Serious Christians only, what is the diffrence between Homo habilius and Homo erectus?

Question

I found about them in
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homo_habilis
and
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homo_erectus

But since you say wikipedia has been written by atheists to promote thier interests I am not believing it. Please tell me the diffrence between them

Answer 1

Okay gimme a sec let me go and read your links....

Quoted from Wikipedia (which I use all the time BTW)
Australopithecus africanus
...when one of his colleagues spotted a few bone fragments and the cranium on the desk of a...

You're kidding me, right? You're going to base this entire guesswork, pie in the sky theory on a FEW BONE FRAGMENTS AND A CRANIUM?? Who's to say this wasn't just some human being born with defects? Or an animal born with defects? I'm going to need a lot more fossil evidence if you want me to believe this theory...

Australopithecus afarensis
The remains known as "Lucy"

Quoted from Wikipedia:
It is difficult to predict the social behaviour of extinct fossil species.

Well, duh, that's the most truthful statement they've printed so far.

Have you ever heard of the word personification? Since you like Wikipedia so much, here is their definition of it:

Personification, or personification anthropomorphism is a figure of speech that gives non-humans and objects human traits and qualities.(EX: the bear was talking to the little girl) These attributes may include sensations, emotions, desires, physical gestures, expressions, and powers of speech, among others. As a figure of speech it has a very long history; its Greek name is prosopopoeia. Examples include: "The pencil flew out of my hand", "The tree jumped into the road in front of my car", and "With an evil scowl, the stormcloud thundered its disapproval". Personification is widely used in poetry and in other art forms.

Personification's treatment of inanimate objects is very similar to the figure of speech called the pathetic fallacy; the key difference is that personification is direct and explicit in the ascription of life and sentience to the thing in question, whereas the pathetic fallacy is much broader and more allusive. Another related rhetorical device is apostrophe; this entails not speaking about, but speaking to, a personified entity or an absent person. All these tropes should be understood as separate from anthropomorphism, which ascribes human attributes to any non-human entities, in particular to animals and other creatures.


As humans we have a tendency to personify human traits on to non-human things. It is a desperate need in us to make the world around us, the universe, animals, etc, more relevant and easier to understand. Hence, we personify human traits onto these things.

Answer 2

Homo Habilis was an ape, probably an australopithecine, homo erectus was a human whose level of intelligence is no different from our own. The differences in appearance between Homo Erectus and us are simply racial differences. The primary reason for evolutionists to define Homo erectus as "primitive" or a “missing link” is the cranial capacity of its skull (900-1100 cc), which is smaller than that of the average modern man, and its thick eyebrow projections. However, there are many people living today in the world who have the same cranial capacity as Homo erectus (for instance the pygmies) and there are some other races that have protruding eyebrows (for instance the Australian Aborigines). It is a commonly agreed fact that differences in cranial capacity do not necessarily denote differences in intelligence or abilities. Intelligence depends on the internal organisation of the brain rather than its volume. Even evolutionist Richard Leakey states that the differences between Homo erectus and modern man are no more than racial variance: "One would also see differences in the shape of the skull, in the degree of protrusion of the face, the robustness of the brows and so on. These differences are probably no more pronounced than we see today between the separate geographical races of modern humans." There is, on the other hand, a huge gap between Homo erectus, a human race, and the apes that preceded it in the "human evolution" scenario, (Australopithecus, or Homo habilis). This means that the first men appeared in the fossil record suddenly and right away without any evolutionary history.

Answer 3

Homo Habilius supposedly has a smaller brain and longer arms. Supposedly farther back in the evolutionary chain. Problems stem from the fact the sample specimen bones are taken from a wide area, possibly leading to pieces from separate specimens. Also when the bones were put under a spectrograph they match a chimp not a human. It always fascinates me how SCIENCE can take one or two bones and create a whole era of evolution and the animals and their society. What they always forget is the incredible amount of times they have to backtrack. They say as they learn they have to adapt their theory to fit the new evidence. Like Kenya Man skull with more human features than Lucy, turned out to be a Chimp, Peking man, smashed monkey skulls, found next to modern human skeletons. (guess they found some of the missing links alive and tried to kill them off and died in the process. How else did modern humans get buried alongside prehistoric man?) Nebraska man, evolutionists built a whole society around this one, then two years later the rest of the skull was found, a pig! Piltdown man, a fraud, created by the "discoverer" to the jaw of an Orangutan and a child and stained.

Answer 4

Urr. . . which direction are you pointing at?

To proof that evolutionis correct? Well . .. if I were to said i want to believe, but needed proof to see the process, where can i find one?

If evolution is true, than it must be on going. I will not need to buy air ticket to go thailand, for I would either be able to fly, or swim for miles. . . but can anyone do that?

Bible is the message from God to redeem us from our sins. We may find some clue here and there that coincide with the history world, but it was never intend to be written as history books.

There may be some thing mentioned that is scientisfic, but it is never a science book.

So, what u want me to proof?

Can I use Geogaphy book to proof Calculus? Nonsense

Answer 5

As much as I love Wikipedia, there is a lot of misinformation. Homo Habilius, like the Peking Man, and Nebraska Man, and Lucy are all fictitious creations of evolutionists, trying to find the imaginary missing link.

These things always turn out to be either men, apes, extinct pigs, or outright fabrications. Strangely, we don't hear the evolutionists talk about that.

Answer 6

Both of those species lived more than 6,000 years ago - thus disproving the Christian belief that Jehova created the world in 7 days.

Answer 7

"a larger cranial capacity" can lead to many differences....and it also stated that the bodies of the homo H. were a bit dis-proportioned.
The latter was much more sophisticated than its ancestor.

Answer 8

According to Darwin, women have smaller brains and are deficient in professions, indicating lower intellectual capacity.

(1850)

Do you believe in Social Darwinism?

Answer 9

You are asking this question to serious Christians on a Sunday morning?

Answer 10

their heights, don't be hating on little people, I don't believe in different classifications of people, I think that their lifestyles effected their body shapes and masses. That is my opinion. Have a peaceful and God filled sunday.