While Darwinists continue declaring their belief in human evolution from apes, the weight of scientific evidence demonstrates that humans share no common ancestry with great apes.
Where did we come from and why are we here? The weight of scientific evidence demonstrate that the claimed intermediate fossils between apes and humans do not confirm any common ancestry, Neanderthals were 100 percent human, Lucy and other australopithecines apes were not truly bipedal, and natural selection and mutations provide strong evidence against the pseudo-scientific doctrine of macro-evolution. Darwinian claims for human evolution from apes have not been supported by the scientific data. If human macro-evolution from primitive ape-like ancestors were true, anthropologists should observe evidence in the fossil record and they should have found a mechanism for this kind of dramatic transformation, according to Dr. Duane T. Gish and zoologist Frank Sherwin.
Evolutionists believe that modern human beings evolved from extinct nonhuman apelike ancestors. They argue that genetic evidence points to an evolutionary divergence between primeval humans and great apes lineages on the African continent about 6.5 million years ago. The earliest hominid (the human lineage) fossilized remains date back to roughly 4 million years ago in Africa and they are classified as genus Australopithecus. The next major evolutionary stage, classified as Homo habilis, occupied sub-Saharan Africa about 1.75 million years ago, according to Dr. Ian Tattersall and Dr. Phillip V. Tobias.
Darwinists argue Homo habilis appears to have been replaced by taller, more intelligent, and superior humanlike species, classified as Homo erectus, who lived from 1,500,000 to 200,000 years ago. Homo erectus gradually migrated into Asia and Europe. Between 600,000 and 200,000 years ago, Homo heidelbergensis lived in Africa, Europe, and Asia. Evolutionists argue that Homo erectus and modern human features indicate their evolutionary roots to Homo heidelbergensis. Neanderthals (Homo Neanderthals), who evolved from Homo erectus, occupied Europe and western Asia from 200,000 to 30,000 years ago. Darwinists believe that completely modern humans (H. sapiens) emerged in Africa roughly 150,000 years ago after evolving from directly from Homo erectus or from Homo heidelbergensis, according to Dr. Gail Kennedy.
However, creationists and intelligent design theorists reject these unscientific claims because scientific data show more evidence for an omniscient intelligence creator and designer for humankind. Analysis of the Darwinian claims, primate case studies, and the naturalistic mechanism for primate transformation demonstrate that human beings did not and could not have evolved from any apelike ancestor.
DARWINIAN APE-MEN
Darwinian ape-men claims show no scientific evidence for human evolution from any apelike ancestor. Nevertheless, macro-evolutionists argue that when we look closely at our hands, we see five flexible fingers on each hand. Animals with five flexible fingers are called primates. Monkeys, apes, and humans are good primate examples. Primates most likely evolved from small, insect eating rodent-like mammals that lived about 60 million years ago, according to Dr. Rinehart and Dr. Winston. All researchers agree on certain basic facts, which is we know, for example, that humans evolved from ancestors we share with other living primates such as chimpanzees and apes,” according to Dr. Miller and Dr. Levine. In other words, macro-evolutionists believe that human beings share a common ancestry with the great apes, such as Gorillas, orangutans, and Chimpanzees. However, fossil findings do not support their beliefs, according to Dr. Gary Parker and Dr. Duane T. Gish.
JAVA MAN
Macro-evolutionists claim that Java man is an evolutionary ancestor of modern man. Java man is the common name for fossilized Homo erectus remains found by Dr. Eugene Dubois near Trinil in Java during 1891. Java man’s remains included a skullcap and a thighbone. This finding represents the first known fossils of Homo erectus, according to many anthropologists. However, when Dr. Rudolph Virchow examined Dubois’ Java man fossil findings, he said that “in my opinion this creature was an animal, a giant gibbon, in fact. The thigh bone has not the slightest connection with the skull.” Dubois was known for keeping information hidden from other anthropologists. Dubois insisted that Java man was not a man but an animal intermediate to the gibbons and humans. Since the 1950s, anthropologists have been calling Java man Homo erectus, but they reject Dubois conclusions that this was an intermediate ancestor between apes and man, according to Dr. Duane T. Gish
PILTDOWN MAN
Darwinists claimed that Piltdown man was an intermediate link between apes and humans. Its remains were found between 1908 and 1912 in Piltdown, England. They claimed that this finding was of a 500,000-year-old intermediate link between humans and apes. It was featured in academic science books and encyclopedias throughout Europe as the missing link between humans and apes. However, it
was discovered to be a fraud in 1953. The bones had been chemically stained to appear old and filed to fit together. The skull was shown to consist of a human cranium expertly joined to an orangutan’s jawbone. The hoax was probably committed either by the skull’s discoverer, Charles Dawson, or by a British Museum staff member, Martin A.C. Hinton, according Dr. Duane T Gish and others.
NEBRASKA MAN
Another missing link claimed by Darwinists was Nebraska man. This fossil remain discovered in 1922 was used to support evolution in the 1925 Scopes Trail. Evolutionists claimed this fossil remain was a one-million year old missing link. However, following careful analysis by other Darwinists, the truth demonstrated that this fossil was the remains of an extinct pig’s tooth, according to Dr. Gary Parker.
RAMAPITHECUS
Ramapithecus animals are related to the genus Sivapithecus, which are extinct primates. G. Edward Lewis found the animal’s upper jawbone and some teeth fragments in Siwalik Hills in northern India and he described them as Ramapithecus in the 1930s. For years, Darwinists presented this finding as modern man’s first direct ancestor. Eventually a baboon living in Ethiopia with similar dental and jaw structure to Ramapithecus was found in the 1970s. Ramapithecus was later dropped from the human line. Today evolutionists believe that Ramapithecus remains belong to any species in the Sivapithecus genus, which are the ancestors to the modern orangutans. For these reasons, scientific analysis of these “ape-men” revealed that Java man was completely human, Piltdown man was a clever hoax, Nebraska man was an extinct pig, and Ramapithecus was only an ape. Additionally, most of dates for these imaginary “ape men” were wrong, according to Dr. Gary Parker and zoologist Frank Sherwin.
PRIMATOLOGY
A case study of Neanderthals and Australopithecines show no evidence for human evolution from any apelike ancestor. The weight of scientific evidence indicates that these fossilized remains were either apes or human beings.
NEANDERTHAL POPULATIONS
Neanderthals were first found near Dusseldorf, Germany in 1856. Their remains were reconstructed by Darwinian anthropologists to appear more apelike, according to Dr. Jack Cuozzo. However, analysis of the scientific data shows that many Neanderthals’ brain sizes were larger than many modern humans (BTW: brain size has no relationship to superior intelligence). Neanderthals had thick brow ridges, short strong legs, and short powerful arms.
Neanderthals had strong muscle fibers and high bone density, which confirms their superior physical strength, according to physical anthropologist Dave Philips. Neanderthal people decorated themselves with jewelry, they played musical instruments, they made artistic cave paintings, they were capable of speech, and they buried their dead, according to Dr. Jack Cuozzo. Neanderthals probably reached sexual maturation in their late teens and they lived longer lives than previously thought, which are usually indicative of high intelligence, according to Dr. Jack Cuozzo.
“Neanderthals were human. They buried their dead, used tools, had a complex social structure, employed language, and played musical instruments. Neanderthal anatomy differences are extremely minor and can be for the most part explained as a result of a genetically isolated people that lived a rigorous life in a harsh, cold climate,” according to physical anthropologist Dave Philips. Therefore, Neanderthals were 100 percent human beings and they were equal to modern humans in their intellectual powers.
LUCY AND THE AUSTRALOPITHECINES
Lucy is an australopithecine ape discovered in 1974 by Dr. Donald Johanson. His team of anthropologists found about 40 percent of the primate fossil remains. Dr. Johanson claimed it to be about 3.5 million years old. He claimed it to be bipedal primate (upright walking). However, scientific analysis of Lucy and other Australopithecines showed that these apes had no similarity in appearance to humans, the primates’ long arms are identical to chimpanzees, their Jaws are similar to chimpanzees, and their leg bones are similar to chimpanzees. Lucy and other australopithecines’ brain sizes are similar to chimpanzees, their large back muscles are designed for tree dwelling, their hands are similar to pygmy chimpanzees, and their feet are long and curved to hold branches and for claiming trees, according to anatomists Dr. Jack Stern, and Dr. Randall Susman.
A computer analysis concluded that Lucy could not walk upright and the primate probably walked like a chimpanzee because its walking mechanism was not developed, according to professor of anatomy and human biology Dr. Charles Oxnard and Dr. Christine Tardieu. Regardless of Lucy’s knee joint status, new evidence has come forth that Lucy has the morphology of a knuckle-walker, according to Dr. Richmand and Dr. Strait. The australopithecines known over the last several decades are now irrevocably removed from a place in the evolution of human bipedalism. All of this information should make anthropologists wonder about the usual presentation of human evolution in introductory science publications, according Dr. Charles Oxnard and other leading experts on australopithecine fossils.
“The fossils provide much more discouragement than support for Darwinism when they are examined objectively, but objective examination has rarely been the object of Darwinist paleontology. The Darwinist approach has consistently been to find some supporting fossil evidence, claim it as proof for ‘evolution,’ and then ignore all the difficulties,” according to lawyer and Intelligent Design theorists Philip Johnson.
“Lucy seemed to be more of a promotion to convince the public that Johanson’s fossils were more important than Richard Leakey’s rather than any attempt to present an evenhanded assessment of current paleoanthropology,” according to William Fix. Therefore, the weight of scientific evidence demonstrates conclusively that Lucy and the Australopithecines were simply never human ancestors.
DARWINIAN MECHANISM
Darwinists believe that modern humans and the great apes evolved from a common apelike ancestor through the mechanism of natural selection and genetic mutations. Evolutionary changes occur when beneficial mutations happen within the primate populations. Natural selection selects this mutation over any existing genes or other detrimental mutations that code for this function. The mutation is inherited by some primate offspring and this process should add new genetic information.
Natural selection beautifully illustrates nature’s ability to facilitate adaptation to different environments and the survival mechanism for the fittest animals. However, while natural selection demonstrates the transformation of the species, the more animals change the more they remain the same because natural selection cannot cause one kind of animal to become a new kind of animal. Natural selection only allows for variations within plant and animal species and this mechanism only works with existing information. In other words, natural selection can act only on those biological properties that already exist; it cannot create properties in order to meet adaptation requirements, according to Dr. Elmer Noble, Dr. Glenn Nobel, and Dr. Gerhard Schad. The very concept of natural selection as defined by the neo-Darwinist is fundamentally flawed, according to Dr. Neil Broom.
Darwinists believe that genetic mutations can create new information required for the evolution of apes into humans. However, scientific data shows that many mutations are detrimental to living systems and
they contribute to physical illness, but no macro-evolution creating new species. In other words, many mutations cause the loss of genetic information, the duplication of genetic information, but never the creation of completely new genetic information, according to Dr. Georgia Purdom.
“There is no evidence that DNA mutations can provide the sorts of variation needed for evolution. There is no evidence for beneficial mutations at the level of macroevolution, but there is also no evidence at the level of what is commonly regarded as microevolution,” according to Dr. Jonathan Wells.
“Mutations are rare phenomena, and a simultaneous change of even two amino acid residues in one protein is totally unlikely. One could think, for instance, that by constantly changing amino acids one by one, it will eventually be possible to change the entire sequence substantially. These minor changes, however, are bound to eventually result in a situation in which the enzyme has ceased to perform its previous function, but has not yet begun its ‘new duties’. It is at this point it will be destroyed and along with the organism carrying it,” according to Dr. Maxim D. Frank-Kamenetski.
“In all the reading I’ve done in the life-sciences literature, I’ve never found a mutation that added information. All point mutations that have been studied on the molecular level turn out to reduce the genetic information and not increase it,” according to Dr. Lee Spetner. “The development and survival of the fittest is entirely a consequence of chance mutations, or even that nature carries out experiments by trial and error through mutations in order to create living systems better fitted to survive, seems to be a hypothesis based on no evidence,” according to Dr. Ernst Chain.
“We see the apparent inability of mutations truly to contribute to the origin of new structures. The theory of gene duplication in its present form is unable to account for the origin of new genetic information, which is a must for any theory of evolutionary mechanism,” according to Dr. Ray Bohlin. “There is no known law of nature, no known process and no known sequence of events which can cause information to originate by itself in matter,” according to Dr. Werner Gitt.
ANALYSIS: HUMAN ORIGINS
If the macro-evolutionary hypothesis describing human origins from an ape-like ancestor were based upon scientific facts, then we should observe solid evidence found in the fossil record where intermediates have been found and the mechanism for change showing how macro-evolution can create new genes that lead to new species. However,
modern scientific data has produced no such evidence
RELATED SOURCES:
- Creation Ex Nihilo; Dr. Giuseppe Sermonti; 1993.
- Creation, Evolution, and Modern Science; Dr. Ray Bohlin; 2000.
- Charles Darwin; Michael Ruse; 2009.
- Darwinism on Trial; Philip Johnson; 1991.
- Evidence that Humans Evolved from Knuckle-Walking Ancestor;Richmand and Strait; 2001.
- Evolution; Lesie Alan Horvitz; 2002.
- Evolution; Dr. Greg Krukonis;2008.
- How Blind Is the Watchmaker; Dr. Neil Broom; 2001.
- Icons of Evolution; Dr. Jonathan Wells; 2002.
- In the Beginning was Information; Dr.Werner Gitt; 1997.
- Not By Chance; Dr. Lee Spetner; 1997.
- Responsibility and the Scientist in Modern Western Society;Dr. Ernst Chain; 1970.
- Parasitology: The Biology of Animal Parasites; Dr. Elmer Noble and Others; 1989.
- The Bone Peddlers; William Fix;1984.
- The Order of Man: A Biomathematical Anatomy of the Primates; Dr. Charles Oxnard; 1984,
- Unraveling DNA; Dr. Maxim D. Frank-Kamenetski; 1997.