The Origin of Man

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

Asia Travex

The Origin of Man