,592
59
✟26,767.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Single
Politics
UK-Conservative
Hi,
can anyone cast light on this Turkana Boy? I've read a bit about it, and get various information, such as he has an extra set of ribs, no jawbone, and narrower hips. It is a human? I also read that the cross section of the bones in the spine were different from humans. Has anyone got any good info. from an open-minded source that can clear up this matter, as this Turkana Boy would decide one way or the other for evolution as far as I can tell.
I'm presently an old-earth creationist.
cosmic
 

HypnoToad

*croak*
Site Supporter
May 29, 2005
5,876
485
✟104,802.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
where are you getting your info about the "extra ribs" and "no jaw"?

this link mentions nothing about those supposed irregularities, pictures include the jaw

wikipedia's page mentions nothing of it, picture includes the jaw

I looked at several other articles, none included what you said.
 
Upvote 0

hiscosmicgoldfish

Liberal Anglican
Mar 1, 2008
3,592
59
✟26,767.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Single
Politics
UK-Conservative
that talk origins link quotes the ...
The most striking is that the holes in his vertebrae, through which the spinal cord goes, have only about half the cross-sectional area found in modern humans.

this alone, if true, would prove it to be non-human?

I can't remember where I saw the other info. I thought it was Wikipedia, I must have read it somewhere else.

wikipedia.. The pelvic structure is narrower than in modern Homo sapiens,
did you not read this on wikipedia..
However, the similarity should not be taken to be too great. The overall KNM-WT 15000 skeleton still had features (such as a low sloping forehead, strong brow ridges, and the absence of a chin) not seen in present day modern humans.
sorry I meant to say no chin rather than no jaw, but where the extra ribs came from I can't remember.
 
Upvote 0

mark kennedy

Natura non facit saltum
Site Supporter
Mar 16, 2004
22,030
7,265
62
Indianapolis, IN
✟594,630.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
The Turkana Boy skeleton is human in every meaningful measurement. The detailed specifics indicate that this boy of 9-12 years old was completely human.

Earlier humans had roughly the same body size as modern chimpanzee. Yet this immature male had already surpassed a height of five feet at the time of his death, and probably would have attained a height of 6 feet and a weight of roughly 150 lbs., assuming Homo ergaster underwent an adolescent growthspurt as modern teenagers do. The hips were more slender and adapted to walking and running over long distances. The proportions of his arm and leg bones were like those of modern humans, as opposed to the shorter legs and longer arms (more ape-like proportions) of Homo habilis and A. afarensis. The cranial capacity of WT 15000 is measured at 880cc. Using the same extrapolations that were used for height, it is estimated that he would have attained an adult cranial capacity of 909cc. His body was long and slender, probably adapted to a tropical environment, given that most tropical populations of modern humans are also tall and slender. KNM WT 15000 "The Turkana Boy". Human Family Tree

The only thing that makes Turkana Boy different then modern humans is the size of the skull which is well below the average cranial capacity but well within the range of modern humans. The immediate ancestor was thought to be Homo habilis who was for all intents and purposed nothing more then an ape. The brain of the Homo ergaster populations would have had to double the cranial capacity roughly 2 million years ago and fully develop the skeleton structure with virtually no precursors.

The co-discoverers describe the detailed specifics in the following book. The skeleton for all intents and purposes is simply human. Something I might add, no one would have expected to find from a nearly complete skeleton between 1.5 and 1.9 million years ago.

An finally, it is striking to us to see how humans this early member of our own genus was over 1.5 mya. In limb proportions and body proportions, in tooth features, in the spinal column with it's curvatures, in the thorax with the characteristic hominid rib torsion, this skelleton looks human. It is possible to find several primitive features, such as the relatively small brain, but one has to search for them. (The Nariokotome Homo erectus Skeleton. Alan Walker and Richard Leaky)​
 
Upvote 0

hiscosmicgoldfish

Liberal Anglican
Mar 1, 2008
3,592
59
✟26,767.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Single
Politics
UK-Conservative
The Turkana Boy skeleton is human in every meaningful measurement. The detailed specifics indicate that this boy of 9-12 years old was completely human.

Earlier humans had roughly the same body size as modern chimpanzee. Yet this immature male had already surpassed a height of five feet at the time of his death, and probably would have attained a height of 6 feet and a weight of roughly 150 lbs., assuming Homo ergaster underwent an adolescent growthspurt as modern teenagers do. The hips were more slender and adapted to walking and running over long distances. The proportions of his arm and leg bones were like those of modern humans, as opposed to the shorter legs and longer arms (more ape-like proportions) of Homo habilis and A. afarensis. The cranial capacity of WT 15000 is measured at 880cc. Using the same extrapolations that were used for height, it is estimated that he would have attained an adult cranial capacity of 909cc. His body was long and slender, probably adapted to a tropical environment, given that most tropical populations of modern humans are also tall and slender. KNM WT 15000 "The Turkana Boy". Human Family Tree

The only thing that makes Turkana Boy different then modern humans is the size of the skull which is well below the average cranial capacity but well within the range of modern humans. The immediate ancestor was thought to be Homo habilis who was for all intents and purposed nothing more then an ape. The brain of the Homo ergaster populations would have had to double the cranial capacity roughly 2 million years ago and fully develop the skeleton structure with virtually no precursors.

The co-discoverers describe the detailed specifics in the following book. The skeleton for all intents and purposes is simply human. Something I might add, no one would have expected to find from a nearly complete skeleton between 1.5 and 1.9 million years ago.

An finally, it is striking to us to see how humans this early member of our own genus was over 1.5 mya. In limb proportions and body proportions, in tooth features, in the spinal column with it's curvatures, in the thorax with the characteristic hominid rib torsion, this skelleton looks human. It is possible to find several primitive features, such as the relatively small brain, but one has to search for them. (The Nariokotome Homo erectus Skeleton. Alan Walker and Richard Leaky)​
what about the reported cross-section difference of the spine? Without actually seeing this, I have to take the word of this person who made the report.
 
Upvote 0

mark kennedy

Natura non facit saltum
Site Supporter
Mar 16, 2004
22,030
7,265
62
Indianapolis, IN
✟594,630.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
what about the reported cross-section difference of the spine? Without actually seeing this, I have to take the word of this person who made the report.

The answer is that the skeleton is human, there are variations of human anatomy, that's all the differences here represent. The main reason for my being a Creationist is that there is not genuine transitional form. Homo habilis was very much an ape and a probably an ancient chimpanzee. The only difference is that they are bigger then modern ones, that's about it. Home erectus represent human ancestors and that is about it.

I've been over all of this for years now, the case for humans being descended from apes is a fraud.
 
Upvote 0

hiscosmicgoldfish

Liberal Anglican
Mar 1, 2008
3,592
59
✟26,767.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Single
Politics
UK-Conservative
The answer is that the skeleton is human, there are variations of human anatomy, that's all the differences here represent. The main reason for my being a Creationist is that there is not genuine transitional form. Homo habilis was very much an ape and a probably an ancient chimpanzee. The only difference is that they are bigger then modern ones, that's about it. Home erectus represent human ancestors and that is about it.

I've been over all of this for years now, the case for humans being descended from apes is a fraud.
My personal opinion is that the homonids are extinct species of African Apes. I thought this years ago, that there don't seem to be many species of extinct African apes listed.
There'd have to be some good evidence presented for me to change my 'hunch', I suppose.
I thought Turkana Boy might be up to the task of a transition species.
 
Upvote 0

mark kennedy

Natura non facit saltum
Site Supporter
Mar 16, 2004
22,030
7,265
62
Indianapolis, IN
✟594,630.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
My personal opinion is that the homonids are extinct species of African Apes. I thought this years ago, that there don't seem to be many species of extinct African apes listed.
There'd have to be some good evidence presented for me to change my 'hunch', I suppose.
I thought Turkana Boy might be up to the task of a transition species.

Let me illustrate it for you:

homonlucy.gif

Human Origins and Intelligent Design

Notice the dramatic difference, ask yourself two questions. One, how long did this take? Two, how many differences are there really?

That's Homo habilis and Turkana Boy and it does not remotely qualify as a transitional. If it is in fact the offspring of Homo habilis, which it would undoubtedly would have had to be it would be one of the largest giant leaps since the Cambrian Explosion with regards to brain evolution.
 
Upvote 0

shernren

you are not reading this.
Feb 17, 2005
8,463
515
38
Shah Alam, Selangor
Visit site
✟33,881.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
In Relationship
Home erectus represent human ancestors and that is about it.

So what are they, mark, humans or not? (Certainly I am allowed to ask for a clarification on an ambiguous statement, right?)
 
Upvote 0

hiscosmicgoldfish

Liberal Anglican
Mar 1, 2008
3,592
59
✟26,767.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Single
Politics
UK-Conservative
Let me illustrate it for you:

homonlucy.gif

Human Origins and Intelligent Design

Notice the dramatic difference, ask yourself two questions. One, how long did this take? Two, how many differences are there really?

That's Homo habilis and Turkana Boy and it does not remotely qualify as a transitional. If it is in fact the offspring of Homo habilis, which it would undoubtedly would have had to be it would be one of the largest giant leaps since the Cambrian Explosion with regards to brain evolution.
that pic you'v got there isn't anything like Homo Habilis, they don't have a complete Homo Habilis, as far as I know. Anyway I don't 'accept' Homo Habilis in the way that evolutionists do. If you have a look at 'talk origins' web-page, listing the fossils/evolution of man, it's surprising.
They've got KNM-ER 147 which looks human to me, listed as homo habilis, and above and below they'v got other non-human species OH24, KNM ER 1813 and STW53 listed as homo habilis.
IMO KNM-ER 147 needs to be moved out of this line-up.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/specimen.html
 
Upvote 0

mark kennedy

Natura non facit saltum
Site Supporter
Mar 16, 2004
22,030
7,265
62
Indianapolis, IN
✟594,630.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
So what are they, mark, humans or not? (Certainly I am allowed to ask for a clarification on an ambiguous statement, right?)

You know what my position is, Homo habilis is ape and Homo erectus including Turkana Boy is human.
 
Upvote 0

mark kennedy

Natura non facit saltum
Site Supporter
Mar 16, 2004
22,030
7,265
62
Indianapolis, IN
✟594,630.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
that pic you'v got there isn't anything like Homo Habilis, they don't have a complete Homo Habilis, as far as I know. Anyway I don't 'accept' Homo Habilis in the way that evolutionists do. If you have a look at 'talk origins' web-page, listing the fossils/evolution of man, it's surprising.
They've got KNM-ER 147 which looks human to me, listed as homo habilis, and above and below they'v got other non-human species OH24, KNM ER 1813 and STW53 listed as homo habilis.
IMO KNM-ER 147 needs to be moved out of this line-up.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/specimen.html

First of all you will not get good information from Talk Origins, at best they make an interesting primer. I have encountered one evolutionist after another that took what they say as gospel even though their source material is sketchy and dated.

Why don't you take a look around here, it's far more comprehensive and you can get a good look at the fossils:

Early Human Phylogeny

I would direct your attention to the question marks right at the most important transitional in the chart.

anthro9.jpg

It was once thought that the evolution of the genus Homo was an example of anagenesis, the continual and gradual change of one parent species into its daughter species in a linear fashion. As the fossil record began to expand and more early human fossils were found dating to the period between 2 million and 1 million years ago, some questions as to the validity of this hypothesis were raised.​

The Homo habilis Debate
 
Upvote 0

Mallon

Senior Veteran
Mar 6, 2006
6,109
298
✟30,412.00
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Private
You know what my position is, Homo habilis is ape and Homo erectus including Turkana Boy is human.
Out of curiosity, what features make H. habilis an ape, and H. erectus a human? Also, how do you think they might have looked in life?
And what about Homo ergaster?
 
Upvote 0

hiscosmicgoldfish

Liberal Anglican
Mar 1, 2008
3,592
59
✟26,767.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Single
Politics
UK-Conservative
First of all you will not get good information from Talk Origins, at best they make an interesting primer. I have encountered one evolutionist after another that took what they say as gospel even though their source material is sketchy and dated.

Why don't you take a look around here, it's far more comprehensive and you can get a good look at the fossils:

Early Human Phylogeny

I would direct your attention to the question marks right at the most important transitional in the chart.

anthro9.jpg

It was once thought that the evolution of the genus Homo was an example of anagenesis, the continual and gradual change of one parent species into its daughter species in a linear fashion. As the fossil record began to expand and more early human fossils were found dating to the period between 2 million and 1 million years ago, some questions as to the validity of this hypothesis were raised.​

The Homo habilis Debate
thanks for the link, I'll have a look when I have time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mark kennedy
Upvote 0

busterdog

Senior Veteran
Jun 20, 2006
3,359
183
Visit site
✟26,929.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Upvote 0

mark kennedy

Natura non facit saltum
Site Supporter
Mar 16, 2004
22,030
7,265
62
Indianapolis, IN
✟594,630.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
Out of curiosity, what features make H. habilis an ape, and H. erectus a human? Also, how do you think they might have looked in life?
And what about Homo ergaster?

Until about 2.2 million years ago the cranial capacity would be right around 500cc. Right around 1.9 mya it would have doubled to just under 1000cc. The brain and the fully developed skeleton of Turkana begs the question of proof as to how it happened. What is more important is that all of these supposed step by step ancestors were contemporaries. The fact of the matter these prehistoric populations descendants are still contemporary. The problem is that every time an ape fossil is dug up in Africa it is automatically marked HomoXXX and proclaimed to be one of our ancestors. That's why there are no chimpanzee ancestors from the period, they are all 5 foot tall with skulls that are larger then contemporary chimps so they are proclaimed Homo.

For the Creationist this is no problem, everything was bigger before the flood.
 
Upvote 0

mark kennedy

Natura non facit saltum
Site Supporter
Mar 16, 2004
22,030
7,265
62
Indianapolis, IN
✟594,630.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
Have brith defects and nutritional problems been ruled out?

http://www.independentliving.org/docs7/miles200609.html#16

I was impressed to find the quote from Stanly Livingston. He is kind of a personal hero of mine, his ministry was intended to open trade routes to expose the practice of the slave trade. His last journey took him to the mouth of the Nile where he died in prayer.

I think you might have something with the physical defect but don't have a lot to go on.
 
Upvote 0

shernren

you are not reading this.
Feb 17, 2005
8,463
515
38
Shah Alam, Selangor
Visit site
✟33,881.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
In Relationship
Well, as long as this thread is stuck in Creationism you're only going to hear ideas from one side.

Yes, the skull has been analyzed and microcephalic features have not been found. Furthermore, micropcephaly is normally concomitant with dwarfism in modern humans - and yet here you have a hominid with brain case much smaller than normal (about 3-5 standard deviations from average) who would stand about as tall as me.
 
Upvote 0

Mallon

Senior Veteran
Mar 6, 2006
6,109
298
✟30,412.00
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Private
Until about 2.2 million years ago the cranial capacity would be right around 500cc. Right around 1.9 mya it would have doubled to just under 1000cc. The brain and the fully developed skeleton of Turkana begs the question of proof as to how it happened. What is more important is that all of these supposed step by step ancestors were contemporaries. The fact of the matter these prehistoric populations descendants are still contemporary. The problem is that every time an ape fossil is dug up in Africa it is automatically marked HomoXXX and proclaimed to be one of our ancestors. That's why there are no chimpanzee ancestors from the period, they are all 5 foot tall with skulls that are larger then contemporary chimps so they are proclaimed Homo.

For the Creationist this is no problem, everything was bigger before the flood.
Out of curiosity, what features make H. habilis an ape, and H. erectus a human? Also, how do you think they might have looked in life?
And what about Homo ergaster?
 
Upvote 0

mark kennedy

Natura non facit saltum
Site Supporter
Mar 16, 2004
22,030
7,265
62
Indianapolis, IN
✟594,630.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
Out of curiosity, what features make H. habilis an ape, and H. erectus a human? Also, how do you think they might have looked in life?
And what about Homo ergaster?

Virtually the entire skeleton of Turkana Boy and virtually all the Homo erectus skulls. Homo habilis looked like apes, hairy with those big black snouts and long dangley arms. Homo erectus, particularly Turkana boy looked like you in a younger day.

Are you really going to keep rehashing the same question. That is a tired game and I really have lost patience with it.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.