Red Deer Cave People or Red Deer Cave Apes?

A new set of bones is now doing the proverbial rounds on the Darwinist circuit. Dubbed the Red Deer Cave People, this latest collection is apparently causing a 're-think' of how another type of hominid was in East Asia other than 'modern' man at the time the bones are purported to date from.

Hold on a second, nothing can't explode! Okay, lets grant the secular humanist his Big Bang (big dud), and his impossible formation of the elements from hydrogen and helium, and the impossibilities of abiogenesis etc etc etc. That granted, what can your really tell from bones in the ground? They don't come with a date tag or a description of who they were and how they got there. That all has to be shoe-horned into a pre-existing world view. Unfortunately for the popular scientific press, that world view is invariably Darwinism.

But lets look at the bones: we have a skull appearing in pictures which is a partial reconstruction due to parts being missing. The lower mandible of the skull being presented is missing; so is the complete rear-portion (occipital bun). The  right side from the upper mandible to the bottom of the frontal lobe is also missing, but has been reconstructed in plaster. What we have is robust skull that has very large and ape-like ocular recesses (orbit). There is also a remarkable cheek bone flare, reminiscent of a male Orang Utan and suggesting a powerful and wide jaw.

What is disappointing is the fact that the reconstructed orbit on the right side has been purposely made smaller to appear more human-like - if you look closely you can see an obvious difference in the original orbit and the reconstruction. I could put it down to incompetence on the part of the person who carried out the plaster moulding if I did not know this was making international news and the fact that I have seen such tricks from evolutionists before. A cursory glance at the illustrations in Donald Johanson's book Lucy reveals such unscientific doctoring - when presenting a line of supposed human ancestors, they are all given a modern human pelvis!

Something revealing with this current 'find' is the fact that the most recent of the discoveries of this particular 'hominid' were uncovered in 1989! Did it really take over twenty years to report on this smashed ape skull? Methinks that someone needed their tenure renewing or a new shot of grant money, and so something that was probably long disregarded was resurrected for financial gain. This wouldn't be the first time - remember Ida? What's next? Make sure the carbon dates that didn't fit into the paradigm are safely discarded and start promoting the book!