We’ve been expecting this. Discovery Institute “senior fellow” Günter Bechly has a record of celebrating the demise of Darwinism whenever something new is discovered that requires the revision of some species’ evolutionary timeline. A typical example is in Günter Bechly: Evolution Has Collapsed! — about a discovery that could require revising the timing of human migration out of Africa.
The latest discovery that has excited Günter was reported at PhysOrg last week in New species of early human found in the Philippines. You’ve almost certainly heard the news already, so we’ll give you only a couple of excerpts. They say:
An international team of researchers have uncovered the remains of a new species of human in the Philippines, proving the region played a key role in hominin evolutionary history. The new species, Homo luzonensis, is named after Luzon Island, where the more than 50,000 year old fossils were found during excavations at Callao Cave. Co-author and a lead member of the team, Professor Philip Piper from The Australian National University (ANU) says the findings represent a major breakthrough in our understanding of human evolution across Southeast Asia.
The researchers uncovered the remains of at least two adults and one juvenile within the same archaeological deposits. “The fossil remains included adult finger and toe bones, as well as teeth. We also recovered a child’s femur. There are some really interesting features – for example, the teeth are really small,” Professor Piper said.
Here’s the paper published in Nature: A new species of Homo from the Late Pleistocene of the Philippines. You need a subscription to see more than the abstract.
There’s another article at PhysOrg about the controversial nature of the new discovery: How much evidence is enough to declare a new species of human? It says:
The announcement of a new species of ancient human (more correctly hominin) from the Philippines, reported today in Nature, will cause a lot of head-shaking among anthropologists and archaeologists. Some will greet the publication with wild enthusiasm, believing it confirms their own views about our evolutionary past. Others will howl angrily, believing the declaration goes way too far with too little evidence.
You can read it for yourself. The situation is ideal for Günter Bechly. He just wrote New Fossil Human Species Thwarts Core Darwinian Predictions, which is posted at the Discoveroids’ creationist blog. Here are some excerpts, with bold font added by us for emphasis, and occasional Curmudgeonly interjections that look [like this]:
The rewriting of the evolutionary narrative of human origins is proceeding at such an unbelievable pace that I am running out of new ways to introduce my comments on the latest findings. … I can hardly resist the temptation to say “I told you so,” or to jokingly remark, “Oops, they did it again.” Let’s instead have a closer look at the actual evidence and the implications of this new discovery.
We’ll spare you the details of Günter’s romp through the evidence. It’s all there in his article if you want to slog through it. In his final paragraph he says:
This new discovery is highly interesting and by no means junk science. It confirms that the fossil evidence supports neither an unambiguous phylogenetic tree of fossil humans nor a smooth directional evolutionary trajectory from ape-like to human-like forms. Furthermore, the fossils occur at the wrong place and the wrong time. Therefore, we see three core predictions of neo-Darwinian evolutionary theory again refuted by empirical data.
Egad, Darwinism is in crisis! Continuing his final paragraph, he tells us:
That’s how good science is supposed to work according to the late great philosopher of science Sir Karl Popper (1963): Conjectures and Refutations! If a theory and its proponents stubbornly refuse falsification by an ever increasing body of substantial conflicting evidence, the theory degenerates into a textbook example of dogmatic pseudo-science. The neo-Darwinian theory of macroevolution has failed on all fronts, from mathematical feasibility, to theoretical plausibility and explanatory power, to empirical support.
So there you are, dear reader. According to Günter, Darwinism has failed once again. That means you can rejoice in the certain knowledge that you ain’t no kin to no monkey.
Copyright © 2019. The Sensuous Curmudgeon. All rights reserved.