The first Neanderthal skeleton was found in the Neanderthal Valley of western Germany at about the turn of the century. Although Neanderthal is posed as link between ape and humans, his brain capacity is larger than man's by some thirteen percent. He has been found in rock formations in which modern humans have also been found, and the stooped appearance of the reconstructed Neanderthals appearing in various texts is due not to the fact that these men were anatomically stooped, but rather because the original 1908 skeleton was diseased with the crippling effects of osteo-arthritis. There are diseases that disfigure the bones, e.g. rickets, arthritis, syphilis, etceteras. It appears that in the past when a person would come down with some type of disease the tribe would cast them out. Often these ?cast out? people would come together in a village or cave for their own needs, e.g. protection, survival, shelter, fellowship, propagation, etceteras.Note: Thanks to SQ there are some interesting links in his post, "Could Neanderthals Tie Flies" under "General Discussion"
Those that hold to the evolution story have been looking in the fossil record for links between past and present species. (Not just ape to human, but between all major kinds ? this too is a very important point). It is not a case of ?a? missing link, but billions of missing links.
If evolution were true how could one tell in the fossil record just what specific animal had been found?
Answer: One could not!
Explanation: You couldn?t classify various animals (and all other organics) because they would all blur together. If all of the billions of transitions (links) were found you could tell a snake from a lizard, a jellyfish from a trout, etceteras.
How does the creationist view the fossil record?
Answer: Primarily as a graveyard attesting to the global flood.
The creationist is not looking for the missing links, because the links were never there in the first place. Since they were never there in the first place, they can?t be missing. The following quote of Charles Darwin is quite interesting:
"As by this theory, innumerable transitional forms must have existed. Why do we not find them imbedded in the crust of the earth? Why is all nature not in confusion instead of being as we see them, well-defined species? Geological research does not yield the infinitely many fine gradations between past and present species required by the theory; and this is the most obvious of the many objections which may be argued against it. The explanation lies, however, in the extreme imperfection of the geological record." ("The Origin of Species," Vol. 2, 6th Ed., p. 49, R. West, 1914, New York New York)
This statement was made approximately 150 years ago and the ?links? are still missing.
Why are they still missing?
Answer: They were never there in the first place!
