A Pair of Fossils Have Demolished the Evolutionary Family Tree
Harun YahyaA scenario that evolutionists describe as a “scientific fact” in text books and that they have attempted to pass off to millions of people as the history of mankind in museums, has been demolished by the latest palaeoanthropological discoveries. Findings to the effect that Homo habilis and Homo erectus, human beings’ supposed evolutionary ancestors, actually lived at the same time have irrevocably done away with the hypthesis that the one evolved from the other. Details of the discovery in question were published in the evolutionist British magazine Nature. (1)
The findings, which even now will clearly be the subject of much debate among palaeoanthropological circles, were made by a team led by the famous palaeoanthropologist Meave Leakey. The team discovered 1.55-million-year-old Homo erectus skull in the Ileret region of Kenya, near Lake Turkana. An additional discovery was a 1.44-million-year upper jaw bone belonging to Homo erectus, found not far away. Since it is their ages that make this pair of fossils that have rocked the world of palaeoanthropology so interesting, the researchers have stressed their reliability in their scientific reports:
With the discovery of the new, well dated specimens from Ileret, H. habilis and H. erectus can now be shown to have co-occurred in eastern Africa for nearly half a million years. (2)
This finding is of greatest significance. The supposed line of descent hypothesised by evolutionists has been totally demolished by the new evidence obtained, and the invalidity of the theory of evolution has once again been proven in an irrefutable manner. In the words of Fred Spoor from University College London, this finding, is the equivalent of finding that your grandmother and great-grandmother were sisters rather than mother-daughter". (3)
What was the collapsed scenario all about?
The evolutionary “staircase model” that has been refuted by scientific discoveries maintained that there was a sequence from "Australopithecus>Homo habilis>Homo erectus>Homo sapiens," the supposed ancestors of human beings, and that these species gradually descended from one another as they developed. According to this fictitious evolutionary model, the entire Homo habilis population changed over the course of time and turned into Homo habilis.
A series of palaeoanthropological developments in recent years, however, began to show that the fossil record irrefutably refuted such evolutionist hypotheses. The anatomist Bernard Wood, for instance, said this during the course of a statement about another fossil discovery in 2002:
"When I went to medical school in 1963, human evolution looked like a ladder. The ladder stepped from monkey to man through a progression of intermediates, each slightly less ape-like than the last. Now human evolution looks like a bush. We have a menagerie of fossil hominids... How they are related to each other and which, if any of them, are human forebears is still debated."(4)
This latest discovery in the wake of Wood’s 1992 statement has dealt evolutionists’ family tree, which was already creaking, its final death blow.
The icon that has collapsed together with the scenario
You must have seen this picture before. On the left of the picture is an orangutan with an undershot jaw and a stooped gait. On the right is a slim, broad-browed human being walking with firm strides towards the future. Between the two are a number of figures following one another from ape to human being. This picture, which is frequently shown in supposedly “scientific” publications, is intended to give the impression that the fossil record supports the evolutionary development that supposedly took place from ape to man and is an important tool of Darwinist propaganda.
Although evolutionists have used this image just about everywhere, they still face a major problem in connection with it; there has never been any evidence of such a direct transition from ape to man. Evolutionists hoped that new fossils would overcome the problem, but the new fossils added to the existing record revealed no continuity in terms of chronological criteria of the kind that evolutionists had hoped for, and merely led to further inconsistencies. Indeed, Fred Spoor openly stated this dilemma facing evolutionists in the words: "The more we know, the more complex the story gets,"(5)
The admission that this scenario, which evolutionists have sought to elevate to the position of genuine science, is in fact a deception can be seen in comments regarding these newly disocovered Kenyan fossils. The evolutionist documentary station Discovery Channel, for instance, broadcast a report titled “Fossils Shake Human Family Tree,” which said: “Surprising fossils dug up in Africa are creating messy kinks in the iconic straight line of human evolution with its knuckle-dragging ape and briefcase carrying man.” (6)
A text by scientific journalist E. J. Mundell commented: “gone is the step-wise theory of one ancient species, Homo habilis, dying off as another, Homo erectus, takes over to give rise later to modern day Homo sapiens.” (7)
Evolutionists’ confessions of ignorance
The contradiction that represents such a predicament for evolutionists is this: although they have been conducting fossil research into the origins of man for more thn a century and have sought to depict, through use of the media, a few fragments of bone that have been unearthed as major anthropological discoveries they actually know nothing about this scenario they believe in so blindly. And they actually admit as much, when obliged to do so. According to the Harvard University anthropologist Dr. Daniel Lieberman the Kenyan discoveries show:
"just how interesting and complex the human genus was and how poorly we understand the transition from being something much more apelike to something more humanlike."(8)
The “independent” origins of Homo habilis and Homo erectus
Leakey, who evaluated the findings, states that Homo erectus could not have evolved from Homo habilis. Her words regarding the origins of H. habilis and H. erectus point to independent origins that refute a line of descent between them. Leakey thinks that the two must have emerged independently of one another some 2-3 million years ago. (9) There is no trace, however, in the fossil record of the imaginary common forebears from which, according to the theory of evolution, they both emerged.
If evolutionist prejudices are set aside
As we have seen, evolutionists;
1. Admit that H. erectus could not have evolved from H. habilis,
2. That H. erectus and habilis" appear to have emerged independently of one another,
3. And that nothing in the fossil record corresponds to common forebear that could connect the two together.
We can use criteria set out by the well-known evolutionist and biologist Douglas Futuyma in order to analyse this state of affairs.Futuyma says:
"Organisms either appeared on the earth fully developed or they did not. If they did not, they must have developed from pre-existing species by some process of modification. If they did appear in a fully developed state, they must have been created by some omnipotent intelligence" (10)
As we have seen, the status of Homo erectus and Homo habilis indicates a flawless and perfect emergence, as Futuyma states, and since they cannot be linked to any other species, either between them as an intermediate for or from which they descended as a common ancestor, it is clear that they did not therefore evolve from life forms that pre-existed them.
In short, it is an obvious and manifest fact for anyone not blindly tied to evolutionist preconceptions that creation is the origin of the human beings classified as H. Erectus and H. Habilis.
A Call to the Darwinist Turkish Media
There is no longer the monopoly of dissemination of information in Turkey to make it easy for Darwinist fairy tales to be spread. There is now a democtratic and rational environment in which the evidence against Darwinism can be learned and evaluated in a free and widespread manner. The Turkish are now aware that the evolutionary scenario, an unscientific myth for years employed as a propaganda tool, has collapsed.
What is more, the global position is no different. Even Western culture in which Darwinism was born frequently broadcasts statements in the media to the effect that the scenario of human evolution has collapsed, and makes clear and constant reference to this. The number of people who believe in the theory of evolution indicates that people are now turning towards the fact of Creation.
That being the case, what needs to be done is this: the Turkish media must evaluate the scientific facts in a rational manner and see that evolution is a theory that never actually happened. The Turkish media need to address their audience in the light of the scientific proof and evidence, without turning towards dogmatic impositions. Because people are by now aware of the scientific facts and the message emanating from them. For that reason, the Turkish media must avoid being regarded as a proponent of the theory of evolution, which will soon go down as the worst scientific fraud in history, and instead support true and honest science.
References;
(1). Fred Spoor et al.,"Implications of new early Homo fossils from Ileret, east of Lake Turkana, Kenya", Nature 448, 9 August 2007, pp. 688-691 (Internet 5 August 2007, http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v448/n7154/full/nature05986.html )
(2). Fred Spoor et al., ibid.
(3). Seth Borenstein [Associated Press writer], "Fossils shake human family tree", Discovery Channel News, 8 August 2007, http://dsc.discovery.com/news/2007/08/08/fossil_arc.html?category=archaeology&guid=20070808160030&dcitc=w19-502-ak-0000
(4). Bernard Wood in: John Whitfield, "Oldest Member of Human Family Found", Nature, 11 July 2002
(5). Seth Borenstein, ibid.
(6). Seth Borenstein, ibid.
(7). E. J. Mundell, "2 Human Ancestors Probably Co-Existed", 8 August 2007, http://www.drkoop.com/newsdetail/93/607136.html
(8). John Noble Wilford, "Fossils Challenge Linear Evolution", 9 August 2007,
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/09/science/08cnd-fossil.html?_r=1&ref=science&oref=slogin
(9). Seth Borenstein, ibid.
(10). Douglas J. Futuyma, Science on Trial, New York: Pantheon Books, 1983. p. 197
