Below is a list of topics covered in this Social Studies / World History
book along with links to the Debunking Evolution videos that address each topic in parenthesis.




Chapter 1

Did Humans Evolve? (3A)

Evolution Topics Covered in these Textbooks:

These books are typically used in the 6th grade in California schools, and teach in the opening chapters (Prentice Hall, pp. 6-28, 2006 and Holt, pages 24-35, 2006) that humans evolved from ape-like creatures starting about 200,000 years ago.

Ape To Man Evolution

Note that the apparent of “progression of tools” in the above three images does not even represent actual items that were found with these skulls!

Biblical Responses Based on Creation Science


Most junior and senior high school textbooks teach that humans evolved from ape-like creatures. This is very different than what the Bible teaches. According to the Bible (in the very first chapter of the first book—Genesis 1), both apes and humans were created on the Sixth Day of creation, but they were created as very different types of beings.

For starters, only humans were created in the image of God (Genesis 1:26-27). Jesus confirmed that humans were in fact created at the beginning of creation (Mark 10:6: “But at the beginning of creation God ‘made them male and female’”), not long ages after creation was completed. In fact, humans were the very last of God’s creations, and we were created to rule over the earth and all other animals that God created. Eve was created by God to be a perfect mate for Adam’s—filling in all the areas that Adam lacked as a man. Only together do they form “man” in the well-rounded way that God wanted us to be. Eve was also given place as the “mother of all the living” (Genesis 3:20).

Other parts of the Bible even confirm that mankind is the most special of all God’s creations. For example, 1 Corinthians 15:39 says, “All flesh is not the same flesh, but there is one flesh of men, and another flesh of beasts, and another flesh of birds, and another of fish.” Because humans are made in God’s image, were God’s last and final creation, and put in charge over all of His creation, it would make sense that humans today (and at the beginning) would be designed much differently than all other living things.

It would only make sense that we would live longer than most, be smarter, and able to plan ahead. Humans do lots of things that apes cannot. Just a starter list includes advanced speech, math, singing, worship, prayer, holding ceremonies, creativity, and love. Truly, we were designed to take care of His creation. We are more equipped for this than any living thing, even if we don’t make the right choices sometimes! The following sections will review each one of the supposed “ape-to-human” transitions as well as disprove them using Creation Science.


What they found

What They Found…They found only 40% of Lucy’s Skeleton

What They Imagined

What They Imagined…Exhibits like this one are misleading and do not reflect the fossil evidence(9)

In 1974, Donald Johansen discovered a fossil in Ethiopia, Africa. Although the skeleton was only 40% complete, Mr. Johansen declared that the fossil was the “missing link” between man and ape. The fossil was nicknamed “Lucy” and given the scientific name of Australopithecus Afarensis. Although the name sounds impressive, Australopithecus simply means “southern ape.” Since then more Australopithecine fossils have been found so we now know more about them.

While public school textbooks often state that Lucy was our ancestor and feature human-like drawings of her, the fossil evidence tells quite a different story. Scientists Jack Stearns, Randall Sussman and others have studied Lucy and other Australopithecine fossils. Here is what they found:

  • Fact: The skulls were sloped and apelike(2)
  • Fact: The hands were curved and designed for hanging from tree limbs. Stearns and Sussman stated that Lucy’s hands were surprisingly similar to chimpanzees(3)
  • Fact: The wrists had the ability to lock in place for knuckle walking(4)
  • Fact: The toe bones were long and curved, even by ape standards(5)
  • Fact: Lucy was around 3ft. tall

So far the fossil evidence would seem to indicate that Lucy was simply an extinct ape and not a human ancestor. Evolutionists’ strongest argument that she is our ancestor is their belief that she was bipedal; in other words, she walked on two legs like we do. Have you ever seen an ape walk upright? If so, you probably noticed that humans and apes walk very differently. While there are several reasons for this, the main reason is that our pelvic bones are very different from apes. So what did Lucy’s pelvic bones look like? Stearns and Sussman said that they were ape-like and resembled a chimpanzee!(6)

So you would think that would have settled the issue right? Wrong! Some evolutionists were not ready to give up yet. In 1994 PBS Nova featured a series entitled: “In Search of Human Origins.”(7) The first episode included a section featuring Dr. Owen Lovejoy talking about Lucy’s pelvic bones. While we encourage you to check it out for yourself, this is essentially what happened in the video:

The narrator states the problem – Lucy’s hip bone fossils show that she could not have possibly walked upright like humans do. Dr. Lovejoy said that the fossils must have been stepped on and broken, so they only appear to be like a chimpanzee’s hip bones. He proceeds to “fix the problem” by making a plaster cast of the fossils, cutting them into pieces, and then reassembling them “the way they were before Lucy died.” As the camera zooms in on Dr. Lovejoy’s new creation, the narrator triumphantly announces that Lucy’s pelvic bones were a lot like ours.

So the question is, “How did Dr. Lovejoy know what Lucy’s bones looked like before she died?” Obviously, his creation was heavily influenced by his prior beliefs that we evolved from ape-like ancestors. This is a great example of someone trying to make the facts fit the theory of evolution.

This is what Dr. Charles Oxnard, professor of anatomy and a leading expert on australopithecine fossils, concluded, “The australopithecines known over the last several decades … are now irrevocably removed from a place in the evolution of human bipedalism,…All this should make us wonder about the usual presentation of human evolution in introductory textbooks”(8)

So was Lucy really our ancestor? No, she wasn’t. Unfortunately, many evolutionists assume we evolved from ape-like creatures. They often try to make the facts fit into their theory and ignore facts that don’t fit.

Works Cited:

  1. Lucy exhibit featured at the St. Louis Zoo.  Source of photo: Lucy She’s No Lady, Dr. David Menton, Answers in Genesis.
  2. Lucy She’s No Lady, Dr. David Menton, Answers in Genesis.
  3. J. Stern & R. Sussman, 1983 American Journal of Physical Anthropology 60:279-317 p. 284.
  4. Science News April 8, 2000 P 235 “Lucy on the Ground With Knuckles” Richmond and Strait, Nature March 23.
  5. J. Stern & R. Sussman, 1983 American Journal of Physical Anthropology 60: 279-312.
  6. J. Stern & R. Sussman, 1983 American Journal of Physical Anthropology 60:279-317 pp 291 & 292.
  7. “In Search of Human Origins” 1994 PBS Nova Series, Episode One.
  8. Charles Oxnard (professor of anatomy and leading expert on australopithecine fossils), The Order of Man: A Biomathematical Anatomy of the Primates, 1984, p 3.

Digging Deeper:

Homo Habilis

Homo habilis or “handy man” is often featured in sixth grade textbooks as some form of ape-to-human “transitional form.” Textbooks state confidently that he was our evolutionary ancestor who lived around 2.4 million years ago, and that scientists believe he was the missing link between australopithecines (apes) and Homo erectus (humans). Are you ready for the rest of the story? In reality, Homo habilis is not just one fossil, it is a collection of fossils that have been the center of intense controversy and confusion. Here are some interesting facts about Homo habilis:

  • In 1964, Louis Leaky, Phillip Tobias and John Napier announced in Nature the discovery of a new human ancestor: Homo habilis. The original fossils were said to be 1.8 million years old and consisted of scattered skull fragments, hand bones and foot bones from four juvenile specimens.
  • According to Louis Leakey, the foot bones showed signs that Homo habilis may have been able to walk upright on two feet, and the hand bones indicated a high degree of manual dexterity. However, since these bones were not found next to the skull fragments, there was no concrete proof that they belonged to the same creature. Some scientists believed that the Homo habilis fossils were just a mixture of australopithecine (ape) and Homo erectus (human) fossils–not a new species.
  • Some primitive stone tools were also found at the site. Originally scientists claimed these tools belonged to another supposed missing link known as Zinjanthropus (who incidentally, turned out to be just an ape). Now Louis Leakey claimed the tools were used by these new fossils. This was the reason for naming these fossils “Homo habilis” or handy man.
  • In 1986, Tim White and Don Johanson discovered a partial adult skeleton. Since the fossil was discovered in Olduvai Gorge, it was designated “Olduvai Hominid 62” and was dated (by evolutionists) at 1.8 million years old. Because the skull and teeth were similar to the original Homo habilis fossils found in 1964, the new fossil was said to belong to the same species. This presented three big problems for evolutionists!
  1. The body of Olduvai Hominid 62 was rather ape-like and smaller than the famous australopithecine fossil known as Lucy.(1)  Since Lucy was just slightly over three feet tall, and Homo erectus fossils grew to be about six feet, Olduvai Hominid 62 should have been somewhere in between them if Homo habilis was truly a missing link.
  2. Since the body of Olduvai Hominid 62 was ape-like, it seemed to support the belief that the original Homo habilis fossils found in 1964 were actually a mixture of australopithecine and human bones (most notably the hands and feet).
  3. If the fossilized hand and feet bones found in 1964 were actually human, then logically the tools found at that site were used by people living there.

Despite the bold statements made about Homo habilis in many school textbooks, paleoanthropologists are still trying to make sense out of this odd collection of fossils. Here is how evolutionist Richard Leakey described the problem:

“Of the several dozen specimens that have been said at one time or another to belong to this species, at least half of them don’t. But there is no consensus as to which 50 percent should be excluded.  No one anthropologist’s 50 percent is quite the same as another’s.”(2)

So was Homo habilis really our ancestor? Not even evolutionists agree.  Bernard Wood (George Washington University), regarded as being an expert on evolutionary trees (phylogenies) suggests that none of the Homo habilis fossils represent human ancestors:

“The diverse group of fossils from 1 million years or so ago, known as H. habilis, may be more properly recognized as australopithecines.” (3)   

Although evolutionists keep trying to convince us that humans evolved from ape-like creatures, interpretations of the fossil record have been filled with mistakes, fraud and fantasy.  The truth is we were created by God on day six of creation week. Since the beginning, humans have always been humans and apes have always been apes.


1. Bones of Contention, Marvin L Lubenow, (Michigan, Baker Books 1992, 2004): p 300

2. Richard Leakey and Roger Lewin, Origins Reconsidered, (New York: Doubleday 1992): p 112

3. Bernard Wood, “The age of australopithecines,” Nature 372, (3 November 1994): pp 31-32

4. Photo source:

Digging Deeper:


Homo Erectus

The species name Homo erectus means “erect or upright man.” Evolutionists claim that various Homo erectus specimens fill up the gap between australopithecines (apes) and both Neanderthals and modern humans. Less than 300 fossils that have been labeled Homo erectus have been found—all of which have been labeled by creationists as either “fully ape” or “fully man.” One of the most famous specimens of this group has often been fabricated to support evolutionary theory.(1)

So who/what are the Homo erectus fossils that have been found? A leading expert on human fossils, Marvin Lubenow, comments, “My own conclusion is that Homo erectus and Neandertal are actually the same: Homo erectus is the lower end, with regard to size, of a continuum that includes Homo erectus, early Homo sapiens, and Neandertal. The range of cranial capacities for fossil humans is in line with the range of cranial capacities for modern humans.”(2)

Works Cited:

  2. Lubenow, Marvin. Bones of Contention: A Creationist Assessment of Human Fossils. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2004. p. 115.

Digging Deeper:


  • Fossil evidence for alleged apemen—Part 1: the genus Homo by Peter Line, Journal of Creation 19(1):22–32, April 2005.
  • Homo erectus ‘to’ modern man: evolution or human variability? by A. W. (Bill) Mehlert, Journal of Creation 8(1):105–116, April 1994.

Home Sapien

Despite what public school textbooks say, creation science proves the point that “homo sapiens” or “homo sapien sapiens,” are all simply human!

Digging Deeper:


Do you have questions regarding the information found on this page? Contact Genesis Apologetics to get in touch with a knowledgeable member of our ministry team. We gratefully acknowledge the excellent work and resources developed by of our allies such as Answers in Genesis (AIG), Creation Ministries International (CMI), the Institute for Creation Research (ICR) and others.