Bones of Contention: A Review by Jon A. Covey, BA, MT(ASCP)
Marvin Lubenow, a professor at Christian Heritage College, graciously had Baker Book House send me a copy of his new book, Bones of Contention. Professor Lubenow has researched the human fossil record for 25 years and this book is the result. I showed this book to a friend and he immediately telephoned an order for it, so that he would be able to digest it and prepare some lessons for his churchs high school students camping trip in a few weeks. Bones of Contention contains a very competent presentation and discussion, comparing the available human fossils, which number in the thousands.
What Lubenow has done, in addition to providing some splendid arguments which expose the weaknesses of evolutionary assumptions and explanations for both alleged human evolution and evolution in general, is give thorough discussions on the actual fossil specimens with their official designations, their putative ages, and their classification according to evolutionists. The array is so complete that once you have seen the detailed fossil time charts of the many alleged human evolutionary ancestors Homo erectus, Homo habilis, Homo sapiens (both ancient and modern), and Australopithecus, you will be able to defend solidly the position that we have no evolutionary ancestors. Lubenow gives us two clear pictures to consider. He writes:
The Big Picture
"Up to this point, we have been painting with a broad brush. We have been concerned with the big picture. The facts of the big picture are that first, fossils that are indistinguishable from modern humans can be traced all the way back to 4.5 m.y.a., according to the evolution time scale [which he thoroughly documents earlier in the book]. That suggests that true humans were on the scene before the australopithecines appear in the fossil record.
"Second, Homo erectus demonstrates a morphological consistency throughout its two-million-year history. The fossil record does not show erectus evolving from something else or evolving into something else.
"Third, anatomically modern Homo sapiens, Neandertal, archaic Homo sapiens, and Homo erectus all lived as contemporaries at one time or another. None of them evolved from a more robust to a more gracile condition. In fact, in some cases (Neandertal and archaic Homo sapiens) the more robust fossils are the more recent fossils in their respective categories.
"Fourth, all of the fossils ascribed to the Homo habilis category are contemporary with Homo erectus. Thus, Homo habilis not only did not evolve into Homo erectus, it could not have evolved into Homo erectus.
"Fifth, there are no fossils of Australopithecus or of any other primate stock in the proper time period to serve as evolutionary ancestors to humans. As far as we can tell from the fossil record, when humans first appear in the fossil record they are already human. It is this abrupt appearance of our ancestors in morphologically human form that makes the human fossil record compatible with the concept of Special Creation.
This fact is evident even when the fossils are arranged according to the evolutionists dates for fossils, although we believe the dating to be grossly in error. In other words, even when we accept the evolutionists dates for the fossils, the results do not support human evolution. The results, in fact, are so contradictory to human evolution that they effectively falsify the theory. This, then, is the big picture.
The Local Picture
"There is a second approach to the human fossil record. We could call it the local picture. Although it is independent of the time element (the dates for the fossils), it confirms the big picture. It involves situations where different types of fossils are found at the same place geographically and at the same level stratigraphically. According to their morphology [shape] they should be placed in two different evolution categories. Since this approach is totally independent of the dating methods, it acts as a control. It confirms what we said previously about the lack of evidence for evolution in the human fossil record. If two different types of fossil humans are found at the same place and at the same level, it is an evolution anomaly. The date of the geologic stratum in which they are found does not matter. The date is irrelevant, and the method is time-independent.
"A chart in this chapter shows specific cases where fossils belonging in two different evolutionary taxa [categories] are found in the same place and at the same level. Although the chronological arrangement on this chart is unnecessary, it is done to show that local contemporaneousness exists throughout the entire alleged history of human evolution. It is independent confirmation of all that we have said thus far."
That should whet your appetite to see what else Professor Lubenow has to say. In addition to the human fossil record, he writes on the Ice Age and what effect it had on post-Flood man, the big bang, and other issues that shed marvelous light on the conflict between the Bible and evolution. Lubenow says,
"The overwhelming majority of people working in science and technology deal with the present, not the past. The overwhelming majority of books and journal articles of a scientific nature also deal with the present, not the past. In truth, there simply is no conflict between the Bible and scientific discoveries and observations in the present. The only conflict between science and the Bible involves the scientific communitys interpretation of the past."
Bones of Contention is available through Master Books 1-800-999-3777.