OPEN ACCESS Editorial

Data-Mining the Revolution: A Golden Opportunity for Young- Age Creationism P.A. Garner Biblical Creation Trust, Ely, United Kingdom

Editor: T.C. Wood Received April 30, 2016; Accepted May 3, 2016; Published May 9, 2016

We are living in a golden age for paleoanthropology. Some in the Djurab Desert of northern Chad, El Sidrón in northwestern extraordinary discoveries in the last couple of decades have Spain (1994), Herto Locality 16 in the Middle Awash area of helped to revolutionize a discipline notorious for its ferocious Ethiopia (1997), Liang Bua on the Indonesian island of Flores debates and (fairly or unfairly) its paucity of data. While scientific (2003), and Malapa (2008) and the Rising Star Cave (2013) controversy and professional rivalries are still never far away, we in Gauteng province, South Africa. now have a body of data that could only have been dreamed about 5. The extraction of new data from existing fossils, including twenty years ago. (but not limited to) the use of new methods and for Two main strategies allow progress to be made in capturing and analyzing the external and internal morphology of paleoanthropology: obtaining new data and improving analytical fossils (e.g., confocal microscopy, laser scanning and computed methods (B. Wood 2005, pp.3-4). Both strategies have contributed tomography), new types of microscopy that allow better analysis to the advances in paleoanthropology made in the last two decades. of the anatomy, wear and growth patterns of bones and teeth, These advances have included: isotopic methods that yield new insights into hominin diets, and 1. The description of new genera, including (but not limited to) molecular biology techniques that allow very small amounts of (comprising two species, Ar. ramidus [White et al. mitochondrial and nuclear DNA to be extracted from fossils and 1994, 1995] and Ar. kadabba [Haile-Selassie and WoldeGabriel sequenced. 2009]), (Leakey et al. 2001), (Senut et al. So how should we as young-age creationists respond to all 2001), and (Brunet et al. 2002). these new data? There is within creationism a common, though 2. The description of new species assigned to existing genera, unfortunate, tendency to want to explain away, rather than to including (in the genus ) A. bahrelghazali explain; to refute rather than to understand. But this seems to me (Brunet et al. 1995), A. anamensis (Leakey et al. 1995), A. garhi to be a response motivated more by fear than by faith. We would (Asfaw et al. 1999), A. deyiremeda (Haile-Selassie et al. 2015), better demonstrate the confidence we profess to have in the Bible and A. sediba (Berger et al. 2010), and (in the genus ) H. by welcoming new paleoanthropological data and mining it for antecessor (Bermúdez de Castro et al. 1997), the difficult-to- new and fascinating insights into the early history of kind. classify hominins (H. georgicus?) (Gabunia et al. 2000, If God’s Word is to be trusted (and it is) then our goal should be Vekua et al. 2002, Lordkipanidze et al. 2006, Lordkipanidze et to search for explanations of the data that are consistent with that al. 2007, Lordkipanidze et al. 2013), H. floresiensis (Brown et al. Word. The search for new explanations will not always be easy; 2004), and, most recently, H. naledi (Berger et al. 2015). it will require patience, determination, and rigorous thinking. But 3. The discovery of important new specimens of existing whoever promised that science would be easy? species, including (but not limited to) new specimens of Homo Of course, as creationists we face some serious limitations in rudolfensis (Leakey et al. 2012), a juvenile Australopithecus constructing new explanations. In most cases we do not have afarensis (Alemseged et al. 2006), an adult Australopithecus access to the actual fossils and, even if we did, we lack the money, afarensis (Haile-Selassie et al. 2010), and the first fossils attributed time and/or expertise required to harvest our own data from them to (McBrearty and Jablonski 2005). (Wise 1995, p.217). But the good news is that (for now at least) 4. The discovery of new hominin-yielding localities, including we do not need to. The explosive growth of the worldwide web, (but not limited to) Koro Toro (1993) and Toros-Menalla (1997) the availability of large on-line databases, and the trend towards

©2016 The author. This article is open access and distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution License, which allows unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium as long as the original author and medium are credited. Citation: Garner. 2016. Data-mining the paleoanthropology revolution: a golden opportunity for young-age creationism. Journal of Creation Theology and Science Series B: Life Sciences 6:3-6. open-access publishing mean that much of the new data is readily examines the increase in hominin endocranial volume through the accessible at the click of a keypad. Pleistocene. With a statistical analysis he shows that significant Some work has already been done to exploit the available data encephalization is seen only in Homo and (marginally) in in order to advance our understanding as creationists. Foremost is two australopiths, A. africanus and A. sediba. In light of the the study by Wood (2010) on hominid baraminology. The author aforementioned baraminology results (Wood 2010, 2016a), examined eight published datasets of fossil and extant hominids this suggests that only one non-human hominin species shows using baraminic distance correlation and multidimensional scaling. significant (though slight) encephalization. He found evidence that the genus Homo plus Australopithecus The volume concludes with two book reviews. My review looks (Homo?) sediba were members of the human holobaramin, and at Svante Pääbo’s story of the sequencing of the separated by significant discontinuity from all other gracile and genome and highlights some lessons for creationists about the robust , chimpanzees and gorillas. A subsequent nature of the scientific enterprise. Todd Wood reviews a book by attempt to clarify the status of A. sediba was inconclusive (Wood Fazale Rana and Hugh Ross in which the authors set out the old- 2013). Wood’s work has been criticized, particularly for its earth human origins model promoted by the Reasons to Believe inclusion of A. sediba in the human holobaramin (Menton et al. (RTB) organization. Wood draws out some important contrasts 2010) but he has provided cogent responses to his critics (Wood with the young-age model, not least the striking absence of 2011, 2014). original research from RTB, as as some of the challenges This special volume of JCTS Series B is a further contribution facing both models. to the data-mining effort. Some general themes emerge: Kicking off the issue, Gary Phillips, Senior Pastor of Signal 1. The utility of baraminology for distinguishing Mountain Bible Church, Signal Mountain, Tennessee, provides ‘A and non-humans. We ought to be excited that statistical pastoral perspective’. How can church leaders best help ordinary baraminology is able to detect discontinuity between humans and Christians with intellectual concerns raised by, say, the discovery non-humans, just as we would expect based on Scripture. Most of a new hominin species? Phillips offers three guiding principles baraminology studies (perhaps 70%) detect discontinuity around but counsels that our overriding response ought to be patience in the family level. But if that were the case here, then Homo, the evaluating the scientific data and faith in the sovereignty of our australopithecines, and modern chimps and gorillas would cluster ever-wise God. together. They do not. This confirmation of a prediction derived The papers in this volume were stimulated by the discovery from Scripture suggests to me that statistical baraminology is and description of the new South African hominin, . detecting something real, and the fact that some extinct humans Kurt Wise of Truett-McConnell College, Cleveland, , had unusual morphologies should not be allowed to detract from gives a paleontological perspective on Homo naledi, covering the this very significant finding. geology of the Rising Star Cave, the of the hominin 2. The morphological diversity of early post-Flood humans. All fossils and their faunal associations. The burial of at least 15 highly the statistical baraminology studies published so far indicate much similar individuals in an isolated cave passage is intriguing. Wise greater diversity in the human holobaramin than creationists have concludes that the remains are deliberate burials, deposited in the previously recognized. Extreme diversity is especially evident cave over months or years, and probably represent members of a in the earliest-appearing members of the human holobaramin single human family that had recently dispersed from Babel. in the fossil record, for example the very variable skulls found Todd Wood of Core Academy of Science, Dayton, Tennessee, at Dmanisi (conventionally dated about 1.8 Ma). Furthermore, provides ‘An evaluation of Homo naledi and “early” Homo from suggestions by some creationists that Homo naledi is a human with a young-age creationist perspective’. He describes the situation in pathological traits (Line 2015), a mixture of two or more species paleoanthropology when Marvin Lubenow wrote his influential (Clarey 2015, 2016; Brandt 2016) or even non-human (Mitchell creationist book Bones of Contention (1992) and the significant 2015; Brandt 2016) are not supported by statistical baraminology, fossil discoveries that have been made since that time. He then the anatomical descriptions or the geological setting. presents a statistical baraminology study of all named hominins 3. Implications for creationist species concepts and models including the recently described Homo naledi. The results help to of diversification. Previous studies have indicated that animal confirm and expand the scope of his earlier work, indicating that and plant baramins diversified after the Flood too rapidly for the both Homo naledi and the Dmanisi hominins belong in the human change to be the result of traditional evolutionary mechanisms. holobaramin. He concludes with an extremely helpful discussion The baraminology studies reported here suggest that the same of his results, their implications for the young-age creation model, must have been true of humans. Intrabaraminic diversification some predictions that may guide future research, and comments probably involved latent genetic information, perhaps even pre- on the wider context (specifically the evangelical debate about the programmed species morphotypes, and species transitions appear historical Adam). to have been very rapid, as indicated by observations of species Independent scholar Jean O’Micks’s baraminology study stasis and the general absence of inter-specific transitional forms provides independent confirmation of some of Wood’s (Wise 1994, pp.162-163). However, bearing in mind the rapidity conclusions. Like Wood’s study, he finds thatHomo naledi clusters of such transitions and the contemporaneity (even at individual with other Homo species in the human holobaramin, although his localities) of highly variable human morphotypes, is it even right analyses were not able to provide strong evidence of discontinuity to call these human forms species? surrounding the human holobaramin. 4. The stratigraphic context of the hominin fossils. All the In his second contribution to this volume, Todd Wood re- hominin fossils without exception are found in post-Flood

JCTS B: Life Sciences www.coresci.org/jcts Volume 6:4 sediments. Indeed, the first hominins appear only in later post- 2002. A new hominid from the Upper Miocene of Chad, Central Flood sediments, assigned radiometric dates of about 6-7 Ma or Africa. Nature 418:145-151. younger. This raises interesting questions about the absence of Clarey, T. 2015. Homo naledi: new claims of a missing link. Acts hominin fossils from Flood sediments and the absence of non- & Facts 44(12):17. human hominins from most post-Flood sediments. Human fossils Clarey, T. 2016. Homo naledi: claims of a transitional ape. Acts might be expected to appear in the post-Flood record only after & Facts 45(2):15. the dispersal from Babel, but even then the radiometric dates Gabunia, L., A. Vekua, D. Lordkipanidze, C.C. Swissher III, R. associated with the earliest-appearing members of the human Ferring, A. Justus, M. Nioradze, M. Tvalchrelidze, S.C. Anton, holobaramin raise interesting questions about where we should G. Bosinski, O. Jöris, M.-A.-de Lumley, G. Majsuradze, and expect to find evidence of Babel in the stratigraphic record. A. Mouskhelishvili. 2000. Earliest Pleistocene hominid cranial remains from Dmanisi, Republic of Georgia: taxonomy, References geological setting, and age. Science 288:1019-1025. Garner, P.A. 2016. Book review: Neanderthal Man: In Search Alemseged, Z., F. Spoor, W.H. Kimbel, R. Bobe, D. Geraads, D. of Lost Genomes. Journal of Creation Theology and Science Reed, and J.G. Wynn. 2006. A juvenile early hominin skeleton Series B: Life Sciences 6:46-49. from Dikika, Ethiopia. Nature 443:296-301. Haile-Selassie, Y., L. Gilbert, S.M. Melillo, T.M. Ryan, M. Alene, Asfaw, B., T. White, O. Lovejoy, B. Latimer, S. Simpson, and A. Deino, N.E. Levin, G. Scott, and B.Z. Saylor. 2015. New G. Suwa. 1999. : a new species of early species from Ethiopia further expands Middle Pliocene hominin hominid from Ethiopia. Science 284:629-635. diversity. Nature 521:483-488. Berger, L.R., J. Hawks, D.J. de Ruiter, S.E. Churchill, P. Schmid, Haile-Selassie, Y., B.M. Latimer, M. Alene, A.L. Deino, L. Gilbert, L.K. Delezene, T.L. Kivell, H.M. Garvin, S.A. Williams, J.M. S.M. Melillo, B.Z. Saylor, G.R. Scott, and C.O. Lovejoy. DeSilva, M.M. Skinner, C.M. Musiba, N. Cameron, T.W. 2010. An early Australopithecus afarensis postcranium from Holliday, W. Harcourt-Smith, R.R. Ackermann, M. Bastir, Woranso-Mille, Ethiopia. Proceedings of the National Academy B. Bogin, D. Bolter, J. Brophy, Z.D. Cofran, K.A. Congdon, of Sciences USA 107:12121-12126. A.S. Deane, M. Dembo, M. Drapeau, M.C. Elliott, E.M. Haile-Selassie, Y. and G. Woldegabriel, eds. 2009. Ardipithecus Feuerriegel, D. Garcia-Martinez, D.J. Green, A. Gurtov, J.D. kadabba: Late Miocene evidence from the Middle Awash, Irish, A. Kruger, M.F. Laird, D. Marchi, M.R. Meyer, S. Nalla, Ethiopia. University of California Press, Berkeley and Los E.W. Negash, C.M. Orr, D. Radovcic, L. Schroeder, J.E. Scott, Angeles, CA. Z. Throckmorton, M.W. Tocheri, C. VanSickle, C.S. Walker, P. Leakey, M.G., C.S. Feibel, I. McDougall, and A. Walker. 1995. Wei, and B. Zipfel. 2015. Homo naledi, a new species of the New four-million-year-old hominid species from Kanapoi and genus Homo from the Dinaledi chamber, South Africa. eLife Allia Bay, Kenya. Nature 376:565-571. 4:e09560. Leakey, M.G., F. Spoor, F.H. Brown, P.N. Gathogo, C. Kiarie, Berger, L.R., D.J. de Ruiter, S.E. Churchill, P. Schmid, K.J. L.N. Leakey, and I. McDougall. 2001. New hominin genus Carlson, P.H.G.M. Dirks, and J.M. Kibii. 2010. Australopithecus from eastern Africa shows diverse middle Pliocene lineages. sediba: a new species of Homo-like australopith from South Nature 410:433-440. Africa. Science 328:195-204. Leakey, M.G., F. Spoor, M.C. Dean, C.S. Feibel, S.C. Anton, C. Bermúdez de Castro, J.M., J.L. Arsuaga, E. Carbonell, A. Rosas, Kiarie, and L.N. Leakey. 2012. New fossils from Koobi Fora I. Martinez, and M. Mosquera. 1997. A hominid from the in northern Kenya confirm taxonomic diversity in early Homo. Lower Pleistocene of Atapuerca, Spain: possible ancestor to Nature 488:201-204. Neandertals and modern humans. Science 276:1392-1395. Line, P. 2015. The puzzling Homo naledi: a case of variation Brandt, M. 2016. Homo naledi – neuer Hominine mit vielen or pathology in ? http://creation.com/puzzling- Fragezeichen. Wort und Wissen Special Paper B-16-1. homo-naledi Brown, P., T. Sutikna, M.J. Morwood, R.P. Soejono, Jatmiko, Lordkipanidze, D., T. Jashashvili, A. Vekua, M.S. Ponce de Leon, E.W. Saptomo, and R.A. Due. 2004. A new small-bodied C.P.E. Zollikofer, G.P. Rightmire, H. Pontzer, R. Ferring, O. hominin from the Late Pleistocene of Flores, Indonesia. Nature Oms, M. Tappen, M. Bukhsianidze, J. Agusti, R. Kahlke, 431:1055-1061. G. Kiladze, B. Martinez-Navarro, A. Mouskhelishvili, M. Brunet, M., A. Beauvilain, Y. Coppens, E. Heintz, A.H.E. Nioradze, and L. Rook. 2007. Postcranial evidence from early Moutaye, and D. Pilbeam. 1995. The first Homo from Dmanisi, Georgia. Nature 449:305-310. 2,500 kilometres west of the Rift Valley (Chad). Nature Lordkipanidze, D., M.S. Ponce de Leon, A. Margvelashvili, Y. 378:273-275. Rak, G.P. Rightmire, A. Vekua, and C.P.E. Zollikofer. 2013. A Brunet, M., F. Guy, D. Pilbeam, H.T. Mackaye, A. Likius, D. complete skull from Dmanisi, Georgia, and the evolutionary Ahounta, A. Beauvilain, C. Blondel, H. Bocherens, J.-R. biology of early Homo. Science 342:326-331. Boisserie, L. De Bonis, Y. Coppens, J. Dejax, C. Denys, P. Lordkipanidze, D., A. Vekua, R. Ferring, G.P. Rightmire, C.P.E. Duringer, V. Eisenmann, G. Fanone, P. Fronty, D. Geraads, T. Zollikofer, M.S. Ponce de Léon, J. Agusti, G. Kiladze, A. Lehmann, F. Lihoreau, A. Louchart, A. Mahamat, G. Merceron, Mouskhelishvili, M. Nioradze, and M. Tappen. 2006. A fourth G. Mouchelin, O. Otero, P.P. Campomanes, M. Ponce de Leon, hominin skull from Dmanisi, Georgia. Anatomical Record A: J.-C. Rage, M. Sapanet, M. Schuster, J. Sudre, P. Tassy, X. Discoveries in Molecular, Cellular, and Evolutionary Biology Valentin, P. Vignaud, L. Viriot, A. Zazzo, and C. Zollikofer. 288A:1146-1157.

JCTS B: Life Sciences www.coresci.org/jcts Volume 6:5 Lubenow, M.L. 1992. Bones of Contention. Baker Book House, Wise, K.P. 1994. Australopithecus ramidus and the fossil record. Grand Rapids MI. Creation Ex Nihilo Technical Journal 8:160-165. McBrearty, S. and N.G. Jablonski. 2005. First fossil . Wise, KP. 1995. Towards a creationist understanding of Nature 437:105-108. ‘transitional forms’. Creation Ex Nihilo Technical Journal Menton, D., A. Habermehl, and D. DeWitt. 2010. Baraminological 9:216-222. analysis places , , and Wise, K.P. 2016. Paleontological note on Homo naledi. Journal of in the human holobaramin: discussion. Creation Theology and Science Series B: Life Sciences 6:9-13. Answers Research Journal 3:153-158. Wood, B. 2005. : A Very Short Introduction. Mitchell, E. 2015. Is Homo naledi a new species of human Oxford University Press, Oxford. ancestor? https://answersingenesis.org/human-evolution/ Wood, T.C. 2010. Baraminological analysis places Homo habilis, homo-naledi-new-species-human-ancestor/ Homo rudolfensis, and Australopithecus sediba in the human O’Micks, J. 2016. Preliminary baraminological analysis of Homo holobaramin. Answers Research Journal 3:71-90. naledi and its place within the human baramin. Journal of Wood, T.C. 2011. Baraminology, the image of God, and Creation Theology and Science Series B: Life Sciences 6:31-39. Australopithecus sediba. Journal of Creation Theology and Phillips, G. 2016. A pastoral perspective on Homo naledi. Journal Science Series B: Life Sciences 1:6-14. of Creation Theology and Science Series B: Life Sciences 6:7-8. Wood, T.C. 2013. Australopithecus sediba, statistical Senut, B., M. Pickford, D. Gommery, P. Mein, K. Cheboi, and baraminology, and challenges to identifying the human Y. Coppens. 2001. First hominid from the Miocene (Lukeino holobaramin. In: Horstemeyer, M., ed. Proceedings of the Formation, Kenya). Comptes Rendus de l’Academie des Seventh International Conference on Creationism. Creation Sciences, Series IIA Earth and Planetary Science 332:137-144. Science Fellowship, Pittsburgh, PA, n.p. Vekua, A., D. Lordkipanidze, G.P. Rightmire, J. Agusti, R. Ferring, Wood, T.C. 2014. Psychological considerations on the recognition G. Maisuradze, A. Mouskhelishvili, N. Nioradze, M. Ponce de of the human holobaramin. Journal of Creation Theology and Leon, M. Tappen, M. Tvalchrelidze, and C. Zollikofer. 2002. Science Series B: Life Sciences 4:30. A new skull of early Homo from Dmanisi, Georgia. Science Wood, T.C. 2016a. An evaluation of Homo naledi and “early” 297:85-89. Homo from a young-age creationist perspective. Journal of White, T.D., G. Suwa, and B. Asfaw. 1994. Australopithecus Creation Theology and Science Series B: Life Sciences 6:14-30. ramidus, a new species of early hominid from Aramis, Ethiopia. Wood, T.C. 2016b. Estimating the statistical significance of Nature 371:306-312. hominin encephalization. Journal of Creation Theology and White, T.D., G. Suwa, and B. Asfaw. 1995. Australopithecus Science Series B: Life Sciences 6:40-45. ramidus, a new species of early hominid from Aramis, Ethiopia. Wood, T.C. 2016c. Book review: Who Was Adam? A Creation Nature 375:88. Model Approach to the Origin of Humanity. Journal of Creation Theology and Science Series B: Life Sciences 6:50-58.

JCTS B: Life Sciences www.coresci.org/jcts Volume 6:6