According to some evolutionary biologists, pre-human creatures started on the road to becoming human about 7,000,000 years ago. So exactly what do they think happened to make that advance?
According to a “new study” published in Nature magazine written by Franck Guy, a research fellow at Université de Poitiers in France, “researchers looked at a femur and two ulna arm bones of Sahelanthropus Tchadensis,” one of the earliest known supposed human ancestors, and found signs that they walked on two feet. He believes from this observation that “the remnants of the ancient beings show that bipedalism (the ability to walk on two feet) emerged soon after chimpanzees and human ancestors diverged on their evolutionary tracks.” He concluded that, “the new analysis of the limbs from that find provides even more evidence that hominins were traveling on two legs when they roamed Earth about 7 million years ago.”
In the end, Guy concluded that it was bipedalism that provided ancient human ancestors with the kind of advantage they needed to evolve further – and the advantage was that it gave them more energy to travel. They say that bipedalism was the big differentiator from apes that helped humans free up their hands and enabled them to develop tools. Another evolutionary biologist, commenting on Guy’s conclusions said, “We proved Darwin right. That’s kind of cool.”
There’s only one problem. None of this “new research” proved anything. They didn’t start out with any kind of objective evidence that their conclusion was accurate. There is no actual proof whatsoever that their interpretation that the femur and two ulna arm bones of Sahelanthropus Tchadensis affirms bipedalism’s link to evolutionary advancement – or even that there is such a thing as “evolutionary advancement” in the way they define it. So what we see is that they didn’t start with science. They started with a “belief” that naturalistic evolution is true, then read into the characteristics of the bones the kind of “facts” that supposedly supported their philosophical presuppositions. THAT IS NOT SCIENCE!!!
But that is the way evolutionary “science” works. These “scientists” don’t look at evidence and prove with it that naturalistic evolution is true. Rather, they start with the belief that it is true, then try to figure out a way that the fossils they find can fit into their belief. That is no different than what people do when they try to prove false beliefs using the Bible by cherry picking out of context Bible verses and reinterpreting them to go along with their beliefs.
I don’t know if you have ever gotten into a discussion with someone who firmly believes in naturalistic evolution, but they are religious zealots. They will throw out all kinds of statements based on unproven (and unprovable) assumptions, and they honestly believe they are basing their statements on science. In doing that, they treat their beliefs “as if” they were science, and treat science “as if” it were a belief system.
Science is a methodology, not a belief system. It is the use of observation and experimentation to discover things about the natural world. When it comes to naturalistic evolution, it has never been observed in nature, and there is no experiment that has ever been done that demonstrates it is even possible for less complex life forms to evolve to more complex forms.
Guy’s conclusions are bogus! He can speculate all he wants about how the shape of those bones “might be” evidence that some pre-human ancestor became able to stand upright on the evolutionary road to becoming human, but his speculation is only as good as his presuppositions. And in that arena, “he ain’t got nuttin.”