Spend an exotic holiday in Asia

• The Origin of Man
• Marathon Training: How...
• Las Vegas Vacationing Tips
• Holidays - Out & About...

The Origin of Man Anyone who seeks an answer to the evolutionary history. This is a most question of how living things, including clear indication of their being created. himself, came into existence, will Yet, admitting this fact is totally encounter two distinct explanations. The against the dogmatic philosophy and first is "creation," the idea that all ideology of evolutionists. As a result, living things came into existence as a they try to portray Homo erectus, a consequence of an intelligent design. truly human race, as a half-ape The second explanation is the theory of creature. In their Homo erectus "evolution," which asserts that living reconstructions, they tenaciously draw things are not the products of an simian features. On the other hand, with intelligent design, but of coincidental similar drawing methods, they humanise causes and natural processes. apes like Australopithecus or Homo For a century and a half now, the theory Habilis. With this method, they seek to of evolution has received extensive "approximate" apes and human beings and support from the scientific community. close the gap between these two distinct The science of biology is defined in living classes. terms of evolutionist concepts. That is Neanderthals why, between the two explanations of Neanderthals were human beings who creation and evolution, the majority of suddenly appeared 100,000 years ago in people assume the evolutionist Europe, and who disappeared, or were explanation to be scientific. assimilated by mixing with other races, Accordingly, they believe evolution to quietly but quickly 35,000 years ago. be a theory supported by the Their only difference from modern man is observational findings of science, while that their skeletons are more robust and creation is thought to be a belief based their cranial capacity slightly bigger. on faith. As a matter of fact, however, Neanderthals were a human race, a fact scientific findings do not support the which is admitted by almost everybody theory of evolution. Findings from the today. Evolutionists have tried very last two decades in particular openly hard to present them as a "primitive contradict the basic assumptions of this species", yet all the findings indicate theory. Many branches of science, such that they were no different from a as paleontology, biochemistry, "robust" man walking on the street population genetics, comparative anatomy today. A prominent authority on the and biophysics, indicate that natural subject, Erik Trinkaus, a processes and coincidental effects paleoanthropologist from New Mexico cannot explain life, as the theory of University writes: evolution proposes. Detailed comparisons of Neanderthal THE ORIGIN OF MAN skeletal remains with those of modern Darwin put forward his claim that human humans have shown that there is nothing beings and apes descended from a common in Neanderthal anatomy that conclusively ancestor in his book The Descent of Man, indicates locomotor, manipulative, published in 1871. From that time until intellectual, or linguistic abilities now, the followers of Darwin's path have inferior to those of modern humans. tried to support this claim. But despite Many contemporary researchers define all the research that has been carried Neanderthal man as a sub-species of out, the claim of "human evolution" has modern man and call him "Homo sapiens not been backed up by any concrete neandertalensis". The findings testify scientific discovery, particularly in that Neanderthals buried their dead, the fossil field. fashioned musical instruments, and had The man in the street is for the most cultural affinities with the Homo part unaware of this fact, and thinks sapiens sapiens living during the same that the claim of human evolution is period. To put it precisely, supported by a great deal of firm Neanderthals are a "robust" human race evidence. The reason for this incorrect that simply disappeared in time. opinion is that the subject is Homo Sapiens Archaic, Homo frequently discussed in the media and Heilderbergensis and Cro-Magnon Man presented as a proven fact. But real Archaic Homo sapiens is the last step experts on the subject are aware that before contemporary man in the imaginary there is no scientific foundation for evolutionary scheme. In fact, the claim of human evolution. David evolutionists do not have much to say Pilbeam, a Harvard University about these fossils, as there are only paleoanthropologist, says: very minor differences between them and If you brought in a smart scientist from modern human beings. Some researchers another discipline and showed him the even state that representatives of this meagre evidence we've got he'd surely race are still living today, and point say, "forget it; there isn't enough to to native Australians as an example. go on."(( Richard E. Leakey, The Making Like Homo sapiens (archaic), native of Mankind, Sphere Books Limited, Australians also have thick protruding Barcelona, 1982, p. 43.)) eyebrows, an inward-inclined mandibular And William Fix, the author of an structure, and a slightly smaller important book on the subject of cranial capacity. paleoanthropology, makes this comment: The group characterised as Homo As we have seen, there are numerous heilderbergensis in evolutionist scientists and popularizers today who literature is in fact the same as have the temerity to tell us that there archaic Homo sapiens. The reason why two is 'no doubt' how man originated. If different terms are used to define the only they had the evidence...(( William same human racial type is the R. Fix, The Bone Peddlers, Macmillan disagreements among evolutionists. All Publishing Company, New York, 1984, pp. the fossils included under the Homo 150-153.)) heidelbergensis classification suggest This claim of evolution, which "lacks that people who were anatomically very any evidence," starts the human family similar to modern Europeans lived tree with a group of apes that have been 500,000 and even 740,000 years ago, claimed to constitute a distinct genus, first in England and then in Spain. Australopithecus. According to the It is estimated that Cro-Magnon man claim, Australopithecus gradually began lived 30,000 years ago. He has a to walk upright, his brain grew, and he dome-shaped cranium and a broad passed through a series of stages until forehead. His cranium of 1,600 cc is he arrived at man's present state (Homo above the average for contemporary man. sapiens). But the fossil record does not His skull has thick eyebrow projections support this scenario. Despite the claim and a bony protrusion at the back that that all kinds of intermediate forms is characteristic of both Neanderthal exist, there is an impassable barrier man and Homo erectus. between the fossil remains of man and Although the Cro-Magnon is considered to those of apes. Furthermore, it has been be a European race, the structure and revealed that the species which are volume of Cro-Magnon's cranium look very portrayed as each other's ancestors are much like those of some races living in actually contemporary species that lived Africa and the tropics today. Relying on in the same period. Ernst Mayr, one of this similarity, it is estimated that the most important proponents of the Cro-Magnon was an archaic African race. theory of evolution in the twentieth Some other paleoanthropological finds century, contends in his book One Long have shown that the Cro-Magnon and the Argument that "particularly historical Neanderthal races intermixed and laid [puzzles] such as the origin of life or the foundations for the races of our of Homo sapiens, are extremely difficult day. and may even resist a final, satisfying As a result, none of these human beings explanation."(( "Could science be were "primitive species". They were brought to an end by scientists' belief different human beings who lived in that they have final answers or by earlier times and either assimilated and society's reluctance to pay the bills?" mixed with other races, or became Scientific American, December 1992, p. extinct and disappeared from history. 20.)) Species Living in the Same Age as Their But what is the basis for the human Ancestors evolution thesis put forward by What we have investigated so far forms a evolutionists? It is the existence of clear picture: The scenario of "human plenty of fossils on which evolutionists evolution" is a complete fiction. In are able to build imaginary order for such a family tree to interpretations. Throughout history, represent the truth, a gradual evolution more than 6,000 species of ape have from ape to man must have taken place lived, and most of them have become and a fossil record of this process extinct. Today, only 120 species live on should be able to be found. In fact, the earth. These 6,000 or so species of however, there is a huge gap between ape, most of which are extinct, apes and humans. Skeletal structures, constitute a rich resource for the cranial capacities, and such criteria as evolutionists. walking upright or bent sharply forward On the other hand, there are distinguish humans from apes. considerable differences in the anatomic Another significant finding proving that makeup of the various human races. there can be no family-tree relationship Furthermore, the differences were even among these different species is that greater between prehistoric races, species that are presented as ancestors because as time has passed the human of others in fact lived concurrently. races have to some extent mixed with If, as evolutionists claim, each other and become assimilated. Australopithecus changed into Homo Despite this, important differences are habilis, which, in turn, turned into still seen between different population Homo erectus, the periods they lived in groups living in the world today, such should necessarily have followed each as, for example, Scandinavians, African other. However, there is no such pygmies, Inuits, native Australians, and chronological order to be seen in the many others. fossil record. There is no evidence to show that the According to evolutionist estimates, fossils called hominid by evolutionary Australopithecus lived from 4 million up paleontologists do not actually belong until 1 million years ago. The creatures to different species of ape or to classified as Homo habilis, on the other vanished races of humans. To put it hand, are thought to have lived until another way, no example of a 1.7 to 1.9 million years ago. Homo transitional form between mankind and rudolfensis, which is said to have been apes has been found. more "advanced" than Homo habilis, is After these general explanations, let us known to be as old as from 2.5 to 2.8 now examine the human evolution million years! That is to say, Homo hypothesis together. rudolfensis is nearly 1 million years The Imaginary Family Tree of Man older than Homo habilis, of which it is The Darwinist claim holds that modern alleged to have been the "ancestor". On man evolved from some kind of ape-like the other hand, the age of Homo erectus creature. During this alleged goes as far back as 1.6-1.8 million evolutionary process, which is supposed years ago, which means that Homo erectus to have started from 4 to 5 million appeared on the earth in the same time years ago, it is claimed that there frame as its so-called ancestor, Homo existed some "transitional forms" habilis. between modern man and his ancestors. Alan Walker confirms this fact by According to this completely imaginary stating that "there is evidence from scenario, the following four basic East Africa for late-surviving small "categories" are listed: Australopithecus individuals that were 1. Australopithecines (any of the contemporaneous first with H. Habilis, various forms belonging to the genus then with H. erectus."(( Alan Walker, Australopithecus) Science, vol 207, 1980, p. 1103.)) 2. Homo habilis Louis Leakey has found fossils of 3. Homo erectus Australopithecus, Homo habilis and Homo 4. Homo sapiens erectus almost next to each other in the Evolutionists call the genus to which Olduvai Gorge region of Tanzania, in the the alleged ape-like ancestors of man Bed II layer. belonged "Australopithecus", which means There is definitely no such family tree. "southern ape". Australopithecus, which Stephen Jay Gould, who was a is nothing but an old type of ape that paleontologist from Harvard University, has become extinct, is found in various explained this deadlock faced by different forms. Some of them are larger evolution, although he was an and strongly built (robust), while evolutionist himself: others are smaller and delicate What has become of our ladder if there (gracile). are three coexisting lineages of Evolutionists classify the next stage of hominids (A. africanus, the robust human evolution as the genus Homo, that australopithecines, and H. habilis), is "man". According to the evolutionist none clearly derived from another? claim, the living things in the Homo Moreover, none of the three display any series are more developed than evolutionary trends during their tenure Australopithecus, and not very much on earth. different from modern man. The modern When we move on from Homo erectus to man of our day, that is, the species Homo sapiens, we again see that there is Homo sapiens, is said to have formed at no family tree to talk about. There is the latest stage of the evolution of evidence showing that Homo erectus and this genus Homo. archaic Homo sapiens continued living up Fossils like "Java Man", "Pekin Man", to 27,000 years and even as recently as and "Lucy", which appear in the media 10,000 years before our time. In the Kow from time to time and are to be found in Swamp in Australia, some 13,000-year-old evolutionist publications and textbooks, Homo erectus skulls have been found. On are included in one of the four groups the island of Java, Homo erectus remains listed above. Each of these groupings is were found that are 27,000 years old. also assumed to branch into species and The Secret History of Homo Sapiens sub-species, as the case may be. The most interesting and significant Some suggested transitional forms of the fact that nullifies the very basis of past, such as Ramapithecus, had to be the imaginary family tree of excluded from the imaginary human family evolutionary theory is the unexpectedly tree after it was realised that they ancient history of modern man. were ordinary apes. Paleoanthropological findings reveal By outlining the links in the chain as that Homo sapiens people who looked "australopithecines > Homo habilis > exactly like us were living as long as 1 Homo erectus > Homo sapiens", the million years ago. evolutionists imply that each of these It was Louis Leakey, the famous types is the ancestor of the next. evolutionist paleoanthropologist, who However, recent findings by discovered the first findings on this paleoanthropologists have revealed that subject. In 1932, in the Kanjera region australopithecines, Homo habilis and around Lake Victoria in Kenya, Leakey Homo erectus existed in different parts found several fossils that belonged to of the world at the same time. Moreover, the Middle Pleistocene and that were no some of those humans classified as Homo different from modern man. However, the erectus probably lived up until very Middle Pleistocene was a million years recent times. In an article titled ago. Since these discoveries turned the "Latest Homo erectus of Java: Potential evolutionary family tree upside down, Contemporaneity with Homo sapiens in they were dismissed by some evolutionist Southeast Asia", it was reported in the paleoanthropologists. Yet Leakey always journal Science that Homo erectus contended that his estimates were fossils found in Java had "mean ages of correct. 27 ± 2 to 53.3 ± 4 thousand years ago" Just when this controversy was about to and this "raise[s] the possibility that be forgotten, a fossil unearthed in H. erectus overlapped in time with Spain in 1995 revealed in a very anatomically modern humans (H. sapiens) remarkable way that the history of Homo in Southeast Asia" sapiens was much older than had been Furthermore, Homo sapiens assumed. The fossil in question was neandarthalensis and Homo sapiens uncovered in a cave called Gran Dolina sapiens (modern man) also clearly in the Atapuerca region of Spain by co-existed. This situation apparently three Spanish paleoanthropologists from indicates the invalidity of the claim the University of Madrid. The fossil that one is the ancestor of the other. revealed the face of an 11-year-old boy Intrinsically, all findings and who looked entirely like modern man. scientific research have revealed that Yet, it had been 800,000 years since the the fossil record does not suggest an child died. Discover magazine covered evolutionary process as evolutionists the story in great detail in its propose. The fossils, which December 1997 issue. evolutionists claim to be the ancestors This fossil even shook the convictions of humans, in fact belong either to of Juan Luis Arsuaga Ferreras, who lead different human races, or else to the Gran Dolina excavation. Ferreras species of ape. said: Then which fossils are human and which We expected something big, something ones are apes? Is it ever possible for large, something inflated-you know, any one of them to be considered a something primitive. Our expectation of transitional form? In order to find the an 800,000-year-old boy was something answers, let us have a closer look at like Turkana Boy. And what we found was each category. a totally modern face.... To me this is Australopithecus: An Ape Species most spectacular-these are the kinds of The first category, the genus things that shake you. Finding something Australopithecus, means "southern ape", totally unexpected like that. Not as we have said. It is assumed that finding fossils; finding fossils is these creatures first appeared in Africa unexpected too, and it's okay. But the about 4 million years ago, and lived most spectacular thing is finding until 1 million years ago. There are a something you thought belonged to the number of different species among the present, in the past. It's like finding astralopithecines. Evolutionists assume something like-like a tape recorder in that the oldest Australopithecus species Gran Dolina. That would be very is A. Afarensis. After that comes A. surprising. We don't expect cassettes Africanus, and then A. Robustus, which and tape recorders in the Lower has relatively bigger bones. As for A. Pleistocene. Finding a modern face Boisei, some researchers accept it as a 800,000 years ago-it's the same thing. different species, and others as a We were very surprised when we saw it. sub-species of A. Robustus. The fossil highlighted the fact that the All of the Australopithecus species are history of Homo sapiens had to be extinct apes that resemble the apes of extended back to 800,000 years ago. today. Their cranial capacities are the After recovering from the initial shock, same or smaller than the chimpanzees of the evolutionists who discovered the our day. There are projecting parts in fossil decided that it belonged to a their hands and feet which they used to different species, because according to climb trees, just like today's the evolutionary family tree, Homo chimpanzees, and their feet are built sapiens did not live 800,000 years ago. for grasping to hold onto branches. They Therefore, they made up an imaginary are short (maximum 130 cm. (51 in.)) and species called "Homo antecessor" and just like today's chimpanzees, male included the Atapuerca skull under this Australopithecus is larger than the classification. female. Many other characteristics-such A Hut 1.7 Million Years Old as the details in their skulls, the There have been many findings closeness of their eyes, their sharp demonstrating that Homo sapiens dates molar teeth, their mandibular structure, back even earlier than 800,000 years. their long arms, and their short One of them is a discovery by Louis legs-constitute evidence that these Leakey in the early 1970s in Olduvai creatures were no different from today's Gorge. Here, in the Bed II layer, Leakey ape. discovered that Australopithecus, Homo However, evolutionists claim that, Habilis and Homo erectus species had although australopithecines have the co-existed at the same time. What is anatomy of apes, unlike apes, they even more interesting was a structure walked upright like humans. Leakey found in the same layer (Bed II). This claim that australopithecines Here, he found the remains of a stone walked upright is a view that has been hut. The unusual aspect of the event was held by paleoanthropologists such as that this construction, which is still Richard Leakey and Donald C. Johanson used in some parts of Africa, could only for decades. Yet many scientists who have been built by Homo sapiens! So, have carried out a great deal of according to Leakey's findings, research on the skeletal structures of Australopithecus, Homo habilis, Homo australopithecines have proved the erectus and modern man must have invalidity of that argument. Extensive co-existed approximately 1.7 million research done on various years ago. This discovery must surely Australopithecus specimens by two invalidate the evolutionary theory that world-renowned anatomists from England claims that modern men evolved from and the USA, Lord Solly Zuckerman and ape-like species such as Prof. Charles Oxnard, showed that these Australopithecus. creatures did not walk upright in human Footprints of Modern Man, 3.6 Million manner. Having studied the bones of Years Old! these fossils for a period of 15 years Indeed, some other discoveries trace the thanks to grants from the British origins of modern man back to 1.7 government, Lord Zuckerman and his team million years ago. One of these of five specialists reached the important finds is the footprints found conclusion that australopithecines were in Laetoli, Tanzania, by Mary Leakey in only an ordinary ape genus and were 1977. These footprints were found in a definitely not bipedal, although layer that was calculated to be 3.6 Zuckerman is an evolutionist himself. million years old, and more importantly, Correspondingly, Charles E. Oxnard, who they were no different from the is another evolutionist famous for his footprints that a contemporary man would research on the subject, also likened leave. the skeletal structure of The footprints found by Mary Leakey were australopithecines to that of modern later examined by a number of famous orang-utans. paleoanthropologists, such as Donald Briefly, Australopithecines have no link Johanson and Tim White. The results were with humans and they are merely an the same. White wrote: extinct ape species. Make no mistake about it, ...They are Homo Habilis: The Ape that was Presented like modern human footprints. If one as Human were left in the sand of a California The great similarity between the beach today, and a four-year old were skeletal and cranial structures of asked what it was, he would instantly australopithecines and chimpanzees, and say that somebody had walked there. He the refutation of the claim that these wouldn't be able to tell it from a creatures walked upright, have caused hundred other prints on the beach, nor great difficulty for evolutionist would you.(( Donald C. Johanson & M. A. paleoanthropologists. The reason is Edey, Lucy: The Beginnings of Humankind, that, according to the imaginary New York: Simon & Schuster, 1981, p. evolution scheme, Homo erectus comes 250.)) after Australopithecus. As the genus After examining the footprints, Louis name Homo (meaning "man") implies, Homo Robbins from the University of North erectus is a human species and its California made the following comments: skeleton is straight. Its cranial The arch is raised-the smaller capacity is twice as large as that of individual had a higher arch than I Australopithecus. A direct transition do-and the big toe is large and aligned from Australopithecus, which is a with the second toe… The toes grip the chimpanzee-like ape, to Homo erectus, ground like human toes. You do not see which has a skeleton no different from this in other animal forms.(( Science modern man's, is out of the question News, Vol 115, 1979, p. 196-197.)) even according to evolutionist theory. Examinations of the morphological form Therefore, "links"-that is, of the footprints showed time and again "transitional forms"-are needed. The that they had to be accepted as the concept of Homo habilis arose from this prints of a human, and moreover, a necessity. modern human (Homo sapiens). Russell The classification of Homo habilis was Tuttle, who also examined the footprints put forward in the 1960s by the Leakeys, wrote: a family of "fossil hunters". According A small barefoot Homo sapiens could have to the Leakeys, this new species, which made them... In all discernible they classified as Homo habilis, had a morphological features, the feet of the relatively large cranial capacity, the individuals that made the trails are ability to walk upright and to use stone indistinguishable from those of modern and wooden tools. Therefore, it could humans. have been the ancestor of man. Impartial examinations of the footprints New fossils of the same species revealed their real owners. In reality, unearthed in the late 1980s, were to these footprints consisted of 20 completely change this view. Some fossilised footprints of a 10-year-old researchers, such as Bernard Wood and C. modern human and 27 footprints of an Loring Brace, who relied on those even younger one. They were certainly newly-found fossils, stated that Homo modern people like us. habilis (which means "skillful man", This situation put the Laetoli that is, man capable of using tools) footprints at the centre of discussions should be classified as Australopithecus for years. Evolutionist habilis, or "skillful southern ape", paleoanthropologists desperately tried because Homo habilis had a lot of to come up with an explanation, as it characteristics in common with the was hard for them to accept the fact australopithecine apes. It had long that a modern man had been walking on arms, short legs and an ape-like the earth 3.6 million years ago. During skeletal structure just like the 1990s, the following "explanation" Australopithecus. Its fingers and toes started to take shape: The evolutionists were suitable for climbing. Their jaw decided that these footprints must have was very similar to that of today's been left by an Australopithecus, apes. Their 600 cc average cranial because according to their theory, it capacity is also an indication of the was impossible for a Homo species to fact that they were apes. In short, Homo have existed 3.6 years ago. However, habilis, which was presented as a Russell H. Tuttle wrote the following in different species by some evolutionists, an article in 1990: was in reality an ape species just like In sum, the 3.5-million-year-old all the other australopithecines. footprint traits at Laetoli site G Research carried out in the years since resemble those of habitually unshod Wood and Brace's work has demonstrated modern humans. None of their features that Homo habilis was indeed no suggest that the Laetoli hominids were different from Australopithecus. The less capable bipeds than we are. If the skull and skeletal fossil OH62 found by G footprints were not known to be so Tim White showed that this species had a old, we would readily conclude that small cranial capacity, as well as long there had been made by a member of our arms and short legs which enabled them genus, Homo... In any case, we should to climb trees just like modern apes do. shelve the loose assumption that the The detailed analyses conducted by Laetoli footprints were made by Lucy's American anthropologist Holly Smith in kind, Australopithecus afarensis. 1994 indicated that Homo habilis was not To put it briefly, these footprints that Homo, in other words, "human", at all, were supposed to be 3.6 million years but rather unequivocally an "ape". old could not have belonged to Speaking of the analyses she made on the Australopithecus. The only reason why teeth of Australopithecus, Homo habilis, the footprints were thought to have been Homo erectus and Homo neanderthalensis, left by members of Australopithecus was Smith stated the following; the 3.6-million-year-old volcanic layer Restricting analysis of fossils to in which the footprints were found. The specimens satisfying these criteria, prints were ascribed to Australopithecus patterns of dental development of purely on the assumption that humans gracile australopithecines and Homo could not have lived so long ago. Habilis remain classified with African These interpretations of the Laetoli apes. Those of Homo erectus and footprints demonstrate one important Neanderthals are classified with humans. fact. Evolutionists support their theory Within the same year, Fred Spoor, not based on scientific findings, but in Bernard Wood and Frans Zonneveld, all spite of them. Here we have a theory specialists on anatomy, reached a that is blindly defended no matter what, similar conclusion through a totally with all new findings that cast the different method. This method was based theory into doubt being either ignored on the comparative analysis of the or distorted to support the theory. semi-circular canals in the inner ear of Briefly, the theory of evolution is not humans and apes which provided for science, but a dogma kept alive despite sustaining balance. Spoor, Wood and science. Zonneveld concluded that: The Bipedalism Impasse of Evolution Among the fossil hominids the earliest Apart from the fossil record that we species to demonstrate the modern human have dealt with so far, unbridgeable morphology is Homo erectus. In contrast, anatomical gaps between men and apes the semi-circular canal dimensions in also invalidate the fiction of human crania from southern Africa attributed evolution. One of these has to do with to Australopithecus and Paranthropus the manner of walking. resemble those of the extant great apes. Human beings walk upright on two feet. Spoor, Wood and Zonneveld also studied a This is a very special form of Homo habilis specimen, namely Stw 53, locomotion not seen in any other and found out that "Stw 53 relied less mammalian species. Some other animals do on bipedal behavior than the have a limited ability to move when they australopithecines." This meant that the stand on their two hind feet. Animals H. habilis specimen was even more like bears and monkeys can move in this ape-like than the Australopithecus way only rarely, such as when they want species. Thus they concluded that "Stw to reach a source of food, and even then 53 represents an unlikely intermediate only for a short time. Normally, their between the morphologies seen in the skeletons lean forward and they walk on australopithecines and H. erectus." all fours. This finding yielded two important Well, then, has bipedalism evolved from results: the quadrupedal gait of apes, as 1. Fossils referred to as Homo habilis evolutionists claim? did not actually belong to the genus Of course not. Research has shown that Homo, i.e. humans, but to that of the evolution of bipedalism never Australopithecus, i.e. apes. occurred, nor is it possible for it to 2. Both Homo habilis and have done so. First of all, bipedalism Australopithecus were creatures that is not an evolutionary advantage. The walked stooped forward-that is to say, way in which monkeys move is much they had the skeleton of an ape. They easier, faster, and more efficient than have no relation whatsoever to man. man's bipedal stride. Man can neither Homo Rudolfensis: The Face Wrongly move by jumping from tree to tree Joined without descending to the ground, like a The term Homo rudolfensis is the name chimpanzee, nor run at a speed of 125 km given to a few fossil fragments per hour, like a cheetah. On the unearthed in 1972. The species contrary, since man walks on two feet, supposedly represented by this fossil he moves much more slowly on the ground. was designated Homo rudolfensis because For the same reason, he is one of the these fossil fragments were found in the most unprotected of all species in vicinity of Lake Rudolf in Kenya. Most nature in terms of movement and defence. of the paleoanthropologists accept that According to the logic of the theory of these fossils do not belong to a evolution, monkeys should not have distinct species, but that the creature evolved to adopt a bipedal stride; called Homo rudolfensis is in fact humans should instead have evolved to indistinguishable from Homo habilis. become quadrupedal. Richard Leakey, who unearthed the Another impasse of the evolutionary fossils, presented the skull designated claim is that bipedalism does not serve "KNM-ER 1470", which he said was 2.8 the "gradual development" model of million years old, as the greatest Darwinism. This model, which constitutes discovery in the history of the basis of evolution, requires that anthropology. According to Leakey, this there should be a "compound" stride creature, which had a small cranial between bipedalism and quadrupedalism. capacity like that of Australopithecus However, with the computerised research together with a face similar to that of he conducted in 1996, the English present-day humans, was the missing link paleoanthropologist Robin Crompton, between Australopithecus and humans. showed that such a "compound" stride was Yet, after a short while, it was not possible. Crompton reached the realised that the human-like face of the following conclusion: A living being can KNM-ER 1470 skull, which frequently either walk upright, or on all fours.(( appeared on the covers of scientific Ruth Henke, "Aufrecht aus den Baumen", journals and popular science magazines Focus, Vol 39, 1996, p. 178.)). was the result of the incorrect assembly A type of stride between the two is of the skull fragments, which may have impossible because it would involve been deliberate. Professor Tim Bromage, excessive energy consumption. This is who conducts studies on human facial why a half-bipedal being cannot exist. anatomy, brought this to light by the The immense gap between man and ape is help of computer simulations in 1992: not limited solely to bipedalism. Many When it [KNM-ER 1470] was first other issues still remain unexplained, reconstructed, the face was fitted to such as brain capacity, the ability to the cranium in an almost vertical talk, and so on. Elaine Morgan, an position, much like the flat faces of evolutionist paleoanthropologist, makes modern humans. But recent studies of the following confession in relation to anatomical relationships show that in this matter: life the face must have jutted out Four of the most outstanding mysteries considerably, creating an ape-like about humans are: 1) why do they walk on aspect, rather like the faces of two legs? 2) why have they lost their Australopithecus. fur? 3) why have they developed such The evolutionist paleoanthropologist J. large brains? 4) why did they learn to E. Cronin states the following on the speak? matter: The orthodox answers to these questions ... its relatively robustly constructed are: 1) 'We do not yet know'; 2) 'We do face, flattish naso-alveolar clivus, not yet know'; 3) 'We do not yet know'; (recalling australopithecine dished 4) 'We do not yet know'. The list of faces), low maximum cranial width (on questions could be considerably the temporals), strong canine juga and lengthened without affecting the large molars (as indicated by remaining monotony of the answers. roots) are all relatively primitive Evolution: An Unscientific Faith traits which ally the specimen with Lord Solly Zuckerman is one of the most members of the taxon A. africanus. famous and respected scientists in the C. Loring Brace from Michigan University United Kingdom. For years, he studied came to the same conclusion. As a result the fossil record and conducted many of the analyses he conducted on the jaw detailed investigations. He was elevated and tooth structure of skull 1470, he to the peerage for his contributions to reported that "from the size of the science. Zuckerman is an evolutionist. palate and the expansion of the area Therefore, his comments on evolution can allotted to molar roots, it would appear not be regarded as ignorant or that ER 1470 retained a fully prejudiced. After years of research on Australopithecus-sized face and the fossils included in the human dentition". evolution scenario however, he reached Professor Alan Walker, a the conclusion that there is no truth to paleoanthropologist from Johns Hopkins the family tree in that is put forward. University who has done as much research Zuckerman also advanced an interesting on KNM-ER 1470 as Leakey, maintains that concept of the "spectrum of the this creature should not be classified sciences", ranging from those he as a member of Homo-i.e., as a human considered scientific to those he species-but rather should be placed in considered unscientific. According to the Australopithecus genus. Zuckerman's spectrum, the most In summary, classifications like Homo "scientific"-that is, depending on habilis or Homo rudolfensis which are concrete data-fields are chemistry and presented as transitional links between physics. After them come the biological the australopithecines and Homo erectus sciences and then the social sciences. are entirely imaginary. It has been At the far end of the spectrum, which is confirmed by many researchers today that the part considered to be most these creatures are members of the "unscientific", are "extra-sensory Australopithecus series. All of their perception"-concepts such as telepathy anatomical features reveal that they are and the "sixth sense"-and finally "human species of ape. evolution". Zuckerman explains his This fact has been further established reasoning as follows: by two evolutionist anthropologists, We then move right off the register of Bernard Wood and Mark Collard, whose objective truth into those fields of research was published in 1999 in presumed biological science, like Science magazine. Wood and Collard extrasensory perception or the explained that the Homo habilis and Homo interpretation of man's fossil history, rudolfensis (Skull 1470) taxa are where to the faithful anything is imaginary, and that the fossils assigned possible - and where the ardent believer to these categories should be attributed is sometimes able to believe several to the genus Australopithecus: contradictory things at the same time. More recently, fossil species have been Robert Locke, the editor of Discovering assigned to Homo on the basis of Archeology, an important publication on absolute brain size, inferences about the origins of man, writes in that language ability and hand function, and journal, "The search for human ancestors retrodictions about their ability to gives more heat than light", quoting the fashion stone tools. With only a few confession of the famous evolutionist exceptions , the definition and use of paleoantropologist Tim White: the genus within human evolution, and We're all frustrated by "all the the demarcation of Homo, have been questions we haven't been able to treated as if they are unproblematic. answer." But ... recent data, fresh Locke's article reviews the impasse of interpretations of the existing the theory of evolution on the origins evidence, and the limitations of the of man and the groundlessness of the paleoanthropological record invalidate propaganda spread about this subject: existing criteria for attributing taxa Perhaps no area of science is more to Homo. contentious than the search for human ...in practice fossil hominin species origins. Elite paleontologists disagree are assigned to Homo on the basis of one over even the most basic outlines of the or more out of four criteria. ... It is human family tree. New branches grow now evident, however, that none of these amid great fanfare, only to wither and criteria is satisfactory. The Cerebral die in the face of new fossil finds. Rubicon is problematic because absolute The same fact was also recently accepted cranial capacity is of questionable by Henry Gee, the editor of the biological significance. Likewise, there well-known journal Nature. In his book is compelling evidence that language In Search of Deep Time, published in function cannot be reliably inferred 1999, Gee points out that all the from the gross appearance of the brain, evidence for human evolution "between and that the language-related parts of about 10 and 5 million years ago-several the brain are not as well localized as thousand generations of living earlier studies had implied... creatures-can be fitted into a small ...In other words, with the hypodigms of box." He concludes that conventional H. habilis and H. rudolfensis assigned theories of the origin and development to it, the genus Homo is not a good of human beings are "a completely human genus. Thus, H. habilis and H. invention created after the fact, shaped rudolfensis (or Homo habilis sensu lato to accord with human prejudices" and for those who do not subscribe to the adds: taxonomic subdivision of "early Homo") To take a line of fossils and claim that should be removed from Homo. The obvious they represent a lineage is not a taxonomic alternative, which is to scientific hypothesis that can be transfer one or both of the taxa to one tested, but an assertion that carries of the existing early hominin genera, is the same validity as bedtime not without problems, but we recommend story-amusing, perhaps even instructive, that, for the time being, both H. but not scientific. Habilis and H. Rudolfensis should be What, then, is the reason that makes so transferred to the genus many scientists so tenacious about this Australopithecus. dogma? Why have they been trying so hard The conclusion of Wood and Collard to keep their theory alive, at the cost corroborates the conclusion we have of having to admit countless conflicts maintained here:"Primitive human and discarding the evidence they have ancestors" do not exist in history. found? Creatures that are alleged to be so are The only answer is their being afraid of actually apes that ought to be assigned the fact they will have to face in case to the genus Australopithecus. The of abandoning the theory of evolution. fossil record shows that there is no The fact they will have to face when evolutionary link between these extinct they abandon evolution is that God has apes and Homo, i.e., human species that created man. However, considering the suddenly appears in the fossil record. presuppositions they have and the Homo Erectus and Thereafter: Human materialistic philosophy they believe Beings in, creation is an unacceptable concept According to the fanciful scheme for evolutionists. suggested by evolutionists, the internal For this reason, they deceive evolution of the Homo genus is as themselves, as well as the world, by follows: First Homo erectus, then using the media with which they so-called "archaic" Homo sapiens and co-operate. If they cannot find the Neanderthal man (Homo sapiens necessary fossils, they "fabricate" them neanderthalensis), and finally, either in the form of imaginary pictures Cro-Magnon man (Homo sapiens sapiens). or fictitious models and try to give the However all these classifications are impression that there indeed exist really only variations and unique races fossils verifying evolution. A part of in the human family. The difference mass media who share their materialistic between them is no greater than the point of view also try to deceive the difference between an Inuit and an public and instil the story of evolution African or a pygmy and a European. in people's subconscious. Let us first examine Homo erectus, which No matter how hard they try, the truth is referred to as the most primitive is evident: Man has come into existence human species. As the name implies, not through an evolutionary process but "Homo erectus" means "man who walks by God's creation. Therefore, he is upright". Evolutionists have had to responsible to Him. separate these fossils from earlier ones Please see this book to know more about by adding the qualification of the origin of other living things: "erectness", because all the available Darwinism Refuted(Book): Homo erectus fossils are straight to an PDF file format: extent not observed in any of the Word file format: australopithecines or so-called Homo Another useful Book & website in habilis specimens. There is no different languages: difference between the postcranial Evolution Deceit(Book): skeleton of modern man and that of Homo Website: erectus. Darwin's Imagination The primary reason for evolutionists' The person who put forward the theory of defining Homo erectus as "primitive", is evolution the way it is defended today, the cranial capacity of its skull was an amateur English naturalist, (900-1,100 cc), which is smaller than Charles Robert Darwin. the average modern man, and its thick Darwin had never undergone a formal eyebrow projections. However, there are education in biology. He took only an many people living today in the world amateur interest in the subject of who have the same cranial capacity as nature and living things. His interest Homo erectus (pygmies, for instance) and spurred him to voluntarily join an other races have protruding eyebrows expedition on board a ship named H.M.S. (Native Australians, for instance). Beagle that set out from England in 1832 It is a commonly agreed-upon fact that and travelled around different regions differences in cranial capacity do not of the world for five years. Young necessarily denote differences in Darwin was greatly impressed by various intelligence or abilities. Intelligence living species, especially by certain depends on the internal organisation of finches that he saw in the Galapagos the brain, rather than on its volume. Islands. He thought that the variations The fossils that have made Homo erectus in their beaks were caused by their known to the entire world are those of adaptation to their habitat. With this Peking man and Java man in Asia. idea in mind, he supposed that the However, in time it was realised that origin of life and species lay in the these two fossils are not reliable. concept of "adaptation to the Peking Man consists of some elements environment". Darwin opposed the fact made of plaster whose originals have that God created different living been lost, and Java Man is "composed" of species separately, suggesting that they a skull fragment plus a pelvic bone that rather came from a common ancestor and was found metres away from it with no became differentiated from each other as indication that these belonged to the a result of natural conditions. same creature. This is why the Homo Darwin's hypothesis was not based on any erectus fossils found in Africa have scientific discovery or experiment; in gained such increasing importance. (It time however he turned it into a should also be noted that some of the pretentious theory with the support and fossils said to be Homo erectus were encouragement he received from the included under a second species named famous materialist biologists of his "Homo ergaster" by some evolutionists. time. The idea was that the individuals There is disagreement among the experts that adapted to the habitat in the best on this issue. We will treat all these way transferred their qualities to fossils under the classification of Homo subsequent generations; these erectus) advantageous qualities accumulated in The most famous of the Homo erectus time and transformed the individual into specimens found in Africa is the fossil a species totally different from its of "Narikotome Homo erectus" or the ancestors. (The origin of these "Turkana Boy" which was found near Lake "advantageous qualities" was unknown at Turkana in Kenya. It is confirmed that the time.) According to Darwin, man was the fossil was that of a 12-year-old the most developed outcome of this boy, who would have been 1.83 meters imaginary mechanism. tall in adolescence. The upright Darwin called this process "evolution by skeletal structure of the fossil is no natural selection". He thought he had different from that of modern man. The found the "origin of species": the American paleoanthropologist Alan Walker origin of one species was another said that he doubted that "the average species. He published these views in his pathologist could tell the difference book titled The Origin of Species, By between the fossil skeleton and that of Means of Natural Selection in 1859. a modern human."(( Boyce Rensberger, The Darwin was well aware that his theory Washington Post, November 19, 1984.)) faced lots of problems. He confessed Concerning the skull, Walker wrote that these in his book in the chapter he laughed when he saw it because "it "Difficulties of the Theory". These looked so much like a Neanderthal."(( difficulties primarily consisted of the Ibid. )) As we will see in the next fossil record, complex organs of living chapter, Neanderthals are a modern human things that could not possibly be race. Therefore, Homo erectus is also a explained by coincidence (e.g. the eye), modern human race. and the instincts of living beings. Even the evolutionist Richard Leakey Darwin hoped that these difficulties states that the differences between Homo would be overcome by new discoveries; erectus and modern man are no more than yet this did not stop him from coming up racial variance: with a number of very inadequate One would also see differences in the explanations for some. The American shape of the skull, in the degree of physicist Lipson made the following protrusion of the face, the robustness comment on the "difficulties" of Darwin: of the brows and so on. These On reading The Origin of Species, I differences are probably no more found that Darwin was much less sure pronounced than we see today between the himself than he is often represented to separate geographical races of modern be; the chapter entitled "Difficulties humans. Such biological variation arises of the Theory" for example, shows when populations are geographically considerable self-doubt. As a physicist, separated from each other for I was particularly intrigued by his significant lengths of time. comments on how the eye would have Professor William Laughlin from the arisen. (( H. S. Lipson, "A Physicist's University of Connecticut made extensive View of Darwin's Theory", Evolution anatomical examinations of Inuits and Trends in Plants, Vol 2, No. 1, 1988, p. the people living on the Aleut islands, 6.)) and noticed that these people were While developing his theory, Darwin was extraordinarily similar to Homo erectus. impressed by many evolutionist The conclusion Laughlin arrived at was biologists preceding him, and primarily that all these distinct races were in by the French biologist, Lamarck. fact different races of Homo sapiens According to Lamarck, living creatures (modern man). passed the traits they acquired during When we consider the vast differences their lifetime from one generation to that exist between remote groups such as the next and thus evolved. For instance, Eskimos and Bushmen, who are known to giraffes evolved from antelope-like belong to the single species of Homo animals by extending their necks further sapiens, it seems justifiable to and further from generation to conclude that Sinanthropus [an erectus generation as they tried to reach higher specimen] belongs within this same and higher branches for food. Darwin diverse species. thus employed the thesis of "passing the It is now a more pronounced fact in the acquired traits" proposed by Lamarck as scientific community that Homo erectus the factor that made living beings is a superfluous taxon, and that fossils evolve. assigned to the Homo erectus class are But both Darwin and Lamarck were actually not so different from Homo mistaken because in their day, life sapiens as to be considered a different could only be studied with very species. In American Scientist, the primitive technology and at a very discussions over this issue and the inadequate level. Scientific fields such result of a conference held on the as genetics and biochemistry did not subject in 2000 were summarised in this exist even in name. Their theories way: therefore had to depend entirely on Most of the participants at the their powers of imagination. Senckenberg conference got drawn into a While the echoes of Darwin's book flaming debate over the taxonomic status reverberated, an Austrian botanist by of Homo erectus started by Milford the name of Gregor Mendel discovered the Wolpoff of the University of Michigan, laws of inheritance in 1865. Not much Alan Thorne of the University of heard of until the end of the century, Canberra and their colleagues. They Mendel's discovery gained great argued forcefully that Homo erectus had importance in the early 1900s. This was no validity as a species and should be the birth of the science of genetics. eliminated altogether. All members of Somewhat later, the structure of the the genus Homo, from about 2 million genes and the chromosomes was years ago to the present, were one discovered. The discovery, in the 1950s, highly variable, widely spread species, of the structure of the DNA molecule Homo sapiens, with no natural breaks or that incorporates genetic information subdivisions. The subject of the threw the theory of evolution into a conference, Homo erectus didn't exist. great crisis. The reason was the The conclusion reached by the scientists incredible complexity of life and the defending the abovementioned thesis can invalidity of the evolutionary be summarised as "Homo erectus is not a mechanisms proposed by Darwin. different species from Homo sapiens, but These developments ought to have rather a race within Homo sapiens". resulted in Darwin's theory being On the other hand, there is a huge gap banished to the dustbin of history. between Homo erectus, a human race, and However, it was not, because certain the apes that preceded Homo erectus in circles insisted on revising, renewing, the "human evolution" scenario, and elevating the theory to a scientific (Australopithecus, Homo Habilis, and platform. These efforts gain meaning Homo rudolfensis). This means that the only if we realise that behind the first men appeared in the fossil record theory lay ideological intentions rather suddenly and without any prior than scientific concerns. 1 A B C D 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117