The "Orce Man" Specimen

SUMMARY

In 1983, a skull fragment was found in Orce, Spain. Those who discovered it touted it as an ancient human skull fragment, although it's identity has been placed in question (mainly, that it is not a human skull fragment but a donkey skull fragment). Some creationists (see this article from Evolution is a Myth) claim that such a "blunder" on the part of evolutionary scientists must mean that organism identification through fossil remains must be pure guesswork and totally unreliable. However, researchers like Mark Isaak (Isaak, 2004) and C. M. Baruzzi (Baruzzi, 2015; 2016; 2021) have pointed out that 1.) the human fragment interpretation was local and did not come to be endorsed by the wider scientific community due to lack of evidence, and 2.) the human fragment interpretation was politically motivated, and constitutes poorly conducted science. As such it is not surprising that misidentification took place, and this specimen does not present a flaw in the specimen identification process or a "route" against the theory of evolution.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Alba, D. M. (2022) A fistful of fossils: The rise and fall of the Orce Man and the politics of paleoanthropological science. Journal of Human Evolution, 165(103166). LINK.

Baruzzi, M. C. (2015) Orce Man: A Public Controversy in Spanish Human Origins Research [Doctoral thesis]. Autonomous University of Barcelona. LINK.

Baruzzi, M. C. (2016, March 18) A Country's Obsession During the Construction of a Democracy: "Is the Orce Man our ancestor?". UABDivulga. LINK.

Baruzzi, M. C. (2021) The Orce Man: Controversy, Media and Politics in Human Origins Research. Brill. LINK.

Foley, J. (2001) Creationist Arguments : Orce Man. TalkOrigin's Fossil Hominid's FAQ. LINK.

Isaak, M. (2004, January 9) CC021 : Orce man. TalkOrigin's Index to Creationist Claims. LINK.

Martinez-Navarro, B. (2002) The skull of Orce: Parietal bones or frontal bones? Journal of Human Evolution, 43(2), 265-270. LINK.