Homo Habilis | EssayIvy.com

HOMO HABILIS

Student Name

Class Information

Date

Abstract

The evolution and the evolution theory have been a topic of discussion since the

argument by Louise Leakey in the 1960's. Scientists and historians agree with the evolution of

man, dating their existence from five million years ago. The Homo habilis, to be specific, was

first of its kind the in the Hominid species. The word hominid comes from the word human. This

view was derived from the fact that the Homo habilis had a few characteristic similar to humans

such as a straight gait posture. Nevertheless, different scholars from Young-Earth creation have

various theories on the origin of man and arguments about the evolution. The discourse of this

essay highlights the origin and the importance of Homo habilis during its time and the

surrounding evolution theory.

Homo habilis: The first known class of the specie "homo" is the Homo habilis also

known as "handyman". It was originally found in Tanzania in 1960

. Its unique characteristics

mostly visible from the likes of Australopithecus is that it has an increased brain size and the

capacity for extensive use of tools. Louis and Mary Leakey first discovered the fossils were in

Olduvai George in Tanzania

The initial findings of the Homo habilis species included a molar and a fragment of a

mandible in 1959

. However, it was not until Louise's son, Jonathan who discovered the Olduvai

Hominid 7 (OH7), that it was established that it consisted of juvenile's teeth, jaw, and a few

1. White, Louise, Kenneth Kelly, and T. A. B. J. Clifford. "An Examination of the

History, Characteristics, and Significance of the Hominid Species Homo habilis." (2015).

2. White 2

3. White 3

bones. Besides, the Olduvai fossils originated from the upper Villafranchian and lowered middle

Pleistocene geological horizon, which was the domicile of the fossils about two million years

ago

. It is important to note, however, that the fossils were initially discovered in Bed I and the

lower part of Bed II of Olduvai George. The Homo habilis fossils found, therefore, date between

2.4 and 1.4 million years ago. Further, the stratigraphic layer was dated using the latest discovery

of potassium-argon dating method alongside a method known as fission-track dating.

Importance and interpretation of Homo habilis: The Homo habilis fossils, also referred

as the handyman, had a more extensive cranial capacity relative to Australopithecus but smaller

compared to that of Homo erectus. Besides, the molars of handyman were found to be smaller

than that of the Australopithecus but slightly larger than that of Homo erectus molars. Scholars

indicate that the steady decrease of the molar size shows a change in the hominid's diet

Moreover, the foot bones of the handyman developed longitudinally with transverse arches that

resembled those of Homo sapiens. Additionally, the human-like clavicle bone structure and the

biological study of the tibia and fibula further proves that Homo habilis had a full striding gait

distinctive to that of regular biped

. Further, H. habilis is bigger than an Australopithecus

Africanus. However, they both show similar characteristics of their teeth and jaw, making an H.

habilis a better climber than all other undisputed ancestors. Besides, the Homo habilis fossils

unearthed with stone tools has been important in highlighting that the handyman was the first to

use stone tools expansively, showing an essential step towards the cultural evolution tree.

4. White 2

5. White 4

6. White 6

Finally, homo habilis, a descendant of Australopithecus are believed to have co-existed together

for many years based on the evidence found in Olduvai George

Literature review: Various scholars express different objectives concerning the evolution

of man from the Young-Earth creation site. One of the scholars, Ken Ham, says that if one did

not see or was not there during the evolution period, then the evolution does not count as a

scientific data

. Morris, another famous scholar on matters concerning the scientific evolution

and Christian perspective of evolution, supported Ham's statement. He says that an individual

cannot create any claims in the kingdom of beginnings since God relaxed on the seventh day,

and sojourned with his initial usual decree of inventing. Consequently, any scientific research of

the universe's current procedure cannot harvest any wisdom of God's innovative deeds."

Morris’

statement includes the big bang theory since it is based on the explorations of the current

understanding of physics. However, Larson says that the fossils were interpreted wrongly.

Strict creationists reject all the arguments based on the geological evidence that scientists

bring about, and claim that the geological evidence is worth in explaining the results from the

7. Spoor, Fred, Philipp Gunz, Simon Neubauer, Stefanie Stelzer, Nadia Scott, Amandus

Kwekason, and M. Christopher Dean. "Reconstructed Homo habilis type OH 7 suggests deep-

rooted species diversity in early Homo." Nature 519, no. 7541 (2015): 83-86.

8. Ham, Ken, and Steve Cardno. The lie: evolution. Green Forest, AR: Master Books,

1987

9. Morris, Henry M., and John D. Morris. The modern creation trilogy. New Leaf

Publishing Group, 1996.

10. Larson, Edward J. Evolution: The remarkable history of a scientific theory. Vol. 17.

Random House Digital, Inc., 2006.

worldwide floods that took place in Genesis 6-9.

One of the creationists is Huse who casts off

the proof for a chronology grounded on a radioactive dating method that Louis Leakey used.

Huse’s rejection arguments are based on the geographic column that scientists used, and terms it

as "spherical thinking" and upholds the pillar which is grounded on evolutionary assumptions

Further, he views the geological column as only a belief and not a real sequence of rock layers,

and therefore is no complete sequence.

The YEC young-Earth creation also states educating of evolution and evolution theories

in schools is accountable for the alteration in ethical conduct that bother numerous conformist

Christians. According to Schneider, Morris’ reconstruction of the evolution history entirely

distorts the historical records. He continues to say that Morris started with a conclusion then

came up with an antiquity to defend it, the very sin that he accuses evolutionary experts.

Nevertheless, the evolution theory could true

Almost all the scholars in young-Earth creation came to one conclusion with their

arguments; the evolution theory is only an idea that a person came up. Moreover, the method has

no real evidence and justifiable arguments that could date the fossils to the years when they

11. Huse, Scott M. The collapse of evolution. Baker Books, 1997.

12. Huse13-15

13. Huse 14

14. Morton, Glenn R., "The Geologic Column and Its Implications for the Flood"

(privately published at http://home.entouch.net/dmd/geo.htm).

15. Schneider, Robert J. "VIII: YOUNG EARTH CREATIONISM." Berea education,

2007.

existed. This view is true for all scientists except Schneider who opposes all the facts that has

other scholars have tabled against evolution, more so on Morris's evolution history.

Conclusion: In a nutshell, the H. habilis species was the first species of the hominid that

became intelligent and used better tools for cutting and tearing than the previous predecessors

such as Australopithecus. In addition, the H. habilis was much more alike with the humans than a

monkey, a view derived from its similarity to human in some aspects such as a straight gait

posture, bigger skull, jaw, and teeth. Nonetheless, the Young-Earth creationist has brought

different findings to the evolution theory. Most of the scholars from this school of thought say

that evolution theory is a sham with no substantial arguments and evidence that could date the

fossils. Further, they argue that some of the dating methods used were found to be unreal.

However, Schneider says that evolution took place and that some of the arguments from

creationists are based on personal judgments. However, just as Ken Ham says, “If we were not

there when it happened then it didn't happen.”

Bibliography

Ham, Ken, and Steve Cardno. The lie: evolution. Green Forest, AR: Master Books, 1987.

Huse, Scott M. The collapse of evolution. Baker Books, 1997.

Larson, Edward J. Evolution: The remarkable history of a scientific theory. Vol. 17. Random

House Digital, Inc., 2006.

Morris, Henry M., and John D. Morris. The modern creation trilogy. New Leaf Publishing

Group, 1996.

Morton, Glenn R., "The Geologic Column and Its Implications for the Flood" (privately

published at http://home.entouch.net/dmd/geo.htm).

Schneider, Robert J. "VIII: YOUNG EARTH CREATIONISM." Berea education, 2007.

Spoor, Fred, Philipp Gunz, Simon Neubauer, Stefanie Stelzer, Nadia Scott, Amandus Kwekason,

and M. Christopher Dean. "Reconstructed Homo habilis type OH 7 suggests deep-rooted

species diversity in early Homo." Nature 519, no. 7541 (2015): 83-86.

White, Louise, Kenneth Kelly, and T. A. B. J. Clifford. "An Examination of the History,

Characteristics, and Significance of the Hominid Species Homo habilis." (2015).

Wood, Bernard. "Fifty years after Homo habilis." Nature 508, no. 7494 (2014): 31-33.

Place new order. It's free, fast and safe

Paper type

Deadline

Page count

550 words

Total price: $ 15.00

Our customers say

Jeff Curtis

USA, Student

"I'm fully satisfied with the essay I've just received. When I read it, I felt like it was exactly what I wanted to say, but couldn’t find the necessary words. Thank you!"

Ian McGregor

UK, Student

"I don’t know what I would do without your assistance! With your help, I met my deadline just in time and the work was very professional. I will be back in several days with another assignment!"

Shannon Williams

Canada, Student

"It was the perfect experience! I enjoyed working with my writer, he delivered my work on time and followed all the guidelines about the referencing and contents."