At what point did god create the other Hominid species?

Question

Quite a number of remains have been found of humans ancestors. Homo floresiensis (or Hobbits) are a notable example.

I wonder if we could just rewrite the bible to fit them in?

I recommend you take a look at the following sites for more information.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/specimen.html

http://www.becominghuman.org/

Answer 1

dont want to be the one that breaks it to you. but god and hobbits aren't real. they're just invented to sell books.
sorry to be the bearer of bad news.

Answer 2

Those were god's prototype developments. He first went through his 'hairy, quadriped' period but then thought the whole biped thing would go better with the blue sky background. After repeated failures, he finally said enough's enough and just stuck with his last design. On top of his to-do list is to go back and fix the major brain malady called 'fundamentalism', a design flaw (that emerges in a given sample of homosapiens) that causes reason and logic to be forever blocked.

Answer 3

Whoever said there was only one garden of Eden? With God all things are possible even God. Without going back in time and seeing all of the evidence we are only speculating as to why there were so many diverse mutations. What may have looked good on paper didn't work so well in the diverse environments back then. God was having "fun" with his new toys.Aren't you glad you're not in someones else's refrigerator?

Answer 4

Hobbit bone wars

Professor says new analysis on ‘stolen bones’ confirms ‘hobbit’ just a small, sick human

by Carl Wieland, CEO/president, AiG–Australia

28 February 2005

We have already featured two articles on the tiny human specimen nicknamed ‘the hobbit’, after the diminutive quasi-humans imagined in Tolkien’s Lord of the Rings fiction classics. See Soggy Dwarf Bones and Hobbling the Hobbit.

The scientific name assigned to this alleged new species of human is Homo floresiensis (after the Indonesian island of Flores, on which the bones of seven individuals were discovered).

These remains are now the centre of a substantial international controversy. Indonesia’s Professor Teuku Jacob, who had allegedly agreed to return the bones (to the Australian team which made the discovery) by 1 January this year, finally returned them on 23 February.

However, while the bones were in his custody, he permitted two other Australian scientists to study them in detail—Dr Alan Thorne of the Australian National University, and Professor Maciej Henneberg, of the Department of Anatomical Sciences at the University of Adelaide. The discoverers have protested loudly at the alleged impropriety of this pair studying ‘stolen remains’.

Following their three-day examination of the most complete specimen, Professor Henneberg said it confirmed his previous opinion, gained from studying the reports, that this was a modern human who had a brain-shrinking disorder called microcephaly. He is reported as saying that there is now ‘absolutely no doubt that this person had a growth disorder.’1

Whether the tiny people of Flores were indeed microcephalic modern types, or whether they represent a pygmy version of so-called Homo erectus, the point is really the same. Namely, that there is no reason not to classify them all—the Flores inhabitants as well as H. erectus—as Homo sapiens—part of the range of variation found within a single species (see also Skull wars: new ‘Homo erectus’ skull in Ethiopia).

In fact, evolutionist Alan Thorne is one of those who, along with the University of Michigan’s Milford Wolpoff, has been saying for years to his paleoanthropological colleagues that, even though they believe that H. erectus evolved into modern humans, it is wrong to assign a separate species name to it. Thorne and Henneberg are natural allies in this; Henneberg has recently published his findings that if you bunch all the ‘apemen’ in together, they exhibit the range of variation one would normally find within a single species!2

While this is radical even by creationist standards, it certainly undermines the dogmatism with which evolutionists have claimed that these sorts of ‘apemen’ demonstrate our nonhuman ancestry—and this is from an expert in anatomy!3

The Australian scientists who made the original discovery are even further dismayed that about two grams of the hobbit bones have been sent, without their permission, to Germany’s Max Planck Institute for extracting DNA.

While not buying into the ethics controversy surrounding the ‘hobbit bone wars’, we await the results of the DNA analysis with great interest. We would suggest with a great deal of confidence that it will be consistent with the human status of the tiny former inhabitants of Flores, and thus consistent with a biblical recent-creation worldview.

Sadly, the media ‘hype’ surrounding the initial discovery, as is so often the case, does its evolutionary-brainwashing damage in the public arena, without the subsequent sober withdrawals or corrections getting anywhere near the same airtime.

Answer 5

The Bible covers about 5000 yrs of history till Jesus came and some after that and future stuff. What went before Adam and Eve is not for us to know right now. Why do you care? Isnt it more important to know what to say when you are judged???

Answer 6

"They are however mostly fragmentary, often consisting of single bones or isolated teeth. Complete skulls and skeletons are rare. "

taken from your link, how do you suppose a complete re-creation is made without the complete fossil? i could take a bone of a dog and make it into whatever the heck i wanted it to be. doesnt mean it was true. id have to see a full size skeleton of something before i blieved. (one of those forms of human was recreated from the tooth of a prehistoric/extinct pig)

Answer 7

Sure, Edit the Bible

Answer 8

the bible is the holy spirited breathed word of God. It doesnt need editing.

Answer 9

Get ready for christian apologists making ridiculous claims to avoid the facts.

Answer 10

Hobbits, huh?