ADNAN OKTAR One of the classical tactics of Darwinists is to bring old fossils back to the agenda and to make up new stories about the same fossil. This is because evolutionists do not want to admit their defeat, yet there is nothing left in their hands to put forth. The most recent example is the news reports coming through media organizations.
The most recent example is the news reports coming through media organizations such as National Geographic and the Washington Post regarding the fossils known as Homo Naledi. Although new claims and attempts are being made about the fossil in question almost every year since 2013, all of these efforts have been in vain.
As it could be remembered, about 1,500 bone fragments were found inside a 1,450- meter deep cave in South Africa in 2013, which are claimed to belong to 15 separate individuals. The information initially disclosed to the public was that the skull volume of these individuals was the size of an orange and that their finger bones were curved; it was thus claimed that the fossils showed "the characteristics of an ape". Actually, there was no proper skull;, four worn out parietal pieces were placed in way that they were suspended in the air without touching each other. Despite this, the claims continued that the creature had a brain weighing some 500 grams and a cranial capacity about the size of an orange.
We have documented in our previous articles that the news reports regarding this fossil do not reflect the truth and that the prejudiced evolutionist comments were made without fully determining the age and characteristics of the fossils. You can read our responses - given in 2015 and 2016 - in two separate articles on the fact that the so-called evolutionary gradation cannot be made according to the volume of the skull.
(http://harunyahya.com/en/NetCevap/209368/The-Evolutionist-Scenario-over-“Homo-naledi”-Has-Come-to-Nothing and http://harunyahya.com/en/NetCevap/241668/Darwinist-Tales-Are-Repeated-on-CNN-Homo-Naledi) However, since speculative news continues to be published in 2017 regarding the Homo Naledi fossils, it will be useful to bring the issue back to the agenda and to decipher the Darwinists' schemes:
Homo naledi doesn't belong to 2.5 million-year-old species, but to a 250,000 -year-old species
The Homo Naledi fossils were first presented to the public as 2.5 million-years-old when first discovered. Moreover, the gradation was made to fit this scenario of evolution according to this age, and imaginary evolutionary trees of life were thus drawn up. It was so exaggerated that it was alleged that the creature was the so-called "missing link" that existed between Australopithecus and H. erectus. In many media outlets, these claims were presented to the public as if they were scientific. However, as a result of the latest age determination measures it was understood that H. Naledi fossils were between 236,000 and 335,000 years-old. This result shocked evolutionist circles and it was once again understood that the scenario of an intermediate form on Naledi's age was simply a fictional story, far from being scientific. These are important in showing that it is necessary to adopt a suspicious approach to all so-calledevolutionary grading carried out by the evolutionists through anatomical measurements such as skull volume.
According to evolutionary scenarios before 2017, H. Naledi was presented as an intermediate form in the so-called evolutionary gradation of mankind. However, it became clear that H. Naledi, with its 250,000 year-old age as verified by the latest studies, existed almost in the same period with a human species which is estimated to date back about 200,000 years ago. This is important in demonstrating how wild the evolutionists’ imagination gets when there is no scientific evidence.
Age determination methods are far from providing exact results
Today, two main methods are used for age determination. One of these is the comparison method based on the idea that the fossils, lying in the same stratum, existed in the same period, which is determined through conducting an age determination of various strata. The second is a radioactive dating method based on the decomposition of radioactive atoms, such as carbon and uranium, found in the collagen tissue samples of fossil remains. Both methods have an intrinsic margin of error.
The age determination of strata is only applicable for volcanic and sedimentary rocks. Even if the age determination of the strata is carried out, one cannot be certain whether the strata changed place after the fossil formation. In places such as caves, where stratification is limited or in places washed by rivers, the margin of error in information provided by the strata increases.
Likewise, the methods based on radioactive decomposition are far from providing precise information. The radioactive method should be a "closed system" in order to be used in age determination. The closed system is conducted assuming that the transfer of radioactive material is stopped after the fossil remains are buried in the soil and there is no subsequent exchange of new material. The "open system", in which the material exchange continues, won't be used for age determination as the amount of decomposition will not be accurate. However, since there is no method that can detect whether a fossil is exposed to a closed or open system, no definitive conclusion can be reached to state that “the fossil was not exposed to an open system.”
Another limiting case, questioning the reliability of age determination methods, is that samples taken from different regions of the same fossil can give different ages. The aforementioned open system exposure that causes different effects in different tissues, is shown as the reason of this.
As a matter of fact, the age determination range estimated for the Naledi fossils offers an extended period of time, as much as 100,000 years. This is an indication of the fact that the method is not entirely reliable. In spite of such a wide range regarding the dating of the fossil, it is not certain that Naledi is younger or older than calculated.
Comments made without any knowledge of DNA are unscientific
All of the comments based on the anatomical features on ancient fossils, as in the case of Naledi, are speculative. The interspecies and intraspecies phenotypic differences only allow interpretations concerning which species the discovered fossil belongs to be based on evolutionist belief rather than being scientific. As a matter of fact, history is full of pseudo-scientific misconceptions and frauds based on topographic features.
Definitively proving which species a fossil belongs to is only possible with the knowledge of the DNA sequence of the concerned fossil. But since the DNA cannot remain intact for many years due to its structure, it is not possible to obtain DNA sequences in fossils. DNA studies, conducted by evolutionist circles on fossils from time to time, cannot give definitive results because these studies are based on statistical calculations and the DNA can be mixed with other species' DNA or degenerate and decompose. The comments made without the knowledge of DNA are bound to be far from being scientific.
A new scenario is written for Naledi after our knowledge regarding its age is corrected
After the discovering that H. Naledi, which was presented as a 2.5 million-year-old so-called intermediate form, was only about 250,000 years old, the whole evolutionist scenario collapsed. However, the Darwinists would not rest. The intermediate form claim is revised; another scenario is put forward. This time, they claimed that Homo Naledi, having lived with Homo sapiens 250,000 years ago, was a so-called "hominid" that came into existence 2 million years ago and remained unchanged until 250,000 years ago.
Just as the first scenario was groundlessly put forward, this scenario is not based on any scientific basis either. There is no fossil of a H. Naledi which existed 2 million years ago. The only thing that exists is the boundless and non-scientific imagination of evolutionists.
The effort to associate an ape to human is in vain.
Only based on its brain size, H. Naledi was assumed to have lived 2.5 million years ago. Since humans suddenly appeared in the fossil records, there should have been intermediate forms according to the so-called evolution scenario. Darwinists, who considered H. Naledi open to speculation, tried to use H. Naledi for this purpose, but this lasted but a short time. When Naledi’s real age was discovered, these claims became invalid.
It is understood from the obtained fossil structures that H. Naledi is an ape species with a small brain volume and curved phalanges. Naledi existed in the same period with humans. In this case, Darwinist claims that H. Naledi was the “ancestor of humans”, became meaningless. Moreover, even if Naledi had existed 2.5 million years ago, this would not place it in the intermediate form category because Naledi was a fully developed living being with all its organs and functions. As is, it has nothing to serve the purposes of evolutionists.
Infinite number of scenarios can be produced when there is no need for scientific evidence. However they would have no importance as delusions can never cover the truth. Having existed in one stage of history and gone extinct, H. Naledi is an ape species and just like every other life form was created by God.