Quote:
Originally Posted by PonyPotato
How would this be a point for creationists? Or does "one back" mean one point less for them? I'm not sure what you mean.
The Laetoli footprints date to 3.6 million years ago. These more modern footprints are 1.5 million years old. Since when is 2.1 million years NOT long enough for the foot to evolve, along the same lines as the full-body evolution shown in the hominin line?
I studied anthropology in college. I'm a huge proponent of Darwin and evolution. I love studying hominin and hominid fossils.
|
i meant one point for creationists.
from what im reading of it, is that this is the oldest footprint of the closest human found. not sure, but are homo ergasters' considered human or sub human? im assuming that the laetoli fossil dating 3.6 million years is considered closer to the ape species and less human?
i really dont know all that much about anthropology. but i would love to hear from a proponent of the creationists point of view as well as from darwinists.