Original Owner Well
Original Owner Well
The Descent of Man
Any person seeking an answer to the question of how living beings, including himself, came in existence, lies with two different explanations. The first is the "creation", the idea that all living beings has emerged as a result of intelligent design. The second explanation is the theory of "evolution", which asserts that things are not the life of the product intelligent design, but a cause and coincidence of natural processes.
For a century and a half now, the theory of evolution has received broad support from the scientific community. The science of biology is defined terms of evolutionary concepts. Therefore, among the two explanations of creation and evolution, most people assume the evolutionist explanation to be scientific. Therefore, they believe that evolution is a theory supported by the observation results of science, while creation is considered a religious belief. In fact, however, scientific results do not support evolutionary theory. The results of the last two decades in particular openly contradict the basic assumptions of this theory. Many branches of science as paleontology, biochemistry, population genetics, anatomy Comparative and biophysics, indicate that natural processes and coincidental effects can not explain life, as suggested by the theory of evolution.
Origin of Man
Darwin presented his claim that humans and apes descended from a common ancestor, in his book The Descent Of Man, published in 1871. From then until now, supporters of the way Darwin tried to substantiate this claim. Despite all the research that has been made, the claim of "human evolution" has not been substantiated by research scientifically grounded, especially in the field of fossils.
The man on the street is rarely aware of this fact and believes that the application of evolution human is supported by a large number of solid evidence. The reason for this misconception is that the subject is often discussed in the media and presented as a fait proved. But the real experts are aware that there is no scientific basis for the claim of human evolution. David Pilbeam, a paleoanthropologist Harvard University, wrote:
If you made an intelligent scientist from another discipline and showed scant evidence, we had no probably say "forget it, does not continue." ((Richard E. Leakey, The Making of Humanity, Books limited sphere, Barcelona, 1982, p. 43.))
And William Fix, author of an important book on the subject of paleoanthropology, makes this comment:
As we have seen, there are many scientists and broadcasters today who have the audacity to say that there is "no doubt" how man origin. If only There was evidence ...(( William R. Fix, suppliers bones, Macmillan Publishing Company, New York, 1984, pp. 150-153.))
The claim of evolution This "lack of evidence," the family tree of man begins with a group of monkeys who were suspected of different sexes, the australopithecines. According to the complaint, Australopithecus gradually began to walk upright, his brain has increased, through a series of steps to the current state of man (Homo sapiens). But the fossil record does not support this scenario. Despite the assertion that all sorts of intermediate forms there is a barrier impenetrable barrier between the fossil remains of humans and monkeys. On the other hand, has shown that species are presented as ancestors are actually contemporary species that lived in the same period. Ernst Mayr, one of the main proponents of the theory of evolution in the twentieth century, argued in his book a long discussion "All puzzles [] history, such as the origin of life or of Homo sapiens, it is extremely difficult, if not resist a definitive explanation and satisfactory. "((" Could science end to the belief of scientists who have final answers or by society's reluctance to pay the bills? "Scientific American, December 1992, p. 20.))
But what is the basis of the theory of human evolution presented by evolutionists? It is the existence of plenty of fossils on which evolutionists are able to construct interpretations imaginary. Throughout history, more than 6,000 species of ape have lived, and most of them have disappeared. Today, only 120 species Living on Earth. These 6,000 or more species of monkeys, the majority have disappeared, are a valuable resource for the evolutionists.
Other hand, there are considerable differences in the anatomical structure of different races of mankind. By In addition, the differences were even greater between prehistoric races, because time has passed the human races have to some extent mixed with each other and reach to be assimilated. However, significant differences remain between the population groups living in the world today, for example, Scandinavians, African pygmies, Inuit, indigenous Australians, and many others.
There is evidence that the fossil hominid known by paleontologists evolution in not actually belong to different species of monkey or go to the races of man. In other words, no example of a transitional form between humans and monkeys has been found.
After these explanations, we will now examine the hypothesis of evolution human whole.
The tree hypochondriac Family of Man
The Darwinist claim contends that modern man has evolved from a species of ape-like creature. During this alleged evolutionary process, would have started from last year 4-5000000, it was claimed that There were some forms of "transitional" between modern man and his ancestors. According to this completely imaginary scenario, the following four core "categories" are listed:
1. Australopithecines (one of many forms of the genus Australopithecus)
2. Homo habilis
3. Homo erectus
4. Homo sapiens
Evolutionists call the genus to which the ancestors of the ape man suspects belonged "Australopithecus" which means "southern ape." Australopithecus, which is nothing but an old type of monkey is extinct, is found in several different ways. Some of them are construction bigger and stronger (strong), while others are smaller and delicate (Gracilis).
Evolutionists classify the next stage of evolution that the human genus Homo, which is "man". According to the statement of evolution, living beings in the Homo series are more developed of Australopithecus, and not very different from modern man. The modern man of our time, ie the case Homo sapiens, is said to have formed in the last stage of the evolution of the genus Homo.
Fossils like "Java Man", "Man Beijing "and" Lucy ", which appear in the media from time to time and are in evolutionist publications and textbooks, including one the four groups mentioned above. Each of these groups are also expected to branch into species and subspecies, as appropriate.
Some have suggested transitional forms of the past, as Ramapithecus, had to be excluded from the family tree of human imagination after it became account as ordinary apes.
In describing the links in the chain as "Australopithecus> Homo habilis> Homo> sapiens erectus, evolutionists means that each of these types is the ancestor of the other. However, recent findings by paleoanthropologists have revealed that the Homo habilis Australopithecines and Homo erectus existed in different parts of the world at the same time. In addition, some humans classified as Homo erectus probably lived up recently. In an article titled "Latest Homo erectus of Java: potential contemporaneity with Homo sapiens in Southeast Asia" was reported in the journal Science that Homo erectus fossils found in Java had "mean age 27 ± 2 to 53.3 ± 4000 years ago, and this increase ['S] the possibility that Homo erectus overlapped in time with anatomically modern humans (Homo sapiens) in Southeast Asia "
In addition, Homo sapiens and Homo sapiens sapiens neandarthalensis (modern man) also clearly coexisted. This situation apparently indicates the invalidity of the claim that one is the ancestor of the other.
Intrinsically, all findings and scientific research have revealed that the archives Fossils do not suggest an evolutionary process as evolutionists propose. The fossils that evolutionists claim to be the ancestors of human beings in fact, belong to different human races, or more than the species of great apes.
After the fossils are human beings and what monkeys? Is possible for any of them to be regarded as a transitional form? For answers, let's take a look at each category.
Australopithecus: a species of monkey
The first category, the genus Australopithecus, means "southern ape" as we have said. It is assumed that these creatures appeared in Africa about 4 million years, and lived up to 1 million years. There are a number of different species between astralopithecines. Evolutionists assume that the oldest species Australopithecus afarensis is. After that comes from A. africanus A. robustus, and that the bones relatively more important. As A. boisei, some researchers to accept it as a different species, and others as a subspecies of A. robustus.
All Australopithecus species are extinct apes that resemble the apes of today. Its cranial capacity is less than or equal to today's chimpanzees. There are projecting parts in their hands and feet used to climb trees, like chimpanzees today, and his feet are designed to grab hold of the branches. They are short (maximum 130 cm. (51 inches)) and like today's chimpanzees, male Australopithecus is larger than the female. Many other features such as details in their skulls, the closeness of their eyes, their molar teeth pointed, their jaw structure, long arms and short legs, are proof that these creatures Monkeys are no different today.
However, evolutionists claim that, although australopithecines have the anatomy of apes, unlike apes, they walked upright like humans.
This claim that australopithecines walked upright is a view that has remained paleoanthropologists as Richard Leakey and Donald C. Johanson for decades. However, many scientists who have conducted a broad front of research on the skeletal structures of australopithecines have demonstrated the invalidity of this argument. Extensive research conducted on samples from two different Australopithecus world famous anatomists England and the USA, Lord Solly Zuckerman and Prof. Charles Oxnard, has shown that these creatures walked upright on a human form. After Having studied the bones of these fossils for a period of 15 years thanks to funding from the British government, Lord Zuckerman and his team of five specialists the conclusion that the australopithecines have a single regular single genus and were definitely not bipedal, although Zuckerman an evolutionist same. Therefore, Charles E. Oxnard, another evolutionist famous for his research on the subject, also likened the skeletal structure of Australopithecus to that of modern orang-utans.
Briefly, Australopithecines have no link with human beings are nothing more than an extinct ape species.
Homo habilis: The monkey was presented as the man
The great similarity between the bone and the skull Australopithecus and chimpanzees, and the refutation of the claim that these creatures walked upright, have caused great difficulties paleoanthropologists evolutionists. The reason is that, according to the imaginary evolution scheme, Homo erectus comes after Australopithecus. As the genus name Homo (meaning "man") implies, Homo erectus is a species of man and his skeleton is straight. Its cranial capacity is twice that of Australopithecus. Transition Australopithecus direct a monkey chimpanzee, Homo erectus, which has a skeleton no different from modern man, is beyond question, even by the theory evolution. Therefore, the "links", ie "transitional forms" are required. The concept of Homo habilis arose from this need.
The classification of Homo habilis was filed in 1960 by Leakey, a family of "fossil hunters." By Leakey, the new species, which are classified as Homo habilis had a cranial capacity is relatively large, the ability to walk upright and use tools of stone and wood. Therefore, could be the ancestor of man.
new fossils of the same species found in 1980s, would completely change this view. Some researchers, as Bernard Wood and C. Loring Brace, who relied on these recently discovered fossils, said that Homo habilis (meaning "clever man", ie the man capable of using tools) should be classified as Australopithecus habilis, or "skillful southern ape", because Homo habilis had many characteristics in common with the australopithecine apes. His long arms, short legs and monkey skeletal structure of Australopithecus. His fingers were fit for climbing. Her jaw is very similar to that of apes today. Their cranial capacity averaged 600 cc is also an indication that they were monkeys. In short, Homo habilis, which was presented as a separate species by some evolutionists, was in fact a kind of ape like all the other australopithecines.
Research conducted in the years because the wood and labor Brace showed that Homo habilis was indeed no different from Australopithecus. The skull and skeleton OH62 fossil found by Tim White showed that this species had a cranial capacity of small and long arms and short legs which enabled them to climb trees like monkeys moderns.
A detailed analysis conducted by American anthropologist Holly Smith in 1994 shows that Homo habilis was not Homo, In other words, "man" at all, but only a monkey. " Speaking of his analysis on the teeth of Australopithecus, Homo habilis, Homo erectus and Homo neanderthalensis, Smith stated the following;
Restricting analysis of fossils to specimens satisfying these criteria, the models dental development of gracile australopithecines and Homo habilis are classified with African apes. Those of Homo erectus and Neanderthals are classified with humans.
In the same year, Fred Spoor, Bernard Wood and Frans Zonneveld, all specialists on anatomy, reached a conclusion Similarly, a completely different method. This method is based on comparative analysis of the semicircular canals of the inner ear of humans and monkeys have provided the balance. Spoor, Wood and Zonneveld concluded the following:
Among the fossil hominids the first species to demonstrate morphology of modern humans is Homo erectus. On the contrary, the dimensions of the semicircular canal in skulls from southern Africa attributed to Australopithecus and Paranthropus resemble those of extant great apes great.
Spoor, Wood and Zonneveld also studied a sample Homo habilis to namely Stw 53, and found that "Stw 53 relied less on bipedal behavior of australopithecines." This means that H. habilis specimen was more simian species Australopithecus. They therefore concluded that "Stw 53 represents an unlikely intermediate between the morphologies seen in Australopithecus and Homo erectus. "
This has led to two important results:
1. The fossil known as Homo habilis did not really part of the genus Homo, the man knowledge, but to that of Australopithecus ape say.
2. Homo habilis and Australopithecus were creatures that walked bent forward, it to say they had the skeleton of a monkey. They have no connection with the man.
Homo rudolfensis: The face unduly cumulative
The term Homo rudolfensis is the name given to a fossil fragments unearthed in 1972 a few. The species supposedly represented by this fossil was called Homo rudolfensis because these fossil fragments were found in the vicinity of Lake Rudolf in Kenya. Most paleoanthropologists accept that these fossils do not belong to a distinct species, but the creature called Homo rudolfensis is in fact indistinguishable from Homo habilis.
Richard Leakey, who unearthed the fossils, presented the skull named "KNM-ER 1470, which he said was 2.8 million years the greatest discovery in the history of anthropology. According to Leakey, this creature, I had a small cranial capacity like that of Australopithecus today with a face similar to that of humans, has been the missing link between Australopithecus and humans. However, after some time he realized that the human face-like KNM-ER 1470 skull, which appears frequently on the covers of scientific journals of popular science magazines and was the result of improper assembly of skull fragments, which may have been intentional. Professor Tim Bromage, which conducts research the anatomy of the face of the man brought this to light with the help of computer simulations in 1992:
When [KNM-ER 1470] was the first reconstruction, the face has been equipped with the skull in a nearly vertical position, much like the flat faces of modern man. But recent studies show that the anatomical relationships in life should have stuck to the face considerably, creating a look similar mono, not the faces of Australopithecus.
The evolutionary paleoanthropologist JE Cronin states the following about it:
... its relatively sturdy, flattened naso-alveolar clivus, (remember the faces Australopithecus served), low maximum cranial width (in time), played canine strong and large molars (as indicated in the remaining roots) are relatively primitive traits ally of the sample with members of the A. taxon africanus.
C. Loring Brace of the University of Michigan at the same conclusion. Following the analysis he did in the jaw and the structure of head of the tooth 1470, stated that "the size of the mouth and the expansion of the area allocated to roots of molars, it appears that ER 1470 retained Australopithecus a face full of teeth and businesses. "
Professor Alan Walker, a paleoanthropologist at Johns Hopkins has done much Research KNM-ER 1470 as Leakey, maintains that this creature should not be considered a member of Homo-ie, as a human species, but should rather be placed in the genus Australopithecus.
In summary, classifications like Homo habilis or Homo rudolfensis presented as transitional forms between Australopithecus and Homo erectus are totally imaginary. It has been confirmed by many researchers today that these creatures are members of the Australopithecus series. All of their anatomical features reveal that this species of great apes.
This was in two anthropologists Evolutionists, Bernard Wood and Mark Collard, whose research was published in 1999 in the journal Science. Wood and Collard explained that the Homo habilis and Homo rudolfensis (Skull 1470) taxa are imaginary, and that fossils assigned to these categories be assigned to the genus Australopithecus:
More recently, fossil species have been assigned to Homo on the basis of absolute brain size, inferences about language ability and hand function, and retrodiction on their ability to shape stone tools. With few exceptions, the definition and use of gender development human and demarcation of Homo, have been treated as if they were no problem. But ... Recent data, new interpretations existing data, and the limits of record palaeoanthropological invalidate existing criteria for allocating taxa to Homo.
... In practice, species of hominid fossils attributed to Homo on the basis of one or more of the four criteria. ... It is now clear, however, no of these criteria is satisfactory. The cerebral Rubicon problematic because absolute cranial capacity is of questionable biological significance. Similarly, evidence that language function can be reliably inferred from the macroscopic appearance of the brain, and the language parts of the brain are not as well located previous studies have suggested ...
... In other words, with the hypodigm H. and H. habilis rudolfensis assigned to the genus Homo is not a genre well. Thus, H. and H. rudolfensis habilis (Homo habilis sensu lato O for those who do not subscribe to the taxonomic subdivision of "Homo") should be removed from Homo. The obvious solution is Taxonomy, which is transfer of one or two taxa in one of the types of early hominids existing is not without its problems, but we recommend that for the moment, the two H. H. habilis rudolfensis should be transferred to the genus Australopithecus.
The conclusion of Wood and Collard corroborates the conclusion that we had here, "primitive human ancestors" do not exist in history. The creature is alleged that in reality are so cute to be assigned to the genus Australopithecus. The record shows that fossils there no evolutionary relationship between extinct apes and Homo, ie, the human species that suddenly appears in the fossil record.
Homo erectus and that time: human beings
According to the scheme proposed by evolutionists Fantasy, the internal evolution of the Homo genus is as follows: First Homo erectus, then called "primitive man" Homo sapiens and Neanderthals (Homo sapiens neanderthalensis), and finally, Cro-Magnon (Homo sapiens). Without However, all these classifications are really only variations and unique races in the human family. The difference between them is not greater than the difference between an Inuit and African pygmy and a European one and a.
Consider Homo erectus first, known as the most primitive species of man. As its name implies, Homo erectus means "man who walks standing. "Evolutionists have had to separate these fossils from the above, adding the qualifier" vertical "because all available fossil Homo erectus are straight to an extent which is not observed in any of the australopithecines or so-called Homo habilis specimens. There is no difference between post-cranial skeleton of modern humans and Homo erectus.
The principal reason for evolutionists Homo erectus defined as "primitive" is the cranial capacity of its skull (from 900 to 1100 cc), which is smaller than the average modern man, and his thick eyebrows projections. However, Many people today live in the world who have the same cranial capacity as Homo erectus (pygmies, for example) and other races that are different eyebrows (Native Australians, for example).
Often, according to the fact that differences in cranial capacity does not refer not necessarily differences in intelligence or abilities. Intelligence depends on the internal organization of the brain, not by volume.
Fossils who have known Homo erectus around the world are those of Peking man and Java man in Asia. However, with time given to realize that these two fossils are not reliable. Peking Man consists of some of plaster whose originals have been lost, and Java Man is "composed" of a skull fragment plus a pelvic bone that was yards away and no indication that these belonged to the same creature. While Homo erectus fossils Africa have gained such increasing importance. (It should also be noted that some of the Homo erectus fossils have been included in the second species named Homo ergaster "by some evolutionists. There is disagreement among experts on this issue. We will treat all these fossils under the classification of Homo erectus)
The most famous specimens of Homo erectus in Africa is the fossil of Homo erectus Narikotome "or" Turkana Boy "was found near Lake Turkana in Kenya. It is confirmed that the fossil was that of a 12-year-old who was 1.83 meters tall in adolescence. The vertical structure of skeleton of the fossil is no different from that of modern man. The American paleoanthropologist Alan Walker said he doubted that "the pathologist That could mean the difference between the fossil skeleton of a modern man. "(Boyce Rensberger (The Washington Post November 19, 1984.))
From the skull, Walker wrote that he laughed when he saw it, because "it looked so much like a Neanderthal. ((Ibid.)) As stated in the next chapter, Neanderthals are a modern human race. Thus, Homo erectus is also a modern human race.
Even evolutionist Richard Leakey says the differences between Homo erectus and modern man are nothing more than racial variance:
You are also differences in the shape of the skull the degree of sagging of the face, robustness eyebrows, etc.. These differences are probably no more pronounced than we see today between the various geographical races of modern man. Such biological variation arises when populations are geographically separated from each other for the lengths time significantly.
Professor William Laughlin University of Connecticut made extensive anatomical examinations and Inuit people living in the Aleutian Islands, and I realized that these people were highly similar to Homo erectus. Laughlin The conclusion was that all these distinct races are that different races of Homo sapiens (modern man).
If one considers the large differences between remote groups such as Eskimos and Bushmen, who are known to belong to Homo sapiens one species, it seems justified to conclude that Peking [a] erectus pattern belongs to the same kind varied.
It became more pronounced in the scientific community that Homo erectus is a superfluous taxon, and that fossils of Homo erectus given class are not really so different from Homo sapiens to be considered a separate species. In American Scientist, the discussions on this issue and the outcome of a conference on the subject in 2000 are summarized as follows:
Most conference participants Senckenberg is immersed in a heated debate on the taxonomic status of Homo erectus started by Milford Wolpoff of the University of Michigan, Alan Thorne University of Canberra and his colleagues. They argued forcefully that Homo erectus had no validity as a species and must be eliminated. All members of the genus Homo about 2 million years so far have been highly variable, widespread species, Homo sapiens, with no natural breaks or subdivisions. The theme of the conference, Homo erectus did not exist.
The conclusion reached by scientists defense of thesis mentioned can be summarized as "Homo erectus is a species of Homo sapiens, but rather a race within Homo sapiens.
On the other hand, there is a huge gap between Homo erectus, a human race, and the great apes, Homo erectus prior in human evolution "scenario (Australopithecus, Homo habilis and Homo rudolfensis). This means that the first humans appeared suddenly in fossil record and without notice, evolutionary history. This is a clear indication of his being created.
However, admitting this fact is completely contrary to the philosophy evolutionary dogma and ideology. Therefore, try to represent Homo erectus, a human race really like a creature half-ape. In its reconstruction Homo erectus, who with tenacity develop characteristics of apes. In addition, similar methods of drawing, to humanize apes and australopithecines or Homo habilis. With this method, seek to "approximate" apes and humans and to eliminate the difference between these two different types of life.
Neanderthals
Neanderthals were human beings who suddenly appeared 100,000 years ago in Europe, and they have disappeared or were assimilated by mixing with other races, it quietly but quickly 35,000 years. The only difference with the man the modern age is that their skeletons are more robust and their cranial capacity slightly bigger.
Neanderthals were a human race, a fact admitted by almost everyone now days. Evolutionists have tried very hard to present them as a sort of "primitive" but all results indicate that they are no different from a solid "man walking down the street today. A leading authority on this issue, Erik Trinkaus, a paleoanthropologist at the University of New Mexico, wrote:
Detailed comparisons of Neanderthal skeleton remains with those of modern humans have shown that there is nothing in Neanderthal anatomy that conclusively indicates locomotor, manipulative, intellectual ability or language lower than those of modern humans.
Many contemporary researchers define Neanderthal man as a subspecies of modern humans and Homo neanderthalensis called "sapiens. The results show that Neanderthals buried their dead instruments, musical fashion, and cultural affinities with the Homo sapiens sapiens living in the same period. To put it precisely, Neanderthals are a "solid" human race than just faded over time.
Heilderbergensis archaic Homo sapiens, Homo and Cro-Magnon
Archaic Homo sapiens is the last step before contemporary man in the imaginary evolutionary scheme. In fact, evolutionists have not much to say about these fossils, as there are only very small differences between them and the modern humans. Some researchers argue that representatives of this race are still alive today, and the point of indigenous Australians as an example. As Australians, Homo sapiens (archaic) native as thick prominent eyebrows, a jaw structure in stability, and a cranial capacity slightly less.
The group known under the name Homo heilderbergensis in evolutionist literature is in fact the same as the archaic Homo sapiens. The reason why two different terms are used to define the very type of the human race is the disagreement among evolutionists. All the fossils included in the classification of Homo heidelbergensis suggest that people who were anatomically very similar to modern Europeans lived 500,000 and up to 740,000 years, first England and then Spain.
It is estimated that the man of Cro-Magnon man lived 30,000 years ago. It has a domed skull and forehead. Skull 1,600 cc is greater than the average man today. His skull has thick eyebrow projections and a bony protuberance at the back which is characteristic both Neanderthals and Homo erectus.
While Cro-Magnon is considered a European race, the structure and volume of the skull of the Cro-Magnon is very close to those of certain races living in Africa and the tropics today. Based this similarity, it is estimated that Cro-Magnon was an archaic race Africa. Some other results have shown that paleoanthropological Cro-Magnon and Neanderthal Métis and laid the foundation for career today.
Therefore, none of these people are "primitive species." They were different from humans who lived in the past and treated well and mix with other races, or became extinct and disappeared from history.
Species live in the same age as their ancestors
What we have studied so far is a clear picture: The scenario of "evolution human "is pure fiction. For a family tree representing the truth, a gradual evolution from ape to man must have taken place and a fossil of this process must be able to find. In fact, however, there is a difference between monkeys and humans. skeletal structures, the cranial capacity and criteria such as walking or standing bent sharply forward distinguish humans from monkeys.
Another significant data to prove it can be no relation between the different tree species is that species that occur as the ancestors of others, in fact, lived in the same time. If, as evolutionists claim, Australopithecus became Homo habilis, which, in turn, became in Homo erectus, the periods in which they lived would necessarily succeed. However, there is no such chronological order to see in the fossil record.
According estimates of evolutionists, Australopithecus lived from 4 million to a million years. The creatures classified as Homo habilis, on the other hand, is believed that lived 1.7 to 1.9 million years. Homo rudolfensis, would have been more "advanced" than Homo habilis, is known to be as old as 2.5 to 2.8 million years! In other words, Homo rudolfensis is close to 1 million years older than Homo habilis, which is presumed to have been the ancestor. " In addition, the age of Homo erectus goes back years and 1.6 to 1.8 million, which means that Homo erectus appeared on earth at the same period known as the ancestor of Homo habilis.
Alan Walker confirms this fact by saying that "no evidence of eastern extremity of Africa lads Australopithecus survivors who were contemporaries of first with H. Habilis, then with the H. erectus. "(Alan Walker (, Science, Vol 207, 1980, p. 1103.))
Louis Leakey found fossils of Australopithecus, Homo habilis and Homo erectus almost side by side in the region of Olduvai Gorge in Tanzania in the Bed II layer.
There is certainly no tree family such. Stephen Jay Gould, who was a paleontologist at Harvard University, said the deadlock against evolution, although is an evolutionist himself:
What has become of our ladder if there are three coexisting lineages of hominids (A. africanus, Australopithecus robust, and H. habilis), none clearly derived from another? In addition, none of the three evolutionary trends show during his tenure on earth.
If we moving from Homo erectus to Homo sapiens, we are still there to speak a pedigree. There is evidence that Homo erectus and Homo sapiens archaic continued to live for 27,000 years and even recently as 10,000 years before our era. The Kow Swamp in Australia, some 13,000 skulls years of Homo erectus were discovered. On the island of Java, Homo erectus remains were found that are 27,000 years old.
Secret History of Homo Sapiens
The most interesting and significant that overrides the base of the tree itself imaginary family of the theory evolutionary history is ancient unexpectedly modern man. Homo sapiens paleoanthropological findings show that was exactly as long as we have lived a million years.
It was Louis Leakey, the famous evolutionary paleoanthropologist, who discovered initial findings that question. In 1932, the region around Lake Victoria Kanjera Kenya, Leakey found several fossils that belonged to the Pleistocene average, and are not different from modern man. However, the Middle Pleistocene was a million years. Since these discoveries is the tree of evolution in reverse, were fired paleoanthropologists some evolutionists. But Leakey has always maintained that his estimate was correct.
Just when this controversy was about to be forgotten, a fossil unearthed Spain in 1995 revealed a remarkable even than the history of Homo sapiens were much higher than previously assumed. The fossil in question was discovered in a cave called Gran Dolina in the Atapuerca region of Spain by three Spanish paleoanthropologists Polytechnic University of Madrid. The fossil shows the face of a child under 11, who looked as though modern man. However, it was 800,000 years since the child died. Discover magazine covered the story in detail in its December 1997 report of the review.
This fossil even shook the convictions of Juan Luis Arsuaga Ferreras, who lead the Gran Dolina excavation. Ferreras said:
We expected something big, something big, something inflated, you know, something primitive. What we expect of a child of 800,000 years, was something like Turkana Boy like. And we found a thoroughly modern face .... For me it's more spectacular, these are the kinds of things to shake. Find something totally unexpected that. In the absence of fossils of finding fossils is unexpected too, and that's okay. But the most dramatic thing to find something that apparently belonging to the current in the past. It's like finding something like a tape recorder in Gran Dolina. This would surprising. We do not expect cassettes and cassette recorders in the Pleistocene. Finding a modern face 800,000 years, is the same thing. We were very surprised when we saw.
Fossils have revealed the fact that the history of Homo sapiens had to be extended back to 800,000 years. After recovering from the initial shock, the evolutionists who discovered the fossil decided that belonged to another species, because, depending on the family tree of evolution, Homo sapiens living 800,000 years. By Therefore, consisting of a sort of imaginary called Homo antecessor "and included the Atapuerca skull under that classification.
Cabin 1.7 million years
There were many findings demonstrating that Homo sapiens dates back even earlier than 800,000 years. One of them is a Louis Leakey's discovery in 1970 at Olduvai Gorge. Here in the Bed II layer, Leakey discovered Australopithecus habilis, Homo erectus and Homo species coexisted in the same time. What is even more interesting was a structure Leakey found in the same layer (Bed II). Here, found the remains of a stone hut. The unusual aspect of the event was that this building, which is still used in parts of Africa, not may have been built by Homo sapiens! Thus, according to results Leakey, Australopithecus, Homo habilis, Homo erectus and modern man must have co-existed approximately 1.7 billion years. This discovery must surely invalidate the theory of evolution states that modern humans evolved from species such as Australopithecus ape.
Traces of modern man, 3.6 million years!
In fact, some other discoveries trace the origins of modern humans back to 1.7 million years. An important finding is the fingerprint found in Laetoli, Tanzania by Mary Leakey in 1977. These footprints were found in a layer that was estimated at 3.6 million years and most important is that the footprints were different from modern man would leave.
The footprints found by Mary Leakey were later examined by a number of famous as paleoanthropologists Donald Johanson and Tim White. The results were the same. White wrote:
Not Make no mistake ... They are like modern human footprints. If we remain in the sand on a beach in California today, and an old four years, child was asked what he was saying immediately that someone had been there. It would not be able to say a hundred other impressions on the beach, or you. ((Donald C. Johanson & MA Edey, Lucy: The Beginnings of Mankind, New York: Simon & Schuster, 1981, p. 250.))
After examining the footprints, Louis Robbins from the University of Northern California made the following comments:
The arc raised, the smallest person had an arc greater than me and the big toe is large and aligned with the second toe ... The handle of the ground like the fingers toes man. You do not see this in animal forms. ((Science News, Vol 115, 1979, p. 196-197.))
Reviews the morphological form of fingerprints showed Time and again they had to be accepted as evidence of a human being, and secondly, a modern Homo sapiens human (). Russell Tuttle, who also examined the footsteps wrote:
A small barefoot Homo sapiens could have done ... In all morphological characteristics sensitive feet of those who made the tracks are indistinguishable from those of modern humans.
impartial examinations footprints revealed their real owners. In reality, these footprints consisted of 20 fossilized footprints of a 10-year-old modern human and 27 footprints of an even younger. They were certainly modern people like us.
This situation that the Laetoli footprints at the center of debate for years. Evolutionists paleoanthropologists desperately tried to reach an explanation, because it was difficult for them to accept the fact that modern man has been walk on the earth 3.6 million years ago. During the 1990s, the following "explanation" started to take shape: The evolutionists decided that these footprints must have been left by Australopithecus, because according to their theory, it was impossible for a Homo species exist for 3.6 years. However, Russell H. Tuttle wrote in an article published in 1990:
In sum, the features of 3.5 million years old presence on the site Laetoli similar to those of G usually barefoot modern human. Neither of its characteristics suggest that the Laetoli hominids were less capable bipeds us. If G tracks were known to be old, easily come to the conclusion that were made by a member of our genus Homo ... In any case, we must reject Assuming that the loose Laetoli footprints were made by type of Australopithecus afarensis Lucy.
In short, these traces taken at 3.6 million years could not have belonged to Australopithecus. The only reason why the footprints were thought to have been caused by members of the Australopithecus volcanic layer was 3.6 million years in which the fingerprints were found. The drawings have been attributed to Australopithecus only on the assumption that humans could not have lived so long.
These interpretations of fingerprints Laetoli demonstrate an important fact. Evolutionists support their theory is not based on scientific data, but despite them. Here is a theory that is blindly defended no matter what, all new results that cast doubt on the theory that may consist therefore ignored or manipulated to support the theory.
In short, the theory of evolution is not science, it is a dogma kept alive despite science.
The impasse Evolution of bipedalism
In addition to the fossil record that we examined so far, unbridgeable anatomical gaps between men and apes also invalidate the fiction of human evolution. One of them to see with the way you walk.
Human beings walk upright on two feet. This is a very special locomotion not seen in other species mammals. Some other animals have a limited ability to move while standing on its hind legs. Animals such as bears and monkeys can move in this way only rarely, and when they want to reach a food source, and only for a short period. Generally, their skeletons lean forward and walk on all fours.
It has evolved from bipedal walking quadruped monkeys, as claimed Evolutionists?
Of course not. Research has shown that the evolution of bipedalism has never happened, or you may have. First, bipedalism is not an evolutionary advantage. The way the removal of monkeys is much easier, faster and more efficient than the step the human biped. Man can not move jumping from tree to tree without falling to the ground, like a chimpanzee, or run at a speed of 125 kilometers per hour, like a cheetah. On the contrary, since man walked on two feet, squirms more slowly in the soil. For the same reason, He is one of the most vulnerable of all species in nature in terms of movement and defense. According to the logic of evolutionary theory, the monkeys have not evolved to adopt a bipedal, man must have evolved rather than quadrupeds.
A other end of the evolution of the dead ask is that bipedalism does not serve the "progressive development" model of Darwinism. This model which is the basis of evolution, there must be a "compound" stride between bipedalism and quadruple. However, research conducted computerized In 1996, paleoanthropologist English Robin Crompton showed that "compound" calm has not been possible. Crompton reached the following conclusion: a living being can walk standing or on all fours. ((Ruth Henke, Aufrecht "Bäumen aus den" Focus, Vol 39, 1996, p. 178.)).
A sort of walking between the two is impossible This would involve excessive energy consumption. Why is half-bipedal being can not exist.
The huge gap between man and monkey is not limited to bipedalism. Many other questions remain unexplained, as the brain's ability, the ability speak, and so on. Elaine Morgan, an evolutionist paleoanthropologist, makes the following confession in relation to this issue:
Four of mysteries most remarkable about humans are: 1) Why do you walk on two legs? 2) Why have lost their skin? 3) Why were developed such large brains? 4) Why learn to speak?
The orthodox answers these questions are: 1) "We do not know yet," 2) "We do not know yet," 3) "We do not know, 4)" We do not know yet. "The list of questions could be considerably lengthened without affecting the monotony responses.
Evolution: Faith unscientific
Lord Solly Zuckerman is one of the most famous scientists and respected in the United Kingdom. For years, he studied the fossil was very thorough investigations. He was knighted for his contribution to science. Zuckerman an evolutionist. Therefore, his comments on the evolution can not be regarded as ignorant or prejudiced. After years of research on the fossils included in the stage of human evolution, however, came to the conclusion that there is no truth in the family tree is presented.
Zuckerman also advanced an interesting concept of "spectrum of science" ranging from scientific thought he considered unscientific. According to Zuckerman spectrum, the more "scientific", ie according to specific data fields are chemistry and physics. After them come the biological sciences and social sciences. At the other end of the spectrum, which is considered be as "unscientific" are "extra-sensory perception", concepts such as telepathy and sixth sense and finally "the evolution human. "Zuckerman explains his reasoning as follows:
Then, move right to the registration of the objective truth of these areas of presumed biological science, like extrasensory perception or the interpretation of the fossil history of man where all the faithful is possible - and where the most ardent believer is sometimes able to believe several contradictory things at once.
Robert Locke, editor of finding the remains Archaeological, a major on the origins of man, wrote in this magazine, "The search for human ancestors gives more heat than light," quoting the confession of the famous evolutionist paleoantropologist Tim White:
We are all frustrated by "all issues that have not been able to respond. "
Locke article reviews the deadlock theory of evolution on the origin of man and baseless propaganda about the spread of this item:
Perhaps no area of science more contentious than the search for human origins. Elite paleontologists disagree over the most basic level of the tree of man. new branches grow with great fanfare, only wither and die in the face of new fossil is found.
The same fact was also recently accepted by Henry Gee, editor of Nature well known. In his book In Search of Deep Time, published in 1999, Gee points out that all evidence of human evolution "between about 10-5000000 generations years, thousands of living creatures can fit into a small box. He concludes that conventional theories the origin and development of human beings are "an entirely human invention created after the fact, shaped by the prejudices rights ", adding:
To take a line of fossils and claim that they represent a lineage is not a scientific hypothesis can be tested, but an assertion that carries the same validity bedtime story-amusing, perhaps even instructive, but not scientific.
So what is the reason why many scientists are so tenacious about this dogma? Why did they try very hard to keep alive his theory to the detriment of admission countless conflicts and screening tests have found?
The only answer is the fear that will face out of the theory of evolution. This will face when they leave the evolution is that God created man. However, taking into account the budgets they have and philosophy materialistic, according to them, creation is a concept unacceptable to the evolutionists.
For this reason, they are mistaken, and in the world, using media with which they cooperate. If they can find fossils is necessary, "make" them either in the form of imaginary pictures or models of fiction and trying give the impression that because there are fossils to monitor the situation. Part of the media who share their views too materialistic attempt to mislead the public and an awareness of the history of evolution in the subconscious of people.
No matter how hard they try, the truth is obvious: Man came into existence not by an evolutionary process, but by God's creation. Therefore, it is responsible to him.
If Please consult this book to learn more about origin of living things:
Darwinism refuted (Book)
Pdf format:
http://fs.harunyahya.net/popup/Download.php?WorkNumber=85&Format=pdf
Word file format:
http://api.fmanager.net/api_v1/xmlapi.php?dev-t=EDCRFV&with=mod=file, id = 13732
Another useful book and the website in different languages:
Lie of Evolution (Book)
http://fs.harunyahya.net/popup/Download.php?WorkNumber=462&Format=pdf
Website:
www.evolutiondeceit.com
Darwin imagination
The person who has proposed the theory of evolution in the way currently available, was an amateur English naturalist Charles Robert Darwin.
Darwin had never undergone a formal education in biology. It took a only interest fans the theme of nature and living things. His interest led him to voluntarily join an expedition aboard a ship called the Beagle left England in 1832 and has traveled through different regions of the world for five years. Young Darwin was very impressed by living species, especially some finches that live in the Galapagos Islands. I thought that the variations in their beaks have been caused by adaptation habitat. In this spirit, it is assumed that the origin of life and species is the concept of "adaptation to the environment." Darwin against the fact that God created different living species separately, suggesting that the more he comes from a common ancestor and differ each other because of natural conditions.
Darwin's hypothesis was not based on a scientific discovery or experience, but over time has transformed into a pretentious theory, with the support and encouragement he has received from the famous materialist biologists of his time. Idea was that individuals adapted to the habitat of the best qualities transferred to succeeding generations, two qualities advantageous accumulated over time and transforms the individual into a species entirely different from their ancestors. (The origin of these "advantageous qualities" was unknown at the time.) According to Darwin, man was the result of this mechanism more developed imagination.
Darwin called this process "Evolution by natural selection." He thought he had found the origin of the species ": the origin of here is another case. He published these views in his book The Origin of Species by Natural Selection in 1859.
Darwin was aware that the theory has many problems. He admitted in his book in the chapter "Difficulties in the theory." These difficulties mainly involved in the study of fossils, complex organs of living beings could not be explained by chance (eg the eye), and instincts of living things. Darwin hoped that these difficulties will be overcome by new discoveries, but this does not stop with a series explanations for some very poor. The American physicist Lipson made the following comments on the difficulties "of Darwin:
After read The Origin of Species, Darwin found I was less sure of himself that he is often presented as the chapter entitled "The difficulties of the theory, for example, shows considerable lack of confidence. As a physicist, I was particularly intrigued by comments on how the eye would have occurred. ((SA Lipson, "View of a physicist" Darwin's theory, the evolutionary trends in Plants, Vol 2, No 1, 1988, p. 6.))
In developing his theory, Darwin was impressed by biologists Evolutionists others before him, and especially by the French biologist Lamarck. According to Lamarck, living beings who have successfully acquired characteristics during the life of a generation to another and has changed so much. For example, giraffes evolved from animals like antelopes, extending neck more than one generation to another as they tried to reach higher and higher branches for food. Darwin and the theory used to "pass on acquired characteristics, proposed by Lamarck as the factor that has evolved living beings.
But both Darwin and Lamarck were wrong, because in his time, life could not be studied with very primitive technology and in a very inappropriate. science such as genetics and biochemistry did not exist even in name. Their theories therefore had to rely fully its powers of imagination.
Then the echoes of Darwin's book reverberated, an Austrian botanist named Gregor Mendel discovered the laws of succession in 1865. There is not much heard the end of the century, Mendel's discovery gained great importance in the 1900s. This was the birth of the science of genetics. Shortly after, the structure genes and chromosomes was discovered. The discovery in the 1950s, the structure of the DNA molecule that incorporates information Genetics sheds theory of evolution into a major crisis. The reason is the incredible complexity of life and nullity of the mechanisms evolution proposed by Darwin.
These developments should have led to Darwin's theory is relegated to the dustbin of history. However, because certain circles outlined in the notice, the renewal and the rise of the theory of scientific platform. These efforts gain meaning only if we realize that behind the theory of ideological intentions rather than scientific concerns.
Links:
Videos
THE COLLAPSE OF EVOLUTION:
http://www.harunyahya.com/m_video_detail.php?api_id=1245
Collapse of atheism
http://www.harunyahya.com/m_video_detail.php?api_id=1244
THE CREATION OF THE WORLD:
http://harunyahya.com/m_video_creation_universe.php
The miracle of human creation:
http://www.harunyahya.com/m_video_detail.php?api_id=1249
Books
Collapse the theory of evolution in 20 questions:
http://fs.www.harunyahya.net/popup/Download.php?WorkNumber=80&Format=pdf
=*=*=*=*=
Disasters Darwinism brought to humanity:
http://fs.www.harunyahya.net/popup/Download.php?WorkNumber=74&Format=pdf
=*=*=*=*=
Millions of tests that refute Darwinism
http://fs.www.harunyahya.net/popup/Download.php?WorkNumber=4813&Format=pdf
=*=*=*=*=
A definitive answer to the evolutionist propaganda:
http://fs.harunyahya.net/popup/Download.php?WorkNumber=210&Format=pdf
=*=*=*=*=
How Fossils reversed the trend:
http://fs.harunyahya.net/popup/Download.php?WorkNumber=4813&Format=pdf
=*=*=*=*=
The religion of Darwinism
http://fs.harunyahya.net/popup/Download.php?WorkNumber=1959&Format=rtf
=*=*=*=*=
It is no coincidence:
http://fs.www.harunyahya.net/popup/Download.php?WorkNumber=1815&Format=pdf
=*=*=*=*=
A definitive answer evolutionist propaganda
http://fs.harunyahya.net/popup/Download.php?WorkNumber=210&Format=pdf
=*=*=*=*=
Why Darwinism is incompatible with the Koran
http://fs.harunyahya.net/popup/Download.php?WorkNumber=208&Format=pdf
=*=*=*=*=
Disasters Darwinism Humanity
http://fs.harunyahya.net/popup/Download.php?WorkNumber=74&Format=pdf
=*=*=*=*=
Fascism ideology Bloody Darwinism
http://fs.harunyahya.net/popup/Download.php?WorkNumber=225&Format=pdf
=*=*=*=*=
The Add Dark Darwinism
http://fs.harunyahya.net/popup/Download.php?WorkNumber=2182&Format=pdf
=*=*=*=*=
The Golden
http://fs.harunyahya.net/popup/Download.php?WorkNumber=1462&Format=pdf
=*=*=*=*=
=* For help, please send me a message ON *=
smiling4ever222@hotmail.com
About the Author
How can one be blamed for moving the current divorce law?
Why do people care law blamed the movement of history is always a child with Their mothers. What if the movement has started the process. whereby men are recognized as equally important components not only in the family. But in social development and feel. Growth of the child than divorce laws have always divided the property received in the period. 50/50 marriage, but anything owned before the marriage back to the original. Owner
Wow! Despite what the burden of the women directors! At first marriage has a long history. (I suggest you read all marital history). Many forms of marriage and divorce laws have changed a lot in past. It was not until 100 years of Supreme Court Judgement. s '60 'to the crime for someone who raped his wife. This change monument everyone complained about the divorce settlement. The best idea is to sign the contract. nup before the restrictions set forth so clearly before the wedding to begin. Dead beat dads why are not harassed because of the movement. This dish comes from the Fundies hated (and hate). Single moms on welfare. State agreed with Fundies as they usually Do and now it's legal. . Feminists I know that all marriages are happy and loving spouse. They have no work to stand in the way of the mother. . People must love each other a whole lot more.
 |
 |
Chevrolet : Caprice Classic Caprice Classic 2/tone Original Owner well maintained |  |
1 Bid | US $500.00 | 3d 1h 53m |
Tonight, Tonight - The Smashing Pumpkins
|
|
|