Luskin quotes the first sentence of the abstract, but this is the last
sentence of the abstract:
QUOTE:
A fresh look at brain size, hand morphology and earliest technology
suggests that a number of key Homo attributes may already be present in
generalized species of Australopithecus, and that adaptive distinctions
in Homo are simply amplifications or extensions of ancient hominin trends.
END QUOTE:
The abstract does mention Hono habilis that was basically
Australopithicine from the neck down with features of the skull that
made it part of our genus. Homo erectus is basically modern human from
the neck down with cranial features more like H. habilis. The
transitional difference is small as Luskin admits that the authors
claim, but the authors just claim that we don't have the fossils, and
then conclude that it doesn't matter because the transition can be
crossed by just extending what is already happening in Australopithicine
evolution.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4920303/
There is likely a reason that Luskin doesn't cite the review paper like
he should have (he has a PhD and should know better) it appears that he
doesn't want anyone to check it out.
Why is Luskin wallowing in this gap denial. Why isn't he taking his own
advice. This is still recommended up at the ID scam web site.
https://evolutionnews.org/2021/12/what-is-intelligent-design-and-how-should-we-defend-it/
Ron Okimoto