“Ape-Men” Missing Links

“Ape-Men” Missing Links

Bodie Hodge, M.Sc., B.Sc., PEI

Biblical Authority Ministries, September 9, 2025 (Donate)

Evolutionists have proposed many fossil discoveries as “missing links” in the supposed transition from ape-like creatures to humans. These claims are based on an evolutionary worldview rather than a biblical worldview. When examined carefully, these fossils fall into one of two categories: fully ape (or other creature like a lemur) or fully human, with no true intermediate forms between kinds.

Why The Need For “Ape-Men”?

“Ape-men” are vital to the evolutionary worldview because they provide the illusion of a bridge between humans and animals. Evolutionists teach that humans are the product of countless gradual changes from ape-like ancestors. Without convincing transitional forms, the idea of human evolution collapses.

Fossils labeled as “ape-men” or “apemen” are often used as iconic proof (primarily with their respective artist reconstructions) to persuade the public that the religion of evolution (e.g., naturalism, materialism, secular humanism) is true. Textbooks, museums, and media outlets often showcase these reconstructions to give evolution a sense of credibility. In reality, these fossils fall into one of two categories: fully human or fully ape, with no real transitions or intermediate forms between the ape kind and the human kind.

By promoting ape-men, it is an attempt to undermine the truth that humans were made uniquely (Adam from dust and Eve from Adam) and created in God’s image (Genesis 1:26–27). Without these supposed links, the evolutionary story loses one of its most persuasive arguments.

Invented “Ape-Men”

Evolutionists often claim to have discovered “ape-men,” fossil evidence allegedly indicating a transition from ape-like creatures to humans. These claims are not based on objective evidence but on interpreting fossils through an evolutionary worldview. There are three basic ways to construct an “ape-man”.

1. Combine Human And Ape Fossils

One common method is to mix ape bones with human bones and present them as a single transitional creature. A famous example is Piltdown Man (1912), which combined a human skull with an orangutan jaw. For over 40 years, it was celebrated as proof of human evolution until it was exposed as a deliberate hoax in 1953. This approach relies on misinterpretation and sometimes blatant deception, but not real intermediate fossils.

Another example is Homo habilis. This species supposedly represents a step toward the genus Homo, showing increased brain size and tool use. However, the fossils labeled Homo habilis are a mixture of fully ape-like remains (likely australopithecines) and fully human remains.

When properly sorted, the ape fossils belong with Australopithecus, while the human fossils belong to early true humans such as Homo erectus. The category itself is artificial and misleading (i.e., “a junk category”).

Other cases, such as Nebraska Man (based on a single pig tooth), show how evolutionary bias can lead to false claims when evidence is incomplete. This wasn’t even using human or ape fossils.

2. Add Ape-Like Features To Human Fossils

Another method is to take fully human fossils and highlight or add certain features that appear primate-like (primitive) or ape-like. For example, Neanderthals were once portrayed as stooped, brutish “cave men”.

Later studies of their DNA and skeletons revealed they were fully human, with posture and intelligence equal to modern humans. Their differences, such as large ridge brow or robust bones, simply reflect normal human variation. In their case, it was likely due to genetics and environmental factors after the Flood.

Detailed studies of Neanderthal DNA and skeletons show they were fully human. They buried their dead, made tools, musical instruments, and displayed culture and intelligence.

Another example is Homo erectus. The evolutionary claim is that they were a more advanced ancestor, still somewhat primitive, leading eventually to modern humans.

But Homo erectus skeletons are completely human, with only minor variations in skull shape and size—similar to the differences among modern human groups today. Features like heavy brow ridges or a slightly smaller cranial capacity are simply variations within mankind, not evidence of an evolutionary transition.

3. Add Human-Like Features To Ape Fossils

The third method is to take ape fossils and give them human characteristics through artistic reconstructions or biased interpretations. This often happens with fossils like Australopithecus afarensis (“Lucy”). Lucy and similar australopithecines are viewed by evolutionists as key links showing ape-like creatures evolving toward humans (some caveat that perhaps Lucy was in a line that didn’t lead to man but was parallel).

While the skeletal evidence clearly shows ape-like features—artists reconstruct Lucy with human-like eyes, skin tone, and upright posture, misleading the public into thinking it’s a true intermediate form.

Lucy and other australopiths had curved finger and toe bones suited for climbing trees. They also had a hip and knee structure designed for knuckle-walking, which was not efficient for upright walking. Lucy et al also had a small brain size consistent with modern apes.

Australopithecus afarensis in the Natural History Museum in Stockholm Sweden; Notice the human-like hands and feet, erect posture, and other human-like features; Photo by Bodie Hodge

Evolutionary artists often “humanize” Lucy with facial reconstructions, but the fossils themselves show nothing truly transitional. Lucy was a member of a now-extinct ape group and not a missing link at all.

Another example that falls into this category takes the same tact but goes farther back. This is the case of Ardipithecus ramidus (“Ardi”). Ardi’s fossil remains are highly fragmentary and were reconstructed using evolutionary assumptions.

Many features, such as its grasping big toe, are typical of tree-dwelling creatures, not humans. There is no conclusive evidence that Ardi walked habitually upright. It represents an extinct creature but not a human ancestor.

Another curious creature is Homo naledi. Homo naledi is the name given to a collection of fossilized bones discovered in 2013 in the Rising Star Cave system in South Africa. Evolutionary scientists claimed these bones represented a new species of ancient human, suggesting they were a “missing link” between ape-like ancestors and modern humans.

The fossils were unusual because they showed a mixture of traits: some features similar to modern humans, like certain skull and leg bones, and others more ape-like, such as a small braincase and curved fingers. But remember this might be a case of category 1 (a mix of human and animal fossils). Based on the main fossils though, it should be a category 3 (animal being incorrectly labelled with human characteristics).

Dr. David Menton—known for curating the Creation Museum’s “Lucy” exhibit and world renown anatomist—reviewed the published fossil evidence and concluded that Homo naledi does not deserve to be classified as Homo. He explicitly stated:

“I am not convinced that H. naledi is human, and I don’t recognize the status of ‘near human.’ From what I can see from the fossils and skull reconstruction, H. naledi had a sloped lower face and a very robust mandible that bears little resemblance to humans. It also has a small cranium. The proximal and medial phalanges of the hand are even more curved than Australopithecus afarensis, suggesting an ape-like creature.”[1]

In his assessment, Menton emphasizes that the combination of a sloping ape-like face, robust jaw, small braincase, and highly curved finger bones point to an ape-like anatomy, not human or even “near human.”

Dr. Menton’s position is that Homo naledi is best interpreted as a non-human ape, not a transitional or human variation. In line with this, was Dr. Elizabeth Mitchell’s assessment.

Mitchell reviews the fossil assemblage discovered by Lee Berger—which includes over 1,500 bone fragments from at least 15 individuals in the Dinaledi chamber of South Africa’s Rising Star Cave.[2]

Berger classified them as a new species, Homo naledi, thought to combine humanlike and australopithecine traits. Mitchell highlights that the fossils display a mosaic of features[3]:

1. Braincases of only 560 cc and 465 cc—within the size range of australopithecines, and much smaller than typical archaic or modern humans.
2. Skull characteristics like a sloped lower face and lack of protruding nasal bones—more similar to apes than humans.
3. Towards the upper body, shoulder joints and curved finger bones align with those of tree-swinging apes.
4. Hip and ribcage anatomy also resemble australopithecine apes. While certain foot and ankle features may superficially resemble human structure, they diverge in orientation and form.

Mitchell does not accept Berger’s Homo designation. She interprets the evidence as indicating that Homo naledi is not human or a human ancestor but rather reflects ape-like anatomy—consistent instead with a variant within the ape “kind,” not an evolutionary transition.[4]

Drs. Elizabeth Mitchell and David Menton argue that Homo naledi exhibits traits that are clearly ape-like—particularly in skull, hand, hip, and rib anatomy—and thus should not be considered a human species or a “missing link.”

Two Kinds, Not Transitions

Humans were created separately in God’s image (Genesis 1:26–27) and did not evolve from apes. Fossils do not show a gradual transition but rather fit into two distinct groups:

• Apes: Extinct varieties like australopithecines and modern species.
• Humans: Neanderthals, Homo erectus, and all other members of the human race.

Claims of “missing links” stem from evolutionary storytelling rather than observable evidence. When examined without evolutionary assumptions, these fossils confirm the biblical truth that man is a unique creation, separate from animals.

Every supposed “ape-man” falls into one of these three categories: a mix of ape and human bones, a fully human skeleton portrayed ape features, or an ape fossil depicted with human features. The Bible teaches that humans were created separately in God’s image (Genesis 1:26–27), and the fossil record supports this, showing two distinct groups—apes and humans—with no true transitional forms from one kind to another.

Many articles often give the scientific name of fossil finds. This is often confusing for people who are trying to determine if it really is a missing link or something else. To sum up, this chart gives a few popular alleged missing link names and what they are simplistically. 

Name	What is it?[5]
Australopithecus afarensis such as “Lucy”	Extinct ape
Australopithecus africanus	Extinct ape
Australopithecus boisei	Extinct ape
Australopithecus robustus	Extinct ape
Australopithecus ramidus	Extinct ape
Homo Naledi	Extinct ape
Pan troglodytes and Pan paniscus (Chimpanzee)	Living ape
Gorilla gorilla and Gorilla beringei (Gorilla)	Living ape
Pongo pygmaeus and Pongo abelii (Orangutan)	Living ape
Ramapithecus	Extinct ape (extinct orangutan)
Homo habilis	Junk category mixing some human and some ape fossils
Homo floresiensis	Human (dwarf, pygmy)
Homo ergaster	Human
Homo erectus such as “Peking man” and “Java man”	Human[6]
Homo neanderthalensis (Neanderthals)	Human
Archaic Homo sapiens	Human
Modern Homo sapiens	Human

 Chart developed by Bodie Hodge

□

Bodie Hodge, Ken Ham's son in law, has been an apologist since 1998 helping out in various churches and running an apologetics website. He spent 21 years working at Answers in Genesis as a speaker, writer, and researcher as well as a founding news anchor for Answers News. He was also head of the Oversight Council. 

Bodie launched Biblical Authority Ministries in 2015 as a personal website and it was organized officially in 2025 as a 501(c)(3). He has spoken on multiple continents and hosts of US states in churches, colleges, and universities. He is married with four children. 

---

[1] David Menton, Naledi Nailed Down as a Human-Like Species?, Answers in Genesis, September 11, 2015, https://answersingenesis.org/about/press/naledi-nailed-down-as-human-like-species/.

[2] Elizabeth Mitchell, Is Homo naledi a New Species of Human Ancestor?, Answers in Depth, September 12, 2015, https://answersingenesis.org/human-evolution/homo-naledi-new-species-human-ancestor/.

[3] Ibid.

[4] Ibid.

[5] This always depends on an accurate classification whether afarensis, neanderthalensis, etc.  Most fossils would be this type but of course there are always some exceptions classified as something when it shouldn’t be. With the human ones (Archaic Homo sapiens, Homo erectus, etc.), it shows there is indeed variation within the created kind. This would be the same with the different ape kinds, showing great variation as we would expect biblically.   

[6] For the most part they are anatomically human. This legitimate homo category more, than most others, have some finds classified as Homo erectus that are not human but rather ape-like but put in this category due to evolutionary beliefs. Really, they should be classified as something else.