Homo erectus

[[File:Homme de Tautavel 01-08.jpg|thumb|right|165px|We might as well get the boner jokes out of the way too.]]
{{hatnote|Yes, we have heard that joke before. Stop it.}}{{DISPLAYTITLE:''Homo erectus''}}
{{evolution}}
'''''Homo erectus''''' is an [[extinct]] [[hominid]] [[species]] that originated in East [[Africa]] about 1.8 to 1.9 million years ago. They survived until at least 800,000 years ago although some researchers put the date of their extinction as recently as 70 thousand years ago or less. Found in Africa, [[Asia]], and possibly [[Europe]], they were the most far-ranging hominid species to have existed before ''[[Human|Homo sapiens]]'' and the first to come out of Africa.

This species is credited with significant advances in the use of stone tools including the earliest hand axes,<ref>[http://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/human-fossils/species/homo-erectus Homo erectus]</ref> cleavers, and other large cutting tools. They used fire, ate meat, and hunted.<ref>[http://www.dichotomistic.com/mind_readings_fire.html ''Homo erectus'' was pretty smart already judging by evidence that fire had been discovered over 1.6 million years ago]</ref> They were likely capable of speech, and [[evidence]] indicates they cared for their old and weak, just like modern humans do today.<ref>{{cite book|last=Lordkipanidze|first=David|url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/book/9780124201903/on-human-nature|title=On Human Nature: Biology, Psychology, Ethics, Politics, and Religion|publisher=Academic Press|year=2017|isbn=978-0-12-420190-3|editor-last=Tibayrenc|editor-first=Michel|location=|pages=45–54|chapter=The History of Early ''Homo''|ref=CITEREFLordkipanidze2017|editor-last2=Ayala|editor-first2=Francisco J.|chapter-url=https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B978012420190300003X}}</ref>

The species was discovered by {{wpl|Eugene Dubois}} in Java, [[Indonesia]], in 1891. The "Turkana Boy" or "Nariokotome Boy" [[fossil]], discovered by {{wpl|Richard Leakey}} and A. Walker at Nariokotome, [[Kenya]], in 1984, is the most complete early human skeleton ever discovered. It is approximately 1.6 million years old, the identification of which scientists disagree pending further evidence. Million and a half year-old footprints discovered in 2015 show conclusively that the gait of ''Homo erectus'' was well within the modern range of variability, meaning that modern human locomotion had already evolved 1.5 Ma.<ref>[https://www.nature.com/news/homo-erectus-footprints-hint-at-ancient-hunting-party-1.17346 ''Homo erectus'' footprints hint at ancient hunting party]</ref>

''Homo erectus'' is likely a descendant as well as a contemporary of ''[[Homo habilis]]''. ''Homo erectus'' is the [[evolution|direct ancestor]] of ''Homo sapiens'', but only a specific subpopulation of ''H. erectus'' gave rise to modern humans, said same subpopulation being ancestral to [[Neanderthals]] and {{wpl|Denisovans}} as well. Some researchers identify the early African material as ''[[Homo ergaster]]''.

==Physical characteristics==
''H. erectus'' demonstrates [[transitional fossil|transitional features]] between [[australopithecines]] and modern humans. An individual could resemble a robust modern human at about 4'9" to 6'1" (1.45-1.85 m) in height and about 88 to 150 pounds (40-68 kg) with decreased [[sex]]ual dimorphism compared to earlier hominids. It is likely that its growth rate was similar to that of great [[ape]]s and that ''H. erectus'' was largely hairless. The increase in [[brain]] size from the australopithecines to approximately 900-930 cc nonetheless represents a significant statistical difference from that of modern humans, which is approximately 1350 cc, and ''H. erectus'' therefore had lower mental ability than do modern humans. However, later ''H. erectus'' specimens show cranial capacities well within the range of modern humans, if at the lower end, with the Peking Man fossils of {{wpl|Zhoukoudian}}, [[China]], showing cranial capacities of up to 1225 cc, with the average cranial capacity being 1015 cc.<ref>[http://talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/peking.html Peking Man]</ref>

Features of the skull, jaw, and teeth were transitional between australopithecines and modern humans. There were noticeable differences between the neck and spine of this species and those of modern humans. The chest was more barrel-shaped rather than the funnel-shaped chest of australopithecines. The pelvis might have been narrower than that of modern humans, indicating a smaller infant brain size.

''H. erectus'' possibly used fire, since the evidence for controlled fire dates from between 400,000 to 1,000,000 years ago.<ref>Francesco Berna, Paul Goldberg, Liora Kolska Horwitz, James Brink, Sharon Holt, Marion Bamford, and Michael Chazan. Microstratigraphic evidence of ''in situ'' fire in the Acheulean strata of Wonderwerk Cave, Northern Cape province, South Africa. ''Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences'', April 2, 2012 DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1117620109.</ref><ref>Miller, Kenneth (May 2013). "Archaeologists Find Earliest Evidence of Humans Cooking With Fire". ''Discover''.</ref> However, evidence of three different species of tapeworms (''Taenia saginata'', ''T. asiatica'' and ''T. solium'') in ''H. erectus'' fossils indicates that ''H. erectus'' was eating [[Raw food|raw meat]].<ref>''Dragon Bone Hill: An Ice-Age Saga of Homo erectus'' by Noel t. Boaz & Russell L. Ciochon (2004) Oxford University Press. {{Isbn|0195152913}}.</ref> Katherine Zink and Daniel Lieberman conducted experiments with humans eating different foods ([[goat]] meat, yams, carrots, and beets) unprepared, pounded with a stone to soften it, sliced or cooked.<ref name=goat1>[https://www.sciencenews.org/article/h-erectus-cut-chewed-way-through-evolution?mode=magazine&context=191647&tgt=nr ''H. erectus'' cut, chewed way through evolution: Less energy needed to eat sliced raw meat led to smaller teeth, jaw] by Bruce Bower (1:00pm, March 9, 2016) ''Science News''.</ref><ref name=goat2>[Impact of meat and Lower Palaeolithic food processing techniques on chewing in humans] by Katherine D. Zink & Daniel E. Lieberman. ''Nature''. Published online March 9, 2016. doi: 10.1038/nature16990.</ref> The researchers then compared the number of chews needed to eat the food. Participants couldn't break apart 3 gm chunks of raw goat meat after 40 chews, but could eat raw goat slices after an average of 31 chews. The overall conclusion was that ''H. erectus'' would need to chew their food less often (2.5 million fewer chews per year!) if they ate sliced goat with pounded roots. The hypothesized end result of this increased net caloric consumption was reduced need for large teeth and jaw muscles, which in turn allowed for larger brains and bodies.<ref name=goat1/><ref name=goat2/>

==Creationists' viewpoints==
[[File:Skull evolution.png|center|thumb|920px|Skulls of successive (or near-successive, depending on the source) human evolutionary ancestors]]
[[File:Brain size and tooth size in hominins.jpg|thumb|upright=1.5|Brain size and tooth size in hominins]]
In order to maintain their [[creationist claims|claim]] that men appeared suddenly and without prior evolutionary history, it is necessary for [[creationists]] to identify early hominid fossils as being either "fully human" or "fully ape."<ref>Bowden, Malcolm (1988). "[http://creation.com/images/pdfs/tj/j03_1/j03_1_152-153.pdf ''Homo erectus''&mdash;A Fabricated Class of 'Ape-Men']."</ref> However, there is a lack of agreement among creationists as to which fossils to call ape and which to call human.<ref>[http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/compare.html Comparison of all skulls]. [[talk.origins]]. Oct. 28, 2008.</ref> An [[Answers in Genesis]] (AIG) article notes that ''H. erectus'' was [[tradition]]ally placed with apes, however more recently tends to be placed with humans. <ref>Mehlert, A. W. (Apr. 1994). [http://www.answersingenesis.org/tj/v8/i1/erectus.asp ''Homo erectus'' 'to' modern man: evolution or human variability?].</ref> It is also interesting to note that the [[author]] admits he disagrees with creationist Marvin Lubenow about where to place ''Homo habilis''.

To demonstrate that ''H. erectus'' is fully human, the website "Darwinism Refuted" claims, "There is no difference between the postcranial skeleton of modern man and that of ''Homo erectus''."
<ref>[http://www.darwinismrefuted.com/origin_of_man_05.html The Origin of Man:  ''Homo erectus'']. Darwinism Refuted.</ref> In addition to admitting that there are differences in the skulls, this statement ignores differences such as those in the neck, spine, pelvis, feet, growth rate, and others noted by [[Palaeontology|paleontologists]]. As further evidence that ''H. erectus'' was human, the website presents a recent photograph of a [[guy]] with a sloping forehead and additionally a supportive quote from Lubenow, a [[young Earth creationist]] per [[CreationWiki]].

The author of the above-mentioned AIG article notes one G. I. Beasley's speculation that apparent differences between ''H. erectus'' fossils and modern human skeletons could be caused by "prolongation of skeletal maturation and greater longevity potential; environmental; and dietary/pathological pressures within a post-Deluge framework."  The author goes on to proclaim, "Beasley's paper is a land-mark in creationist research on this subject, and every Christian should possess a copy with which to question materialist-minded educators." Beasley's essential "research" referenced is an essay titled "A possible creationist interpretation of archaic fossil human remains" that appeared in the ''Journal of Creation'' in 1992. Greg Beasley is an [[engineers and woo|engineering analyst]] with Sydney, [[Australia]]'s, CityRail.<ref>[http://www.orgsites.com/oh/creation/_pgg1.php3 Darwin Doubters of the Twentieth & Twenty First Century].</ref>

The AIG article poses the question of how, given that ''H. erectus'' was supposed to have evolved into ''H. sapiens'', do [[anthropologists]] "reconcile the presence in Australia of both modern sapiens types and ''erectus'' types all within the last 35,000 years?" In fact, although the Kow Swamp people that were mentioned do bear a superficial resemblance to ''H. erectus'', it is not the [[scientific consensus]] that this indicates the species existed in Australia at this late date.<ref>[http://www-personal.une.edu.au/~pbrown3/KowS.html Kow Swamp]. Peter Brown's Australian & Asian Palaeoanthropology.</ref>

The AIG article uses the gradual evolution from ''H. erectus'' to ''H. sapiens'' as evidence that they are the same species. Additionally both this article and the above-mentioned "Darwinism Refuted" webpage refer to the minority opinion of paleoanthropologist Milford Wolpoff that the species ''H. erectus'' is redundant and that ''for [[Taxonomy|taxonomic]] reasons'' it should be sunk into ''H. sapiens''. Both of these [[argument]]s fail to recognize the clear differences between the species.

AIG further makes the claim that the creationist view would eliminate any perceived confusion regarding the species making up the genus ''Homo''. The author notes, "On the other hand, if creationists are right in believing that earth has only a short history (measured in millennia, rather than
millions of years), then there would be no argument &mdash; all forms of ''Homo'' (except the phantom-like ''H. habilis''), would form just a single contemporary species." This [[logic]] demonstrates the creationist tendency to [[Confirmation bias|seek evidence that supports the conclusion rather than to let the evidence lead to it]].

In another AIG article we find the creationist explanation for the existence of ''H. erectus'' fossils. Therein the author reasons that at the time of the [[Tower of Babel]], all humans must have looked like ''H. erectus'', since they were the first hominid to spread out over the [[Earth]] and the [[Bible]] indicates that humans did not do so until after the [[Global flood|flood]]. The article also claims, "Aside from the skull, ''Homo erectus'' skeletons are virtually indistinguishable from modern humans, so the evidence indicates they are human."<ref>[http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/am/v3/n2/lucy-buried-first Lucy Was Buried First: Babel Helps Explain the Sequence of Ape and Human Fossils].  Answers in Genesis. 2009.</ref> The [[Fallacy|fallacies]] involved in these arguments include the observation that ''H. erectus'' could not possibly have had the [[culture]] described in the relevant Bible passages. For a more in-depth examination of the fallacies involved in this article, see Brayton (2008).<ref>Brayton, Ed (Aug. 22, 2008). [http://scienceblogs.com/dispatches/2008/08/the_sadness_of_kurt_wise.php The Sadness of Kurt Wise]. [[ScienceBlogs]]</ref>

==See also==
* [[Missing link]]
* [[Hominid]]
* ''[[Homo floresiensis]]''
* ''[[Homo neanderthalensis]]''
* ''[[Homo heidelbergensis]]''

==External links==
* O'Neil, Dennis (1999-2010). "[http://anthro.palomar.edu/homo/homo_2.htm ''Homo erectus'']."
* "[http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/kowswamp.html Kow Swamp: is it ''Homo erectus''?]"  talk.origins. Apr. 28, 1997.
* "[http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/java15000.html Java Man and Turkana Boy]."  talk.origins. Apr. 28, 1997.
* "[http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/a_peking.html Creationist Arguments:  Peking Man]."  talk.origins. Apr. 30, 2001.
* "[http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/a_java.html Creationist Arguments:  Java Man]. talk.origins. Aug. 11, 2005.
* "[http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/a_erectus.html Creationist Arguments:  ''Homo erectus'']."  talk.origins. Sept. 23, 2003.
* Brace, C. Loring (Apr. 30, 2001). "[http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/brace.html Creationists and the Pithecanthropines]."  talk.origins.
*[http://morphosource.org/index.php/Detail/SpecimenDetail/Show/specimen_id/1996 EA-CCC-06, ''Homo erectus''] &mdash; Data from a 3D scan of an ''H. erectus'' fossil skull
*[http://morphosource.org/index.php/Detail/MediaDetail/Show/media_id/6248 EA-CCC-07, ''Homo erectus''] &mdash; Data from a 3D scan of an ''H. erectus'' fossil left hemi-mandible

==References==
{{reflist|2}}

[[Category:Hominids]]

Categories: Hominids