Ape to Man

Q: Recently the History Channel aired a special on the evolution of man. They mentioned a couple of the fakes and mistakes, but they still presented the information uncritically. This is more than they were doing just a few years ago though. Maybe the creationists are making some headway. Did you see it?

A: Yes I did. If you viewed this documentary you may not have recognized some of the subtle cues indicating how devoid of merit the whole notion is. Did you notice they showed an animated chain of potential missing links? Did you also notice they only offered a few candidates out of the thousands needed to form the chain? Furthermore, one of their fossils is contemporaneous with homosapiens with aboriginal facial features and has a larger brain than most folks living today (Neanderthals). Neanderthals, once thought to be our ancestor, are almost universally accepted as being completely homosapien today. Translation….they are humans, not an ape to man transition. The other two are clearly apes (Lucy and Australopithecus) both in brain size and anatomy. Lucy is purported to have human like knee joint essential for upright walking, but what they don’t tell you is that the leg bone was found nearly a mile away from the rest of the skeleton, and in a different geologic layer to boot. In fact the video presentation implies they were found at the same location by showing the discoverers observing these skeletal fragments in the same place. Not only were they not forthcoming about the truth about this issue, they actively misinformed viewers about information that would lead a prudent person to seriously doubt the validity of this specimen.

Although they discussed fakes, it was only very briefly, almost as an insignificant side note. So yes, creationists are making some headway, but there is still a long way to go. The truth of the matter is that fraudulent evidence and grossly exaggerated findings are the norm in paleo-anthropology. One example of proven fraud they offered was Piltdown man. This was a human skull cap with an ape jaw bone. The jaw bone was later found to be filled down to fit, and not even a fossil, but of recent origin. But many famous cases were not even mentioned. Java man was pieced together from a pit full of bones. It was later demonstrated to consist mainly of human fossils combined with an ape skullcap. Heidelberg man for example was built from one jaw bone and later discovered to be human. Nebraska man was mocked up from just a tooth…..yes, just one tooth. In fact a life size representation of this proposed transitional form and his mate was put on display in museums. The tooth was later found to be from an extinct pig. Then you have Peking man, which all the evidence for it conveniently disappeared before it could be scrutinized. Even recently a world famous German paleontologist was dismissed for pervasive long-term fraud (German anthropologist is exposed as fraud). The desire for notoriety in the scientific sphere is very powerful. This vice of human nature is behind the pervasive extent of fraud and exaggeration in this field of study which in and of itself is based on an atheistic viewpoint on the origin of man. 

Another line of discordant evidence for human evolution not mentioned on this “Ape to Man” special is genetics. Evolutionists have been saying for years that humans and apes are only a couple of percent different genetically, but they were only looking at a small portion of the gene code called exons. Exons code for the proteins, the building blocks of cells. The introns, which make up the bulk of the code, have been long viewed as junk…..ever heard of junk DNA? In a recent article in Scientific American (Aug 04) multiple discoveries are now demonstrating that these intron regions are the coding for the how, what and where of cell assembly, function and ongoing maintenance and repair. In other words, this may turn out to be the most important part of the genetic code by far. It is now becoming evident that the evolutionists goofed up again. Just like they assumed we had 100 plus vestigial (junk remnants of evolution) organs at the turn of the century (now we know that none of them are), they assumed the most essential part of the gene code was junk. This clearly demonstrates that if one’s premise is wrong, so will be your conclusions. It also demonstrates how evolutionary bias retards the progress of science by forcing false presumptions on evidence. Once these introns are taken into consideration we will understand what it takes at a molecular genetic cellular systems level to create and maintain all the amazing functionality our immense brains possess. We will finally know the difference between a chimp and Einstein or Mozart. Given the extensive difference in our brains compared to that of apes, we may reasonably expect substantial differences at the genetic level.

The final nail in the coffin of this argument is the implication that similarity is evidence for evolution exclusively. What does similarity prove anyway? Evos hope you assume it proves evolution, but it could obviously point toward a common designer, so it is transparent to the issue at best. As in the above example, even if chimps and humans were only a couple of percent different genetically, that would be exactly what you would expect if they had a common designer. We are obviously more similar morphologically to apes than to reptiles or birds. The blueprints for a Honda Civic are more similar to that of a Honda Accord than to a weed eater or bicycle. This follows to reason from a design perspective.

What should we make of the evidence upon which the theory for human evolution is built? We have briefly discussed at a high level most of the evidence on which the theory is based, and found it entirely lacking. The theory of human evolution is built upon fakes, exaggerations and most of all an unsupported premise. Multiple discoveries in anthropology and genetics are demonstrated ever more clearly that this notion that apes evolved into humans is in and of itself a dead end and offers no intellectually satisfying explanation for the emergence of the most amazing creature in the known universe. In God’s image, we truly are fearfully and wonderfully made.

If you are interested in further study on the ape to man issue, here are a couple good articles on the subject: 

Homo erectus 'to' modern man: evolution or human variability?

Was Adam a Caveman?