New research on human hand proves humans did not evolve from chimps

hands of chimp and human

Dr. Fazale Rana, a biochemist and Christian convert whose father was a Muslim, writes for Reasons to Believe, Aug. 13, 2015:

The human hand is remarkable. It permits humans to manufacture and use a wide range of tools, distinguishing us from animals and undoubtedly contributing to our success as a species.

One of the unique features of the human hand is our lengthy thumbs. In contrast, chimpanzees have much shorter thumbs, strikingly disproportionate to their long fingers.

In spite of the human hand’s elegant design, many evolutionary biologists believe that it was shaped by an evolutionary history. They believe a knuckle-walking ape-like creature evolved the capacity for bipedalism, freeing the hands, which in turn evolved to become more dexterous. While long fingers and a short thumb are ideal for knuckle walking, they have limited utility for tool making. Presumably, strong selective pressure influenced the thumb and finger proportions (along with it the dexterity of the hand) as hominids began to use tools.

New work, however, undermines this standard evolutionary story.1 Researchers from George Washington and Stony Brook universities recently presented data that suggests that the last common ancestor of humans and chimps possessed a human-like hand, not a chimp-like hand. In other words, the human hand is primitive and the chimpanzee hand represents an evolutionarily advanced state.

These researchers reached this conclusion after doing a careful comparison of human hand proportions with those of monkeys, apes, and the fossil remains of early hominid species and by using this hand data to build an evolutionary tree. They discovered that the hand proportions of monkeys and apes are quite diverse, and the human hand isn’t necessarily that unique. The evolutionary tree they built indicated that human and gorilla hands are very similar, suggesting an ancestral state. On the other hand (no pun intended), chimps and orangutans display similar hand proportions, reflecting convergent evolution.

This work has far-reaching implications when humanity’s origin is viewed from an evolutionary vantage point. Even though the standard evolutionary model regards the last common ancestor of humans and chimps as chimp-like, this latest study indicates that this view is incorrect. That is, the evolutionary ancestor of humans wasn’t a knuckle-walking ape-like creature at all. In fact, it’s not clear what this creature looked like.

Perhaps even more significant is the recognition that the human hand didn’t evolve over time to be better adapted for tool use. It seemingly was capable of doing so all along. With this latest insight, evolutionary biologists are left without an explanation for the origin of the remarkable manual dexterity of humans and the genesis of tool usage.

Time and time again the standard account of human evolution turns out to be incorrect. In this particular instance, the idea that the human hand evolved under selective pressure associated with development and use of increasingly sophisticated tools has been a mainstay of human evolution for nearly four decades. And yet, a single study overturns this idea. This latest work begs the question: How secure is any idea associated with human evolution?

If you want to read about another mainstay idea in human evolution that has been cast aside, check out this article: “The Leap to Two Feet: The Sudden Appearance of Bipedalism.”


1 Sergio Almécija, Jeroen B. Smaers, and William L. Jungers, “The Evolution of Human and Ape Hand Proportions,” Nature Communications 6 (July 2015): id. 7717, doi:10.1038/ncomms8717.



31 responses to “New research on human hand proves humans did not evolve from chimps

  1. another black eye for evolutionists 🙂

    Liked by 2 people

  2. …”This latest work begs the question: How secure is any idea associated with human evolution?”…

    They try so hard to deny what we truly are, “sons of God”, no gender intended.

    Nice post.

    Liked by 3 people

  3. JoeStalinIsMyGodILoveHim

    It can be fairly said all modes of transportation evolved over the course of millennia. There are clearly evident evolutionary pathways between and among transport species. For example, all automobiles evolved to have four tires with outboard brakes despite a panoply of other designs evident in the fossil record. In fact, there seems to be convergence among all vehicular evolution to our present “tear drop” design typified by the Asiatic economy car.

    And yet, at each step along the timeline of evolutionary transportation, despite the infinite variety and despite the obviously common features, even between the space shuttle and the Volkswagen (windshield, roughly similar shape, cargo facilities, HVAC systems, etc.) …

    The evolution of transportation was intelligently designed by its very human makers.


    Fancy that.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. I have to laugh at the “evolutionary group” who hold themselves out to be above us all in intelligence . . . . . those of us who were and have been in “the know” (our Bible) already knew that man did not evolve from chimps. What are the poor saps going to believe now???

    Liked by 1 person

  5. So who is the common ancestor of both the chimpanzee and the human? I have yet to see the fossils.
    Even if we share a common ancestor with chimps, this proves nothing.
    This is what I think: I think it is extremely suspect that Darwin came along with his “theory” when he did. For Darwin has us look at the EXACT WRONG EVIDENCE. Instead of looking at the fossils, we needed to look at the DNA. But that was not possible until 1954 with Crick & Watson. We have finally mapped the genome (so they say), but we have yet to thoroughly investigate the entire set of human chromosomes and discover what each specific part is responsible for.
    This suggests to me that science, per se, is NOT to be worshiped as the final word. To the contrary,science is a “fact-finder” for hire: If you’re hiring me to support your conclusions, believe me, I will look for them. I want your money, your funding.
    No, Darwin sought to undermine Christian theology and belief.
    And his so-called “theory” of Evolution (which does not even rate as a hypothesis) went on to be the bedrock upon which eugenics was built. This, in turn, led to Nazism, Communism and the New World Order. Evolution is NOT a “search for truth.” It is nothing but ideology, plain and simple.

    Liked by 3 people

    • his so-called “theory” of Evolution (which does not even rate as a hypothesis)

      Well said, Steven! Darwin’s “theory of evolution” is misnamed: It’s not a theory in the scientific sense of the word — a logical system of empirical generalizations, consisting of axiom(s), from which are logically derived theorems. It’s not even a hypothesis because in science, a hypothesis is a testable, i.e., verifiable, empirical generalization. Darwin’s “theory” should really be called Darwin’s CONJECTURE because, thus far, archaeologists and biologists have not found the “missing link” between primates and homo sapiens who supposedly evolved from the primates.

      Liked by 2 people

      • Yes, Dr. Eowyn! The so-called intellectuals won’t even stop and look at their own terms! They want their Evolution, By Golly, and they’re gonna have it!
        Here is the Answer to the Riddle:
        40 years ago, Merv Griffin had Julian Huxley on his show. Merv asked Huxley, “Why is it that you don’t believe in God?” Huxley’s answer: “We found that the idea of God interfered with our sexual mores.”

        Liked by 3 people

  6. Again, as I have said before, we live in the Age of Ideology. The four (pseudo) intellectual founders of the 20th Century were, in the order of their importance, Darwin, Marx, Freud and Nietzsche. All were, as far as I can determine, demonically possessed. All but Marx were homosexual. All were anti-Christian. All were into the occult. British academia has been the primary force that has enforced their ideas upon the world. The ideas of all these men have served to erect a hive-mind Anti-Christ system.
    At this point, the hangover is nearing its resolution as Civilization is about to crash: We are approaching that point where things will never be the same for all of humanity.

    Liked by 3 people

  7. Pingback: New research on human hand proves humans did not evolve from chimps | DAVE&CHAD.COM

  8. Reblogged this on mtnwolf63 and commented:
    New research on human hand proves humans did not evolve from chimps

    Liked by 2 people

  9. Another point: Cats. The little ones have sensibilities quite similar to humans in that they’re the most successful (and least domesticated) domestic animal ever and prefer houses, canned food, furniture and heating/cooling such that, if they’d developed such, that’s what they’d have done too… except they have no foresight, grammar or opposable thumb (can’t plan ahead, communicate it to each other or effectively manipulate things in detail to accomplish that.)

    Liked by 2 people

  10. Next they’ll say humans came from aliens.

    Liked by 2 people

  11. I would be interested in hearing evolutionist explain, if we evolved from apes, why are there still apes and why did it stop?

    Liked by 3 people

  12. Evolution is men making monkeys of themselves.

    Liked by 3 people

  13. Pingback: Intelwars2 – August 19, 2015 – *Breaking News Headlines!* The Constitution – The Bill of Rights – And The Ten Commandments Are Under Assault! 24 Hour Emergency Broadcast Lines! (512) 646 – 5000 or (605) 562 – 7701. For Tomorrows News, Today! |

  14. Pingback: Intelwars2 – August 19, 2015 – *Breaking News Headlines!* The Constitution – The Bill of Rights – And The Ten Commandments Are Under Assault! 24 Hour Emergency Broadcast Lines! (512) 646 – 5000 or (605) 562 – 7701. For Tomorrows News, Today! |

  15. Great article, Dr. Eowyn. I am so glad to see anything that debunks the Satanic obstacle to faith that is Darwinism. (Of course, this debunking of the ape-to-human myth also means I have lost my explanation of half the “women” I met in art school.) ~ TD, reporting from parts unknown.

    Liked by 2 people

  16. Ah, those women in art school… Enuf said!


  17. Ok, I’m done jesting, let’s get DOWN!

    I’m pleased to see so many VERY sharp comments & insights, as it demonstrates we are not as ill-informed as trolls make us out to be.

    The comparisons of the skeletal hands proves exactly nothing: they may have developed simultaneously in parallel, if we humans were born at a time when we were near to –but distinct from– the chimps [Lord love ’em all!].

    Scientism is the religious belief system that drives 99% of scientists and others to see their existence –and all others, of course– from a solely materialistic world-view, one that’s come to dominate Western thinking for a 1000 years [Ideas Have Consequences by Dr Robert weaver, 1947].

    One fine day –un bel di– they will awaken to the fact that when John wrote/said that ‘the Logos was all, and preceded all’ he was entirely correct: the limitations of our language do not allow us to express what we really feel &/or believe, but if we accept the Logos then we are well on the way to UNDERSTANDING.

    And “in His Way is our Peace.”


  18. You folks do realize that the evolutionary theory doesn’t have humans evolving from chimps or knuckle walking, right?


  19. The responses are hysterical and tragic. I may be wrong, but I imagine very few of the above posters know, without using Google, how many chromosomes humans have. Or how many chromosomes chimpanzees have. And even if they did it would be unlikely they could explain the relationship. Too many of these people are choosing ignorance. They demonize evolution without even trying to understand it. If you can’t argue from authority, call Darwin a homosexual, even though he had ten children. How sad.


  20. Touche, good Doctor. My comment did not refer to the content of the posted article, but to the people who commented. Thank you for pointing that out. I appreciate the consistency with which you apply your indignation. Please tell me how the posts of Mr. Broiles relate to the original post. His ability to diagnose demonic possession is remarkable. But again, I’m straying from the point. Apologies.
    The work done by Almecija raises questions. That is what good science does. If the work withstands peer review then perhaps evolutionary relationships may have to be reviewed. Maybe we’ve gotten some relationships wrong, though DNA studies are pretty clear about our relatedness with other species. Regardless, the search for the truth will continue.
    Is the beef you and your readers have with evolution, or the evolution of man?


  21. Pingback: New evidence suggests ancient Tower of Babel was real – pennine_rainbows

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s