Except serve as evidence for common ancestry for chimps and humans.
I really don't know how you figure. Most of the fossil evidence for our ape ancestory comes from central Africa. Paleontology lays claim to thousands of fossils of human ancestors but virtually none of the apes. This is truely odd since central Africa is the only place in the world where apes life.
It would be expect that were you to find another fossil somewhere else it would be human rather then ape, if your a Creationist I mean.
Can you see the problem with this statement by the Smithsonian Insitute about Turkana Boy?
"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."
http://www.mnh.si.edu/anthro/humanorigins/ha/WT15k.html
Do they expect us to believe that chimpanzees from 9-12 years old stand 5 foot tall, weigh 150 lbs with a cranial capacity nearly 900cc? This was found in Southern Africa (Hadar) not in Central Africa where apes actually live, which leds us to future conclude that this is nothing more then an antideluving human child.
Something else that might be of interest. You remember Lucy right, the little ape they paraded as one of our ancestors for so long. They like to place her at least 5 million years out because she was fully bipedal. Did you know that they actually tested the bed she came out of once and found that it was actually about 900,000 years old?
Here is the best part, Lucy was buried beneath some kind of volcanic ash which is why she was so well preserved. Her contemporaries died, in mass, but in a different way. That drowned in somekind of a flood apparently:
"Michael Bush, one of Don Johanson's students, made another major discovery in 1975: near Lucy, on the other side of the hill, he found the "First Family", including 200 fragments of A. afarensis. The site of the findings is now known as "site 333", by a count of fossil fragments uncovered, such as teeth and pieces of jaw. 13 individuals were uncovered and all were adults, with no injuries caused by carnivores. All 13 individuals seemed to have died at the same time, thus Don concluded that they might have been killed instantly from a flash flood"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australopithecus_afarensis
Piltdown survived was considered actual scientific evidence for 50 years. The actual evidence is telling us something very different then the evolutionist would have us believe. As a matter of fact it has been my experience that evolutionists change the subject when genetics and fossils come up. The evidence does not support their case much at all.
You can handwave and tell everyone how your incredulity won't allow you to accept brain growth, but the evidence is right there in the skulls of Austral and Homo fossils as well as the genes which you reject "just because."
I do look at the evidence and it is telling me that 2 1/2 million years ago our ancestors doubled their cranial capacity overnight. The leap from Homo Habilis (ape) to Homo erectus (human) is something I focus on in great detail in my posts. For whatever reason, you don't like actually looking at the evidence, instead you rely on generalities and clutch phrases.
That's great, but it doesn't mean you can start a thread about common ancestry and just ignore or handwave away all the other evidence that is out there including ERVs, pseudogenes and Chromosome 2.
Ok, ERVs would seem to be polymorphisms of somekind. They appear to make up 10% of the human genome and by some coincidence share common nucleotides with the Chimpanzee sequence. I don't see what this nonfunctioning coincidence has to do with anything or why you care about pseudogenes.
A Chromosome 2 fusion would account for one pericentric inversion. There are 8 in all that total 20 million nucloetides, and that one is well into the millions. This happens without a single gene being damaged. All you are interested in is ancedotal evidence that is coincidental and does not offer a single clue what mechanism evolved the human brain. Science is about having a demonstrated mechanism or directly observation, you have neither.
I did look at the evidence with you and found it fascinating that you would rather talk about Lock Ness monsters then the actual fossils. You are happy to assume we have an ancestor in common with chimps but you don't have a clue how a primate brain triples in size. Our brain is 6 times what it should be for other mammals and three time what it is for apes. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof and I am seeing less and less actual proof over time.
You don't have a demonstrated mechanism, do you know how I know that you don't have one? Every single researcher that has actually looked into this admits it in no uncertain terms based on the evidence, not dispite it.
