The Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Creationism (2023)

states in chimpanzee and gorilla (Table 3). Of the remaining 18 taxa, Homo antecessor has no character states recorded for these characters. The other 17 taxa shared between 33 (H. heidelbergensis) and 1 (Kenyanthropus) of the human character states (Table 4). Par. robustus shared 19 of the LC character states, and Au. africanus shared 18 of the LC character states. Every LC character state is shared by at least one fossil hominin not in the LC. Therefore, the LC character states fail the strict definition of essential characters. Examining the linear distances and gaps between adjacent taxa reveals no significantly long gaps (Figure 1); thus, even the distance-based approach fails to clearly distinguish human from nonhuman taxa. Instead of basing our “essential” character states on humans, we might approach this from the opposite perspective by defining essential ape character states that differ in known humans. The first such set is based on extant apes only (EAO), namely character states that are the same in chimpanzee and gorilla but different in Homo sapiens. I found 95 EAO characters (Table 3). The remaining taxa shared between 4 (H. antecessor) and 49 (Au. africanus) of the EAO character states (Table 4). Neandertals shared 15 of the EAO character states, despite being widely accepted as human by creationists. The linear array of simple matching distances revealed two significantly long gaps, between the extant apes and Ardipithecus (gap length 0.333, p=6.11 × 10-4) and between H. heidelbergensis and H. sapiens (gap length 0.194, p=0.0134) (Weibull shape parameter 1, Weibull scale parameter 0.04) (Figure 1). Hence, the EAO characters do not distinguish fossil taxa accepted as human by creationists (e.g. Neandertals) from fossil taxa accepted as ape by creationists (e.g. Ardipithecus). Expanding the set of apes to include australopiths that all creationists accept as nonhuman, namely Au. afarensis and Au. africanus, results in a set of 22 character states that are identical in all four ape taxa but differ in Homo sapiens (four ape, FA characters, Table 3). Between 2 (Kenyanthropus and H. antecessor) and 13 (Par. boisei) of the FA character states are shared with the remaining taxa. Neandertals shared five of the FA character states. The linear array of simple matching distances revealed one gap of significant length: between H. heidelbergensis and H. sapiens (gap length 0.176, p=0.0183, Weibull shape parameter 1, Weibull scale parameter 0.044). The resultant partition separates Homo sapiens from all other taxa (Figure 1), instead of including the human Neandertals with Homo sapiens. As a further exploration of this technique, two additional character subsets were created as controls. The first set contains character states identical in all three species of Paranthropus (Par. boisei, Par. robustus, Par. aethiopicus) but different in Homo sapiens. This set of 54 Paranthopus-only (PO) character states were chosen as a second ape group that might distinguish human from ape, since all creationists agree that Paranthropus are not human. The number of PO character states shared with the remaining taxa ranged from 2 (H. antecessor) to 29 (Au. africanus) (Table 4). Neandertals shared 4 of these PO character states. The linear array of simple matching distances revealed only one significantly long gap length between Paranthropus and Sahelanthropus (gap length 0.451, p=4.44 × 10-5, Weibull shape parameter 1, Weibull scale parameter 0.045). Thus, the character states only partition Paranthropus from everything else and are not useful for distinguishing humans from apes (Figure 1). Subset SO (found in Homo sapiens but differ in chimps and gorillas): 2, 6, 11, 20, 32, 35, 39, 42, 44, 45, 48, 51, 55, 58, 63, 64, 66, 68, 69, 70, 73, 75, 83, 88, 89, 106, 107, 113, 116, 117, 119, 134, 136, 137, 138, 139, 141, 142, 143, 144, 150, 153, 157, 159, 170, 178, 184, 185, 187, 188, 191, 198, 200, 204, 205, 206, 207, 208, 212, 219, 228, 229, 232, 234, 235, 236, 237, 238, 239, 242, 244, 245, 249, 252, 253, 257, 263, 265, 266, 267, 270, 272, 274, 275, 283, 284, 285, 288, 291, 296, 299, 323, 324, 325, 330, 331, 333, 334, 340, 341, 347, 351, 356, 360 Subset LC (found in H. sapiens, Neandertal, African and Asian H. erectus but differ in chimps and gorillas): 45, 66, 69, 113, 134, 136, 139, 143, 153, 157, 159, 191, 204, 205, 207, 208, 252, 257, 263, 265, 266, 270, 272, 274, 275, 283, 285, 288, 296, 299, 330, 334, 360 Subset EAO (found in chimps and gorillas but differ in H. sapiens): 1, 2, 6, 11, 20, 32, 35, 39, 42, 44, 45, 48, 55, 58, 63, 64, 66, 68, 69, 70, 73, 75, 113, 116, 117, 119, 134, 136, 137, 138, 139, 141, 143, 144, 150, 153, 157, 159, 170, 178, 184, 185, 187, 188, 198, 200, 204, 205, 206, 207, 208, 212, 213, 219, 228, 229, 232, 234, 235, 236, 237, 239, 242, 244, 245, 252, 253, 257, 265, 266, 267, 270, 272, 274, 283, 284, 285, 288, 291, 296, 299, 323, 324, 325, 330, 331, 333, 334, 339, 340, 341, 349, 351, 356, 360 Subset FA (found in gorilla, chimp, Au. afarensis, and Au. africanus but differ in H. sapiens): 1, 2, 11, 44, 58, 75, 134, 139, 159, 178, 184, 245, 257, 267, 272, 291, 330, 331, 333, 339, 340, 356 Subset PO (found in all three Paranthropus species but not in Homo sapiens): 1, 6, 11, 14, 21, 22, 42, 45, 51, 55, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 71, 72, 75, 82, 86, 87, 89, 93, 96, 97, 102, 105, 106, 108, 109, 134, 142, 162, 185, 191, 204, 211, 213, 244, 253, 277, 284, 288, 291, 293, 295, 299, 320, 325, 331, 340, 347, 355, 356 Subset HN (found in Homo sapiens but not in Neandertal): 6, 8, 32, 34, 42, 46, 78, 82, 116, 131, 137, 167, 179, 199, 222, 223, 231, 232, 249, 260, 286, 289, 291, 302, 311, 352, 373, 374, 384, 391 Table 3. Character subset definitions and characters, numbered according to Wood (2020). the SO characters as a weighted subset of the full character matrix. For the SO characters, simulations show that gaps between the adjacent taxa follow a Weibull distribution with a shape parameter of 1 and a scale parameter of 0.04. The gaps between the taxa therefore exhibit only one length that is greater than expected by chance (p<0.05). The significantly long gap between the extant apes and Ar. ramidus is 0.179 (p=0.0114) (Figure 1). Thus, the significantly long gap partitions the taxa into two “groups,” consisting of the extant apes in one and everything else in the other. The SO characters therefore do not demonstrate a significant gap between Homo sapiens and the most similar taxon to Homo sapiens. Expanding the sample of human taxa to include those recognized by Lubenow as human (the “Lubenow core” humans, LC) results in a sample of 33 characters that have identical states in H. sapiens, Neandertals, and African and Asian H. erectus but with different WOOD Essentialism and Human Kind 2023 ICC 92

RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTM4ODY=