Re: Homo erectus: racial variants of Homo sapiens?

Mitchell Coffey (
Fri, 10 Jan 1997 10:19:19 -0500

Jim Foley wrote:
> [this article is being posted on behalf of Alex Duncan]
> In article <>, A Pagano <> wrote:
> >The following is posted on behalf of David Buckna <>:
> snip

> >>From Maclean's magazine (Canada's weekly newsmagazine):
> >***
> >That would place him [Java Man] in the era of modern humans---and argue
> >against an ancestral relationship."If these dates are right," said Philip
> >Rightmire, an anthropologist at the State University of New York at
> >Binghamton, "the multiregionalists will have to do some fast
> >thinking."...The new findings also challenge the rival Out of Africa
> >theory. That view holds that modern humans emerged in Africa as recently as
> >150,000 years ago and spread around the globe, driving Homo erectus into
> >extinction---well before the era pointed to by the new finding.(Maclean's,
> >science section,"The origins of man", Dec. 23, p. 69)
> Yes. So?

The poster evidently is one of those creationist who thinks that, if new
evidence means that a scientific theory must be discarded or changed,
then science is invalid.

> >Marvin Lubenow has an anthropology and zoology from Eastern Michigan
> >University, and teaches at the Institute for Creation Research in El Cajon,
> >California. He is also the author of "Bones of Contention: A Creationist
> >Assessment of Human Fossils", Baker Book House, 1993. According to Lubenow,
> So, Lubenow is a creationist?

Not only that -- he has a MASTER'S DEGREE!

> Well, that would mean that he's already made
> up his mind about the way the world works, and decided that no contrary
> evidence is going to sway his opinion.

And, being with the IRC, has signed an oath to that effect.


> --
> Alex Duncan (posted by

Mitchell Coffey

I read a book on cognative dissonance once,
but it only proved my point.