Evolution Is Not A Fact of Science

lucyWith more than 5000 fossils or fossil fragments of apes, chimps, and humans allegedly showing stages of human evolution, which ape-like animal had enough human characteristics for us to say “this one has just crossed the boundary from ape to human?”  

The short answer is NONE!  Not one of the ape fossils show enough specific human features for evolutionists to say without any doubt that this is the point where an ape turned human, and NONE of the human fossils show enough specific ape characteristics to indicate that they have actually evolved from apes.

All that paleoanthropologists have to show for more than 100 years of digging are an assortment of jawbones, teeth, and fossilized scraps, which together with molecular evidence from living species that generally contradicts fossil evidence, to attempt to piece together a line of human descent back 5 to 8 million years to a time they speculate that humans and apes diverged from a common ancestor.

Java Man, aka Pithecanthropus Erectus, aka Homos Erectus, discovered in 1891 by Eugene Dubois, was concocted from a leg bone, a skullcap, a jaw fragment and three teeth.  Even Dubois had to admit in 1936 that what he had discovered was actually the fossil remains of a giant gibbon.  The Piltdown fossil found in England in 1912 was shown in 1953 to be a cleverly contrived hoax, a hoax that the greater part of the scientific world had accepted for forty years. Carbon tests proved that while the skull was fossilized, the jaw was that of a modern ape with the teeth filed to change the wear pattern and stained to match the skull.  And let’s not forget the Nebraska man, based upon a tooth, that was claimed to be a mixture of human, chimpanzee and pithecanthropus. As with the others, mere speculation passed off as science.

But what about Lucy, a partial fossil skeleton about the size of a chimpanzee, supposedly female, discovered by paleontologist Dr. Donald Johanson in 1974 in Ethiopa, with an estimated age of 3.2 million years?  Skeleton remains included a v-shaped jaw, part of a hip, assorted bones and a very small skull fragment.   Ape-like in appearance, with a small brain cavity not anatomically different from a modern chimp, Lucy had a v-shaped jaw totally unlike a human jaw. Dr. Johanson claimed that Lucy walked upright even through the bones, as found, showed she walked on all fours. His explanation for this discrepancy was that after her death her bones were fractured by other animals walking on her, leaving the bones to fuse in such a manner to make it appear that she walked on all fours.   The logic of that argument escapes me since it takes bones months to heal, requiring, I believe, blood circulation which doesn’t occur when your heart quits pumping.  Dr. Johanson admitted in 1986, that “some” of the bones used to “build” Lucy were found a year earlier about 1.5 miles from where Lucy was actually found. Lucy is not the missing link or even a link in the chain to some unknown ancestor. She’s a figment of Johanson’s imagination, a composite of fossilized primate bones put together to look like a human ancestor.

Then there is Lucy’s grandfather, a 3.6 million partial skeleton found in Ethiopia. From just a lower arm bone, an almost complete clavicle, one shoulder blades and partial rib cage, paleontologist have decided he was fully bipedal with an ability to walk like modern humans. Well, if Lucy is a monkey there is no reason to believe this find is anything but. After all, gorillas can and sometimes do walk upright.

In 2009 scientists found Ida, a  47 million year old 95% complete fossilized skeleton of a lemur monkey that they claimed was the direct connection between humans and the rest of the animal kingdom, drawing this conclusion because, in their mind, the fossil’s teeth, toe and ankle bones resembled anthropoids more than modern lemurs. Researchers immediately pointed out that primitive lemurs, as opposed to modern lemurs, also share many of these features. Chris Gilbert, a paleoanthropologist at Yale said that “while they make an intriguing argument, I would definitely say that the consensus is not in favor of their hypothesis…”

George Wald, Harvard University biochemist and Nobel Laureate, stated in 1954 that “When it comes to the origin of life, there is only two possibilities: Creation or spontaneous generation.  There is no third way. Spontaneous generation was disproved one hundred years ago, but that leads us to only the other conclusion, that of supernatural creation. We cannot accept that on philosophical grounds; therefore, we choose to believe the impossible: That life arose spontaneously by chance!”

History is strewn with attempts to prove Darwinian evolutionary theory is a fact, a fact that cannot be observed as having occurred in the past, cannot be observed as happening in the present and on the molecular level has proven to be a virtual mathematical impossibility by men such as British astronomer Sir Frederick Hoyle. Therefore, since there is no provable scientific evidence, it is reasonable to conclude that evolution is not a fact of science. It is not science at all but an arbitrary system built upon faith in universal naturalism.

I’m still waiting for evolutionary science to explain the Cambrian explosion, the seemingly miraculous appearance of complex invertebrates sans any precursors in the fossil record.

“An honest man, armed with all the knowledge available to us now, could only state that in some, the origin of life appears at the moment to be almost a miracle, so many are the conditions which would have had to have been satisfied to get it going.” Francis Crick, 1982 Nobel Prize Winner in biology


Print Friendly

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Unable to load the Are You a Human PlayThru™. Please contact the site owner to report the problem.