“1.5 million year old” fossil human footprints-Really?

Posted: January 12, 2012 in Archaeology
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Guest blog by Ian Juby: Check out his website or sign up for his newsletter at http://www.ianjuby.org.

Hot off the press, fossil human footprints in supposedly 1.5 million year old rock in Kenya. Whadya know – they’re human! Yup, all five toes, the ball, the arch, and the heel are present. In fact, these tracks are nowhere near as convincing as some of the Paluxy fossil human footprints, yet the Kenyan tracks are acknowledged as being very human. A six foot tall human, according to the estimates of the scientists studying the tracks.

In a photo, (Matthew Bennet, et al, Science, February 27, 2009), the second toe (next to the big toe) is present, just very faint and high. This is a good time to point out that this is a human trait: your second toe is actually the most sensitive of your toes, and often when walking in mud, you will lift that toe…. just like this person did.

Here’s a report on daily planet:

http://watch.discoverychannel.ca/daily-planet/february-2009/daily-planet-february-26-2009/#clip144135

and a layman’s version of the story by the BBC:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7913375.stm

You can also get first hand info straight off the Science mag’s website (it’ll take a few minutes to download, it’s in PDF format):

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/data/323/5918/1197/DC1/1

Interestingly, Bennett, et al, also mention a number of other animal tracks that have graced the rock layers in question. There are actually two rock layers containing the footprints, separated vertically by about 5 meters (15 feet) of other rock layers. Very quickly the various articles point out that these are not the “oldest” fossil footprints found, but the Laetoli footprints are the oldest, dated at 3.7 million years old and attributed to Australopithecus afarensis.

By the way, I have recently acquired a cast of a couple of the Laetoli tracks for the Creation Science Museum of Canada. These tracks are completely human, and very unlike the feet of afarensis! In fact, read what National Geographic wrote, in quoting world-renowned human footprint expert, Dr. Louise Robbins:

“They looked so human, so modern, to be found in tuffs so old,” says footprint expert Dr. Louise Robbins of the University of North Carolina, Greensboro. The best preserved print shows the raised arch, rounded heel, pronounced ball, and forward pointing big toe necessary for walking erect. Pressures exerted along the foot attest to a striding gait. Scuff marks appear in the toe area, and a fossilized furrow seams the footprint.
The footsteps come from the south, progress northward in a fairly straight line. The crispness of definition and sharp outlines convince me that they were left on a damp surface that retained the form of the foot.”

The cast of two Laetoli tracks will be part of the fossil footprints display in the traveling museum.

Putting a good foot forward:
You see, chimps and apes do not have “feet,” but rather have four “hands” for grasping tree branches (photograph on right). There is no creature, fossil or living, which has feet like human feet. One thing you don’t see in the photograph is that the toe bones of apes are curved, while human toe bones are straight. The afarensis toe bones that have been found are curved, just like the apes, and perfect for grasping branches.

It’s amazing that all of these footprints are acknowledged as very human, while the Paluxy human footprints, many of which are vastly superior in detail, are rejected by the evolutionists. Why? Because these are human footprints with dinosaur tracks, which refutes the theory of evolution and affirms the biblical account of creation.

You can see more details on the Paluxy tracks in “The Complete Creation,” parts 9 & 10, available for viewing for free on my website:

http://ianjuby.org/videos.html

The Kenyan footprints are being attributed to Homo erectus, which is a completely modern human. There is nothing half-ape, half-human about the skeletons in question. For more details, see my fossil-by-fossil account of the “hominid” fossils, including Homo erectus.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s