Photo credit: Tyler Stone, University of Iowa.
Researchers name, describe new crocodile that hunted iconic Lucy’s species - Taylor & Francis Newsroom
How does the discovery of an ancient crocodile in the Afar Region of Ethiopia help us to understand why creationists cling so tenaciously to their patently wrong beliefs? The discovery has just been reported by a team led by Professor Christopher A. Brochu of the University of Iowa, in the Taylor & Francis
Journal of Systematic Palaeontology.
It is often said that you cannot reason someone out of a belief they were not reasoned into. This is especially true of religions and, as is becoming increasingly clear, of fundamentalist creationism, in which rejecting evidence and reason is often treated as a badge of ideological commitment. So how did creationists, almost without exception, acquire their fundamental beliefs?
One of the causes of religion is memetic inheritance from parents and authority figures during early childhood. As Ignatius Loyola, founder of the Jesuit Catholic order, is reputed to have said, “Give me the boy until he is seven and I will give you the man.” As can readily be seen from any map showing the global distribution of religions, if a creationist had been born in India, they would probably have been a Hindu; if born in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Turkey or Afghanistan they would most likely have been a Muslim; and in Japan perhaps a Shintoist or Buddhist. The probability is, however, that those encountered online were born into a Christian family, most probably somewhere in the American Bible Belt.
The puzzle is why children accept, without evidence, the opinions of their parents as established fact beyond questioning and not requiring proof.
The answer lies in the psychological process of childhood naïvety, which raises a deeper question: how and why did this trait evolve? What advantage could there be in accepting what parents and authority figures say without independently verifying it?
Discussing this problem some years ago on the now-defunct CompuServe SciMath Forum, I suggested that the explanation lies in a “safety-first” strategy. For example, a child who accepts the warning not to go alone to the waterhole because their parents say it is dangerous will survive with no loss or detriment. A child who decides to check for themselves might instead end up eaten by a crocodile. Over time, natural selection would favour children inclined to trust parental warnings. This mechanism allowed the accumulated knowledge of previous generations to be passed quickly and efficiently to the next generation with little resistance — a classic example of memetic evolution.
However, the same mechanism that helps transmit practical survival knowledge also makes children vulnerable to religious beliefs and other superstitions, just as the need to breathe makes us vulnerable to airborne viruses.
So it is interesting to see that researchers led by Professor Christopher A. Brochu from the University of Iowa’s School of Earth, Environment and Sustainability, working with colleagues from several American universities, the Ethiopian Heritage Authority in Addis Ababa, and the University of Cambridge, UK, have discovered the fossil of an ancient crocodile that lived in the Afar Region of Ethiopia at roughly the same time as “Lucy” (
Australopithecus afarensis), who, if not a direct ancestor of the genus
Homo, was at least a close relative.
The crocodile, which the team have named
Crocodylus lucivenator (“Lucy’s hunter”), would have been the apex predator in the area and would certainly have preyed on any hominins who came too close to its waterhole without exercising great caution.