Skip to comments.Ancient boy's skeleton sparks evolution debate (In Kenya)
Posted on 02/06/2007 5:54:32 PM PST by DaveLoneRanger
Deep in the dusty, unlit corridors of Kenya's national museum, locked away in a plain-looking cabinet, is one of mankind's oldest relics: Turkana Boy, as he is known, the most complete skeleton of a prehistoric human ever found.
But his first public display later this year is at the heart of a growing storm -- one pitting scientists against Kenya's powerful and popular evangelical Christian movement. The debate over evolution vs. creationism -- once largely confined to the United States -- has arrived in a country known as the cradle of mankind.
"I did not evolve from Turkana Boy or anything like it," says Bishop Boniface Adoyo, head of Kenya's 35 evangelical denominations, which he claims have 10 million followers. "These sorts of silly views are killing our faith."
He's calling on his flock to boycott the exhibition and has demanded the museum relegate the fossil collection to a back room -- along with some kind of notice saying evolution is not a fact but merely one of a number of theories.
Against him is one of the planet's best-known fossil hunters, Richard Leakey, whose team unearthed the bones at Nariokotome in West Turkana, in the desolate, far northern reaches of Kenya in 1984.
"Whether the bishop likes it or not, Turkana Boy is a distant relation of his," Leakey, who founded the museum's prehistory department, told The Associated Press. "The bishop is descended from the apes and these fossils tell how he evolved."
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
Bishop Adoyo believes the world was created 12,000 years ago, with man appearing 6,000 years later. He says each biblical day was equivalent to 1,000 Earth years.
So! Even Bishop Adoyo compromises a little. But as I've stated before about this case in Kenya, the creationists there are going about it all wrong. They embody the evolutionary characterization of creationists looking like this:
Wrong way to go about it. Instead, meet their interpretation head-on. This evidence isn't "theirs." They're just looking at the evidence through a certain filter of beliefs and assumptions. This specific specimen, Turkana Boy, was likely just as human as you or I.
For more reading pertaining to human fossils, I recommend the following page: Homo erectus 'to' modern man: evolution or human variability?
""I did not evolve from Turkana Boy or anything like it," says Bishop Boniface Adoyo... " And he surely did not evolve, because he hasn't, and it shows.
I don't know much about your ancestors but
Mine didn't swing from a tree.
What tree? Mine lived in the best cave in the neighborhood.
"Mine didn't swing from a tree. "
Then why can't you make your own Vitamin C like your dog can?
The article doesn't say. How long ago did the kiddo live?
How could it be otherwise? There are so many living specimens of humans that differ vastly from the norms in various respects; this is much ado about nothing.
It's only a skeleton of an individual; let those that wish to view it do so.
Gee, that was cheap...
This is more from the camp Leakey/Dubois gang, right?
"Whether the bishop likes it or not, Turkana Boy is a distant relation of his," Leakey, who founded the museum's prehistory department, told The Associated Press.
Well, if Leakey said it, it absolutely has to be true. End of story. /s
...so you want everyone else to get that song in their heads for the next 30? :)
Dino makes this stuff?
Mine ate insects for about 100,000,000 years.
Thankfully the seals living in the arctic make so much vitamin C their hides are full of it, and people who hunt and eat seals get their vitamin C from those animals.
Supposedly a single reversal of a single base in one gene keeps us from producing our own vitamin C.
They can have my vitamin C when they pry my cold dead fingers off of my oranges.
I imagine that Richard Leakey know the correct way to say things, but I recall being slapped on FR for phrasing it that way. The pro-evolution people (IIRC) take offense at this sloppy wording. Humans and apes share a common ancester, or some such phrasing, is correct. But to make an assertion the way Richard Leakey did is to brand oneself as an ignorant slug who doesn't know enough about Evolution to discuss it intelligently. Which I find amusing.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.