Further to my previous article regarding the failure of the fossil record to support evolution, a comprehensive treatment of this topic requires that I deal specifically with the supposed ape-man transitional forms in the proposed evolutionary tree of humans. Currently, paleoanthropologists identify a range of fossil skulls they claim demonstrate a transition from ape-like ancestors to modern homo sapiens. These include:
- Homo habilis: Small cranial capacity (~500–700 cc), rounded skull, prognathic face.
- Homo erectus: Cranial capacity (~800–1100 cc), heavy brow ridges, long low cranium.
- Neanderthals: Cranial capacity (~1200–1750 cc, oftenlarger than modern humans), prominent brow ridges, occipital bun, robust bone structure.
- Archaic Homo sapiens: A catch-all category, often resembling Homo erectus or Neanderthals but with slightly more modern traits.
The identification of these as transitional forms is based entirely upon cranial morphology: the supposed marked differences that these skulls exhibit from those of modern humans. These differences include Prominent supraorbital ridges (brow ridges), Occipital buns (a rear protrusion of the skull), Long, low cranial vaults (a flatter skull shape) and a protruding jaw.
For example, above is an image from an article in the Harvard Gazette, February 28, 2002, entitled “Skull and Face Changes Define Modern Humans” which contrasts the rounded cranial morphology of modern humans (on the left) with a supposedly pre-human skull shape (on the right).
To put it simply, evolutionists claim that skulls that exhibit the kind of cranial morphology of the image on the right must be pre-human. But this is evidentially not true. The same or very similar skull morphology persists through to the present day among some populations, particularly some people groups living in Africa, Papua New Guinea, Indonesia, Polynesia and among the Australian Aborigines. For example, the image below is of a contemporary Australian Aborigine. If you showed this skull to an evolutionist who did not know its history it would be unequivocally identified as pre-human based upon its morphology, but the truth is it belongs to a modern human who died within the last 200 years! The skull was discovered near the Darling River in 1905 and belongs to a man who died in the 1800s or later.
A strong case can be made from the creationist viewpoint that what evolutionary theory classifies as “pre-human” or hominin cranial morphology could, instead, represent natural variation within the human kind (homo sapiens)—a variation that still persists to some extent in contemporary human populations.
Contemporary Cranial Variation in Human Populations
Anthropological studies confirm that substantial morphological diversity exists within modern humans, even across cranial features. Some modern populations exhibit traits that closely resemble so-called “primitive” or pre-human skull characteristics.
For example, the previous quoted article in the Harvard Gazette, February 28, 2002, entitled “Skull and Face Changes Define Modern Humans”, admits:
“Cranial morphology, or skull shape, varies significantly among modern human populations globally. This variation is influenced by a combination of genetic factors, population history, and potentially environmental influences. Key areas of difference include skull shape (length/breadth), facial profile, and cranial vault features like the forehead and occipital incline. For example, the length/breadth ratio of the neurocranium (the skull that houses the brain) shows considerable variation, with African populations generally having elongated crania and Northeast Asians possessing globular crania. Similarly, facial proportions (length and width) are often correlated with overall cranial size. Larger crania tend to have longer and narrower facial profiles, as seen in some American Native and Northeast Asian populations.”
Examining modern human cranial morphology in greater detail, we find the following:
A. Brow Ridges and Skull Shape
- Prominentsupraorbital ridges (brow ridges) are still found in some populations, particularly among certain Aboriginal Australians and Melanesians.
- Occipital buns(a rear protrusion of the skull), a characteristic of Neanderthals, also occur in some Europeans.
- Long, low cranial vaults(common in Homo erectus) appear in various modern human skulls.
B. Cranial Capacity
- Cranial capacity varies widely in modern humans from around 900 cc to over 1700 cc.
- The assumption that smaller brain size indicates a less developed or less intelligent being is scientificallyunfounded. Intelligence correlates weakly with brain volume and more strongly with brain organization.
C. Robust vs. Gracile Features
- Just as some fossil hominins exhibit robust skeletal features (thicker bones, heavy jaws), so too do some modern populations.
- Studies have noted the existence of individuals withthick cranial bones, flared cheekbones, or prognathic faceswithin fully modern human populations.
This range of variation can be interpreted, from a biblical creationist perspective, as simply intra-species diversity within the descendants of Adam and Eve, shaped over time by genetic drift, dietary influences, climate, and epigenetic factors.
The persistence of “archaic” traits in modern humans challenges the linear evolutionary model. If such traits still exist without implying inferiority or sub-human status, then the same should apply to fossil humans.
Creationist Interpretation of “Pre-Human” Fossils
Creationist scholars such as Marvin Lubenow, John Sanford and others have long argued that so-called pre-human fossils are in fact fully human, and they challenge the taxonomic distinction imposed by evolutionary theory.
A. Homo erectus as Fully Human
- Lubenow argues inBones of Contention that Homo erectus is not an evolutionary intermediate, but simply an early human variety.
- The features typically used to distinguish Homo erectus (e.g., heavy brow ridges, long skulls) are still found in modern humans, particularly among Aboriginal Australians and certain Polynesian groups.
B. Neanderthals as Humans
- Neanderthals are now recognized by many paleoanthropologists (including secular ones) as fully human, capable of art, speech, ritual burial, and interbreeding with modern Homo sapiens.
- Their distinctive morphology may reflect genetic bottlenecks, environmental adaptation, or diet, rather than primitive status.
- Genetic evidence confirms that Neanderthals interbred with humans, and their DNA is found in modern humans (particularly Europeans and Asians), supporting the view that they are not a separate species but part of the post-Flood human diaspora.
Biblical and Theological Support
Scripture affirms that all humans are descended from one original pair (Genesis 1:27, 3:20), followed by the dispersion of people groups, which, over centuries, led to genetic differentiation and morphological diversity, a process consistent with the observable data.
Acts 17:26 (ESV) clearly states: “And he made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined allotted periods and the boundaries of their dwelling place.”
This text undermines the evolutionary assumption of multiple hominin lineages and supports the biblical doctrine of human unity. On this viewpoint, skeletal variation is expected as a result of diversity within a species. Such variation does not indicate a sub-human status but rather reflects the wide potential for adaptation embedded in the created genome.
Scientific Support and Anthropological Observations
Anthropologist Dr. Charles Oxnard (former professor at USC), once an evolutionist, concluded from statistical studies of Australopithecine and Homo erectus skeletons:
“The australopithecines are now irrevocably removed from a place in the evolution of human bipedalism… All of this should make us wonder about the usual presentation of human evolution in introductory textbooks.” (The Order of Man: A Biomathematical Anatomy of the Primates, 1984)
Similarly, respected anatomist Dr. Jack Cuozzo, in his book Buried Alive, argues that many so-called Neanderthal features can result from longer lifespans and environmental influences, not from evolutionary development. He maintains:
“The differences in skull shape can be accounted for by post-Flood environmental conditions, diet, and longevity, especially as the face continues to grow throughout life.”
These conclusions support the view that morphological features once considered evidence of evolution are instead the result of variation within mankind, possibly enhanced by longer pre-modern lifespans, malnutrition, or pathology.
Conclusion
In summary, from a creationist viewpoint, there is a compelling case that so-called “pre-human” cranial features are not evidence of evolutionary ancestry but reflect the natural variation within the human population, a variation that is still observable in modern times. The data fits better with a model of early human dispersion, environmental adaptation, and created diversity than with a gradualistic evolutionary model.