Customer Reviews

Bones of Contention: A Creationist Assessment of Human Fossils

5 star:		(45)
4 star:		(11)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(12)

 

 

I have to admit that I almost didn't bother to read this book because it has the word "Creationist" in the title. Fortunately I realized my own petty reasoning and bought the book, title and all.

I think that it is always healthy to have two perspectives on every issue, especially one as emotionally charged as the Evolution debate. The author does a good job of presenting an alternative interpretation of the different hominid fossils. It is evident that he has devoted a lot of time into achieving expertise in this field of study. The chronological charts that he pulls together with statistics are hard to find anywhere else.

The first two hundred pages make the book well worth the read. It is actually refreshing to hear someone speak candidly about their religious beliefs when discussing the subject of Evolution and it yields that kind of credibility that one does not sense when reading Gould or Dawkins, who attempt to manipulate the reader into religious conclusions while feigning scientific objectivity.

Ironically the author appears much kinder to evolutionists than to some of his fellow creationists, who get skewered in the last 50 pages or so of infighting. This section didn't interest me much - I would have preferred to learn more about the Australopithecus fossils.

It is interesting how paleontologists can write so confidently about their interpretation of the hominid fossils and yet contradict each other, usually unbeknownst to the casual reader. A book like this exposes the contradictions and corrections, helping the student obtain a greater perspective.

As a publishing and practising physician, I was impressed by this book. Despite its popular tone and its casual observations, its strengths should not be underestimated - he cites some of the best contemporary work with critical familiarity, unveils some hideous flaws of reasoning and practice in standard works, and shines valuable insights into the field. Well worth studying objectively.

Lubenow's argument is not based on anatomy but on stratigraphy. For the most part, he does not challenge the evolutionists' reconstructions of the fossils, typically based upon tiny fragments. Nor does he, for the most part, challenge the evoutionists' classifications. He simply points out that the hominid fossil record, taken as a whole, does not show a progression, as we move up the geologic column, from more primitive, apelike fossils to modern humans. Quite the contrary, the hominid fossil record shows long periods when all hominid types lived side by side. For the most part, all the different types of hominid fossils co-exist all the way up the geologic column. Of course, nowhere does the geologic column preserve a series of fossils showing a reasonably smooth progression from one species into another, so it would be shocking if it showed such a progression from apes to humans. If evolution were really a scientific theory or hypothesis subject to being disproven by the evidence, the fossil record would be sufficient to disprove it. In fact, evolution is not a scientific theory, but rather the only possible outcome when the the philosophical assumption of naturalism is applied to the history of the earth's flora and fauna.

One gets the impression though, based on the piltdown hoax and several similar incidents, that the reconstructions and the classifications are exceedingly shaky, and rife with opportunities for self-serving fraud and, likely more common, self-delusion. Only a tiny handful of professionals have access to the original fossils, which are typically kept in padded boxes inside locked vaults. The rest must make do with photographs, written descriptions or, at best, plaster-cast models. The significance of this? The file-marks on the teeth of Piltdown man were visible on the original, but they were not detectible on the plaster-cast model. (p. 16). Worse yet, it is not uncommon for the paleoanthropologist who discovered the fossil to deny access to it to those he suspects may be hostile to his classification of it. Lord Zuckerman said of those studying fossil primates that their record was "so astonishing that it is legitimate to ask whether much science is yet to be found in this field at all. The story of the Piltdown Man hoax provides a pretty good answer."

Let me save you trouble of reading the book. The theory of hominid evolution is utterly destroyed and demolished before we even get to chapter six. (p. 59). It turns out that the oldest hominid fossil, KP 271, is dated to 4.5 million years old, according to the evolutionist/uniformitarian time scale. It is a fully modern human upper arm (humerus) bone. Obviously, no younger fossil --and that includes all of the putative missing links-- can be the ancestor of man. The evolutionists call KP 271 an australopithecus fossil not because it looks ape-like, but because if it really is human and is correctly dated, the modern theory of human evolution is exploded. Allow Lubenow to quote a colleague of the discoverer of KP 271: "The humeral fragment from Kanapoi, with a date of about 4.4 million, could not be distinguished from homo sapiens morphologically or by multivariate analysis by Patterson and myself in 1967 (or by much more searching analysis by others since then). We suggested that it might represent Australopithecus because at that time allocation to Homo seemed preposterous, although it would be the correct one without the time element." (p. 56-57). Did everyone follow that? Instead of trying to figure out what a human fossil is doing in strata notionally 4.5 million years old, the evolutionist simply concludes that it must not be a human fossil. After all, what are you going to believe the theory of evolution or your lying eyes?

The creationist asks, "at what point does this type of behavior cease to be merely abject, wretched self-delusion and slip on over into intellectual dishonesty, or outright fraud?" Well, it never does, according to Lubenow, because "to the evolutionist, there is but one primary fact in the universe: evolution. Everything else is just data. . . . Good data is that which supports evolution. Bad data is that which does not fit evolution, and it is to be discarded." In other words, its not dishonest because the evolutionist doesn't realize or acknowledge that there could be any debate about whether we in fact did evolve from apes. Why not? I think its because the great bulk of established Christian denominations don't seriously question evolution anymore. Amazing but true. Lubenow spends a rather tedious chapter upbraiding our Christian brethren for trying to harmonize the evolution/uniformitarian model with the creation account in Genesis. But he has a point. Those that try to "harmonize" are in fact accepting the frail theories of finite men over the revealed Word of God. The larger question is why anyone imagined, and so many still do believe, that both evolution and Christianity can be true. Christianity pre-supposes the need for a Savior, which hinges on the doctrine of the Fall of man. If man evolved up from bacteria by survival of the fittest, the concept of sin, the fall of man, and the need for a Redeemer make no sense whatsoever. Those concepts become totally allegorical and utterly non-factual. In order for Christianity to have any appeal to grown men who wish maintain their intellectual integrity, Christianity must oppose the theory of evolution.

While some religious evolutionist extremist scoffers have said such things:

"I wish I could give this less than one star This book is horrifying. I am continually amazed at the misinformation so many insist upon spreading about science, especially evolutionary biology. It horrifies me that a book like this can be published and treated as if it has any scientific validity whatsoever. "Scientific" creationsim is not science, it is merely thinly veiled religious dogma. This book distorts the writings of real scientists to support its beliefs and ignores scientific evidence when it does not suit the author's purpose. This book is fundamentalist Christianity disguised in scientific clothing for ulterior religious motives. As a Christian, and a scientist, I hope that everyone who reads this book will read it with St. Thomas Aquinas' words in mind, "The truth of our faith becomes a matter of ridicule among the infidels if any Christian, not gifted with the necessary scientific learning, presents as dogma what scientific scrutiny shows to be false.",

I, a former hardcore atheist/evolutionist, found the book to be extremely honest, excellent in its scholarship, extremely well documented with references from original sources and with enough documentation for anyone who is really and truly scientifically objective to actually research it and see if it is true or not, which indicates that the author is not interested in his own opinion, but rather the facts of science as they are laid out on the table for all who are interested to see, without interpretation.

Which is why evolutionists hate it. Exposition and education are not exactly what evolutionists like.

It's too bad that this book has the word "Creationist" in the subtitle. That allows the Darwinist knee-cappers to invoke their favorite bogeyman to discredit it. This book positively bristles with scholarship, confidence, and good cheer. I don't know who Marvin L. Lubenow is, but he is thoroughly at home in this subject matter. I guess because of the title I expected something dogmatic, full of Bible quotes to "prove" the assertions. Oh, the scripture is here and there, but its appearance in incredibly disarming. It has an effect like going out for a beer and having an `off-the-record' conversation with an opponent after a heated debate.

The author's basic decency is pervasive. There is no hyperbole or vitriol and he really tries to get into the head of his opponents, showing both exceptional insight and empathy. His shining truth that all of us look at the world through the lenses of our own biases is beautiful in its simplicity and noble in its honesty. He argues persuasively that the very concept of the scientific method (at least as defined by scientists) is an illusion. Brilliant.

All the criticism of this book I've found focuses on knocking down the notion that groups in the evolutionary sequence cannot overlap. Not only do I find the critics reasoning to be faulty (in light of the hominid fossil record), it's a really a minor part of Lubenow's case. Neo-Darwinists ignore this book or dismiss it with their usual personal attacks and bigotry at their own peril.

If you're a creationist and looking for a scripturally-based defense of your beliefs, or if you're a Darwinist true-believer looking for a strawman to knock down, this book isn't for you.

Despite the pronouncements of naturalists that evolution has clearly won the war of origins, Christian creationists are growing in their ability to bring new perspectives to the evidence involved in the debate. Marvin Lubenow is one such young-earth creationist. In an era with much important writing (and predictable controversy) in the intelligent design arena, Lubenow offers back-to-the-basics analysis of the so-called "hominid fossils" that are the backbone of the human evolution story.

Lubenow challenges the naturalistic assumption that important fossils are few and far between. Instead, Lubenow considers a very wide range of human fossils and systematically explains how most of the well-known fossils such as Java Man, Homo erectus and Neanderthals have been misinterpreted by the entrenched, circular institution of evolutionary sciences as multimillion-year-old hominid ancestors. To take the case further, the author carefully compares the morphology of these fossils (anatomical shape of skulls, femurs, etc.) and other associated evidence, like fossilized tools, to show these important specimens are best described as modern humans.

The overall organization of the book is somewhat confusing, but there are multiple chapters that progress nicely within themselves. Chapters One through Four discuss the methods of analysis used by evolutionists and by Lubenow. The words of an evolutionist must be carefully considered because, "While he is certainly not telling the truth, in his own mind, he is not lying. He is speaking a different language, and the public has not learned the translation" (p. 32). Numerous quotations of technical evolutionary language that avoid problems in data are provided throughout the book.

In chapters Five through Seven, various well-known fossil hominids are scrutinized to demonstrate the "magic-wand" that evolutionists use to make various fossil finds conform to whatever evolutionary theory needs to be supported. In many cases, the public was subjected to a public relations campaign about the importance of the find even before mainstream evolutionists scrutinized the evidence. Further, human evolution can actually be falsified on its own criteria from the fossil evidence. "If Homo erectus people persisted long after they should have died out" or "if one could show fossils indistinguishable from modern humans existed long before they were supposed to exist...this also would falsify the concept" (p. 48). The book seeks to meet both of these challenges to devastate the theory of human evolution on both the timeline and anatomy of the fossil evidence.

Chapters Eight through Eleven detail the work of Eugene Dubois, whose Java Man find in 1891 became the hallmark transitional form of twentieth century evolution. Lubenow documents his reasons for being highly critical of the methods and even scientific ethics of Dubois relating to Java Man and his other finds. Despite the shoddy methods, "Java man was eventually accepted as our evolutionary ancestor in spite of the evidence because he could be interpreted to promote evolution" (p. 87).

The wildly varying fossil record of Homo erectus is analyzed in chapters Twelve and Thirteen and shown to cover an incredible range of dates even by the evolutionists' own estimates. The skull morphology and other non-circular evidence actually establish that Home erectus was fully human and left fossil specimens everywhere in the alleged timeline. Chapter Fourteen provides a young-earth creationist's explanation of the Ice Age that followed the Flood of Noah and how this event affected dietary and other health-related concerns to affect the morphology of human fossils, especially Neanderthal. Chapters Fifteen and Sixteen extensively document, and chart, how Homo habilis and other fossils actually falsify the evolutionists' account because of tools, footprints, and the recurring theme of "fossils that are indistinguishable from modern humans [that] can be traced all the way back to 4.5 m.y.a, according to the evolution time scale" (p. 178).

The final chapters touch on various subjects of interest to science and theology, such as ethics, the Big Bang, the TOLeDOT structure of Genesis, and the various evangelical views of origins. Lubenow concludes his work with an Appendix on the use of radiometric dating methods often so important to evolutionists. The Appendix is essentially a critique of the ten-year controversy concerning the 1967-69 KBS Tuff finds in Kenya. Radiometric dating is shown to be highly subjective, often inaccurate, and even irrelevant to evolutionists when it produces disagreeable results for evolutionary theory.

Marvin Lubenow has provided a technical book that is enjoyable to read and presents the fruit of decades invested doing original research and analysis on evolution. Most of the book is a critique of the methods of evolution, but there is also a considerable amount of new interpretation for the "Bones of Contention".

(I am from Iceland, so if there are some spelling errors it is because english is not my native language, and I am to lazy to search in a dictionnary.)

I read this book about 5-years ago for the first time, and I have read it all in all about three times.

I have not read any other creationist book with as much information about the humans now extinct like cro-magnon and neardelthal etc. It explains that creatures like "Lucy" and others are simply apes.

It is interesting to read about how a fossil can change from one kind of hominid to antoher in the mind of the paleoanthroplogist, just to fit what is currently believed in his field, and than change again when the doctrine changes. The fossil can become old, young again, and then old again even though no new information have been atained about him and he has been dated by the carbon II method only once etc.

What I dislike: 1. Lubenow believes in a young earth, I don't.
2. Sometimes the text in the book is not written very well, and is a bit boring.

One negative reviewer said this:
The stratigraphic "evidence" is selectively presented in a distortive, inaccurate fashion, so as to suit conclusions previously reached.

I ask: if you have read the book, why do you not even try to refute any of it's arguments??

Lubenow takes the results of his research over the past 35+ years and illustrates how the hominid fossil data published among the scientific community does not fit the theory of evolution as they claim it does. Evolutionists, of course, would disagree but Lubenow takes the fossil record as a whole, instead of a selective sampling of the data, and shows that even while using the established evolutionists' dates, the fossils do not fit evolution. One of his greatest strengths is his comprehensive fossil hominid chart demonstrating his main premise. Why is such a chart lacking in the evolutionist arsenal? Perhaps because it shows the exact opposite of what they'd like the public to believe.

Lubenow shows that the entire hominid fossil record can be explained, perhaps even better, without the use of evolution. After astutely observing that it is absolutely impossible to prove that any fossil has ever evolved into another (such relationships can only be speculated), he takes the reader on an enlightening journey through the human fossil material. By showing that the supposed transitional fossils are contemporaneous with everything from modern Homo sapiens to Australopithecus, he shows that such a timeline does not favor evolution any more than it does special creation. His conclusions are solid and straightforward.

How does Lubenow explain the existence of Homo neanderthalensis, Homo erectus, Homo habilis, and the like? His answer is as simple as it is surprising: the fossils we have are all either humans (neanderthalensis/erectus/(some habilis)) or they are extinct apes (some habilis)/Australopithecus. How does he account for anatomical differences between modern H. sapiens and the others? He explains that such differences could easily be the result of rickets/syphillis and similar pathological conditions. In other words, human fossils simply show a great deal of variation among the same species. Humans are all human, apes are all apes. Just becuase a neanderthal has thick brow ridges and slightly flatter skull doesn't make it a different creature, it's a human like you and me. He backs up his diagnosis by joining it with his theory that the world-wide Genesis flood caused the ice age and led to exactly the kind of conditions necessary to cause those pathological conditions.

Evolutionists like to claim that relatively recent discoveries (like Dmanisi) show that the gap between apes and man is illusory. They neglect to mention, however, that such discoveries were just as much a shock to the evolutionist community (i.e. blew 'African Eve' out of the water). What they fail to see is that such transitional fossils are contemporaneous with fossils that can be qualified as modern H. sapiens (KNM ER 1470, 1590, 1472, 1481) so the transition is disqualified. In addition, their claim that the cranial capacity of the Dmanisi skulls bridges the gap between Australopithecus and Homo is silenced by the fact that they resort to a pathological explanation of Homo floresiensis. If H. floresiensis is pathological, then the Dmanisi skulls could be as well. If H. floresiensis is not pathological, then hominids with a similar cranial capacity to the supposed gap species (even smaller, in fact) were around just 18,000 years ago. So much for that theory!

Lubenow's book can weather the storms. Read this book and you'll learn some amazing things. Sure, the book is geared toward creationists and rightly so, I don't know any evolutionists who can stomach the term 'Genesis flood'. As Lubenow thoroughly demonstrates, evolutionists already believed in evolution as a 'fact' long before they had their fossil data. When the data doesn't match what they expect (and he shows that this is often the case) they just pick the data they like and throw out the rest. I can't think of a better text to debunk the idea that evolution (human evolution in this book) is a 'proven fact based on evidence' nothing could be further from the truth.

Let me be clear from the start that I am not a very religious person. I am a firm believer in follwing the scientific evidence wherever it leads. Even though this book is written by a creationist, there is no knee-jerk fundamentalist Christianity underlying the book. This book focuses on the evidence against evolution and the deceit many scientists use to bolster the alleged "evidence" of evolution. Lubenow has done his research and does not attempt to overstate it ormake things fit into a creationist view. The evidence speaks for itself and proponents of Darwinian evolution should be extremely nervous about books like this. It's raising serious questions about their flawed evolutionary theories.

The fossil record clearly shows that human life evolved from simple organisms to modern humans like what we see on earth today, right? Or does it?

This book take a critical look at the "evidence" and forces the reader to think like both a scientist and a detective.

It is a bit deep in some parts and that will make a few chapters hard to struggle through, but for those who really want to know how much "proof" there is in the fossil record for evolution, this book is a must read.