Actually all you evos, Loudmouth was silly enough to mention chimp characteristics in his intial reply. This was a very silly thing to do. Loudmouth also woffled on for weeks about the chimp-like connection to his embarassment, because even I know better than that.
Now let's look at this flavour of the month invented of course after you lot realized that chimp-like is falsified and not the way to go. Evos had to invent a brand new story recently that falsified 150 years of evolutionary history to yet again invent another myth to save the day...
"A
transitional fossil is any
fossilized remains of a lifeform that exhibits characteristics of two distinct
taxonomic groups. A transitional fossil is the fossil of an organism near the branching point where major individual lineages (
clades)
diverge. It will have characteristics typical of organisms on both sides of the split, but because of the incompleteness of the fossil record, there is usually no way to know exactly how close it is to the actual point of divergence."
Now what are these traits that are relating to humanity?
You know that bipedalism was first displayed in non human apes eg Lucy. Reduced facial features were demonstated in Lluc 12mya, and most importantly mankind has much more in common with an orang than a chimp.
Then of course there is brain size and I have already spoken to with Turkana Boy having no bigger cranial capacity than an ape like Rudolfensis that has a brain capacity of 525cc and does not observe nor address the variation between species.
Then of course there is my point that erectus and Turk were too stupid to light and control fire and is a short waddler anyway about to undergo a pelvic reconstruction. Erectus is also too stupid to raise large brained dependent babies.
Of course using your own psuedo science against you is necessary to demonstrate that evolutionists have lost the science of observation and replaced it with story telling and algorithmic magic.
Additionally Loudmouth can finally give his ideas on Turks whackey pelvis and defend it as a single individual.
Additionally researchers can reconstruct shattered fragments to reflect anything they want eg Turks pelvis, and Rudolfensis' initial Leakey flat face, morphing into an ape head after Leakey was shown to have produced a biased reconstruction.
Then let's not forget the 'human' fossils that turned out to be an ornagutan and a pig. The fact is that evolutionists would not know what a human trait looks like anymore yet they base a definition on a mix of human traits.
The overarching theme I am presenting is that all evidence for human ancestry is based on myth, inconsistency and non plausibility.
Go!........