Pace Four 



EVOLUTION 



February, 1928 



Science Bridges Gaps in Evolution of Man 



By Bakkow Lyons 



CINCE John T. Scopes stood before a jury of his peers 

 two years ago in the famous trial at Dayton, Tenn., 

 science has unearthed a large amount of new evidence 

 which reinforces the argument in favor of the Darwinian 

 view of evolution — that man and the modern man-like 

 apes sprang from a common ancestral stock. 



Nothing has been brought to light, however, which 

 traces the line of descent more clearly than the study 

 of teeth made by Dr. William K. Gregory and Dr. 

 Milo Hellman of the American Museum of Natural 

 History. 



The evidence consists of fossil remains of apes and 

 prehistoric men, teeth and bones of existing primitive 

 types and similar records of the most highly civilized 

 men. Teeth time and again have been the key in tracing 

 the development of species. They are harder than other 

 portions of the body and preserve the intricate patterns 

 which trace the growth and adaptation of animals to 

 their environment, often revealing habits of living which 

 no other portions of the fossils divulge. 



The patterns upon the grinding teeth in the American 

 Museum collection of apes and men illustrate the de- 

 velopment of the human species from its ape ancestors 

 just as clearly as fossil remains show the development 

 of the modern elephant with the multiple folds in its 

 grinding teeth, from the African predecessors of the 

 mastodon, which had but two or three ridges on its 

 molars. They show man's marvelous change froin a 

 forest creature into a cultured, social being as clearly 

 as another fossil group shows the development of the 

 modern horse from a creature about the size of a fox. 

 which ran over the open plains millions of years ago. 



While the ihain of evidence goes back further than the 

 point at which the split between the apes and man 

 apparently occurred, the immediate ancestor of each 

 branch seems to have been a widely scattered fossil 

 form found both in Europe and Asia. It is quite pos- 

 sible that none of the actual fossils that have been found 

 were of the species from which modern forms descended. 

 There undoubtedly were many more species at one time 

 than we have records of, and some of these which have 

 left no trace may have been the actual ancestors. 



Yet, it may very well be that Dryopilhecus rhenanus. 

 found in the Miocene deposits of Germany, may have 

 been our own particular ancestor for the res'uiblances 



to prehistoric man are, in some respects, very striking. 

 The Miocene deposits in which they were found date 

 back some 2,000.000 years. 



Next come the Piltdown fragments found in England 

 in the lower Pleistocene, or early glacial period of more 



A. Palate oj fossil Neanderthal man ( Le Moustier) ; 



B. Second upper molar oj Le Moustier; C. Second upper 

 molar oj jossil ape Dryopithecus; D. Loner molar oj 

 Dryopilhecus; E. Ehringsdorj- Child. 



than 500,000 years ago. Then the Heidelberg man of 

 tile first inter-glacial period aliout 350,000 years ago. 

 Then in succession the Ehringsdorf man of early Nean- 

 derthal times, 50,000 years back; the Mousterian youth 

 of the later Neanderthal period, perhaps 30,000 years 

 ago; C'ro-magnon man of 20,000 years ago and then the 

 INeolithic men of about 15,000 years ago. 



The latter Here more advanced tlian some of the primi- 

 tive races today, like the Australian bushmen, and were 

 the early representatives of modern, European man. 



The evidence which Drs. Gregory and Hellman have 

 presented is based largely upon an examination of first 

 ;'nd second molars and first and second premolars, or 



Lower Grinding Teeth of the Lejt Side.- 



-A. B. Fossil Dryopithecus jaws jroin India; C. Fossil jrom 

 D. Modern White; E. Modern India. 



Piltdown. England ^Dnutiman) , 



