... the science of peace




The Scenario Of Human Evolution *


In previous pages, we saw that there are no mechanisms in nature to lead the living beings to evolve and that living species came into existence not as the result of an evolutionary process, but rather emerged all of a sudden in their present perfect structure. That is, they were created individually. Therefore, it is obvious that "human evolution", too, is a story that has never taken place.

What, then, do the evolutionists propose as the basis for this story?

This basis is the existence of plenty of fossils on which the evolutionists are able to build up imaginary interpretations. Throughout history, more than 6,000 ape species have lived and most of them have become extinct. Today, only 120 ape species live on the earth. These approximately 6,000 ape species, most of which are extinct, constitute a rich resource for the evolutionists.

Evolutionists wrote the scenario of human evolution by arranging some of the skulls that suited their purpose in an order from the smallest to the biggest and scattering the skulls of some extinct human races among them. According to this scenario, men and modern apes have common ancestors. These creatures evolved in time and some of them became the apes of today while another group that followed another branch of evolution became the men of today.

However, all the paleontological, anatomical and biological findings have demonstrated that this claim of evolution is as fictitious and invalid as all the others. No sound or real evidence has been put forward to prove that there is a relationship between man and ape, except forgeries, distortions, and misleading drawings and comments.

The fossil record indicates to us that throughout history, men have been men and apes have been apes. Some of the fossils the evolutionists claim to be the ancestors of man, belong to human races that lived until very recently-about 10,000 years ago-and then disappeared. Moreover, many human communities currently living have the same physical appearance and characteristics as these extinct human races, which the evolutionists claim to be the ancestors of men. All these are clear proof that man has never gone through an evolutionary process at any period in history.

The most important of all is that there are numerous anatomical differences between apes and men and none of them are of the kind to come into existence through an evolutionary process. "Bipedality" is one of them. As we will describe later on in detail, bipedality is peculiar to man and it is one of the most important traits that distinguishes man from other animals.

The Imaginary Family Tree of Man                                                 BACK TO TOP

The Darwinist claim holds that modern men of today have evolved from some kind of ape-like creatures. During this alleged evolutionary process, which is supposed to have started 4-5 million years ago, it is claimed that there existed some "transitional forms" between modern man and his ancestors. According to this completely imaginary scenario, four basic "categories" are listed:

1. Australopithecines (plural form of Australopithecus)

2. Homo habilis

3. Homo erectus

4. Homo sapiens

The evolutionists call the so-called first common ancestors of men and apes "Australopithecus" which means "South African apes". Australopithecus, nothing but an old ape species that has become extinct, has various types. Some of them are well built, and others are small and slim structured.

The evolutionists classify the next stage of human evolution as "homo", that is "man". According to the evolutionist claim, the living beings in the Homo series are more developed than Australopithecus, and not very much different from modern man. The modern man of our day, that is, Homo sapiens, is said to have formed at the latest stage of the evolution of this species.

Fossils like "Java Man", "Pekin Man", and "Lucy", which appear in the media from time to time and are to be found in evolutionist publications and lecture books, are included in one of the four species listed above. These species are also assumed to branch into sub-species.

Some transitional form candidates of the past, such as Ramapithecus, had to be excluded from the imaginary human evolution family tree after it was understood that they were ordinary apes. (61)

By outlining the link chain as "Australopithecines > Homo habilis > Homo erectus > Homo sapiens", the evolutionists imply that each of these species are one another’s ancestor. However, recent findings of paleoanthropologists have revealed that Australopithecines, Homo habilis and Homo erectus existed at different parts of the world at the same time. Moreover, a certain segment of humans classified as Homo erectus have lived up until very modern times. Homo sapiens neandarthalensis and Homo sapiens sapiens (modern man) co-existed in the same region. This situation apparently indicates the invalidity of the claim that they are ancestors of one another.

Intrinsically, all findings and scientific research have revealed that the fossil record does not suggest an evolutionary process as evolutionists put forward. The fossils, which are claimed to be the ancestors of humans by evolutionists, in fact belong either to different human races or to ape species.

Then, which fossils are human and which ones are apes? Is it ever possible for any one of them to be considered as a transitional form? In order to get the answers, let us have a closer look at each category.

Australopithecus : An Ape Species                                                                BACK TO TOP

Australopithecus, that is the first category, means "southern ape". It is assumed that these creatures first appeared in Africa about 4 million years ago and they lived until 1 million years ago. There are some classes among Astralopithecines. The evolutionists assume that the oldest Australopithecus species is A. Afarensis. After that comes A. Africanus, which have slimmer bones, and then A. Robustus, which have relatively bigger bones. For A. Boisei, some researchers accept it as a different species and some others as a sub-species of A. Robustus.

All of the Australopithecus species are extinct apes that resemble the apes of today. Their cranial volumes are the same or smaller than the chimpanzees of our day. There are projecting parts in their hands and feet which they used to climb trees just like today’s chimpanzees and their feet have grasping abilities to hold onto the branches. They are short (maximum 130 cm. (51 in.)) and just like today’s chimpanzees, male Australopithecus is larger than the female. Many characteristics such as the details on their skulls, the closeness of the eyes, sharp molar teeth, mandibular structure, long arms, short legs, are evidence to show that these living beings were no different from today’s apes.

The evolutionists claim that although Australopithecines have the anatomy of an ape, they walked upright like humans and unlike apes.

This claim of "walking upright" is in fact a view that has been held by paleoanthropologists like Richard Leakey and Donald C. Johanson for decades. Yet many scientists have carried out a great deal of research on the skeletal structures of Australopithecines and proved the invalidity of this argument. Extensive research done on various Australopithecus specimens by two world-renown anatomists from England and the USA, namely, Lord Solly Zuckerman and Prof. Charles Oxnard, has shown that these creatures were not bipedal and had the same sort of movement as today’s apes. Having studied the bones of these fossils for a period of 15 years with the provision supplied by the British government, Lord Zuckerman and his team of 5 specialists reached the conclusion that Australopithecines were only an ordinary ape species and definitely were not bipedal, although Zuckerman was an evolutionist himself. (62) Correspondingly, Charles E. Oxnard, who is another evolutionist famous for his research on the subject, also likened the skeletal structure of Australopithecines to that of modern orang-utans. (63) Finally, in 1994, a team from Liverpool University in England launched an extensive research to reach a definite conclusion. Finally, they concluded that "the Australopithecines are quadripedal". (64)

Briefly, Australopithecines have no link with humans and they are merely an extinct ape species.

Homo Habilis: The Ape that was Presented as Human                     BACK TO TOP

The great similarity between the skeletal and cranial structures of Australopithecines and chimpanzees and the refutation of the claim that these creatures walked upright, caused great difficulty for the evolutionist paleoanthropologists. The reason is that, according to the imaginary evolution scheme, Homo erectus comes after Australopithecines. As the prefix "homo" meaning "human" implies, Homo erectus is a human class and its skeleton is straight. It cranial volume is two times bigger than that of Australopithecines. A direct transition from Australopithecines, which is a chimpanzee-like ape, to Homo erectus that has a skeleton no different from modern man’s, is out of the question even according to the evolutionist theory. Therefore, "links", that is, "transitional forms" are needed. The concept of Homo habilis arose from this necessity.

The classification of Homo habilis was put forward in the 1960’s by the Leakeys who are "fossil hunters" as a whole family. According to the Leakeys, this new species which they classified as Homo habilis had a relatively large cranial capacity, the ability to walk upright and to use stone and wooden tools, and had a relatively large cranial volume. Therefore, it could have been the ancestor of man.

New fossils of the same species unearthed in the late 1980’s, were to completely change this view. Some researchers like Bernard Wood and C. Loring Brace who relied on those newly-found fossils, stated that Homo habilis, which means "man capable of using tools" should be classified as Australopithecus habilis which means "South African ape capable of using tools", because Homo habilis had a lot of characteristics in common with the apes named Australopithecines. It had long arms, short legs and an ape-like skeleton structure just like Australopithecines. Its fingers and toes were suitable for climbing. Its mandibular structure was very similar to that of today’s apes. Their 550 cc cranial volumes were the best indication of the fact that they were apes. In short, Homo habilis, which was presented as a different species by some evolutionists, was in reality an ape species just like all the other Australopithecines.

Research carried out in years to come indeed demonstrated that Homo habilis was no different than Australopithecines. The skull and skeleton fossil OH62 found by Tim White showed that this species had small cranial volume, and long arms and short legs which enabled them to climb trees, just like modern apes.

The detailed analyses conducted by American anthropologist Holly Smith in 1994 indicated that Homo habilis was not "homo", in other words, "human", but "ape". About the analyses she made on the teeth of Australopithecus, Homo habilis, Homo erectus and Homo neandertalensis, Smith stated the following;

Restricting analysis of fossils to specimens satisfying these criteria, patterns of dental development of gracile australopithecines and Homo Habilis remain classified with African apes. Those of Homo erectus and Neanderthals are classified with humans. (65)

Within the same year, Fred Spoor, Bernard Wood and Frans Zonneveld, all specialists on anatomy, reached the same conclusion through a totally different method. This method was based on the comparative analysis of the semi-circular canals in the inner ear of humans and apes which provided for sustaining balance. The canals of humans walking straight differed considerably from those of apes who walked bent downwards. The inner ear canals of all Australopithecus and furthermore, Homo habilis specimens analysed by Spoor, Wood and Zonneveld were the same as modern apes’. The inner ear canals of Homo erectus were the same as modern men’s. (66)

This finding yielded two important results:

1. Fossils referred to as Homo habilis actually did not belong to the classes of "homo", i.e. humans, but to those of Australopithecines, i.e. apes.

2. Both Homo habilis and Australopithecines were living things that had a bent stride, and therefore, the skeleton of an ape. They did not have any relation whatsoever with the humans.

Homo Rudolfensis: The Face Wrongly Joined                                          BACK TO TOP

The term Homo rudolfensis is the name given to a few fossil fragments unearthed in 1972. The class supposedly represented by this fossil was also designated as Homo rudolfensis for these fossil fragments were found in the vicinity of Rudolf River in Kenya. Most of the paleoanthropologists accept that these fossils do not belong to a distinct species but that the living being called Homo rudolfensis was in fact a Homo habilis.

Richard Leakey, who unearthed the fossils, presented the skull he named "KNM-ER 1470" and said to have 2.8 million years of age, as the greatest discovery of the history of anthropology and had a sweeping effect. According to Leakey, this being, which had a small cranial volume like Australopithecus and yet the face of a human, was the missing link between Australopithecus and human. Yet, after a short while, it was to be understood that the human-like face of KNM-ER 1470 skull which frequently appeared on the covers of scientific magazines was the result of the flawed joining of the skull fragments-which may have been deliberate. Prof. Tim Bromage, who made studies on human face anatomy, outlined this fact which he disclosed by the help of computer simulations in 1992:

When it (KNM-ER 1470) was first reconstructed, the face was fitted to the cranium in an almost vertical position, much like the flat faces of modern humans. But recent studies of anatomical relationships show that in life the face must have jutted out considerably, creating an ape-like aspect, rather like the faces of Australopithecus. (67)

The evolutionist paleoanthropologist J. E. Cronin states the following on the matter:

... its relatively robustly constructed face, flattish naso-alveolar clivus, (recalling australopithecine dished faces), low maximum cranial width (on the temporals), strong canine juga and large molars (as indicated by remaining roots) are all relatively primitive traits which ally the specimen with members of the taxon A/ africanus. (68)

C. Loring Brace from Michigan University concluded the same as a result of the analyses he made on the jaw and tooth structure of skull 1470 and said that the size of the jaw and of the part containing molars showed that ER 1470 had exactly the face and teeth of an Australopithecus." (69)

Prof. Alan Walker, a paleoanthropologist from John Hopkins University who has done as much research on KNM-ER 1470 as Leakey, defends that this living being should not be classified under a "homo", that is, human species such as Homo habilis or Homo rudolfensis, but on the contrary must be included under the Australopithecus species. (70)

In summary, classifications like Homo habilis or Homo rudolfensis which are presented as transitional links between the Australopithecines and Homo erectus are entirely imaginary. As confirmed by many researchers today, these living beings are members of the Australopithecus series. All of their anatomical features disclose that they are each an ape species.

Following these creatures, each of which is an ape species, come the "homo" fossils which are human being fossils.

Homo Erectus and Thereafter: Real Human Beings                          BACK TO TOP

According to the fanciful scheme of evolutionists, the internal evolution of the Homo species is as follows: First Homo erectus, then Homo sapiens archaic and Neanderthal Man, later Cro-Magnon Man and finally modern man. However all these classifications are only original human races in reality. The difference between them is no greater than the difference between an Inuit and a black or a pygmy and a European.

Let us first examine Homo erectus, which is referred to as the most primitive human species. As the word "erect" implies, "Homo erectus" means a "man walking upright". Evolutionists have had to separate these men from previous ones by adding the quality of "erectness", because all the available Homo erectus fossils are straight to an extent not observed in any of the Australopithecines or Homo habilis specimens. There is no difference between the skeleton of modern man and Homo erectus.

The primary reason for evolutionists in defining Homo erectus as "primitive", is the volume of its skull (900-1100 cc), which is smaller than the average modern man, and its thick eyebrow projections. However, there are many people living today in the world who have the same skull volume as Homo erectus (for instance the pygmies) and there are some other races that have protruding eyebrows (for instance the Australian Aborigines).

It is a commonly agreed fact that differences in cranial volume do not necessarily denote differences in intelligence or abilities. Intelligence depends on the internal organisation of the brain rather than its volume. (71)

The fossils that have made Homo erectus known to the world are the fossils of Pekin Man and Java Man found in Asia. However it was understood in time that these two fossils were not reliable. Pekin Man consisted of some elements made of plaster whose originals were lost and Java Man was "composed" of a skull fragment plus a pelvis bone that was found meters away from it with no indication that these belonged to the same living being. This is why the Homo erectus fossils found in Africa have gained such increasing importance. (It should also be noted that some of the fossils said to be Homo erectus were included under a second class named "Homo ergaster" by some evolutionists. There is a disagreement between them on this issue. We will treat all these fossils under the classification of Homo erectus)

The most famous of Homo erectus specimens found in Africa is the fossil of "Narikotome homo erectus" or the "Turkana Boy" which was found near Lake Turkana Kenya. It is confirmed that the fossil was of a 12-year-old boy, who would have been 1.83 meters tall in his adolescence. The upright skeleton structure of the fossil is no different from that of modern man. Concerning it, American paleoanthropologist Alan Walker said that he doubted that "the average pathologist could tell the difference between the fossil skeleton and that of a modern human." (72) Concerning the skull, Walker said that "it looked so much like a Neanderthal." (73) As we will see in the next chapter, Neanderthals are a modern human race. Therefore, Homo erectus is also a modern human race.

Even evolutionist Richard Leakey states that the differences between Homo erectus and modern man are no more than racial variance:

One would also see differences in the shape of the skull, in the degree of protrusion of the face, the robustness of the brows and so on. These differences are probably no more pronounced than we see today between the separate geographical races of modern humans. Such biological variation arises when populations are geographically separated from each other for significant lengths of time (74)

Prof. William Laughlin from the Univercity of Connecticut made extensive anatomical examinations on Inuits and the people living in Aleut islands and noticed that these people were extraordinarily similar to Homo erectus. The conclusion Laughlin arrived was that all these distinct races were in fact different races of Homo sapiens (modern man).

When we consider the vast differences that exist between remote groups such as Eskimos and Bushmen, who are known to belong within the single species of Homo sapiens, it seems justifiable to conclude that Sinanthropus [an erectus specimen-ALC]belongs within this same diverse species. (75)

There is, on the other hand, a huge gap between Homo erectus, a human race, and apes that preceded Homo erectus in the "human evolution" scenario, (Australopithecus, Homo Habilis, Homo rudolfensis). This means that the first men appeared in the fossil record suddenly and right away without any evolutionary history. There can be no clearer indication of their being created.

Yet, admitting this fact is totally against the dogmatic philosophy and ideology of evolutionists. As a result, they try to portray Homo erectus, a truly human race, as a half-ape creature. In their Homo-erectus reconstructions, they tenaciously draw simian features. On the other hand, with similar drawing methods, they humanise apes like Australopithecus or Homo Habilis. With this method, they seek to "approximate" apes and human beings and close the gap between these two distinct living classes.

Neanderthals: A Robust Human Race                                              BACK TO TOP

Neanderthals are human beings who suddenly appeared 100 thousand years ago in Europe and disappeared-or were assimilated by being blended with other races-quietly yet quickly 35 thousand years ago. Their only difference from the modern man is their skeleton being more robust and their cranial volume slightly bigger.

Neanderthals are a human race and this fact is admitted by almost everybody today. Evolutionists have tried very hard to present them as "a primitive species", yet all findings indicate that they were no different from a "robust" man walking on the street today. A prominent authority on the subject, Erik Trinkaus, a paleoanthropologist from New Mexico University writes:

Detailed comparisons of Neanderthal skeletal remains with those of modern humans have shown that there is nothing in Neanderthal anatomy that conclusively indicates locomotor, manipulative, intellectual, or linguistic abilities inferior to those of modern humans. (76)

Many contemporary researchers define Neanderthal man as a sub-species of modern man and call it "Homo sapiens neandertalensis". The findings testify that Neanderthals buried their dead, fashioned musical instruments, and had cultural affinities with the Homo sapiens sapiens living during the same period. To put it precisely, Neanderthals are a "robust" human race that simply disappeared in time.

                                                                                                                                   BACK TO TOP

Homo Sapiens Archaic, Homo Heilderbergensis and Cro-Magnon Man

Archaic Homo sapiens is the last step before contemporary man in the imaginary evolutionary scheme. In fact, evolutionists do not have much to say about these men, as there are only very minor differences between them and modern men. Some researchers even state that representatives of this race are still living today, and point to the Aborigines in Australia as an example. Like Homo sapiens, the Aborigines also have thick protruding eyebrows, an inward-inclined mandibular structure, and a slightly smaller cranial volume. Moreover, significant discoveries have been made hinting that such people lived in Hungary and in some villages in Italy until not very long ago.

The group characterised as Homo heilderbergensis in evolutionist literature is in fact the same as Homo sapiens archaic. The reason why two different terms are used to define the same human race is the conceptual differences among the evolutionists. All the fossils included under the Homo heilderbergensis classification suggest that people who were anatomically very similar to modern Europeans lived 500 thousand and even 740 thousand years earlier first in England and then in Spain.

It is estimated that the Cro-Magnon Man lived 30,000 years ago. He has a dome-shaped cranium and a broad forehead. His cranium of 1,600 cc is above the average for contemporary man. His skull has thick eyebrow projections and a bony protrusion at the back that is characteristic of both Neanderthal man and Homo erectus.

Although the Cro-Magnon is considered to be a European race, the structure and volume of Cro-Magnon’s cranium look very much like that of some races living in Africa and the tropics today. Relying on this similarity, it is estimated that Cro-Magnon was an archaic African race. Some other paleoanthropological finds have shown that Cro-Magnon and Neanderthal races blended with each other and laid the foundations for the races of our day. Moreover, in our day, it is accepted that the representatives of the Cro-Magnon race still live in the different regions of the continent of Africa and the Salute and Dordogne regions of France. People bearing similar characteristics are also noted to be living in Poland and Hungary.

Species Living in the Same Age as Their Ancestors                           BACK TO TOP

What we have investigated so far forms a clear picture for us: The scenario of "human evolution" is totally a fiction. In order for such a family tree to exist, a gradual evolution from ape to man should have taken place and the fossil record of this process should have been found. However, there is a huge gap between apes and humans. Skeletal structures, cranial volumes, and such criteria as walking upright or bent sharply forward distinguish humans from apes. (We mentioned that with a recent research done in 1994 on the balance canals of inner ear, Australopithecus and Homo habilis were classified as ape, while Homo erectus was classified as human.)

Another significant finding proving that there can be no family tree among these different species is that the species that are presented as ancestors of each other in fact lived concurrently. If, as the evolutionists claim, Australopithecus converted to Homo habilis and if they, in turn, converted to Homo erectus, the eras they lived in should necessarily have followed each other. However, there is no such a chronological order.

According to the estimates of evolutionists, Australopithecines lived from 4 million years ago up until 1 million years ago. Living beings classified as Homo habilis, on the other hand, are thought to have lived until 1.7-1.9 million years ago. Homo rudolfensis, which is said to have been more "advanced" than Homo habilis, is known to be as old as 2.5-2.8 million years! That is to say, Homo rudolfensis is nearly 1 million years older than Homo habilis, of which it is supposed to be the "ancestor". On the other hand, the age of Homo erectus dates as far back as 1.6-1.8 million years ago, which means that Homo erectus specimens appeared on the earth in the same time frame as its so-called ancestor, that is, Homo habilis.

Alan Walker confirms this fact by stating that "there is evidence from East Africa for late-surviving small Australopithecus individuals that were contemporaneous first with H. Habilis, then with H. erectus." (77) Louis Leakey has found fossils of Australopithecus, Homo habilis and Homo erectus almost next to each other in Olduvai Gorge region, Bed II layer. (78)

Most certainly there is no such family tree. A paleontologist from Harvard University, Stephen Jay Gould explains this deadlock of evolution although he is an evolutionist himself:

What has become of our ladder if there are three coexisting lineages of hominids (A. africanus, the robust australopithecines, and H. habilis), none clearly derived from another? Moreover, none of the three display any evolutionary trends during their tenure on earth. (79)

When we move on from Homo erectus to Homo sapiens, we again see that there is no family tree to talk about. There is evidence showing that Homo erectus and archaic Homo sapiens continued living up to 27,000 years and even 10,000 years before our time. In the Kow swamp in Australia, some 13,000 year-old Homo erectus skulls have been found. On Java Island, a Homo erectus skull was found that was 27,000 year-old. (80)

The Secret History of Homo Sapiens                                                BACK TO TOP

The most interesting and significant fact that nullifies the very basis of the imaginary family tree of evolutionary theory is the unexpectedly old history of modern man. Paleoanthropological data reveal that Homo sapiens people who looked exactly like us lived as long as one million years ago.

It was Louis Leakey, the famous evolutionist paleoanthropologist, who discovered the first findings concerning this subject. In 1932, in Kanjera region around Lake Victoria in Kenya, Leakey found several fossils that belonged to the Middle Pleistocene Age and that were no different from modern man. However, Middle Pleistocene Age means a million years ago. (81) Since these discoveries turned the evolutionary family tree upside down, they were dismissed by some evolutionist paleoanthropologists. Yet Leakey always contended that his estimates were correct.

Just when this controversy was about to be forgotten, a fossil unearthed in Spain in 1995 revealed in a very remarkable way that the history of Homo Sapiens was much older than assumed. The fossil in question was uncovered in a cave called Gran Dolina in the Atapuerca region of Spain by three Spanish paleoanthropologists from the University of Madrid. The fossil belonged to the face of an 11 year old boy who looked entirely like modern men. Yet, it had been 800,000 years since the child died. Discover magazine covered the story in great detail in its December 1997 issue .

This fossil even shook the convictions of Ferreras, who was leading the Gran Dolina excavation. Ferreras said:

We expected something big, something large, something inflated... you know, something "primitive". Our expectation of an 800,000 years old boy was something like Turkana Boy. And what we found was a totally modern face.... To me this is most spectacular... These are the kinds of things that shake you. Finding something totally unexpected like that. Not finding fossils; finding fossils is unexpected too, and it’s okay. But the most spectacular thing is finding something you thought belonged to the present, in the past. It’s like finding something like... like a tape recorder in Gran Dolina. That would be very surprising. We don’t expect cassettes and tape recorders in the Lower Pleistocene. Finding a modern face it’s the same thing. We were very surprised when we saw it. (82)

The fossil highlighted the fact that the history of Homo sapiens had to be extended back to 800 thousand years ago. After recovering from the initial shock, the evolutionists who discovered the fossil decided that it belonged to a different species, because according to the evolutionary family tree, no Homo sapiens should ever have lived 800 thousand years ago. Therefore, they made up an imaginary species called "Homo antecessor" and included the Atapuerca skull under this classification.

                                                                                                                                   BACK TO TOP

A Hut 1.7 Million Yrs Old & Footprints of Modern Man 3.6 Million Yrs Old!                                

There have been many findings demonstrating that Homo sapiens dates even earlier than 800 thousand years. One of them is the discovery of Louis Leakey made in the early 1970s in Olduvai Gorge. Here, in the Bed II layer, Leakey discovered that the Australopithecus, Homo Habilis and Homo erectus species co-existed at the same time. What is even more interesting was a structure Leakey found in the same layer (Bed II). Here, Leakey found the remains of a stone-hut. The unusual aspect of the event was that this construction, which is still used in some parts of Africa, could only be constructed by Homo sapiens! So, according to the findings of Leakey, Australopithecus, Homo habilis, Homo erectus and modern man must have co-existed approximately 1.7 million years ago. (83) This discovery must surely invalidate the evolutionary theory that claims that modern men evolved from any ape-like species like Australopithecus.

Indeed, some other discoveries trace the origins of modern man back to 1.7 million years ago. One of these most important finds is the footprints found in Laetoli, Tanzania by Mary Leakey in 1977. These footprints were found in a layer that was calculated to be 3.6 million years old and more importantly, they were no different from the footprints that a contemporary man would leave.

The footprints found by Mary Leakey were later examined by a number of famous paleoanthropologists like Don Johanson and Tim White. The results were the same. White wrote:

Make no mistake about it,... They are like modern human footprints. If one were left in the sand of a California beach today, and a four-year old were asked what it was, he would instantly say that somebody had walked there. He wouldn't be able to tell it from a hundred other prints on the beach, nor would you. (84)

After examining the footprints, Louis Robbins from North California University made the following comments:

The arch is raised-the smaller individual had a higher arch than I do-and the big toe is large and aligned with the second toe... The toes grip the ground like human toes. You do not see this in other animal forms. (85)

Examinations made on the morphological form of the footprints showed time and again that they had to be accepted as the prints of a human, and more, a modern human (Homo sapiens). Russell Tuttle who examined the footprints wrote:

A small barefoot Homo sapiens could have made them... In all discernible morphological features, the feet of the individuals that made the trails are indistinguishable from those of modern humans. (86)

Impartial examinations of the footprints revealed their real owners. In reality, these footprints consisted of 20 fossilised footprints of a 10 year-old modern human and 27 footprints of an even younger one. They were certainly modern people like ourselves.

This situation put the Laetoli footprints at the centre of discussions for years. Evolutionist paleoanthropologists desperately tried to come up with an explanation as it was hard for them to accept the fact that a modern man had been walking on the earth 3.6 million years ago. During 1990s, this "explanation" started to take shape. The evolutionists decided that these footprints should have been left by an Australopithecus, because according to their theory, it was impossible for a homo species to exist 3.6 years ago. Russell H. Tuttle wrote the following in his article dated 1990:

In sum, the 3.5 million-year-old footprint traits at Laetoli site G resemble those of habitually unshod modern humans. None of their features suggest that the Laetoli hominids were less capable bipeds than we are. If the G footprints were not known to be so old, we would readily conclude that there were made by a member of our genus Homo... In any case, we should shelve the loose assumption that the Laetoli footprints were made by Lucy's kind, Australopithecus afarensis. (87)

To put it briefly, these footprints that were supposed to be 3.6 million years old could not have belonged to Australopithecus. The only reason why the footprints were thought to have been left by Australopithecus was the 3.6 million year old volcanic layer in which the footprints were found. The prints were ascribed to Australopithecus on the assumption that humans could not have lived at such an early age.

These interpretations of the Laetoli prints show us a very important reality. Evolutionists support their theory not by considering scientific findings but despite them. Here we have a theory that is being blindly defended no matter what, with all new findings that are against the theory being either ignored or distorted to serve its purposes.

Briefly, the evolutionary theory is not science, but a dogma kept alive despite science.

The Bipedalism Impasse of Evolution                                               BACK TO TOP

Apart from the fossil record that we have dealt with so far, unclosable anatomical gaps between men and apes also invalidate the fiction of human evolution. One of these gaps has to do with the manner of walking.

Human beings walk upright on their two feet. This is a very special kind of motion not seen in any other species. Some other animals do have a limited ability to move when they stand on two hind feet. Animals like bears and monkeys can move in this way only rarely, such as when they want to reach a source of food and then only for a short time. Normally their skeletons lean forward and they walk on all fours.

Well then, has bipedalism evolved from the quadripedal stride of monkeys as the evolutionists claim?

Of course not. Research has shown that the evolution of bipedalism has never occurred, nor is it possible for it to have occurred. First of all, bipedalism is not an evolutionary advantage. The way in which monkeys move is much easier, faster, and more efficient than man’s bipedal stride. Man can neither move by jumping from tree to tree without stepping on the ground like a chimpanzee, nor run with a speed of 125 kms an hour like a cheetah. On the contrary, since man walks on his two feet, he moves much more slowly on the ground. For the same reason, he is one of the most unprotected of all species in nature in terms of movement and defence. According to the logic of evolution, monkeys should not have evolved to adopt a bipedal stride: humans should instead have evolved to become quadripedal.

Another impasse of the evolutionary claim is that bipedalism does not serve the "gradual development" model of Darwinism. This model, which constitutes the basis of evolution, requires that there should be a "compound" stride between bipedalism and quadripedalism. However, with the computerised research he conducted in 1996, the English paleoanthropologist Robin Crompton, showed that such a "compound" stride was not possible. Cromptom reached the following conclusion: A living being can either walk upright or on all fours. (88) A type of stride in-between cannot be possible because of extreme energy consumption. This is why it is impossible for a half-bipedal being to exist.

The immense gap between man and ape is not limited solely to bipedalism. Many other issues still remain unexplained such as brain capacity, the ability to talk, and so on. Elaine Morgan, an evolutionist paleoanthropologist, makes the following confession in relation to this matter:

Four of the most outstanding mysteries about humans are: 1) why do they walk on two legs? 2) why have they lost their fur? 3) why have they developed such large brains? 4) why did they learn to speak?

The orthodox answers to these questions are: 1) 'We do not yet know'; 2) 'We do not yet know'; 3) 'We do not yet know'; 4) 'We do not yet know'. The list of questions could be considerably lengthened without affecting the monotony of the answers. (89)

Evolution: An Unscientific Faith                                                       BACK TO TOP

Lord Solly Zuckerman is one of the most famous and respected scientists in the U.K. For years, he studied the fossil record and conducted many detailed investigations. He was honoured with the title of "Lord" for his contributions to science. Zuckerman is an evolutionist. Therefore, his comments on evolution can not be regarded as deliberately perverse remarks. After years of research on the fossils included in the human evolution scenario however, he reached the conclusion that there is no such family tree in truth.

Zuckerman also made an interesting "spectrum of science". He formed a spectrum of sciences ranging from those he considered scientific to those he considered unscientific. According to Zuckerman’s spectrum, the most "scientific"-that is, depending on concrete data-fields of science are chemistry and physics. After them come the biological sciences and then the social sciences. At the far end of the spectrum, which is the part considered to be most "unscientific", are "extra-sensory perception"-concepts such as telepathy and sixth sense-and finally "human evolution". Zuckerman explains his reasoning:

We then move right off the register of objective truth into those fields of presumed biological science, like extrasensory perception or the interpretation of man's fossil history, where to the faithful anything is possible - and where the ardent believer is sometimes able to believe several contradictory things at the same time. (90)

What, then, is the reason that make so many scientists so tenacious about this dogma? Why have they been trying so hard to keep their theory alive, at the cost of having to admit countless conflicts and discarding the evidence they have found?

The only answer is their being afraid of the fact they will have to face in case of abandoning the theory of evolution. The fact they will have to face when they abandon evolution is the fact that man has been created by Allah. However, considering the presuppositions they have and the materialistic philosophy they believe in, creation is an unacceptable concept for evolutionists.

For this reason, they deceive themselves, as well as the world, by using the media with which they co-operate. If they cannot find the necessary fossils, they "fabricate" them either in the form of imaginary pictures or fictitious models and try to give the impression that there indeed exist fossils verifying evolution. Some media organs who share their materialistic point of view also try to deceive the public and instil the story of evolution in people’s subconscious.

No matter how hard they try, the truth is evident: Man has come into existence not through an evolutionary process but by having been created by Allah. Therefore, he is responsible to Him however unwilling he may be to assume this responsibility.


"Early humans were much smarter than we suspected..."

News published in New Scientist on March 14th 1998 tells us that the humans called Homo Erectus by evolutionists were practicing seamanship 700 thousand years ago. These humans, who had enough knowledge and technology to build a vessel and possess a culture that made use of sea transport, can hardly be called "primitive".

Next : The Impasse Of Molecular Evolution        



* Copy Rights; http://www.islamicity.com   http://www.islamology.com http://www.harunyahya.org

  Imaginary Mechanisms
  The Fossil Record's Refutations
  Deceptive Fossil Interpretations
  Evolution Forgeries
22 The Scenario Of Human Evolution
  The Impasse Of Molecular Evolution