Other Human Species and Biblical History

Very likely the most interesting aspect of origins as a study is the origins of our own species. Anthropologists have searched tirelessly for the missing link between humans and apes. Even the great American inspiration for Indiana Jones, Roy Chapman Andrews, was drawn to Mongolia to search for mankind's ancestor. And some of the most self-centered, deceitful acts in all of paleontology were over a few measly scraps of bone thought to be human ancestors.
I don't think there is any gray area between humanity and ape. From Homo erectus to Homo sapiens, Homo is distinctly human. And from Australopithecus to Gorilla, apes are distinctly ape. Certainly some apes possess characteristics more characteristic of humans and vice versa but, all together, they are distinct. I don't even think they have a common ancestor, evolutionarily speaking. Most of the scraps currently believed to be intermediate between the two are to fragmentary to say for certain exactly what they are, so, after years of time wasted on paleoanthropology, I don't think they will ever find a fossil link.
And I don't think there is enough time in earth's history for us to share a common ancestor with apes. While conventional scientists presume an Earth of millions of years in age, I presume a much shorter lifespan for Earth. My reasons for this are complex and supported by a lot of subjective evidence. I'll save all that for another post. I do hesitate to put an exact number on the age of the Earth, however.
To answer the question, "Where did we come from?" I think the easy answer is, simply put: God created us. However, that answer certainly doesn't make any connections between what we know about the paleontology and history of early humans. I think most rational people would agree that the Bible is a historical document, to say the least, and among historical documents, it is among the most complete as far as a description of the origins of humanity and it is the certainly the most widely believed among historical descriptions of our origins. Not to mention the Son of God accepted it as history (see Matthew 10:15, 12:40-41, 19:3-6, and 24:38-39; Mark 10:3-9; Luke 4:25-27, 11:50-51, and 17:28-32; John 3:14, 5:45-47, and 6:32-49; etc.). Following Jesus' example, I use the Bible as if it were a historical document.
I find it interesting that little attempt to rationally tie fellows like Homo erectus and H. neanderthalensis with known history were made until 2012. A great article was written for Answers magazine that year (Snelling & Matthews 2012) which explained these extinct species within the framework of a biblical history. It was a very interesting article and I encourage you to read it here. Generally speaking, I agreed with this article. However, there was some disconnect between the nations that stemmed from Noah's sons, ancient people like Homo erectus, and later peoples like those in early Egypt and Mesopotamia.
Before the tower of Babel, people were primarily accumulated in one place. This means that the nations described as stemming from the sons of Noah must be in a general sense, and not in the distinct, immediate segregation that we usually think of. This would also mean that racial distinction did not arise among people until after the tower of Babel. Assuming that people did not spread around the earth before Babel, Homo erectus must have arisen after this time (their fossils are very widespread). So all the people of Babel must have been of an H. erectus, or earlier, form. Only after this, as fossil evidence indicates, did forms like H. neanderthalensis and H. sapiens arise (see note about evolution). These differences were probably due to adaptations caused, largely, by the isolation of different populations (founder effect). With the assimilation and disappearance of neanderthals, Homo sapiens pushed on to diversify into ancient history as we know it, from the Egypt to Babylon, to Israel. This theory makes sense in light of all historical, paleontological, and archeological considerations except one.
The lifespans and chronologies found in the Bible indicate that many of the first people off Noah's ark, such as Noah's sons, were still alive when the earliest "civilizations" were taking root. Apparently, people like Shem, who are presumably of a pre-erectus type, could have met with Abraham, an essentially modern H. sapiens. How could so many distinct human forms, requiring many, many generations, diversify so rapidly under the shadow of their still living forefathers? It is possible that the Bible records the ages of exceptional family lines, possibly obtaining extraordinary ages because of their closeness to God. However, it is unlikely that the thousands of generations presumably needed to develop H. erectus into H. sapiens would fit into the lifespan of a few hundred years.
Because this seems to be the only potential problem with the theory, it seems likely that many generations did pass while the patriarchs lived on, enjoying their long lives. Also, the presumed number of generations may not be necessary as isolations of populations can result in very rapid diversification in a matter of just a few generations. A combination of these two possibilities certainly seems to provide a justification of the explanation presented by Snelling and Matthews in their article and until a better explanation presents itself, I hold to this one.
Would you agree? Leave a comment for me below or on my google+ page with your opinion and the reasons for it. Were H. erectus exploring the world before Babel? Are there gaps in the genealogies of the Bible? What do you think?

Note: I have avoided the word "evolution" in this paper because of the nature of many of those who will read this. Many Christians have an aversion to the word because acceptance of Darwin's theory of evolution, as it applies to the origin of all life from a common ancestor, conflicts with a literal interpretation of the Bible. However, the principle of evolution as change, adaptation, and diversification among species is an observational aspect of biology that few can deny. Additionally, humans evolve just like any other living thing would, though I have chosen to replace the word with substitutes like "adapt" or "arise." Some people may be offended by the concept of human evolution because of the deep philosophical attachments that bog it down in secular thinking.

References:
Ham, Ken. 2006. "Did Jesus Say He Created in Six Literal Days?" The New Answers Book 1. Ken Ham (general editor). Master Books, Inc.: Green Forest, AR.

Snelling, A. A., and M. Matthews. 2012. "When did Cavemen Life? Finding a Home for Cavemen." Answers 7(2): 50-55.