There are many convoluted ideas concerning this story with much confusion which has sprung some controversy within evolutionary circles. Although I believe evolutionists like mysteries to create various stories with rather than saying factually, it was created by God.
Evolution with many of it’s predictions being faulty which some have been shown in this blog, while trying to fill in the gaps, they tend to open up more gaps so as a result, the mysteriousness of evolution will always be there to their delight.
In a publication called; Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences Vol. 37: 67-92, we find the latest progress of the story concerning human evolution. Does the evidence match with the fossil record? Are scientists agreeing on the big picture? Readers are left for answering these questions themselves.
But what it does say is this…
“Definition of the genus Homo is almost as fraught as the definition of Homo sapiens. We look at the evidence for “early Homo,” finding little morphological basis for extending our genus to any of the 2.5–1.6-myr-old fossil forms assigned to “early Homo” or Homo habilis/rudolfensis.”
“We also point to heterogeneity among “early African Homo erectus,” and the lack of apomorphies [traits restricted to a single species] linking these fossils to the Asian Homo erectus group, a cohesive regional clade that shows some internal variation, including brain size increase over time. The first truly cosmopolitan Homo species is Homo heidelbergensis, known from Africa, Europe, and China following 600 kyr ago.”
“One species sympatric with it included the >500-kyr-old Sima de los Huesos fossils from Spain, clearly distinct from Homo heidelbergensis and the oldest hominids assignable to the clade additionally containing Homo neanderthalensis.”
“This clade also shows evidence of brain size expansion with time; but although Homo neanderthalensis had a large brain, it left no unequivocal evidence of the symbolic consciousness that makes our species unique. Homo sapiens clearly originated in Africa, where it existed as a physical entity before it began (also in that continent) to show the first stirrings of symbolism.”
“Most likely, the biological underpinnings of symbolic consciousness were exaptively acquired [i.e., co-opted from other bodily changes] in the radical developmental reorganization that gave rise to the highly characteristic osteological structure of Homo sapiens, but lay fallow for tens of thousands of years before being “discovered” by a cultural stimulus, plausibly the invention of language.”
Hominid taxonomy is the focus along with getting bogged down with classifications. Human-primate taxonomy has undergone major changes and repeated reversals, with those who want large inclusive categories vs. those who rather have tighter organization instead.
As a result, with more discoveries of fossils has flared up major controversy among those two groups. A new paradigm about human evolution emerged which revised hominid taxonomy into a more simple form of three species.
So it’s interesting to note, we see one year, a plethora of fossils each have their own genus; then the next year, they are all lumped into a “catch-all” category called Homo erectus, which is defined as everything in between bipedal apes and modern humans.
Talk about altering a tale using vast amounts of uncertainty in order to attempt to fill in the gaps with so much speculation. Plus faith in chance miracles in which natural selection uses to make unthinking specialized choices concerning survival of the fittest.